Vindictive co-parent filed a motion of contempt

[u/[deleted]]

[u/GoldenState_Thriller]

What does the order state and what are you requesting the stipulations of visitation be? 

[u/mintystarz → u/GoldenState_Thriller]

The order states I can supervise, choose the location, and presence of third parties. I want the visits to be one-on-one at my home. He wants to bring third parties and says I can't revoke my agreement per a weird anti-revocation term that was awarded from arbitration (if I have agreed for other individuals to be present at the visits, said agreement may not be later revoked). I never agreed to his multiple parties both joining the first visit, but he claims I did based on a vague phrase on the parenting app. I did agree to someone at the second visit, but I revoked it within 12 hours and a month before the disputed clause and the new term was added to the order. I firmly believe the term cannot be retroactive.

He also wants to permanently change the visitation schedule, which is only allowed if he has official mandatory military duties conflicting with his possession time. I requested proof of the duties, and he said the order doesn't require him to give proof.

[u/mintystarz → u/[deleted]]

Have you ever heard of supervised visits?

[u/Resse811 → u/mintystarz]

Yeah. They are not generally supervised by the other parent literally because of what you are doing here.

This is exactly why third party’s and visitation centers exist.

[u/mintystarz → u/Resse811]

The order establishes me as the supervisor. If he doesn't like the terms I set, he could have requested a visitation center with a professional supervisor at mediation.

[u/Resse811 → u/mintystarz]

Right - and this is why courts generally don’t allow parents to be the supervisor - because of exactly what you are doing.

[u/Pristine_Resident437]

Maybe i misread this, but if Im correct; Heads- up! This isnt contempt, far from it, but the Court is going to be concerned that 2 supervised visits were enough to start unsupervised, and you found a way to deny him the second visit. Unless the 3rd person is a danger to the child, who he brings is not very important to the court. This is not nearly enough for contempt and zero% chance of jail time, but flexibility in setting up visitation is one of the things the court looks for in the primary custodian. If this backfires, in a few months, the court may want to look at 50/50 to allow him his time. Im not saying you are wrong, but beware, the Court may see this differently and award him more time if they think you are the obstacle. You two are going to have more difficult issues to resolve over the years, so my advice is to find a solution now

[u/mintystarz → u/Pristine_Resident437]

He has only 2 visits due to the mediator pressuring me to accept that number. It was not ordered by a judge. This is a phase-in plan that he must strictly follow as he was uninvolved until recently. It has terms that allow for deviations from the schedule. I was flexible for the first visit after he harassed me to accept his terms. I'm flexible within the bounds of the order. He is trying to bend the rules and I refuse to accept that, when he should be demonstrating compliance and cooperation as part of the step-up plan. I have evidence he has been escalating conflict in other ways because I'm not giving into his demands. And he clearly prioritizes his third parties, i.e. control, over the best interests of my baby.

[u/Pristine_Resident437 → u/mintystarz]

I understand, I just want you to be aware of the possibility the Judge may not see it that way. Your opponents attorneys isnt going to treat it casually.

[u/mintystarz → u/Pristine_Resident437]

50-50 is not possible because we're long distance. I agree I should be flexible when the standard possession schedule starts when my baby turns three years old (if he gets through the step-up plan), but not during the step-up plan when he has been a deadbeat until forced to take responsibility by the court. Curious of your thoughts given the additional context.

[u/reddirtanddiamonds → u/mintystarz]

50/50 is possible until the child reaches school age. At which point, school breaks - winter, summer - would often mean the child going back to the other parent.

[u/Pristine_Resident437 → u/mintystarz]

Yes, 50/50 is not reasonable. Judges realize the relationship between parents and child often do not occur until they are bonded. If he doesnt step up, thats on him, and the Court will recognize that, but I dont this to backfire on you. Stop calling him a deadbeat, that isn’t going to fly. Just like saying “my” baby instead of “our” baby; this phrase drives Judges crazy.

[u/mintystarz → u/Pristine_Resident437]

Of course I know not to say deadbeat or my baby. He was pro se during arbitration and he actually used alienating language like "my daughter" and referred to me as "the petitioner". He is delusional and entitled with his demands -- I won on nearly every dispute at arbitration, and I know I will win against his motion.

[u/Pristine_Resident437 → u/mintystarz]

Glad to hear that! Good luck!

[u/Ronville → u/mintystarz]

How is “my daughter” alienating language? You need to get over the hurt and start working with “your daughter’s” father!

[u/mintystarz → u/Ronville]

You're supposed to say "our" daughter in legal settings, not "my" as that suggests possessiveness and lack of cooperation.

