Custody agreement no steps near kid?
BM is apparently ready to meet and agree to a new custody agreement. She made a comment that she wants in the agreement that it states that SS is NOT to be anywhere near "that skank" (That would be me)...
I told BF that he can agree to it if the custody also states that she can't have a man near SS. But I think once she gets a new BF, SS will be dumped upon the doorstep once again. Thoughts? Anyone ever hear of this?
Maybe it's different in your
Maybe it's different in your country but I can't imagine such a clause being allowed in any agreement here in Britain. It's bizarre and ridiculous.
Sadly not unusual.
Sadly not unusual.
We are fortunate that we never had to deal with this level of petty crap from the blended family opposition (The SpermClan). My DW was never referred to as "the skank". At least outside of their own shallow and polluted gene pool. Even they were not able to sell that level of delusional manipulative crap.
My XW... OTH. Fits the definition of "the skank"at the poster child level of cavern crotched adulterous skank whoredom. Pregnant with a cheat baby when she moved out of our home, had two OOWL spawn with the geriatric Fortune 500 executive sugar/baby daddy, he finally married her and she went on to get knocked up with a 3rd OOWL spawn by the cheat partner she was banging while married to the geriatric sugar/baby daddy. Thankfully I did not sully my gene pool with that ...... less than quality individual.
We were allowed to have it
We were allowed to have it written into the court orders that Spawn was not to be around Meth Mouths dealer/pimp/boyfriend. But the only reason the judge allowed it was because the guy has a wrap sheet that goes back from the time he was in his late teens. Now that doesn't mean Spawn or Meth Mouth upheld that, I mean once she was with Meth Mouth we have no clue who she was around or what she was doing.
Okay but only if the wording
Okay but only if the wording specifically states "that skank", so when she tries to enforce it she has to prove who "that skank" is.
.
Ha Ha!!
Love it!!
Ha Ha!!
Love it!!
I have heard there can be a
I have heard there can be a clause such as "No introduction of new partner until 6 months have passed" etc.
Are you living together yet?
We are
not living together. We were house hunting but I decided on getting a house on my own due to BM's shenanigans. BF was uspet when I told him my decision but understands.
And you just gave her exactly
And you just gave her exactly what she wanted. No it should not be in there and bo you should not base your decisions on her unhealthy mental stability. Do not let her run your life.
If I were him I would push
If I were him I would push back. Unless she can prove you are a clear danger to her children.. then she just can kick rocks on that one. She has no right to control who her DH dates.
Now, I have seen some attempt at not allowing them to have a live in BF/GF.. when the kids are present.. but that only pertains to sleeping arrangements/residency.. can't ban the GF or BF from seeing the kids in most cases.
Nope!
I would push back. She has no justification for asking such a thing. And if your partner is ever in a pinch, he should be able to lean on you. She will also use this as an opportunity to tell everyone who will listen that you aren't allowed around the children. With absolutely no further information what do you think they will assume.
No way I would let anybody like that in about me.
Absolutely not! First, do not
Absolutely not! First, do not meet BM. She will use that meeting to accuse you of harassment or violence. Do not meet BM. Second, no judge will ever agree to that stipulation unless there is a clear and documented reason like abuse, drugs, etc. Accepting that stipulation will make you look guilty and will allow BM to enforce that stipulation forever. You will never be able to remove it.
Our BM made false allegations of sexual misconduct against my BIL and created false documentation to prove it. BM wanted a no contact order in place against BIL. The judge approved it based on the "he said, she said" because there was "proof" and the judge had to "protect the child." It has been 9 years and we have been unable to get that stipulation removed even though there is no proof of sexual misconduct and we have had tons of proof to counter BM's claims.
This sounds like a power play. My guess is that BM says she is "willing" to reach an agreement, will meet you, use that meeting to further abuse you and BF, then will back out on reaching an agreement due to "information" gained from meeting you. Let BF's attorney handle this ridiculous request and stay far away from BM.
BM asking to meet is a trap.
BM asking to meet is a trap..lol. She just wants to check you out and make you think that she has some control over your home.. or your BF's home. She wants to check you out to see where your weaknesses lie and to create a false hierarchy where you listen to her rules. Nope and no....
The bottom line is that when you have a child with someone.. you have already theoretically trusted that person enough to be intimate and to make them a father to your children..(or mother). At that point, barring outright danger or neglect.. you don't get some veto power about who that person may expose your children to.. again barring outright danger and neglect. You don't get to vet your Ex's new romantic interests.. you don't get to decide whether that person is ok as a babysitter... just like you don't have to run the name of ever sitter YOU hire by your ex BM!
I know it probably is a bit scary and frustrating to not have any control over who your kids may spend time with.. but you just have to trust the judgement of someone you chose to have a child with.. that's when that decision was made for you.. no taksey backsies on that.. (barring danger/neglect again)
EXACTLY! ALL OF THIS!
EXACTLY! ALL OF THIS!
Why would your BF agree to
Why would your BF agree to that? Oh, that's right, it would be an easy out for him since his son has already stated that he doesn't want a relationship with his dad unless he dumps you. This way, BF has an excuse for you not to be around when he has his son. He can pretend that he's not dating you.
Why are you still wasting your time with this situation?
My BF
has not agreed to it, I suggested that he can agree to it unless it applies to her as well. I didn’t think of the consequences that posters have pointed out.
BM was served with full custody papers and got a new attorney (This is why she now wants to agree to something I think). The new lawyer has agreed to the GAL, whereas the old one said no way to one and kept fighting over trivial things.
As far as SS, court ordered therapy is going well. SS has expressed that he wants to start visiting but it will make BM maaaaaaaad…..He also that he had no problems with us, but it made his life difficult when he disagreed with BM. He said he missed being around but could not say anything at the time.
It was brought up in therapy that when BM found out SS was calling BF when she went on trips she now won’t let him out of her sight, has been taking a lot of time off of work, not going out, and blaming SS for her not being able to have a social life because he is a “bad boy.”
What a loon!
What a loon!
I suggest your bf tells his son AND bm that once custody is sorted out he will not be taking any excuses for SS not turning up for visitation and that he'll call the cops each and every time there is a violation of the order. Spell it out for her. That will also take the guilt/pressure off of SS.
Thank you
For all of your great advice. I will NOT be meeting her.