17 1/2 year old wants to reduce summer visitation

[scarletrose]

My 17 1/2 year old son needs advise. I have custody. Bio mom lives across the country. We have always complied with visitation requests. We even give her time that she requests that is not included in court order.

She is allowed to have 5 weeks of vacation during the summer. Last year she only took 2 weeks (her decision). My son only wants to spend two weeks with her this year as well. He is very active with sports, friends, girl friend, community service, etc. He wants one week with her in her state and one week with her in ours. She is insisting that he come for two weeks in her state - and is calling him selfish. He is very sensitive and he cries after these conversations. He always tries to please her. He doesn't want to hurt her feelings. But he knows that she is manipulating him and he just doesn't want to spend that much time away from his home and his "normal" life. (She left state when he was 2).

She says she is going to force him to go. He says that he is not going to go for more than a week.

I want to support my son, and feel that he shouldn't have to go if he doesn't want. Can she do anything to make him go? How can I help him.

 

[Duranie]

He does not get to decide if he wants to go or not. You have to comply with the decree or you can be held in contempt. If you want to risk the contempt that is your choice.

 

[BayState]

My 17 1/2 year old son needs advise. I have custody. Bio mom lives across the country. We have always complied with visitation requests. We even give her time that she requests that is not included in court order.

She is allowed to have 5 weeks of vacation during the summer. Last year she only took 2 weeks (her decision). My son only wants to spend two weeks with her this year as well. He is very active with sports, friends, girl friend, community service, etc. He wants one week with her in her state and one week with her in ours. She is insisting that he come for two weeks in her state - and is calling him selfish. He is very sensitive and he cries after these conversations. He always tries to please her. He doesn't want to hurt her feelings. But he knows that she is manipulating him and he just doesn't want to spend that much time away from his home and his "normal" life. (She left state when he was 2).

She says she is going to force him to go. He says that he is not going to go for more than a week.

I want to support my son, and feel that he shouldn't have to go if he doesn't want. Can she do anything to make him go? How can I help him.

Why on EARTH would you allow your son to dictate terms to his MOTHER? Your son is being selfish.

A court order is a ORDER. Not a suggestion.

 

[scarletrose]

First of all this situation was resolved (relatively) amicably between my son and his bio mom last night. The end result being that he is going for 2 more days than he originally wanted, and 3 days less than what bio mom wanted.

My son learned several key lessons through this process that will help him through his adult years. He learned the art of negotiation and the helpfulness of compromise. He learned that he can love someone, even though he doesn't like the way they behave (she lied to him repeatedly throughout the conversation – and he knew it – and called her on it). He learned how to recognize when he is being manipulated through false tears and even falser promises. He learned how to control his anger and resentment and stand up for himself in a calm, rational, respectful and adult manner.
Most importantly, he now is looking forward to going on this visit and spending time with his bio mom – instead of resenting her and the entire visit. I personally think that is the best result all of us involved could hope for. I am extremely proud of him.

In response to Duranie:
Thank you for taking the time to respond. However, I found your response obvious and completely unhelpful. I am quite aware of my obligations as the custodial parent – and the subsequent consequences of not fulfilling them. I am not, nor have I ever tried to keep my son from visiting his bio mother. I was seeking advice on how to help my 17 ½ year old son. After reading your brilliant insight, I continued my research and found this gem on a LAWYERS website (Kinsey Law) which I did find most helpful and thought it might be of interest to others facing similar situations:

​

Implementing a visitation order necessarily turns upon the custodial parent's ability to make the child available for visitation. A custodial parent probably has sufficient control over a child of "tender years" to compel the child to visit with the other parent under the terms of the court order; and the custodial parent's failure to comply would thus be punishable by contempt.