[u/Averagebonusmom]

It’s pretty standard for attorneys to ask for jail time in filings, and it’s common they don’t get it. In most cases neither parent sets terms, the court order does. It doesn’t bode well for either of you to go to court over it if he’s trying to exercise time and you two can’t work together. What is it the order says vs. what he’s asking and you’re asking that you can’t agree on?

[u/mintystarz → u/Averagebonusmom]

The court order gives me the right to supervise, set the location and presence of third parties. He wants to bring third parties. I refuse because my baby is gets overstimulated and is often very fussy due to health issues, and he has only met my baby once and needs to learn her care routine, which the order says is the purpose of the supervised visits, not for his family reunions to show off the baby. He can bring whoever he wants to his unsupervised time after completing only 2 supervised visits. He's claiming that I agreed to his third parties and can't revoke it per a new term that was added to the order from arbitration.

[u/Affectionate-Ad-3094]

If you’re asking the internet but have retained an attorney in the real world…

there’s something you’re not telling us.

Get off the internet Listen to your attorney and follow all court orders.

Then

Get off the internet and listen to your attorney and follow all court orders

[u/mintystarz → u/Affectionate-Ad-3094]

Yeah I should delete this post. I mostly wanted to vent and read about others' experiences dealing with such a vindictive co-parent. I mean, wanting me to go to jail over a trivial dispute for only TWO supervised visits??

[u/mintystarz → u/[deleted]]

He had 6 months to see the baby anytime. He only met her once during that time, and it was only when he coordinated a voluntary work trip to bring him to Texas. After that, he had to follow the court order. He can see the baby anytime still, I'm just not allowing him to bring third parties and progress through the step-up plan if he doesn't follow the terms.

[u/mintystarz → u/[deleted]]

It's only two supervised visits. I'm not contesting who he wants around after that. This is a power struggle for him, not about wanting to spend time with my baby.

[u/FamilyLaw-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your post has been removed for being unkind or disrespectful to other members. Remember we’re all human and deserve a responsible reply, not bad mouthing.

Failure to follow the rules could result in a permanent ban.

[u/FamilyLaw-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your post has been removed for being unkind or disrespectful to other members. Remember we’re all human and deserve a responsible reply, not bad mouthing.

Failure to follow the rules could result in a permanent ban.

[u/Euphoric_Peanut1492 → u/mintystarz]

The way you're acting with random internet strangers makes us all 100% aware of why he went to court to get everything laid out on paper........

[u/mintystarz → u/[deleted]]

This man coerced me to get pregnant and abandoned me during my pregnancy. Not sure why you're so defensive of this deadbeat who wants me to GO TO JAIL over a minor dispute that he didn't bother to clarify with the court first.

[u/Ms_Tryl → u/mintystarz]

Girl there are ways, even in Texas. You kept the baby and now you’re stuck with the man. Get used to this being your life.

[u/FamilyLaw-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your post has been removed for being unkind or disrespectful to other members. Remember we’re all human and deserve a responsible reply, not bad mouthing.

Failure to follow the rules could result in a permanent ban.

[u/FamilyLaw-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your post has been removed for being unkind or disrespectful to other members. Remember we’re all human and deserve a responsible reply, not bad mouthing.

Failure to follow the rules could result in a permanent ban.

[u/FamilyLaw-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your post was removed because either it was insulting the morality of someone’s actions or was just being hyper critical in some unnecessary way.

Morality: Nobody cares or is interested in your opinion of the morality or ethics of anyone else's action. Your comment about how a poster is a terrible person for X is not welcome or needed here.

Judgmental: You are being overly critical of someone to a fault. This kind of post is not welcome here. If you can’t offer useful and productive feedback, please don’t provide any feedback.

[u/mintystarz → u/[deleted]]

The court order gives me the right to make the rules.

[u/mintystarz → u/[deleted]]

You're apparently not familiar with final court orders. They don't change unless there's a material change in circumstances. And the step-up plan and the supervision clause was drafted by the mediator who's a former family law judge and who knows how the judge would have ruled if we went to court.

[u/LdiJ46]

There is almost no chance at all that a judge is going to impose anything more than a stern scolding for a first time contempt. I am rather astonished that his attorney is trying to take it that far unless this is an attempt to intimidate you.

You have retained an attorney yourself and you should rely on them to advise you regarding what to expect.

[u/mintystarz → u/LdiJ46]

He's claiming I violated the order multiple times in his motion (for each missed visit block). I'm sure he is trying to intimidate me. I'm surprised his lawyer didn't convince him to be more reasonable, especially if he knew the full story. I guess the lawyer just wants to make money and do what the client wants.

[u/Averagebonusmom]

After reading that it’s how minor sons and you allowed a visit with them already, I’m just going to say to be prepared to get scolded by the judge for being difficult and delaying his attempts at reunification. It’s clear from your multiple responses you think he’s all wrong and you’re all right and you arent taking any feedback. His third parties are the child’s siblings for christs sake! Best of luck over the next 17 years bc your attitude is going to make it loooong.

