Divorced Co-Parenting Oxymoron

The Big Lie About Co-Parentinga-parent-with-high-morals-2016

Divorce is shrouded in terminology that doesn’t begin to describe the intricacies of the relationships affected. It comes down to this: co-parenting or shared-custody is a full-time commitment. It requires just as much negotiating as a married couple engage in. Why would a couple who divorced due to irreconcilable differences be able to co-parent well?

It’s no wonder that often co-parenting is just a clever joining of words without substance. It comes down to who is caring for children the majority of the time — whomever the equation is weighted toward, is in charge. And within that paradigm there is little room for co-anything. And divorced? Forget about it. You are married without the health insurance.

You are never divorced if children are involved. You are perpetually divorcing. If the spoils amount to a cat and a Kitchen Aid bought with hoarded 20 percent discount cards from Macy’s by your former mother-in-law, being fully divorced is possible. This past weekend, negotiating the ends and outs of parenting teenagers, I had to admit, I’m not divorced. It won’t be a done deal until I’m pronounced dead. Time of death, 3:10 a.m. Time of divorcED, 3:11 a.m.

I’m just as married as any other aging former Girl Scout leader littering the hair salons of my small town. We are all covering our gray hair now. We are all stepping through the parenting minefields that are the teenage years. The difference between me and the ladies wearing out-of-style 1990s yellow gold wedding band sets? They may still have health insurance through their spouse, and possibly through the years their spouse has morphed into a good friend. Or, they might live inside stony silence and tolerate their spouse.

It is difficult enough with two parents living under the same roof to parent peacefully. It may be impossible when living under two different roofs. Different roofs, with a backdrop of unfinished business, anger, dislike for the other person and a sense of failure — failure for not having been able to paint the back drop a vibrant orange, for not having been able to find a way to get along, for failing to stay under the same roof.

An enlightened few have figured out how to be peaceful living beneath different roofs. Maybe they had good manners to begin with. Maybe they had a preternatural clarity of mind and an ability to transcend the pain accompanying divorce. I am not one of the shiny few.

I was not able to seamlessly move forward. Along with my less than graceful transformation from married to divorcing, I took a “divorce parenting” class required by the state of Massachusetts.

In the mandated class I learned obvious things: Don’t badmouth your former spouse to your children. Don’t ask your children about your former spouse’s private life. Don’t make your children chose who they like to be with more, you or your former spouse. Be kind to your children. Your children will forever be in shock from the selfish and disruptive decision to divorce made by you and your former spouse (that part I added. But something like that was inferred).

The class had the least amount of sexual energy I had ever felt in a room of mixed genders. Our wicks had been snuffed. We were zombie-like. The teacher was hopeful for us all. He assured us that we would go forth and still have healthy children. That we would indeed recover.

That was (hard to believe) six years ago. It was the spring. My mini van in the parking lot after class was the only thing I recognized inside my new life. The class met for four weeks on consecutive Wednesday evenings. After class, we the wickless wonders would file past lilacs heavy and fat, hanging from well-groomed trees. Each of us had failed at something we had cared enough about to make legal. The lilacs in bloom seemed insulting.

Continue reading

Courts must work toward a shared parenting norm – Miami Herald

Continue reading

Mediation and Agreed Orders ~ Your Only Hope in a Child Custody Case

The injustices that are perpetrated in divorce courts in the U.S. and many other countries.

iINGUANZO V. ROSE - CAUSES 2015

So many divorces, yet no one seems to notice how unjust they are, especially to the men. Most men–including legislators and judges–believe it is their duty to protect the poor woman and children at the cost of the men being divorced.

Perhaps they do not realize they are ruining the lives of these men along with our society and usually the women and children they are purporting to protect. Bringing this information into public view can hopefully create the social will to change it. Everyone can see the problems in society. Few are able to correlate the root cause.

Let’s face it. The deck is stacked in favor of the mothers. There is no such thing as equal parenting or doing what is in the “best interest of the children.” This is a moneymaker for government, lawyers, social workers the list goes on and on, at the ultimate expense of children. The truth is, they are not “family court” trials, they are kangaroo courtspersonal attacks and unscrupulous methods are used lawyers against parents in family court. In family court, parents can get dozens, even hundreds, of “trials,” if we count, as he does, every time an innocent parent is hauled into court without having committed any legal infraction and issued with some “order” about how he must conduct his private life if he wants to stay out of jail.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Many parents are forced to appear in court on a regular basis, each time ordered to open their wallets to attorneys and pay other exorbitant “debts” they have done nothing to incur. Indeed, family court has so many ways to criminalize parents that they can just keep “trying” them until they are found guilty of something.

Do any of these numerous trials involve a jury? Is there ever a formal charge? Are parents ever declared innocent and left in peace? Or are these quickly improvised hearings, in which parents are barely permitted to speak before the judge takes away their children, confiscates their savings, seizes their homes, attaches their wages, and jails them without any semblance of what most Americans consider a fair trial or due process of law?

America’s family courts are ideologically driven kangaroo courts. These feminist tribunals are the shame of American justice. They are creating a police state that will only expand along with the federal funding that drives them until other media follow The Free Lance-Star and expose this appalling abuse of government power.

Closed Court precludes any balance analysis of proceedings and when Jack Straw as our one time Justice Minister attempted to ‘Open’ the Court, he was met by derision by the very Judges who should have been called to account. Camilla Cavendish, who won an award for her Family Law column in The Times, was one of the first Journalists to be invited into Family Court in Ipswich and it was clear to me that at that time the same safeguards put in place for sensitive criminal cases could apply to Civil Laws, i.e. Child A, Family XYZ or even a serial number Journalists could refer to a case when given out to news of Parliament. Judges either willingly or otherwise collude with Barristers and Solicitors in perpetuating this corruption where financial gain can be achieved by their Court, rarely do they benefit either party, least of all the children involved and due to the closed nature of these Courts there is no accountability (if you appeal is it likely one Judge will contradict another). Money is the fuel to injustice and closed courts hide this fact from public scrutiny!

Closed Court precludes any balance analysis of proceedings and when Jack Straw as our one time Justice Minister attempted to ‘Open’ the Court, he was met by derision by the very Judges who should have been called to account. Camilla Cavendish, who won an award for her Family Law column in The Times, was one of the first Journalists to be invited into Family Court in Ipswich and it was clear to me that at that time the same safeguards put in place for sensitive criminal cases could apply to Civil Laws, i.e. Child A, Family XYZ or even a serial number Journalists could refer to a case when given out to news of Parliament.
Judges either willingly or otherwise collude with Barristers and Solicitors in perpetuating this corruption where financial gain can be achieved by their Court, rarely do they benefit either party, least of all the children involved and due to the closed nature of these Courts there is no accountability (if you appeal is it likely one Judge will contradict another).
Money is the fuel to injustice and closed courts hide this fact from public scrutiny!

legallybrunettefl

What is Mediation and why does the Judge in my family court case want me to attend at least one time or even more than once?

Mediation is a process by which two people (and possibly their attorney’s) come together in a joint session with a Mediator. The parties usually start out together in the same room while opening remarks are made and then sometimes the parties move into separate rooms and finish the mediation in what is known as a caucus. The Mediator will act as a facilitator and go back and forth between the parties to try to reach a resolution. If a resolution is reached, then the agreement can be reduced to writing.

In family cases where there are minor children, the mediation is a wonderful opportunity to work out a weekly time sharing schedule, a vacation and holiday time sharing schedule, child support and every other issue…

View original post 511 more words