​

But the rule is otherwise as to teenagers. Technically, teenage children remain subject to their parents' control until age 18 or marriage (see Ca Fam § 7505). Nonetheless, if a teenage child refuses to visit with the noncustodial parent per the terms of a court order through no fault of the custodial parent, the noncustodial parent is probably left without a remedy. Simply stated, it is unclear how the custodial parent would have the ability to force the child to visit. [See Coursey v. Super.Ct. (Coursey) (1987) 194 Cal.App.3d 147, 154-156, 239 Cal.Rptr. 365, 369-370--court erred in holding mother in contempt for violation of visitation order re 14-year-old child because no showing mother had ability to compel child to visit]

In addition, I found the following on several LAWYERS website:
Modification Of Child Visitation Orders:
Child visitation orders may be modified at any time before the visitation orders terminate as long as the party moving for the modification can show that there has been a change in circumstances affecting the welfare of the child(ren) since the last order.
Such changes in circumstances include (but are by no means limited to):
o Change in residence of one of the parents. (This may require a motion for a "move-away order")
o The desire of an older child to increase or decrease visitation.
o Evidence of abuse of a child.
o Alteration of the child(ren)'s school schedule
In summary, there apparently are options available for a 17 ½ year old, which do not always result in their custodial parent being held in contempt.

In response to BayState:
Thank you for taking the time to be snarky. Clearly there was no intent on your behalf to be helpful – but you did give me a good laugh.
YOU ASKED: Why on EARTH would you allow your son to dictate terms to his MOTHER?

Have you ever raised a teenager? Tell me, how exactly do you a force a 6' – 200 lb young man into a car let alone an airplane. This is a case of learning how to negotiate and compromise - so that the visit is an enjoyable, pleasant experience for both parties. Not one that is filled with so much resentment that he might refuse to go at all. Furthermore, allowing his bio mom to forcefully "dictate" this summer schedule so close to him becoming 18 – could have resulted in a complete estrangement in just a few short months. My son successfully turned this into a Win/Win situation.

YOU EMPHASIZED "MOTHER": Yes, she is indeed his bio mother. We recognize this fact. But, she is not his "Mom" That would be my wife, who has raised him, cared for him and been there for him every day since he was two. He has turned out to be a fantastic, thoughtful, sweet young man because of my wife and I. Not because of the one weekend a year visits from bio mom (from the time he was 2 until he turned 10). As my son said last night to my wife: "You are my mom, she's my mother but she's more like an aunt to me. She just tries to buy my love, she's never there for me." There is more to being a Mom – then just giving birth.

YOU SAID: Your son is being selfish.
Seriously. Selfish? I think not. Despite Bio moms excellent and continuous example of being selfish, my son is the sweetest, most caring, thoughtful and forgiving person I know. This is despite bio moms kidnapping of him on 3 occasions during his first two years of life, followed by 8 years of almost complete abandonment, followed by her moving into our state for a year, then her moving away from him AGAIN - back across country to follow a man (a year later). He has always shown her love and respect. Much more than I personally think she deserves. A lot of kids would have tried to call it quits a long time ago. But not my boy. Selfish? No. But I do think that if you are going to hand out "advise" or make derogatory comments you should seek more information about the situation in the future before you jump to conclusions.

YOU SAID: A court order is a ORDER. Not a suggestion.
You think? However, that doesn't mean that you can't AGREE to change the terms of the court order to fit the current situation. Which is exactly what successfully occurred.

 

[BayState]

First of all this situation was resolved (relatively) amicably between my son and his bio mom last night. The end result being that he is going for 2 more days than he originally wanted, and 3 days less than what bio mom wanted.

My son learned several key lessons through this process that will help him through his adult years. He learned the art of negotiation and the helpfulness of compromise. He learned that he can love someone, even though he doesn't like the way they behave (she lied to him repeatedly throughout the conversation – and he knew it – and called her on it). He learned how to recognize when he is being manipulated through false tears and even falser promises. He learned how to control his anger and resentment and stand up for himself in a calm, rational, respectful and adult manner.
Most importantly, he now is looking forward to going on this visit and spending time with his bio mom – instead of resenting her and the entire visit. I personally think that is the best result all of us involved could hope for. I am extremely proud of him.

In response to Duranie:
Thank you for taking the time to respond. However, I found your response obvious and completely unhelpful. I am quite aware of my obligations as the custodial parent – and the subsequent consequences of not fulfilling them. I am not, nor have I ever tried to keep my son from visiting his bio mother. I was seeking advice on how to help my 17 ½ year old son. After reading your brilliant insight, I continued my research and found this gem on a LAWYERS website (Kinsey Law) which I did find most helpful and thought it might be of interest to others facing similar situations:

​

Implementing a visitation order necessarily turns upon the custodial parent's ability to make the child available for visitation. A custodial parent probably has sufficient control over a child of "tender years" to compel the child to visit with the other parent under the terms of the court order; and the custodial parent's failure to comply would thus be punishable by contempt.

