Ok, I got three lines down, and stopped...

First, YOU wrote and (he) emailed the "plan."
Second, YOU wrote and (he) emailed the response.

Why are YOU doing this? It's HIS kid.

PS: A judge is most likely going to require mediation.

ETA: If you have an attorney, why are you emailing her??
And why are you making such demands? Do you expect a positive response? That email read hostile to me...

Phew. What a mess.
If BM had a brain, she'd insist you give her "your attorney's" info, so she could contact them directly, as she should. Be careful when bluffing.
BM has ever right to file a modification in this case. Mediation would cost FAR LESS than a court trial, but if your DH is hellbent on doing that, have at it.
YES, BM would get more CS. She has SD full time now, instead of half the time.
YES, there is a 99% chance that BM will be awarded the full custody. The kid is 14, not 4. She prefers her mother's house, for her own reasons, and BM isn't a complete, loser, drug addict, so... she'll get it.
You don't like this child; of that, you've been clear. Why insist so hard that she's there every other week now? You don't want her there.
DH doesn't want her there, either, since he hasn't enforced it until BM made waves.
IMO, you two are being the unreasonable parties, and are only trying to enforce the CO now so you don't have to pay more money.

You're right...this is all about money. But on which side???

Sorry...given the child's age and the fact that you don't want her in your house, it seems counterintuitive to be fighting this.

So the current child support is based on 50-50 custody. But now, the stepkid is living most of the time with BM. Because of this, BM wants an increase in child support.

That actually doesn't sound unreasonable to me.

In my state a child at the age of 14 has the 'absolute right' to choose where he/she lives. Meaning, a Judge will grant a change in custody solely based on the minors wishes.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

What state is this?!

And in this situation, it would be nice if CS was linked to visitation. If the kid does not want to come see her dad then dad should not have to pay for kid. I know it does not work that way, but it should.

This is why we should not make bargins with our kids. And I speak from being a Mom with children that follow a court ordered visitation schedule.

It is not good for the kids, and it's not good for the parents or steps involved because it always comes down to this type of email. And it also comes down to a 14 year old being given the power to make her own choices regarding visitation. I understand why we as parents want to do this for our kids but it always ALWAYS backfires.

As far as the email itself, Ive been on both sides of that too. Just remember something that noone here has mentioned. I have lost track of how long SD has been back with BM but there is such a thing as status quo. And if she has been back there any amount of time, it will be looked at like a change in circumstance. But not only that, the court probably can and will require mediation, and thirdly, I dont know the over all history but unless BM has violated that court order time and time and TIME again, chances are a judge will lightly smack her on her hand and she will be on her way.

Ive had my fair share of court rooms, if I got this email I would probably email you back and tell you to stop blowing smoke up my butt, and then Id turn around and file and the court could tell me no to my requests. Let's hope BM isnt that savvy. Because anytime you mess with court you never know how thats gonna turn out..Good luck...I feel your pain

If the BM has taken it upon herself to change the visitation, dad isn't obligated to bend to her demand that he then pay her more money.

If the order states he pays $xxx.xx in CS, that's what he's obligated to pay.

Nothing states that BM is obligated to have SD more than 50/50, costing her more money. If BM wants to accept more time than that, it's on her dime.

This whole thread is just bumming me out. I can totally empathize with Redwing...DH and I would have loved to have told surly, whining SD (at 14) that she could just keep her sniveling ass at BM's if she didn't want to follow our rules and be semi-pleasant to the family during her sporatic (at best) visits. DH tried to keep the visits going per our status quo, until BM told SD that she "could choose WHETHER SD wanted to see her father". Giving a CHILD the option of choosing NOT to see one of their parents is abusive in itself. Only in COD situations (with bio parents that hate each other) could this EVER fly. You will only have a few possible outcomes, none of them healthy for the child.

