# Be Brutal - Am I the Bad Guy?



## kingsqueen

I have been agonizing over this, and I am looking for outside input. I will try to keep it brief, while giving as much vital information as I can.

Ex and I were never married, but have 2 children. We split in late 2007 after almost 9 years.

After we split, he decided to go to school again.

The problem was that, though the program he chose was offered in our hometown, he opted to move 3 hours away to attend a different school. He chose this because he said that he could get funding to attend that school, whereas he would have to get a loan to go back to the school here. The school he attended was 3 hours away.

This occured about 1 year after we split up. The program was an 8 month program, and he intended to come home when it was over. He wasn't happy here, and so I supported his decision. Whenever he wanted to see the boys, I helped to make that happen (driving them the 6 hour round trip or paying for gas because he had no money, etc). Prior to him leaving town, we had a 50/50 arrangement, where the boys stayed with me for a week and then with him for a week. He was working at that point and I ran a home daycare, so I watched the boys while he was at work and he never had to pay for any daycare.

He never came back. We have now been split for 3 years. He met someone new in this other town and decided to stay to pursue that relationship. 

His contact with the boys remained minimal. He paid no child support.

Immediately when we split up, I was offered an opportunity to move 8 hours away. I declined, because we had 50/50 custody and I didn't want to move the boys from their father. However, we lived in a Northern community where jobs are scarce. Everyone struggled. Last year, I made just over $13,000 and FH was working a contract that was expiring and there was no sight of a new job.

This past summer, the offer was extended again. We were accumulating a lot of debt paying our day-to-day expenses (rent and heat, gas and groceries), etc. We had already cut corners everywhere we could - no cable, no going out, no cell phones, minimal insurance, etc. This offer would have stabilized our financial situation and would would have the chance to pay off debts and build some savings and emergency funds. Still no child support from my ex.

I was torn about what was best. I talked to my ex and he supported the move, though it would add another 5 hours of distance between he and the boys for a total of 8 hours. FH and I talked it over and decided to go for the summer and test the waters, and come home if it wasn't working out.

It did work out. My ex was supposed to have the boys for 6 weeks that summer, which turned into 2 weeks because he said he couldn't take them because of work. But FH and I were making progress on building financial stability. We were within 1 hour or less of four of my siblings.

The week before school started, we decided that we would stay. I changed our address everywhere, switched schools for the boys, set them up with a pediatrician, dentist, eye doctor, etc. My brother and SIL took their son out of daycare, since it worked out that I would be home when they were working and could watch him. Daycare waiting lists are 6-8 months here.

Five days before school was to start, my ex called and said that he wanted the boys to go live with him for a year (or two). My stomach dropped.

They have never lived in that town. He said they would be within walking distance to a French-Immersion school ... my oldest was going into Grade 2 and had never been in French-Immersion, he would have been crazy behind. My ex and his girlfriend were working overlapping hours and would need to put them in daycare, while I was home and could watch them. Also, I didn't want them shifting homes and schools every year or two.

I was angry that he waited until the last minute to drop that on me, saying that I had had "full" custody for 2 years and it was his turn. I had only had "full" custody by default, because he had disappeared. Also, I resented that his CHOICE to move away from the boys meant that he could justify taking the boys from me, and I not have a CHOICE to be away from them.

I told him that I was willing to move back to our hometown and he could as well. We would struggle financially again, but I was not willing to be parted from them. I said that we could do 50/50 again, or he could stay in his town with his girlfriend and see them whenever he managed to see them, like before we moved from town.

I also said he could move closer to us. He refused all of these suggestions.

Now ... he has backed down about it since I freaked out (he also went to talk to a lawyer afterwards, when I wouldn't agree to that arrangemnt and the lawyer told him he didn't have much chance of having our arrangement changed legally, given that he had let it be for years and hardly seen the boys and had not paid child support). But in the back of my mind, now I am stressing about whether or not I am being unreasonable.

I have always believed that I am doing the best thing for my boys, but am I really? From an outside perspective, from someone not emotionally involved ... would the best thing actually be for me to let him take the boys for a year or two at a time so that they could work on their relationship?