​

But the rule is otherwise as to teenagers. Technically, teenage children remain subject to their parents' control until age 18 or marriage (see Ca Fam § 7505). Nonetheless, if a teenage child refuses to visit with the noncustodial parent per the terms of a court order through no fault of the custodial parent, the noncustodial parent is probably left without a remedy. Simply stated, it is unclear how the custodial parent would have the ability to force the child to visit. [See Coursey v. Super.Ct. (Coursey) (1987) 194 Cal.App.3d 147, 154-156, 239 Cal.Rptr. 365, 369-370--court erred in holding mother in contempt for violation of visitation order re 14-year-old child because no showing mother had ability to compel child to visit]

In addition, I found the following on several LAWYERS website:
Modification Of Child Visitation Orders:
Child visitation orders may be modified at any time before the visitation orders terminate as long as the party moving for the modification can show that there has been a change in circumstances affecting the welfare of the child(ren) since the last order.
Such changes in circumstances include (but are by no means limited to):
o Change in residence of one of the parents. (This may require a motion for a "move-away order")
o The desire of an older child to increase or decrease visitation.
o Evidence of abuse of a child.
o Alteration of the child(ren)'s school schedule
In summary, there apparently are options available for a 17 ½ year old, which do not always result in their custodial parent being held in contempt.

In response to BayState:
Thank you for taking the time to be snarky. Clearly there was no intent on your behalf to be helpful – but you did give me a good laugh.
YOU ASKED: Why on EARTH would you allow your son to dictate terms to his MOTHER?

Have you ever raised a teenager? Tell me, how exactly do you a force a 6' – 200 lb young man into a car let alone an airplane. This is a case of learning how to negotiate and compromise - so that the visit is an enjoyable, pleasant experience for both parties. Not one that is filled with so much resentment that he might refuse to go at all. Furthermore, allowing his bio mom to forcefully "dictate" this summer schedule so close to him becoming 18 – could have resulted in a complete estrangement in just a few short months. My son successfully turned this into a Win/Win situation.

YOU EMPHASIZED "MOTHER": Yes, she is indeed his bio mother. We recognize this fact. But, she is not his "Mom" That would be my wife, who has raised him, cared for him and been there for him every day since he was two. He has turned out to be a fantastic, thoughtful, sweet young man because of my wife and I. Not because of the one weekend a year visits from bio mom (from the time he was 2 until he turned 10). As my son said last night to my wife: "You are my mom, she's my mother but she's more like an aunt to me. She just tries to buy my love, she's never there for me." There is more to being a Mom – then just giving birth.

YOU SAID: Your son is being selfish.
Seriously. Selfish? I think not. Despite Bio moms excellent and continuous example of being selfish, my son is the sweetest, most caring, thoughtful and forgiving person I know. This is despite bio moms kidnapping of him on 3 occasions during his first two years of life, followed by 8 years of almost complete abandonment, followed by her moving into our state for a year, then her moving away from him AGAIN - back across country to follow a man (a year later). He has always shown her love and respect. Much more than I personally think she deserves. A lot of kids would have tried to call it quits a long time ago. But not my boy. Selfish? No. But I do think that if you are going to hand out "advise" or make derogatory comments you should seek more information about the situation in the future before you jump to conclusions.

YOU SAID: A court order is a ORDER. Not a suggestion.
You think? However, that doesn't mean that you can't AGREE to change the terms of the court order to fit the current situation. Which is exactly what successfully occurred.

You're an idiot. You have raised a selfish child that has learned to manipulate the system...Good job. Please ask your child to double up on birth control. This country doesn't need any more selfish people that have no respect for the law and their parents breeding.

 

[Theresagail]

BayState I cant believe you just said that--- Have you any Idea what it is like to have a vindictive parent and be forced to spend "quality time with them?" I think this kid is on the right track, he is 6 months away from being an adult--Courts don't care how the kid feels when they HAVE to go see a parent they don't want to see.