Either a) the kid plays both parents into tripping over themselves to satisfy child's every whim so that the child "chooses" them over the other parent, b) the child learns that they can bounce back and forth between homes in order to find the path of least resistance (and fewer rules/guidelines), c) one of the parents gets wise to the dynamic and refuses to play this sick ass game. (Usually that will be the more intelligent, responsible parent, and ultimately the best place for the child to grow into an intelligent, responsible adult, but rarely where the child will "choose" to be.

Pretty much anyone that has had a teen knows what trying to "force" a teenager into doing something they don't want to do is like. Difficult at best, with two bio parents on the same page, impossible when bio parents are pitted against each other to be favored. Allowing a child to opt out of visits with one of their parents is ridiculous, and only a marginal parent would allow their kid to get away with that, whether custodial or not. This is usually the age when tensions come to a peak, because neither parent wants to be on the "losing" end, and the child knows exactly how to work this insecurity.

Mediation may work in some situations. I have not personally seen it work, because for it to be successful, both parties must enter mediation with a desire for resolution. If the parents are coming in with years of resentments sitting on their shoulders, a mediator can only do so much. In our state, once a child reaches age 12, they are also interviewed separately by the mediator, and their wishes are also taken into consideration, with the mediator "acting" not only as the middleman between the parents, but also the liaison of the child. That setup in itself is not conducive to resolution, because it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out WHY a teenager, that has a history of enjoying a fairly healthy relationship and visits, with BOTH parents, all of the sudden doesn't want to see BD or BM anymore. (Abusive situations excluded.) The parent that is "favored" at that particular moment stands to gain everything, while the other parent is just a sitting duck, thinking that mediation is "supposed" to be helping.

As a SM that has watched my "non-favored" DH be totally cut out of his daughter's life by BM, with the help of a mediator who was supposedly representing the "wishes" of his kid, I call bullsh*t on the whole arrangement. Also, DH was only unnecessary to SD for a short time after mediation....she was crying to him less than six months later that "things are SO awful with BM, daddy, and I want to come live with you now". Chalk it up to love, naivety, idiocy, whatever, DH and I welcomed SD into our home full time. SD then didn't want visits with BM. So we figured at that point, she gets to make her own choice on visitation, AGAIN.

Can anyone guess what happened next? BM bought princess the jeans we told SD she'd have to save her $$ for, and when confronted about her scheming (she'd also lied about WHERE she got the jeans, tried to say she had saved her lunch money for the jeans), DH was no longer "nice" and SD wanted to go back to BM's.

Now the kid has gone back and forth so many times that not even the lawyers can figure out who owes who, how much, if any, child support, and we're literally counting days off of a calendar to figure out who gets to claim SD on this year's tax returns. No one has any control over SD, she does what she wants, when she wants, and her father is so f*cking sick of the histrionics and bullsh*t from both SD and BM that he just can't put his heart into anything having to do with her anymore.

So that was my long-winded way of getting to this: Barring abuse, (and I mean real abuse, not "my mom/dad is mean to me" non-specific sh*t), NEVER TELL A KID that they can choose NOT to visit with one or both of their parents. If kiddo doesn't like the rules at one house, or thinks it'll be more "fun" at the other house, too f*cking bad. There are serious consequences to letting a CHILD, that doesn't have a fully developed brain, call the shots and make their own "choices" when it comes to mom and dad. And while it may feel nice to be the "favored" parent when you ARE, just know for 100% that the only guarantee is that you'll be on the other side of that the first time you have to actually parent and say NO. Fickle little as*holes by nature and design, those teenagers. And it's FAR worse if encouraged by parents desperate to be besties with the kid.

I totally agree with whoever said that if a parent presents in mediation or court saying that "little Susie doesn't want to go to dad/mom's anymore" should be told to pound sand. There certainly shouldn't be a monetary award (more CS) for encouraging the alienation of their kid from the other parent. If both parents aren't enforcing regular visits, therein lies the problem. WTF. *Stepping off my soapbox*