The most difficult part of my divorce was the custody issue. This is where I did everything I possibly could to protect the children from the battle that was going on in trial court.
When my X and I exchanged the children for visitation, I did whatever I could to remain polite and to establish a reasonably friendly and civilized atmosphere. I can remember grinding my teeth to keep my mouth shut so I wouldn't say anything that would later be a problem.
Today I had a conversation with my older daughter. She said to me, I am now beginning to understand what an unusual childhood I have had. My heart leapt to my mouth as I wondered what she meant, thinking she was about to share some divorce trauma with me. Instead, she said "You always took us to the library so that I have read many more books than most people my age."
I felt so relieved. If that is all that she remembers as being unusual about her childhood, I will have achieved my goal of protecting her from the dangerous fallout from my divorce. I then laughed and said, "Well, that was actually you, because when I took you to the library, it never occurred to you to say 'I don't want to go.'"
Unfortunately, for Patricia Bauer, in her case, she didn't have the same luck.
When she told her son, Gregory, we are now moving to Minneapolis, he said "No, I don't want to go. I want to stay in Simsbury with my Dad!"
My position had always been in regard to my children that they will do as they are told because I am the mother. However, when family court involves itself in your lives, that kind of firm control goes overboard as the court allows the kids to use the GAL against you, the attorneys in the case fabricate false information about you, and then undermine your authority.
Can any of you relate to that? I think you can.
This is very problematic for a mother and I have heard stories about this from many of them. I think it is very hard to shift from having full authority to having most of the authority shift from Mother to all these other people from family court who really have no idea what is going on the way a Mother does.
This is tough enough when the children are young and need the kind of firm hand a Mother can provide, but what do you do, what will the family court do when these children begin to verge upon the age of decision making? What do you do when the children reach 13, 14, 15 years old? How much do you listen to the views of children that age?
Now Charles and Patricia Bauer spent around $400,000, as you know, fighting over the custody of their son. The young man involved in this case, Gregory, at the time around 15 years old, met with a psychologist, Dr. Wilbur Nelson, who stated that Gregory had "the requisite intelligence to have an informed preference concerning his living circumstances."
My best bet is that at age 15, the trial court is going to conclude this about any child. So, if you have a 15 year old child who is stating a preference for any particular living arrangement, do not spend $400,000 fighting that because, trust me, the conclusion is foregone.
You know you are out of luck if the trial court assigns an Attorney of the Minor Child to the child rather than a GAL as they did in the Bauer case. That is one great big hint to you that whatever the child wants, he or she will get.
It may be still rather iffy at 13 or 14, but at 15, you have lost before you even begin if you try to go against the wishes of the child. When I tell this to parents, they always argue with me. They can't seem to believe it is true. It is amazing how many so called adults find it hard to understand that little Johnny, little Johnette, is all grown up and responsible for his or her actions, including taking action with AMCs and GALs and the trial court which are harming such parents profoundly.
Regretably speaking, for such litigants, I can only say, the sooner they figure this concept out, the better. Because until they do, they will simply be banging their heads against a brick wall. And I've seen people bang their heads against this particular wall for a considerably long period of time and all that does is cost time, money, and heart ache for no damn good reason, as the Bauer case goes to show. Kids are kids and they can be heartless, not unloving, but heartless.
Regretably speaking, for such litigants, I can only say, the sooner they figure this concept out, the better. Because until they do, they will simply be banging their heads against a brick wall. And I've seen people bang their heads against this particular wall for a considerably long period of time and all that does is cost time, money, and heart ache for no damn good reason, as the Bauer case goes to show. Kids are kids and they can be heartless, not unloving, but heartless.
So, aren't you glad you read this blog, because now you know, now you know not to go wasting your money with a great big custody battle when the results are preordained as everyone involved in this $400,000 court case already knew even as they engaged in it. Isn't it true that the parties are the last to know about these things?
Actually, in this particular case, it wasn't so much the child's age that made the difference. I think where both parents lost their authority to make any determination in regard to Gregory was when the trial court found out that Gregory had "attended seven schools in nine years." as he was growing up. That's nuts, totally nuts!
Sometimes before you go embarking on some big family court case, it makes sense to have some therapy to explore your motivations so you don't use family court as an extremely expensive means to work out your own mental health issues. Just reading over this case, listening to the reports that all Gregory wanted was for his parents to stop fighting over him, I can only say this was a really, really sad situation--"What Maisy Knew" reprised.
No comments:
Post a Comment