He has shot down my offers of moving back to our hometown. So the options appear to be, leaving things as they are or letting the boys go. Did I make a poor choice? I resent him for boiling things down to a situation where one of us HAS to be without them for a year or two at a time, and we can't live in the same town.

(The town he lives in currently was a lateral move up North, and holds no job prospects as well. It is even worse than our hometown, and has no support system for either of us in terms of family - his family lives in our hometown and and my family is divided between our hometown and the area that I am in now.)

I'm confused and angry and I'm not sure if I am letting my emotions make decisions over my logic.


----------



## kingsqueen

Sorry, that wasn't brief AT ALL!


----------



## sbbs

I tried to keep everything straight--please forgive me if I've screwed anything up.

To summarize--you want to move, so you can get a job that pays the bills. Your ex doesn't want to move. He originally abandoned you and the kids, but for the last few years has been co-parenting with you. He wants you to leave the kids with him, if you move far away to work. And he's hired a lawyer to help him.

You don't sound evil at all. You're the boys' primary parent. He was the one who disappeared. I say, take the boys and move to where you can make more money.

Since job prospects aren't so great where you and your ex are now, maybe he can move closer to where your good job offer is (and, presumably where you're planning to go.) That way, maybe he can make more money and be with the kids.

If you leave the kids with your ex and take off, the kids won't understand that you're choosing this out of a sense of parental fairness. They'll feel confused and abandoned. Don't do that to them. Also, you run the risk of losing the parental rights you probably have now.

The fact that he's hired a lawyer doesn't necessarily mean that the options he's outlined to you are really the only ones you have. I'm not a lawyer, but I find it hard to believe that a court would really demand that you choose between moving for work or keeping your kids.

Many lawyers have free consultations. You might want to meet with a lawyer who specializes in domestic law.

Good luck. Let us know how it goes.


----------



## kingsqueen

sbbs - I'm sorry, I realize that my post was lengthy and convoluted. It is hard to summarize everything.



> If you leave the kids with your ex and take off, the kids won't understand that you're choosing this out of a sense of parental fairness. They'll feel confused and abandoned. Don't do that to them. Also, you run the risk of losing the parental rights you probably have now.


My problem is that I desperately do not want to be apart from my children. The thought alone makes me sick. I couldn't have moved out of town without them, and I don't ever want them to feel that I have abandoned them in any way.

I have already moved, four months ago - almost 3 years after our split, nearly 2 years after he left town to live 3 hours away and only after talking to my ex about it first and getting his approval. My FH and I and the children (including an infant that FH and I have together) all currently live 8 hours from my ex. I offered to move back to our hometown, but my ex rejected that offer.

He has not hired a lawyer, but did go to get free legal advice from one.

I did suggest that my ex move closer to us (where he could presumably get a better job as well), but he has refused, stating that he has no desire to live down south and that he doesn't want to uproot his gf's children (she has two, who are enrolled in school in their current town).

I guess that what I am struggling with is that I feel angry that my ex gets to make choices to better his life (going to school), but I don't feel that I am "allowed" to make those same choices (moving to secure financial stability), even though bettering my life results in bettering the children's lives. I resent that my ex chose not to return to the kids after he finished his program, and I resent that he is using those choices as leverage now (saying that I've had the boys so long and it's his "turn") to parent them.

I don't believe that he is thinking of what is best for the kids. I think that he is being unreasonable. 

BUT ... I can't control his actions. I can only control mine. And so, I guess I am trying to figure out if it is more important for me to be the bigger person and close that gap between my ex and the boys, or if it is more important for me to put weight on the logistics of being able to support and provide for the boys.

I feel like I have to give up something important either way - our stable future or my day-to-day life with the boys. I DO NOT want to drag the kids through court, I don't want the boys to know that there is some tension between their parents and I don't want to ask the kids to choose between us (they are 7 and 4). But I want to make the right decision for them, without my judgement being clouded by what I truly want (not to be separated from them).


