Holiday order interpretation for Thanksgiving

Status
Not open for further replies.

ktobias

New Member
Hello all, I am new to this forum. Seeking for some help from members, and I also hope to help others with the best I can to my knowledge.


I have a year old (2 this Dec.) son which I have full legal custody of, but joint custody (primary residence to me). I have been battling court custody/visitation with my son's father.

His father has been so demanding and belittling me, is very skilled at brainwashing people, using his wordds to play around , thinks he has the higher power, is not consistent with his visitations or child support, list goes on. I have told him numerous time to follow court orders (his usual days are Weds and Sundays-one night overnight when not in school).

What i need help with is- the court order states:

...
Commencing 2016,

......

Father will have the child on Thanksgiving break on even number years (From Wednesday til Sunday).
...



If a conflict arises as to the vacation period, on even years mother's preference shall hold, on odd years father preference shall hold.

__________________

I do have an attorney, and she states that if it states "breaks", it usually means school.

To my belief, whenever it states "breaks" for holidays, it means school to me and obviously my son is not in school right now, but he will be starting in 2016.

However, his father is demanding it does not mean school, and that he will have our son for that time, this year, and he will not return our son home until Monday after Thanksgiving.

(in the holiday schedule, such as christmas, spring break, etc they also state breaks, which is for school as well)

I have told him numerous times to follow court orders and he would respond, "well you should follow it as well so I'll be keeping him until monday whether you like it or not."


So for that reason, I need your help and advice on what "Thanksgiving break" is supposed to mean, as I am so tired of his smart mouth and belittling me constantly and his demanding. Please, and thank you very much!!
 
If your child is not in school then there really is no "break" to consider. If the child were going to miss a day of school, that would be different. I can see where it would make sense to follow the school schedule just to have a guide to follow. But I think you should ask yourself if it's worth beating your head against this brick wall over one extra day. You're going to be dealing with this man and these situations for 18 years. He's already antagonistic so fighting over this won't make that any better.
 
The paragraph of this Thanksgiving break described falls under "Commencing 2016..." with the list of holidays that follows. He is fighting me that whether it says break or not, it starts now. Although I was led to believe that breaks mean school breaks, as the christmas, spring break, summer, etc as listed in the holiday schedule, as told by my attorney. I am one to follow court orders and will always stick to it.

**note: judge made the court orders to fit our schedule now to the years when son is in school so we do not constantly go back and forth to court.
 
There is nothing that says you can't be flexible regarding court orders if both parties agree. It would seem unreasonable that the father would have NO holidays for two years, if I understand that is what you're suggesting. Again I say you can fight it, and you can spend more money with your attorney or you can bend on this.
 
I am more than willing to come to an agreement with the father as I want our son to spend time with one other. I even tried to suggest an agreement for the both of us to come to so our son can be with him for Thanksgiving, and all he does is demand when it is not in the court orders and not willing to come to agreement. That is why I came to this forum, because I needed some advice, and also to follow court orders. Thanks for your help
 
If you don't have an issue with the child spending the holiday with his father- the man you chose to have this child with- what is the issue? Who cares if it is a school break or not? If you fight the father spending a holiday with the child until a few years down the road when school is involved, I can virtually guarantee you will lose. Why the agreement is worded that way if it only meant school breaks when there are no school breaks is beyond me. It doesn't matter if you no longer like this guy or not. He is still the child's father and he has every bit as much right to holidays with the child as you do. It is in everyone's best interest to work together, get along, and stop looking for perceived technicalities in order to dig at one another.
 
Judge had made this order for now to the future to prevent any future filings. Never said I would fight with him, it is him that is fighting with me over something that is not included in court's order and just belittling me over everything when I put in an attempt to make agreements with him only for him to disagree. Again, that is why I came to this forum to seek advice on what the court orders meant exactly when it comes to "Breaks", becase after trying to make an agreement with him, nothing else I can do but stick to court orders as the judge ordered exactly.
 
If the written orders are not perfectly clear, then the judge may be the only one who can interpret what the intentions were.
 
Ask your attorney if she can figure out a way to get the judge to interpret exactly what was meant in the order. I would assume that "breaks" meant school as well, but I think it probably could stand some clarification since the child is not currently old enough to attend school.

I have seen custody/visitation agreements interpreted in some interesting ways. One that comes to mind is a friend whose visitation agreement said he could have his child for Christmas Eve. He was preparing to take her home to her mom in the morning on Christmas Day when the police showed up at his door, thinking they had to forcibly remove the child and take her back to her mother! Turns out that the way the mother and the police interpreted the order was that Christmas Eve actually ended at midnight, and that he should have gotten the child out of bed at midnight to take her back to the mom. Against all common sense, they were adamant that was how the order should be interpreted. I would have loved to see how a judge would interpret that one.
 
I agree, it does need some clarification. My son's father is very demanding and will try to "brainwash" me and have his own ways of manipulating to the point where I would take a step back and had to really consider if what he is saying is correct, when it is not. My attorney told me that in the orders, all breaks are included as school breaks. She also said all orders are open for interpretation, so it is up to me and him to come to agreement. I have tried that without success as he is just so demanding and refusing to agree to anything. So basically it is a one way street for him, so I am forced to stick to my court orders as ordered by our judge since he is refusing to communicate or agree.

Also, it comes to mind that if the judge states "breaks", then I would believe it is for school breaks, (in the court orders, judge had stated breaks like this: thanksgiving break, christmas break, summer break, spring break) due to the fact that school DO have breaks... and currently son is not in school as he is only 1 yr. old but as for his father and my workplace, we do not get "breaks" (I am a cosmetologist and he is a bar/club/party goer) and the judge knows what we do for work. So my point is, why would he put "breaks" in the order if he knows what we do for work and it is under the paragraph where it starts with, "Commencing 2016...).

