Need help wording this please:
So, DH is in a custody battle trying to get some things changed on the very one sided agreement he signed years ago. Right now he pays child support and 100% for extra curriculars. Well of course HCBM wants their kids in everything and the most expensive of everything. Our attorney keeps saying to be reasonable. Okay. So, HCBM is asking DH to agree to sooooo much stuff! If we say yes (which of course we won't because the amount of extras she is asking him to agree to it's literally over the top overscheduling) and we would not have any money left over for any family trips this summer or anything else. Any money left over after bills would be going just to the SK's doing their extra curriculars and nothing towards us doing anything as a family nor towards anything for my kids if they want to do a camp this summer.
Well she argues about everything so we need a way to shut her down (I need a perfect BIFF statement folks! Lol) that basically says we are willing to put such amount towards extra curriculars and that's all we are willing to contribute (which trust me, it's still very generous and reasonable) and there no more discussion about it. She wants to know what DH spends on me, on my kids and anything else because she thinks anything DH has should go to their kids. Mind you....she pays for none of this but expects DH to give anything extra to their kids and their kids only. So, we don't want to say "we can't afford it" because technically we *could* but again, it would be at the expense of our family as a whole as well as the other children and we don't want to say it's oversceduling because she will just argue it's not (we have been battling that one too long) . So, give me your best statement you would say that she can't come back and argue, accuse ect., just basically "this is what we are willing to do now shut up"
But in a nicer way. Lol!!! Thank you!
I wouldn't approach this from
I wouldn't approach this from the financial angle. Better to take the over scheduling route. "I am already financing X activities and will not agree on more to avoid over scheduling my child... in accordance with the judge's instructions. "
Yeah that's what we have been
Yeah that's what we have been doing because DH feels they are already over scheduled. She just argues and argues. He doesn't want to give her any reason. He's not require to report a full essay to her on why he is or isn't agreeing to things. He just wants to say a more general statement as to what he is and isn't agreeing to. Does that make sense? Because she will just argue whatever it is he says. If we say "this is what we are willing to do and will not continue the discussion" is all ge should have to say ya know?? As long as he is being reasonable, there should not have to be a huge long winded discussion about it. At least I wouldn't think so. If we were dealing with a normal, healthy rational person? Sure! This works! But we are dealing with an extremely high conflict, narcissistic, controlling, immature, irrational person.
I agree with Winterglow. But
I agree with Winterglow. But remember, you technically can't afford it. If all of your money outside of bills is going to skids and its limiting what you can do for your kids, you can't afford it. I wouldn't address this until it becomes an issue.
If BM contacts DH asking for sport money, I would respond "DH financially contributes to skids every month in the form of court ordered CS. DH is willing to pay for half of one mutually agreed upon sport (per kid) per year. If skids wish to pursue more than one sport or if an agreement cannot be reached, then BM can pay for sports and take my contribution from her monthly child support payment. I will not contribute more than what is outlined above going forward, nor will this topic be up for debate."
Our attorney advised us against paying for half of sports because BM was using sports to alienate because SS was "always too busy with sports to see DH" and BM wasn't giving DH any input in the sports. It was basically "I signed SS up for x, pay me x in reimbursement." Now, we only pay CS and our half of out of pocket medical. BM doesn't like it, but if she is unwilling to coparent and treats DH like a walking ATM, this is what she gets. We stick to only what is court ordered and nothing more.
They have a written agreement
They have a written agreement that he has to follow until it's changed. He's paying 100% for sports. She wants them in a million things. He says it's over scheduling, she argues it not, that SS's make straights A's and can handle it. He says it's too much money. She's says they can with something out (like he can repay her) He just wants a one liner to shut her down and where there's nothing to argue about. The reasoning doesn't really matter. As long as he is being reasonable and not saying no to everything which of course he would never do. He's a great dad.
Is that agreement court
"I can't afford it and I do not agree" is a complete sentence. BM doesn't get to dictate a payment plan or your household budget. If it puts a financial strain on your household, then it doesn't happen or BM can pay for it. If BM brings up the agreement, DH can stress that the agreement did not specify the number of sports and that BM has exceeded what is considered financially reasonable.
The courts are not going to fight if DH cannot afford it. Your lawyer needs to stop taking the approach of kissing BM's butt. It isnt doing you any favors.
No is a complete sentence
No is a complete sentence
Lol! That's true. But, he has
Lol! That's true. But, he has to make sure he's being reasonable. Just saying "no" isn't acceptable while we are in a custody battle.
I totally get it! BM was
I totally get it! BM was doing this to us too until order became more specific. Our wording is so simple. BM is in charge of paying and signing ss up for a winter or fall sport and dh is responsible responsible a spring sport. He only plays two sports a year and the person paying, pays for everything including gear.
That wouldn't work for us.
That wouldn't work for us. She has to have complete control over everything. Last weekend when we had the kids she emailed DH all weekend. Then silence when she had them. Then he gets them Thursdays and she wrote him a huge email with all sorts of crap. Then we haven't heard from her since. He gets them Thursday again and it will be the same....10 emails a weekend. She does this all the time. Our attorney's aren't doing anything but saying "don't answer what you don't have to" I'm at the end of my rope. If this was a man doing this to a woman? He would have harassment charges on him but because she's "mother" why would you do that to a mother?? Omg.
I think you can safely ignore
I think you can safely ignore the messages when the kids are there with you. She has no need to contact you (she just wants to). You have the kids and they're safe so it clearly isn't an emergency (which is the only reason she should be calling you anyway).