----------



## kingsqueen

To further clarify, since moving 8 hours from my ex, the boys have seen their father no less than they did when he lived 3 hours away and the majority of these visits have been paid for by myself.

We had agreed that the boys would spend a week at Christmas, March Break and a month of summer with him, as well as other weekends when we could arrange it.

But I worry that the boys will be hurt by not having enough of a relationship with their father. Living with him would force it - I have no confidence that living closer together would result in him making any more of an effort that he has in the past. So do I let them go live with him, for their own benefit?


----------



## Catherine602

What is his motivated his sudden interest in having the kids live with him full time when he has not had them in his life full time or made the effort to see them part time? Have you not seen the irony in the fact that he does not want to disrupt the lives of gf children but he does not mind abandoning his own children, disrupting their lives by some hair scheam to move into a strange place, into a challenging educational environment and then when that is done send them back. What are you thinking? Just because he is the biologic father does not make him a good parent. 

These boys need stability now, they need two stable loving parents that put their best interest at heart. Staying in place and consolidating their lives in their present location is best for them. Is your bf a good father figure? Does he treat your boys like he is their loving father? You seem to be in fairyland when it comes to parenting and what is best for kids. A relationship with an engaged step parent trumps an unstable lackluster relationship with the biologic parent. They will not miss out on having lived with their father full time and the uncertainty that they may be their one year or two. 

He is a careless father when it comes to your children, he cares more about the stability of his gf children, therefore he understands how important that is but he is unwilling to protect his own children. Right now you are doing all of the work to keep up the relationship with the children he does nothing. If you stopped what you were doing he would probably never see them again. I admire your effort to make sure they see their father. But I would advise that you think first of them and not some ideal about kids and fathers. A loving adult male would be a model of a father that these kids should shape their concepts not a lazy, disinterested self obsorbed man who cannot stir himself to drive to see them, contribute financially, or emotionally to their growth.

His attitude towards his kids has all to do with getting back at their mother. He let's you do all of the work to keep the relationship going because he is angry that you left. He wants to deprive you of them for years because you had them all of this time. WHAT Are they chips in some kind of extream poker game? You have to change your frame of reference, you are still taking care of the adult man by providing him with a relationship with his kids. Is it guilt? Try to think differently his problems are his not yours, he is a poor model of a father for your kids and is not engaged inthekr lives in any way that gives him the right to put the smallest ripple in their lives. 

Forget this so called father put those kids first their well being stability happiness first. Make sure that they have a strong stable present male figure in thier lives to madel the behavior of a man. I would read books on child development and parenting children in divorce. Reconsider using the time and money to send them to see him if it is a financial burden thatthretns the stability of the family and if it is not a quality experience for them. He is not going to court because he wants to see his kids he wants to get back at you. 

You mentioned having an infant do you think this has anything to do with his sudden insterest, could he want to deprive you of the boys because you have another child? I really think you have to change the way you think about this man he sounds selfish and unconcerned about his children, angry with you and using lack to financial support or effort with his kids as a way of getting back at you. Think about it and begin to put them and their needs first. Look up custody laws keep tract of all expenses and conversations with him. You don't have to do all the work to keep the contact up he has to do the same. No court will blame you for the failure to keep up your end he never made the effort he forfeited his rights.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## kingsqueen

Catherine - wow, I appreciate your indepth response. 

To address some of your questions:

Yes, FH treats my older two boys as his own - there is no difference in his parenting/love of them and our youngest son (who is his biological son). He had even asked if the older two could take his family name, but I felt that that was a bad idea. He is the one who is in their lives on a daily basis and who models fathering and a healthy relationship with me. He supports them and pays for extra-curriculars. He puts them to bed at night. He plays with them. If I had no other reason to love him, I could love him for how much he loves the boys (but I do have other reasons. He is an extraordinary man).