How is this 17yr old kid being selfish? Because he has a life? Because he is tired of his mom's crap? This man is right; in 6 months he could tell his mom to hit the road.

 

[BayState]

BayState I cant believe you just said that--- Have you any Idea what it is like to have a vindictive parent and be forced to spend "quality time with them?" I think this kid is on the right track, he is 6 months away from being an adult--Courts don't care how the kid feels when they HAVE to go see a parent they don't want to see.

How is this 17yr old kid being selfish? Because he has a life? Because he is tired of his mom's crap? This man is right; in 6 months he could tell his mom to hit the road.

You do realize that this is a legal advice site right? Not a "OMG I want what I want when I want it" site...


Yup. In SIX months Sonny can determine his own "fate". Until then it is a COURT ORDER that determines it. That DAD encourages this CHILD to VIOLATE a court ORDER is reprehensible. The CHILD is learning that rules do NOT apply to him. That's some great parenting. Next year Dad will be on the Criminal Forum asking advice about how to get sonny out of prison...

The bottom line is DAD is the one that will be in violation of the court. DAD is the one that will be held accountable if Mom is smart enough to bring a motion to the court. It is a CP's JOB and OBLIGATION to facilitate a relationship between the NCP and the CHILD. Dad is not doing his job...And for what reasons?? 'Cause sonny has a girlfriend and personal interests that HE thinks are more important...This is just sad.

Parents are forever...At 17 GF's are a dime a dozen.

 

[mothermayi]

You do realize that this is a legal advice site right? Not a "OMG I want what I want when I want it" site...


Yup. In SIX months Sonny can determine his own "fate". Until then it is a COURT ORDER that determines it. That DAD encourages this CHILD to VIOLATE a court ORDER is reprehensible. The CHILD is learning that rules do NOT apply to him. That's some great parenting. Next year Dad will be on the Criminal Forum asking advice about how to get sonny out of prison...

The bottom line is DAD is the one that will be in violation of the court. DAD is the one that will be held accountable if Mom is smart enough to bring a motion to the court. It is a CP's JOB and OBLIGATION to facilitate a relationship between the NCP and the CHILD. Dad is not doing his job...And for what reasons?? 'Cause sonny has a girlfriend and personal interests that HE thinks are more important...This is just sad.

Parents are forever...At 17 GF's are a dime a dozen.

Ha ha ha, you are so funny!!! :nuts
What..... you mean you are serious. Obviously Baystate has some sort of problem. Apparently she/he did not read the part where the parties successfully negotiated the situation. Nor did she/he read that this story had a happy ending. There is no COURT violation. The absentee mother, who has significant issues (maybe baystate relates to her) AGREED. So what MOTION can be brought? Let see - um - NONE. I really don't know what Baystates problem is - but does it really matter - he/she clearly has no idea what they are talking about. Best to ignore this ignorant person, and pray that he/she has no children of her/his own to mess up. Speaking of double condoms....

Dad you have certainly done a fantastic job raising this boy. Congratulations. You are absolutely doing the right thing by encouraging your son to work things out in a such a positive manner. Your son is lucky to have you to help him through what is clearly a very emotional situation - in a LEGAL manner. Everyone wins in the long run. In fact the only one that is sad about the outcome is Baystate

 

[BayState]

Ha ha ha, you are so funny!!! :nuts
What..... you mean you are serious. Obviously Baystate has some sort of problem. Apparently she/he did not read the part where the parties successfully negotiated the situation. Nor did she/he read that this story had a happy ending. There is no COURT violation. The absentee mother, who has significant issues (maybe baystate relates to her) AGREED. So what MOTION can be brought? Let see - um - NONE. I really don't know what Baystates problem is - but does it really matter - he/she clearly has no idea what they are talking about. Best to ignore this ignorant person, and pray that he/she has no children of her/his own to mess up. Speaking of double condoms....

Dad you have certainly done a fantastic job raising this boy. Congratulations. You are absolutely doing the right thing by encouraging your son to work things out in a such a positive manner. Your son is lucky to have you to help him through what is clearly a very emotional situation - in a LEGAL manner. Everyone wins in the long run. In fact the only one that is sad about the outcome is Baystate

The fact that Mom was willing to forfit part her her court ORDERED visitation to placate Jr. is irrelevent to the legal question;

Can she do anything to make him go?