So difficult, so I agree with you, it is interesting how judges interpret their court orders. Very tricky and difficult.


Ask your attorney if she can figure out a way to get the judge to interpret exactly what was meant in the order. I would assume that "breaks" meant school as well, but I think it probably could stand some clarification since the child is not currently old enough to attend school.

I have seen custody/visitation agreements interpreted in some interesting ways. One that comes to mind is a friend whose visitation agreement said he could have his child for Christmas Eve. He was preparing to take her home to her mom in the morning on Christmas Day when the police showed up at his door, thinking they had to forcibly remove the child and take her back to her mother! Turns out that the way the mother and the police interpreted the order was that Christmas Eve actually ended at midnight, and that he should have gotten the child out of bed at midnight to take her back to the mom. Against all common sense, they were adamant that was how the order should be interpreted. I would have loved to see how a judge would interpret that one.
 
Also, he does not have an attorney so he always claimed to have some form of legal advice when I have an attorney that knows the judge and told me the interpretation of the order from her knowledge of this case throughout. For clarification I would need to do a walk-in and see if I could speak with the clerk to get the statement from the judge since Thanksgiving is coming up soon.
 
I guess I shouldn't be, but I'm always surprised by the people who go into these things without an attorney but then claim to have some sort of inside track into the knowledge and interpretation of the laws/rules. I've heard a judge scold someone (more than once) in the courtroom when they tried to interpret or change something in the custody agreement saying that they "knew" what they were talking about, without benefit of having their own attorney.

I think sometimes people with no real leg to stand on legally think that just by WANTING something to go their way badly enough, things will be interpreted the way they think they should, or a judge will find in their favor. Sounds like your ex may be one of those who thinks that just by sheer force of will he can make things go his way!
 
He definitely is!... Judge made orders due to my son's father inconsistency in visitations and child support and he has been in trouble with the law for alcohol while my son is here so I don't see why he's so Surprised and angry that' he don't get our son most holidays until school breaks because once school commences he loses his wednesday visitations and Sunday overnights no matter how much effort I put in to make an agreement bc I do not want my son to think holidays are only with me but with him as well so he is only Making it so hard for our son. So I am forced to follow orders to detail



I guess I shouldn't be, but I'm always surprised by the people who go into these things without an attorney but then claim to have some sort of inside track into the knowledge and interpretation of the laws/rules. I've heard a judge scold someone (more than once) in the courtroom when they tried to interpret or change something in the custody agreement saying that they "knew" what they were talking about, without benefit of having their own attorney.

I think sometimes people with no real leg to stand on legally think that just by WANTING something to go their way badly enough, things will be interpreted the way they think they should, or a judge will find in their favor. Sounds like your ex may be one of those who thinks that just by sheer force of will he can make things go his way!
 
Better yet.... Quit being a witch... And let the father see his son. so many mother yell and scream about their child father not being in the picture. Now you are bitching because a father wishes to spend more time with his son. Unreal.... Why do parents use a child... a CHILD over the other one head is unreal to me. You both should lose custody of this kid. Maybe then he will grow up with two normal parents. You fought during your marriage, you fight now... this little boy did NOTHING to either one of you. He will grow up learning that dad hates mom and mom hates dad. he will grow up with a step mother then could provide with better love because she isn't attempting to fill his head with " Mom hates dad bullcrap " Keep in mind mom.... Little boys, Little girls grow up..... They learn very, very quickly as well. You will create the next generation of lets slap sally around men. If you close to the father (distance) flood him with his son. You would want the same.... Quit using the child to get back at the father. damn... the kid is like a chess piece in your mind.
 
A year ago, presumably you thought this guy would be a great father. You made him your son's father so you are going to have to live with that for the rest of your life. Right now, you are the one playing games, not him. I don't care that he isn't your biggest fan or "brainwashes" you, he is asking for something which is entirely reasonable and you are trying to deny using a poorly worded agreement based on principle or the fact you don't like him or he said something mean to you or whatever. Wanting the child for a holiday weekend is not manipulating you, it is called parenting. You complain he doesn't see the child regularly and out of one side of your mouth say you want him to have a relationship blah, blah, blah, and out the other claim until the kiddo is in school 5 years from now, no holiday visitation. Which is it? When would you "allow" Dad to see his child? Hiding behind the obviously poor wording of the agreement is cowardly and not going to paint you in a very positive light if Dad does drag you to court. I suggest you cease with the games and stop using your child as an excuse to play out your own version of revenge for a poor choice of relationship.
 
"So I am forced to follow orders to detail"

No you aren't. Even if the judge were to confirm your belief that the orders state that the father gets no holidays until the kid is in school(hard to imagine), you can still agree to let your child have holidays with his father(and presumably his family.) Nobody really cares about exactly following the court orders if the parties agree to some compromises. My husband and I currently have orders that we get our grandkids every other weekend. Sometimes that doesn't work for us or their parents. We work it out with each other. Just because he is being unreasonable(in your opinion) doesn't mean that you also have to be unreasonable.
 
I just wanted to point out that research states kids need to have both parents in the picture. The father barely sees the kid as it is now. Offer him the extra days and let them bond. I hope you can lighten up and remember this is in the best interest of your son. Arguing on divorce technicalities is not in the best interest. In fact, not allowing him access can back-fire and lead to him requesting more time with the court. He already has very little time as it is now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top