I don't think that they baby is the reason that my ex has changed his attitude about seeing the boys, as the baby is a year old and this exchange about taking the boys for a year or two took place a couple of months ago. I got the impression that someone was feeding him ideas, as he suddenly seemed to feel that he had been a "doormat" and that I had walked all over him by "taking" custody, when in reality, he MOVED AWAY. But yeah, I think it was someone else's suggestions to him, I'm not sure who. Maybe the new gf, but I couldn't be sure.

I can see what you are saying ... it is hard for me, because I know that, despite everything, my ex loves the kids. He's just never around. His mother abandoned him when his parents divorced, and so it surprises me that he was able to distance himself so much. Or maybe now he is suddenly feeling guilt about it? I don't know.

And no, the irony of him not wanting to uproot his gf's kids, but him being willing to uproot our boys (continually) did not pass me by, and that was one of the points I argued when he first brought this up.

I am looking for lots of different perspectives. I posted on other forums, and on one I was told that I am being selfish, and that his failures in the past do not give me permission to make it harder for him to parent if he comes around in the future. I don't know.

I feel like this is such a sad situation for my boys, where there is no real happy solution. But I want to choose the least terrible option for them.


----------



## sisters359

I honestly think they are too young for this type of transition, to his household. Having known only you for a parent/primary caregiver for so long, it would be really difficult and would feel like an abandonment if you let them go right now.

Ideally, you slowly increase the amount of time they spend with their dad--sounds like a good plan right now, so add a week or two the next summer, for example. Parenting them during vacations is noting like parenting them during the school year, and leave that transtion for a time when changing schools might happen anyway, as much as you can. 

You really should be pursuing current and back child support b/c your future is at stake. If nothing else, you could put it into a retirement account for your self since you've probably not been able to do that. This is entirely separate from whether the kids should be with him, however; just get a lawyer to handle it and if ex turns ugly about it, just point out that you have sustained the burden to your own detriment and someday, you may need all the money you have had to spend fulfilling his financial obligation to his children, so you cannot wait until then (law wouldn't let you get it if there is a statute of limitations on it). Tell him you are willing to do with as little per month as possible as long as the whole back amount due and still accumulating is paid to you over time, since you are "paying yourself back," and the goal is to slowly get the money to add to a retirement fund or pay off debts, not money you need desperately to live on. Yes, we are all willing to make whatever sacrifices we need for our kids' sake, but it's not the kids who owe you--it is their dad, for his share of the costs of raising them. Besides, would he really want his kids to know he never gave a cent toward supporting them?


----------



## kingsqueen

sister - He has been making payments since this past October or November (I can't remember exactly right this second).

When he went to talk to a lawyer, I think he was thoroughly chastized for having not paid any support and for having not maintained strong contact with the boys. He told me so, at least. After that meeting, he told me that he wanted to start paying something.

I think he was afraid that I would eventually hit him with a lump sum of retro payments (which I am not sure if I ever even could, anyway), so he decided he better get on it.

So he has made some payment for the last 2 or 3 months. I don't count on the money, as he says he hardly makes any and I know that it could disappear anytime.

While living back North, we were not able to save anything. We are now in a position here where we will be able to put away money for retirement, but first we are working on paying off our $15,000 debt and establishing an emergency fund. I have decided to leave anything that my ex pays in the account that we created for it, and keep is flexible for emergencies for now.


----------



## sisters359

Good for you, starting a separate fund. But get the paper work done for the back pay, even if you do not want to ask for it to be collected yet--a lawyer will need to help you with it, b/c iit may not be a very typical thing. You just need to protect your right to recover that money someday if you need it, or part of it. Yes, there is no getting blood out of a rock, but you do not know what the future holds and if he becomes more comfortable and you have a medical crisis, you'll be glad you took some steps to protect your financial health.

As for the kids--what are you going to do? I have adopted a child and I get very concerned about child custody b/c attachment issues can arise all too easily. Just be careful and move slowly for their sake. 

