My husband just had this put in his CO. SD can spend only one night away from BM while in her custody. Anything in excess of that must be offered to my husband. It hasn't been exercised yet. I'm sure BM will be in contempt of it at some point. She loves sending SD to GBM's house for weeks on end in the summer.
The way it is written, per BM'S manipulation, it actually works against her. However, she's also the only one who violates it (and it appears to be on purpose).
FROR is a ticking time bomb if either side in the blended family equation goes toxic. The wording of yours is well done I think. If there is no boundary of reasonableness in the FROR element of a CO then it can turn into a complete PITA and toxic nightmare.
Many STalkers over the years have had a FROR clause in their CO end up biting them in the ass. When BM gets toxic (the situations I recall were BM centric) and starts using FROR to interfere with Dad’s time once Dad gets a new GF or remarries it can take years to get the FROR issues resolved and the wording modified to include a boundary or reasonableness that keeps the toxic opposition under control.
Some STalkers have had to deal with FROR issues because the CO does not define at what point FROR applies or FROR applies in extremely inconvenient horizons. I recall one STalker's CO that required that BM be called and offered the Skid if dad was going to be away from the SKid for more than a couple of hours during visitation. GF/SM and dad had to cater to BM’s manipulations until dad finally put his proverbial foot up BM’s ass to get it under control.
Our CO had no FROR element. However, the Sperm Idiot rarely had the Skid during his visitation time. He forfeited his visitation time to Sperm Grandma and rarely saw the Skid more than one or two days even during his long summer visitation. Visitation in my Skid’s Custody/Visitation/Support CO was 5wks summer, 1wk winter, 1wk spring. He rarely if ever even saw his bio-dad. If our CO had contained a FROR we could have very easily ended all contact between the Skid and his Sperm Clan. When we married I told my wife I would never prevent the Skid from having a relationship with his Sperm Clan and we probably would have never invoked a FROR but there sure were some times during peak Sperm Clan toxicity that I would have loved to have picked the kid up form Sperm Grandma’s house at the beginning of the second night of visitation when the Sperm Idiot abdicated his parental responsibilities to the Sperm Grandhag.
I could have had more fun barring their idiot asses with a FROR clause in the CO. }:) }:) }:)
Be careful when addressing a FROR. It cuts both ways.
We want it (they do not yet have court order- in process now) only because bm sometimes travels for work and has said she will hire a sitter next time so dh can't have sd.
She never asks for her when dh can't be with her during his time and has in fact said to only ask her in emergencies as a last resort and she STILL then says- no get a sitter.
So... I am not worried about her abusing it, though she might just to be a witch, so it will have to be worded carefully.
Some have something like "If the parent will be "unavailable" during visitation for more than X hours." Which I think is perfect, as it allows for the child to be sent to friend's or family's homes for visits.
Occasionally dh has to work all day on a weekend day and we have always offered it to bm, I'd be happy if she'd take it, but she refuses. Shrug.
DH and BM have one, but she does not follow it. She finds ways to screw dh out of time with the skids, but then tells the kids that she "asked DH and he said no." They are old enough to know that this is a lie/manipulation. It just gets frustrating to have the same situation play out over and over again.
The CO isn't worth the money DH paid for it (she refused to pay for their divorce), as it NEVER seems to apply to BM>
My husband just had this put
My husband just had this put in his CO. SD can spend only one night away from BM while in her custody. Anything in excess of that must be offered to my husband. It hasn't been exercised yet. I'm sure BM will be in contempt of it at some point. She loves sending SD to GBM's house for weeks on end in the summer.
We had over 6 hours. BM was
We had over 6 hours. BM was pretty good about this one after DH called her out on it.
Fror?
Fror?
First right of refusal. But
First right of refusal. But remember it has to work both ways... the devil is in the detail with this.
The way it is written, per
The way it is written, per BM'S manipulation, it actually works against her. However, she's also the only one who violates it (and it appears to be on purpose).
FROR is a ticking time bomb
FROR is a ticking time bomb if either side in the blended family equation goes toxic. The wording of yours is well done I think. If there is no boundary of reasonableness in the FROR element of a CO then it can turn into a complete PITA and toxic nightmare.
Many STalkers over the years have had a FROR clause in their CO end up biting them in the ass. When BM gets toxic (the situations I recall were BM centric) and starts using FROR to interfere with Dad’s time once Dad gets a new GF or remarries it can take years to get the FROR issues resolved and the wording modified to include a boundary or reasonableness that keeps the toxic opposition under control.
Some STalkers have had to deal with FROR issues because the CO does not define at what point FROR applies or FROR applies in extremely inconvenient horizons. I recall one STalker's CO that required that BM be called and offered the Skid if dad was going to be away from the SKid for more than a couple of hours during visitation. GF/SM and dad had to cater to BM’s manipulations until dad finally put his proverbial foot up BM’s ass to get it under control.
Our CO had no FROR element. However, the Sperm Idiot rarely had the Skid during his visitation time. He forfeited his visitation time to Sperm Grandma and rarely saw the Skid more than one or two days even during his long summer visitation. Visitation in my Skid’s Custody/Visitation/Support CO was 5wks summer, 1wk winter, 1wk spring. He rarely if ever even saw his bio-dad. If our CO had contained a FROR we could have very easily ended all contact between the Skid and his Sperm Clan. When we married I told my wife I would never prevent the Skid from having a relationship with his Sperm Clan and we probably would have never invoked a FROR but there sure were some times during peak Sperm Clan toxicity that I would have loved to have picked the kid up form Sperm Grandma’s house at the beginning of the second night of visitation when the Sperm Idiot abdicated his parental responsibilities to the Sperm Grandhag.
I could have had more fun barring their idiot asses with a FROR clause in the CO. }:) }:) }:)
Be careful when addressing a FROR. It cuts both ways.
We want it (they do not yet
We want it (they do not yet have court order- in process now) only because bm sometimes travels for work and has said she will hire a sitter next time so dh can't have sd.
She never asks for her when dh can't be with her during his time and has in fact said to only ask her in emergencies as a last resort and she STILL then says- no get a sitter.
So... I am not worried about her abusing it, though she might just to be a witch, so it will have to be worded carefully.
Some have something like "If the parent will be "unavailable" during visitation for more than X hours." Which I think is perfect, as it allows for the child to be sent to friend's or family's homes for visits.
Occasionally dh has to work all day on a weekend day and we have always offered it to bm, I'd be happy if she'd take it, but she refuses. Shrug.
DH and BM have one, but she
DH and BM have one, but she does not follow it. She finds ways to screw dh out of time with the skids, but then tells the kids that she "asked DH and he said no." They are old enough to know that this is a lie/manipulation. It just gets frustrating to have the same situation play out over and over again.
The CO isn't worth the money DH paid for it (she refused to pay for their divorce), as it NEVER seems to apply to BM>