LEGALLY she can. LEGALLY she can file a motion of contempt against DAD for not following the visitation ORDERS. That she isn't going to do this, doesn't mean she CAN'T do it. This is a legal site...Not dearabby.com.

Teaching your child that their mother isn't as important as a girlfriend is wrong. I have a feeling that Dad will be on the receiving end of Jr.'s bad priority list someday...Probably when he is in a nursing home rotting away fruitlessly waiting for his son on visitors day...Sad.

Best to ignore this ignorant person, and pray that he/she has no children of her/his own to mess up.

lol!! I have two sweet, thoughtful, intelligent children that have been raised to care and respect their family. Oldest is on the Deans list at a top University and a member of the National Honor Society. Lil' bay is the top student in her grade. Sorry to disappoint you...lol!!

 

[cbg]

Um, what part of COURT ORDER do you folks not understand?

 

[mothermayi]

Um, what part of COURT ORDER do you folks not understand?

Um, what part of "this situation was resolved" do you not understand.

No violation of court order, no messy return to court, just people talking and working it out. Nothing wrong with that - in fact it should be encouraged!!! What a positive example of how to work through problems.

 

[cbg]

Sure, I'm all in favor of people working things out between them too.

But the impression being left by this thread is that THE MINOR CHILD has a right to make his own decisions, and if that decision is to disregard a COURT ORDER, he can do that because he wants to.

That is simply incorrect. If the mother, in this case, is willing to give up her rights under the court order that's fine, that's her decision. But that does NOT mean that a court order can be disregarded in all cases with impunity.

 

[mothermayi]

Thank you. Thanks for acknowledging that it is best when people talk things out. Everybody wins.

The impression being left by this thread exclusively falls on the shoulders of Bay State. The only person who said that this 17 1/2 year old was told that he can do what he wants is - Bay State - which was a mighty big jump to conclusions based off what Dad actually said in his posts.

PER BAYSTATE: "That DAD encourages this CHILD to VIOLATE a court ORDER is reprehensible.'

If you go back and actually read what Dad wrote - you will find that there exists nothing that indicated that he told his son that. In fact I couldn't find one line in his post that comes close to saying that occurred. It was Bay State's imaginary conversations that has led everyone down this unfortunate path.

Dad actually recommended that Bay State seek additional information prior to jumping to conclusions. Wise advice, from clearly a wise person that SHOULD have been heeded.

But anyway, the important thing is that people realize that talking, negotiating and working things out WIThOUT going to back to court is ALWAYS the best route. Which is what happened here.

 

[BayState]

Thank you. Thanks for acknowledging that it is best when people talk things out. Everybody wins.

The impression being left by this thread exclusively falls on the shoulders of Bay State. The only person who said that this 17 1/2 year old was told that he can do what he wants is - Bay State - which was a mighty big jump to conclusions based off what Dad actually said in his posts.

PER BAYSTATE: "That DAD encourages this CHILD to VIOLATE a court ORDER is reprehensible.'

If you go back and actually read what Dad wrote - you will find that there exists nothing that indicated that he told his son that. In fact I couldn't find one line in his post that comes close to saying that occurred. It was Bay State's imaginary conversations that has led everyone down this unfortunate path.

Dad actually recommended that Bay State seek additional information prior to jumping to conclusions. Wise advice, from clearly a wise person that SHOULD have been heeded.

But anyway, the important thing is that people realize that talking, negotiating and working things out WIThOUT going to back to court is ALWAYS the best route. Which is what happened here.

I want to support my son, and feel that he shouldn't have to go if he doesn't want. Can she do anything to make him go? How can I help him.

Imaginary huh??? Learn to read.

 

[mothermayi]

Imaginary huh??? Learn to read.

Wow- you just proved my point exactly. Albeit unintentionally, I'm sure. Let me spell it out for you: Expressing ones FEELINGS on the internet in the process of seeking advice is not the same as having an actual CONVERSATION with his son.