I hope you're saving all her messages up and pasting them into an ongoing file. That alone should show her for the loon that she is.
She doesn't call. Just
She doesn't call. Just continuous emails because her attorney told her she has the right to email him anytime she wants but that he is not required to respond unless it's "an emergency" which of course, everything is then "urgent" it's really ridiculous. He doesn't answer but it still disrupts our weekends because it's nonstop then she involves the kids talking about practices that pop up and if he doesn't respond SK will say "dad didn't take us" it's just a damn mess!
That's exactly what I am
That's exactly what I am telling you. If the kids are with you, there can be no emergency.
Bingo.
If the SKids are with you and not with BM, there are no BM related emergencies.
Nothing she has to say needs to be read until it is convenient for DH to read it.
Oh gotcha!!! Yeah I guess I'm
Oh gotcha!!! Yeah I guess I'm just thinking emergency is she was in a car accident and in the hospital so we need to keep the kids or her house caught on fire. LOL.
I wonder why dh's lawyer
I wonder why dh's lawyer believes DH paying out the wazoo is ok?
Does BM live in a shack with no running water and dh is a plastic surgeon working in NYC or Beverly Hills?
I disagree...It IS ok to say NO in a middle of a court case. IF she files for dh to pay pay pay, she has to show why he must. Dh has no reason just to write her a check for her whims.
Yeah, HCBM lives in a
Yeah, HCBM lives in a gorgeous house, has plenty of money and the kids are incredibly entitled. Her parents are extremely wealthy as well. She is just entitled and expects whatever she wants.
I would stick with number of
I would stick with number of activities and cost. So - "I'm in agreement with the kids playing 1 sport per season up to $xx amount."
Then if she argues.
"BM, as I stated, I am only in agreement with paying for 1 sport per season up to X amount. You have proposed two sports each season exceeding that amount. Therefore I do not agree. Please let me know which one SS would prefer to do and I will reimburse for that. I will not be discussing this matter any further, as we have already exchanged 4873 emails on this topic. Thanks, ex-H"
Perfect! Thank you. This
Perfect! Thank you. This sounds great and exactly what I needed
With a BM like this, your
With a BM like this, your husband needed a lawyer who was a barracuda, not one who wants to preach reasonableness. Being reasonable with someone who isn't remotely reasonable doesn't work.
From what you've described in other posts, your family can't afford all these sports. Say no, and let him say he cannot afford it and will not discuss it further. IIRC, this BM was a SAHM and wasn't working when that agreement was signed, and is working and doing well for herself now. There's been a change in circumstances, and changes in circumstance are considered where child support is concerned. ECs are essentially child support. You don't want to look like you can afford all this stuff by saying yes when you really can't. And when she offers to "work something out," meaning her parents pay now and DH reimburses later, he still can't afford it - that's just deferring the obligation he can't afford.
Agreed! Our lawyer calls bm
Agreed! Our lawyer calls bm an intentional pain in the a$$. He doesn't even try negotiating. Instead we go straight to mediation
I know! I keep saying this.
I know! I keep saying this. Agreed.
I like Tog's answer but I
I like Tog's answer but I would go with "I am willing to support 1 activity that cost no more then $XX.XX." Willing is much harder to argue with. Agreement leaves wiggle room for a HCBM to argue against.
Great point! Thank you. Of
Great point! Thank you. Of course she will say "so that's all you are willing to do for your children? So you don't think they deserve the best?"
TMI!!!!!!!!!!
"No" is a complete sentence.
Go to court, get what you can, and stick to ............... "No". A one word position is about as BIFF as it can get.
For some reason many in a blended family opposition situation seem to want to talk it out with the toxic opposition. No. Minimizing communication with a toxic opposition is the power position and limiting any information provided to them is an advantage.
Maintaining that advantage makes sense.
Put it in the PP
My DH's PP states that DH and BM have to split cost on 'agreed activities' and transportation to and from agreed events are the responsibility of the perosn the child is with at the time. Activities that are not agreed to can not interfere with the other person's time and the person who signe SS up has to provide all transportation. DH had all school related activities (such as sports, band, dances, etc.) written as agreed into the PP so BM can't deny SS these activities because she doesn't want to pay or transport. BM only sees SS everyother weekend, but sometimes things fall on these days, and she was trying to enroll him in things we would have to pay for and transport him to during our time. Somethings were before we got ut of work (she doesn't work), so when she tried to go to court because we refused to pay or transport the judge sided with us. Now SS plays sports and is band. He also does other activities on our time, but she can not dictate for us to pay or transport him for things she want him to do - suprisingly (not) he is not involved in anyting but playing video games at her house ever since the judge said she had to help foot the bill.
Limit answering
We just don't respond to alot of the texts that don't require immediate attention. They can sit and wait. Usually this has them stop for awhile each time. The message above you agreed with is good and leave it at that. If she wants to argue she can argue with herself. That's what we do all the time.
"BM, The kids are already
"BM, The kids are already enrolled in one sport that semester. I do not agree to adding any more activities to their schedule as it interferes with my parenting time and limits the time they have to concentrate on their schoolwork"
"No, I cannot agree to that summer camp as it conflicts with a planned family vacation that we are taking on my custody time."
"No, I will not agree to more than one sport or extracuricular activity at a time, the kids need time to be kids instead of having every minute of their lives scheduled with obligations".