communication and boundaries - when to give a child a personal phone?
What is the consensus regarding appropriate means of commuication with BM?
We are trying to establish boundaries with BM as she thinks she can just message/call at any time of the day as she doesn't work. DH has told BM that all correspondence regarding both of my SSs should be via email, but of course if there is an emergency, she should contact him directly on his phone. BM's response is that she does not know what is classed as an emergency - she cannot judge what is important and what is not important in order to establish whether the line of communciation should be email or whatsapp. BM has stated that she would like regular phone calls with DH to discuss child-related matters, as going back and forth through emails is "too long" for her and that she has other things to do during the day. I just don't understand how someone cannot differentiate between important/urgent information versus information that can easily be delivered through email. Of course it is a judgement call, but as an adult - especially as a parent - surely you should be able to make judgement calls based on the circumstances?
For example, my DH called BM's phone to speak to both of his sons as per contact arrangemetns he can call every other day after the boys finish school. On one such occasion, BM didn't answer her phone as the youngest had an incident at school with a black eye. This was all she said. BM did not inform DH about the details and whether their son was ok, I suggested he call the school directly if he was concerned.
You're telling me that BM doesn't know what is classed as important information to be relayed to DH?
On another note, what does everyone think about the age in which children should be allowed to have a personal phone, particularly to contact the parent that they do not reside with? BM is the primary carer and DH only sees his children every other weekend on a sunday and sometimes during the school holidays. My SS is 11 and as we all know, children this age start to go through many physical and emotional changes as they go through puberty. As a boy, he may not be comfortable talking to his mum about certain things. BM has refused for SS to continue having a personal phone as she feels that it is disruptive - she returned the phone to DH a month ago, after SS has been using this to communicate with DH for the last year. DH had given the phone to his eldest son as a means to communicate directly with DH without having to go through BM every time. Now it's been a year and SS is 11, BM has stated SS is using it to speak to his friends and play games on it which is disruptive. BM demands that DH speak to the children through her phone only. However BM is always listening in on their conversations on their video call.
If there are strict parental controls on the phone, I don't see why my SS can't have a personal phone to be able to speak to DH freely. It feels like an act of control, as BM wants DH to have no choice bu to go through her to speak to the children.
- wineoclock's blog
- Log in to post comments
Comments
There is a balance. BM can
There is a balance. BM can control what happens in her home. But, she should be following court ordered communication allowances for your DH and the children. He can document those instances.. and if they appear to be regular problems.. then he can have his lawyer take this to court so she can be found in contempt.. the judge may tell her she has to allow kid to have phone if it is for communication only.
As far as knowing whether things are an emergency or not.. those emergencies are going to be rare.
For example, the incident at school you describe, in my mind, is NOT an emergency. The child had no life threatening injuries. This is an issue that should be disclosed reasonably promptly.. but in the immediate heat of the issue.. the parent that has custody may be busy putting ice on the eye.. discussing the altercation... etc.. and since it is not a life threatening issue.. it is NOT an emergency.
What IS an emergency?
1. A change in custody schedule issue request or need that is occuring within the next 12 to 24 hours.
2. An URGENT medical issue with the child that is requiring an ambulance trip to the hospital... may also include an urgent care visit.. but if the kid just has the flu.. it isn't necessarily urgent.. urgent.. emergency notification imho. But broken limb.. need for surgery.. ER room visit.. those are emergencies.
3. An urgent behavioral incident or issue. This would need to be something extremely extreme.. the kid SA assaulted the neighbor's daughter. Child had tortured or killed an animal. Child was throwing a tantrum and destroying the home... extreme and urgent behavioral issues.. not just that he refused to do his chores 2x in a row.
4. The kid is missing.. run away.. abducted.
5. Death of an immediate family member.. grandma.. grandpa.. sibling
Beyond that? I don't see why emails couldn't communicate just fine.. for "non urgent issues"
11 is on the edge of being old enough for a phone.. but if the kid is having issues controlling use.. then BM has the ability to not allow in her home.
How sad that we have to spell out the definition of an emergency
Really useful points, maybe BM needs to be educated on what constitutes an emergency and what it means to maintain boundaries once you are no longer with the father of your children.
Your DH isn’t putting his foot down
He should say e mail. Text and hang up. If BM is old enough to have kids she knows what's a emergency is. Going to Hospital, at hospital, accident, bleeding, trouble at school.
You are right BM whant to control your home and time. You must stop it at all costs.
Education is key
It's that simple! Why do people make things so complicated. If you wanted to have regular contact with DH regarding the kids, then you shouldn't have let DH go in the first place!