I really thinks its best if you stop making assumptions. You are not helping anyone.

 

[cbg]

And I think it would be best if you stopped attacking the responders here.

 

[BayState]

And I think it would be best if you stopped attacking the responders here.

Thank you cbg for understanding that this is a legal site and not drphil.com.

 

[mothermayi]

While I respect your right to have an opinion - I dispute your claim that I am attacking responders.

Am I questioning a particular responder's premise and motives for her entire tirade? Yes I am.

Has this particular responder been on the ATTACK – from her very first post - based solely on her own assumptions and conjecture? Yes she has.

Read the following summary for multiple examples.
Summary of Situation:
1. Father seeks advice on how to help son with situation
2. #1 responder offers advice, #2 responder (BayState)attacks
"Why on EARTH would you allow your son to dictate terms to his MOTHER? Your son is being selfish. "

A court order is a ORDER. Not a suggestion."

3. Father advised all that the situation was successfully resolved through discussion between mother and son. Father goes on to say what he discovered in his research. He further - politely – responds to #2 responders attack, in a logical manner – that explained further how much sense it makes to resolve these family issues through discussion, understanding and compromise – and the benefits for everyone involved. Father requests that #2 responder seek additional information prior to jumping to conclusions

4. #2 Responder (Baystate) attacks AGAIN
"You're an idiot. You have raised a selfish child that has learned to manipulate the system...Good job. Please ask your child to double up on birth control. This country doesn't need any more selfish people that have no respect for the law and their parents breeding."

5. Other uninvolved parties (including myself) step in to hopefully get #2 Responder, to cease the personal attacks, that are based purely on her own assumptions. The attacks continue:
"You do realize that this is a legal advice site right? Not a "OMG I want what I want when I want it" site...


Yup. In SIX months Sonny can determine his own "fate". Until then it is a COURT ORDER that determines it. That DAD encourages this CHILD to VIOLATE a court ORDER is reprehensible. The CHILD is learning that rules do NOT apply to him. That's some great parenting. Next year Dad will be on the Criminal Forum asking advice about how to get sonny out of prison...
The bottom line is DAD is the one that will be in violation of the court. DAD is the one that will be held accountable if Mom is smart enough to bring a motion to the court. It is a CP's JOB and OBLIGATION to facilitate a relationship between the NCP and the CHILD. Dad is not doing his job...And for what reasons?? 'Cause sonny has a girlfriend and personal interests that HE thinks are more important...This is just sad.

and this

[I]"Teaching your child that their mother isn't as important as a girlfriend is wrong. I have a feeling that Dad will be on the receiving end of Jr.'s bad priority list someday...Probably when he is in a nursing home rotting away fruitlessly waiting for his son on visitors day...Sad."[/I]


None of what this responder has said has been based on any real conversations. Father never said he would encourage the child to violate a court order, father never said that the rules do not apply to him. #2 Responder ASSUMED that this occurred and based all of her arguments and attacks on these imagined conversations.

My point in all this is that if you are going to hand out advise – it should be based on facts. If you don't know the facts - ASK. Do not assume. And do not make insulting, denigrating and offensive comments based on these assumptions.

Because #2 Responder has gone so far off base with her assumptions, a real important message is being lost. The Message is: At the end of the day, this family successfully renegotiated a summer visit - not through contempt of court, not by returning to court to change the order, not through manipulating the system, not through encouraging a child to not see his mother - but through a discussion and negotiation process that resulted in a satisfactory outcome for all parties involved. Everyone should be aware that this is a LEGAL OPTION, and be encouraged to resolve their problems this way. It is less contentious, less expensive (emotionally and financially) and preserves critical relationships.

 

[cbg]

I am wearing my moderator hat right now, and this is addressed to EVERYONE.

Stop it. Now.

 

[Delayney]

To the OP - so glad you and your son got everything worked out. Seems like you have the best interest of your kid at heart.


Seriously! Some of you would argue with yourselves if no one else would argue with you. Although there is a court order in place, what judge in their right mind would even find fault with this dad? Come on people. Stop with the textbook answers and false assumptions! The child in question is almost 18, not 2. This order was probably signed when the kid couldn't say his ABC's. If she was any kind of mother....well...I won't go that route.