We had our home visit as part of the Court ordered social study recently.

First, I was shocked at how little the case worker seemed to want to see. She took a 2 minute tour of the 4 bedroom, 2.5 bath, two story home, including garage and backyard. I guess I imagined she'd want to see and ask questions about where/how/when the kids eat, sleep, bathe, etc, etc. It seemed as if she just wanted to make sure the house existed and looked like we actually lived here.

Second, and the real reason for the post, the case worker sat down with SO to discuss BM concerns and give him an opportunity to answer or defend himself against the concerns. Several of her concerns are below.

1. SO is trying to replace BM in the children's lives by asking me to be go along with and/or be involved in things like extracurricular activities, school programs, etc.

SO responded and said, "does BM expect me to pretend SM doesn't exist and just do things alone? BM has every right and opportunity to participate in those things, but even if SM was not there, I'm not going to go in and pretend SM and I are one big happy family just because SM isn't around"

What I wish he'd said, "BM should grow up and accept that she walked out and only recently, because of the upcoming social study, did BM have a desire to become involved in activities"

2. SM goes to the schools and tells the teachers negative things about BM that makes it hard for BM to get information needed from teachers about the kids.

SO response: BM has every right and opportunity to go to the school and talk to whomever BM wants to talk to. SM was asked by one of the kids teachers to assist in the classroom once a week because SM works from home. SM has no reason to say anything negative about BM and would not do that"

What I wish he'd said, "Just because BM is in the habit of saying negative things about SM to anyone who will listen, not excluding the kids, does not mean SM would do that."

3. Backstory, prior to the initial custody hearing, SO method of discipline was corporal, it is how he and I both were raised, and probably how he would still discipline his children if BM had not told the judge the children were "deathly afraid of their father because he physically abuses them (mind you, the court never questioned whether SO should have custody, so the allegation of abuse was dismissed). Since that time, SO has tried to come up with alternative discipline, but for the strong willed SS6, he turns most punishments into a game (e.g. when told to sort SS6 and SS8 laundry, SS6 made up a song and dance to go along...no longer a punhsiment....when told he could not ride his bike, but had to be outside with the rest of the family, SS6 found a scrap piece of wood, gave it a name and personality and sat there playing with the piece of wood for at least 30 minutes....no longer a punishment). Anyway, we read up on many different things and came up with a reward system rather than a punishment system. For good behavior the kids earn fake bucks that can be cashed in for things like "snacks", "extra tv time", "trip to the big park", "movie day, kids choice", "$10 for a toy" and the highest prize is "dinner with dad, kids choice".

Now, BM concern:

The buck system that SM came up with is too harsh because the children have to pay to eat and if they don't have enough bucks, they cannot eat.

SO response: silence and a blank stare :jawdrop:

Followed by, "the only food we make the kids pay for is their 3 snacks they have each day because snacks are not a requirement, they are a treat. So in essence, the kids get 2-3 bucks each day, SS6 for good behavior and any chores, SS8 for behavior, grades and any chores. Every morning, they have to cash in 1 buck for the opportunity to take a snack to school. If the kids come home with good behavior/grades, they get the snack after school and then a dessert. It their behavior/grades are poor for that day they lose the after school snack and possibly the dessert as well. Other than that, the children eat breakfast at school each day, because it is free, they eat lunch at school each day, which is not cheap and we eat home cooked meals together as a family most evenings, the only exception are on days when SM has to work in the field and gets home after dinner time, even then I [SO] eat dinner with the kids each night"

What I wish he'd said, "Not only is that claim ridiculous, it speaks to the fact that BM is just grasping at straws, she's shooting a billion arrows in all directions and hoping to at least land in the area of a possible target just once. This buck system has been in place for 5 months now, if BM was really concerned at all about the kids not eating, why not address this with SO immediately rather than waiting 3 months into the social study process to mention it? And not only that, the fact that she believes the kids are not eating shows that did not bother to ask the children prior to making the claim. If she'd bothered to ask the children, she'd know we make a big deal about family dinners. Our meals range from SS6 and SS8 homemade pizzas, homemade mexican food, brinner (breakfast for dinner), "chicken with an orange bowtie", "chicken all the way", and on and on and on. BM should really just grow up"

[side note: if you ask me, 3 sweet/salty treats is WAY too many, but that is what SO was doing before I met him, I let him raise his children the way he sees fit] [also, SO does most of the cooking, and always has, lucky me!]

4. SM does not like BM and therefore does not let BM talk to children when BM calls.

SO response, "initially, BM claimed she worked a 9-4 job, a few weeks into the custody matter, it was stated she now works late hours and would call during her breaks at work, usually between 6-7:30. That is the time we are usually sitting at the dinner table and I am not going to answer the phone and interrupt that, I did at first, but it creates a distraction."

What I wish he'd said, "You're darn right I stopped answering the phone, it only took her about 3 weeks to realize she should just stop trying. When BM calls the house, she has no purpose other than to try to get information. For example, BM called the house on Christmas evening, after she'd had them Christmas morning and the conversation went like this:

BM: "hey, what are you doing?"
SS: "watching our cousin open his Christmas gifts"
BM: "well, who's there with you"
SS: *looks at me, then at SO, then leaves the room*
SO: *follows SS*
SS: "huh?"
BM: "who's there with you?"
SS: *gives description*
BM: "oh, she's there? what did she get you for Christmas?"
SO: "pass the phone to your brother"

*pass the phone, repeat* and then SO hangs up the phone which is followed by awkward silence and looks*

4. SM has a problem with SO's mother, so kids don't get to see their paternal grandparents

SO response: :jawdrop: :? :O :? :jawdrop: :O :? :O :jawdrop: :jawdrop: :O

I responded: :O :? :O :? :O :?

"WHAT?!?! I cannot believe BM would go so far as to say anything that specific about me when BM and I have said no more than 5 words to one another (her words and my words combined) in the time I have been with SO. To suggest I have a problem with SO mother, when we just spent the last weekend putting together patio furniture while the guys fixed SO's father's computer, we talk to/see each other/hang out at the grandparent's house once per week, etc is crazy"

What I wish I'd said "I notice most of BM concerns are not necessarily about the well-being of the kids, or the way SO is raising the kids, but the presence and even the very existence of SM. SM has come to grips with the reality that BM is never going away, why can't BM try to accept that SM is here, BM cannot change that, and try to go with it? I'm not asking her to like me, to grow up and change over night, but I, and we all, would appreciate it if she would just stop trying to antagonize SM at every step of the way.

Oh well, a girl can dream, right?