Why do BMs think they have the right to control the father of their children after divorce. Just because BM used to be his wife? Emphasis on used to be i.e past not present (and certainly not future).
In this case, I agree with BM
In this case, I agree with BM that a smart phone with a camera and access to the internet is a dangerous thing for a child. They are literally engineered to be addictive, and children are not developmentally ready to regulate themselves. There is a mountain of evidence showing how dangerous that is.
We had the opposite problem in our home. BM gave the kids iPhones so she could keep in constant contact with them and spy on our house. After a couple of weeks trying to decide how to handle it, we ultimately started confiscating the phones as soon as we picked them up from school on Monday, and gave them back when we dropped them off the following Monday. When they were at our house, they had a phone that made phone calls only.
It worked out great because they were so bored/uninterested in it that they rarely took it anywhere, which meant that at most they talked to BM for about 5 minutes in the evenings. Much less intrusive. We couldn't stop them from having iPhones at BM's house, and it did lead to issues with both of them as they got older. But we were able to maintain our rules/boundaries and still give them a way to contact their mom whenever they wanted.
As for the communication between your DH and BM, unless you want to go back to court to try for an order that it only be via email, the only option is to train BM to communicate how you want her to. This may or may not be effective, but I would just not respond at all to any phone calls or messages that aren't via email. Don't answer when she calls. If it's an emergency, she can leave a voicemail and DH can call her back. But other than that, just grey rock her. Hopefully she'll eventually get the picture or get bored.
Agreed
I agree smart phones are a slippery slope. No smart phones, only a brick phone that enables phone contact between DH and his sons. This means we can eliminate using BM's phone for indirect contact with the kids.
BM just needs additional support from DH as she doesn't want to rely on her own support network, which would encompass her own family, friends and potentially long-term boyfriend?
Yep and giving the kid a
Yep and giving the kid a phone won't stop BM. She isn't acting this way out of necessity, so even if there's a way to communicate without going through BM, BM won't change. Until DH stops catering to her, anyway. Text is fine for communication. Even emergencies. DH will get the message that SS is in the hospital just as easily through text as with a call, probably easier since you can miss a call but not a text. If the text has info that warrants a call, DH can call. If BM is too dumb to tell what's an emergency and what isn't, her little squirrel brain can just text and DH can choose what to respond to.
When kids can handle the
When kids can handle the phone ... As long as they are well behaved then I think kids these days are around 10-12 (maybe sooner) getting phones
When my kiddo was with her dad I used to only call her between 8am - 8pm then if I needed anything earlier or later I'd text.
But I really didn't want to be clinging to her remotely and encouraged her to keep in touch but also put the phone down and interact with her dads side of the family
This is what I expect out of the step kids too. If I/my kid could survive with these boundaries, so can they.
Now if someone is hurt/emergency then I'll call anytime
If BM refuses to use email
If BM refuses to use email for non-urgent information, I suggest your DH tells her that if she won't that he'll have no choice but to take her to court to impose Our Family Wizard as the means of communication for everything, that the court will see all communications AND that she'll have to pay for it.
He should take her to court
He should take her to court anyway. With no court order, BM is more able to bully him.
Why was there mediation and
Why was there mediation and who ordered it. ---Mediation is not something x's say "hey , what ya doing to day? Wanna spend a few days AND 1k each, on mediation??? You know, for the fun of it?
I'd look into that one if I were you.
The worst thing to do is NOT to have a court order. Granted very few high conflict bm's follow court orders. As of right now, life is flying by the seat of BM's pants.
Big NOPE.
Edit to add- about cell phone. Our kids did not get cells until they could contribute to paying for them. Our bm tried to pull the cell phone bs--dh said NOPE not in our house. Our Judge did not blink an eye about that either. Our home, our rules. Oh, by the way, bm does NOT have our cell phone numbers---never had it and never will. Other ways to contact people in an emergency.
.
No phone contact with BM - period?
I'm intrigued that you are able to get by without exchanging phone numbers with BM. How does this work in practice? I would like to implement something similar if possible!
A court order would be more convenient at this point
In the UK, they will not allow you to proceed to court without trying mediation first. It is supposedly a chraper route than going to court and not as traumatic for the kids. BM demanded mediation as she did not agree to DH's proposal of a change in contact arrangements. DH could not continue to have overnight contact which had been taking place at his mother's house (where DH lived) until we got married. After our marriage, DH moved iinto my 1 bedroom rental property as a temporary measure while he looks for a more suitable/bigger place so that can accommodate his kids for overnight stays EOW.