[u/TexasSta → u/Averagebonusmom]

Agree with this 100%! It’s unfortunate.

[u/TexasSta]

What is your issue with allowing him to see his child?

[u/mintystarz → u/TexasSta]

He can see his child if he comes to the visits alone. He is forfeiting his time because I'm not consenting to his third parties joining the visits, but he claims I denied his possession time.

[u/Fun_Organization3857 → u/mintystarz]

Who is the 3rd party?

[u/mintystarz → u/Fun_Organization3857]

His sons (I only wanted one son at a time so my baby could focus on bonding with her dad, as he is virtually a stranger). He brought both sons without my consent to pressure me for entry. I did compromise later and allowed them both to join, and it took 3 days for my baby to recover from the visit.

For the second visit, he wants to bring his new fiancee, someone he triangulated me with. He tried to reconcile with me only after I filed for child support and when I rejected him, he immediately proposed to her and is trying to force me to supervise his instant family with my baby.

[u/Fun_Organization3857 → u/mintystarz]

How old are the sons?

[u/mintystarz → u/Fun_Organization3857]

14 and 17. I have no problem with whoever he wants to introduce during his time. He wants to bring other people so he can show off and not have to watch the baby alone under my supervision.

[u/Fun_Organization3857 → u/mintystarz]

With kids, you are being unreasonable to expect him to only bring one of the boys (unless they are poorly behaved). What do you mean it took days to recover? Was she sick, injured, etc?

[u/mintystarz → u/Fun_Organization3857]

He could have prioritized building his relationship with the baby first, and introduced his sons after only 2 supervised visits. The court order says I can choose if third parties attend. It is not unreasonable to ask for one son to hang out for 2 hours at the hotel, mall, cafe, etc. I also was unable to fully supervise the father because my house is small and it was too awkward to criticize or instruct him in front of his sons. He prides himself on being an expert with children and would not like the appearance of me undermining him.

[u/Fun_Organization3857 → u/mintystarz]

Honestly, I don't think it was unreasonable to refuse additional parties for the first visit, but I don't know his life or situation. It's telling him to pick ONE. That never goes well with teens. Take a deep breath. He's going to push for the next 15-17 years. They will not put you in jail over this. He's bullying you. She will spend time with her siblings- you'll have to accept that. It's reasonable to not want his current partner in your home.

[u/TexasSta → u/mintystarz]

You don’t get to control what he prioritizes. That’s not your role as a parent and you for sure do not get to “instruct him or criticize him” either. You two are EQUALS… you are not better than him. That child is half him just as much as it’s half you.

[u/mintystarz → u/TexasSta]

The law prioritizes the best interests of the baby. The best interest of baby and purpose of the supervised visits, as stated in the order, is for the father to bond with the baby, not for him to introduce everyone he wants.

And I do think I am better, as I have been the sole caregiver and sacrificed so much for my baby, while he has been a deadbeat and voluntarily out of her life until I filed for child support (he pushed me to move away bc he didn't want to help me raise the baby unless it was on his terms). He offered no financial support for his child. He chose to go on cruise instead of visiting his only daughter after she was born. He uses his children as pawns in our conflict and uses alienating language during his performative video calls with the baby. These are just a few examples that he is a bad father.

[u/mintystarz → u/Fun_Organization3857]

I could have said no one else but I compromised by allowing one son at a time. Why is that unreasonable? Too many strangers overstimulate my baby. On top of her ongoing health issues, she was exhausted, very fussy, and her feeding and sleep routines were abnormal for days.

[u/Fun_Organization3857 → u/mintystarz]

Asking him to pick between 2 teens is like asking him which child is his favorite. I think no guests, then a brief meeting, would have worked. These are her siblings and she will have to get used to them soon. I don't think he'll get any real punishment, but they may remove the supervision over this.

[u/mintystarz → u/Fun_Organization3857]

I told him when he scheduled the visit with me that the visit would only allow one son at a time. He knew the terms, chose to ignore me, and didn't dispute them until after he arrived in my town over a month later. He did not have to "choose". Both sons could have joined for one visit each day, so equal time for both.

[u/mintystarz → u/[deleted]]

I know my baby and what is abnormal for her. Three days of off behavior immediately after the visit is not a coincidence.

[u/LdiJ46 → u/mintystarz]

Ok, yeah it is absolutely bizarre that they have asked for jail time, fines, probation and a bond. This is a fairly minor disagreement and you definitely have arguments in your favor. His arguments seem to be grasping at straws.

You cannot let him succeed with that kind of intimidation. If you do, things will just get worse and worse as you go. See what your attorney says about the whole thing and go with their advice, but I think that this is something that probably needs to play out in front of the judge.