You sound pretty amazing, working so hard to keep them connected to their dad even when he didn't pay a dime toward visits. That is really putting the kids first and I hope he appreciates it, and they probably will too even if they don't know the whole story. Being denied access to one parent is pretty much the worst thing a parent can do to a child, so that even supervised visits with a psycho parent are better than no contact. You've gone way above the usual and although that is nothing more than your kids deserve, I know so many people (women and men) who would have made no effort--and of course it is the kids who lose. Kudos to you.


----------



## kingsqueen

As far as the kids go, I have decided to keep the status quo for now. I've been going over this so much for the past couple of months, debating what is the best thing for them ...

In reality, even though he says that he wants them for a year or two at a time, I have to consider that the past is the best indicator of the future. This past summer they were supposed to see him for 6 weeks - it turned into 2 weeks. He rarely has the money to see them. Though he has recently become better at maintaining contact through the phone and Skype, I'm just not confident that it will continue in the long term. So I am going to tread carefully. I don't want to tell the boys that they will live with their dad for X amount of time and then he changes his mind. Plus, I am afraid that they will feel like I am "sending them away".

So, for the time being, at least, we'll continue with their planned visits (a week at Christmas, March Break and a month in summer as well as the odd weekend that he requests). I'll be open to extending their summer visits, depending on how things play out over this winter.

In all honesty, I am hoping that he comes around to realize that moving closer to us would be the best thing that he can do for the kids (and likely himself, job-wise).


----------



## Scannerguard

I usually find the law instructive in matters like these. We can all lament family law and the way it is constructed by legislators but usually there is reasoning behind it.

My ex-wife, after lengthy and acrimonious negotiations, now decides, after 1 month of divorce:

"Oh, I can't afford this house on what you pay me for child support. I think I am going to have to move."

Now. . .I already consulted with my attorney. . .he said the courts do NOT look favorably upon uprooting kids from either parent, when there has been a fixed parenting schedule. They do NOT like kids changing school districts, changing friends, etc. The bus stop situation is being worked out on the days I have them and so forth. The courts favor stability and routine for kids.

So. . .she can move all she wants, as far as I am concerned. . .but she is to stay in the same town.

Now, that being said, this is all predicated on the fact that I have been involved, if even peripherally, in my children's lives during our separation. I paid my household support of $1725/month faithfully and took the kids when I could (I'll admit with working 3 jobs in the summer, it was often here and there). My final parenting arrangement is essentially 40% of the time I have the kids and I specifically moved back to my kids town on my wife's demand/request, even though I entertained or tried to entertain many other alternatives, not the least ironic, where I wanted to "birdnest" and help her support the house in exchange for using the house 1 weekend/month to parent.

But nooooooo. . .couldn't have that. So now, her and her father are crying they can't afford the McMansion.

My attorney noted. . .if she moves out of the town, there is a good chance that they would shift me to being the primary parent. He specializes in family law and is an expert in NJ so I respect his opinion.

My point. . .from what I understand. . .to remove the other parent from your kids life by a move, there needs to be a compellilng reason. Operative word: compelling. . .which is open to legal interpretation:

1. A better job (more pay, better hours, better benefits)
2. Closer to family (grandmother)
3. Safer neighborhood
4. An illness.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Courts don't like kids moving around.

Personally, I think you have #1 - a better job. And not just that you got a job that you liked. . .apparently this job means an upgrade in your kids lifestyle. Coupled with the fact he has maintained a spotty connection to them and did not pay child support (and yes, you can seek arrears on him from what I understand), I think you should just do what you think is best for you and your children.

That being said, keep the lines of communication open with him and work on alternatives - like summers with him. Even though you have a justifiable reason, the kids do need a relationship with their father.

I wish my ex-wife would communicate with me. I am OPEN (not necessarily consenting) to the idea of her moving with the kids. . .if, IF, IF. . .I could be convinced she wasn't going to be a b***h about me seeing them. Frankly, I am unsure of that and I know my kids are looking forward to 40% time with Dad right now and have asked for 50/50 before even starting. So for now. . .she's stuck.

If she moves out of town, we will file a motion, I guess.

(sorry if I made this about myself but your subject of moving brought up my own situation)

Good luck.


----------



## unbelievable

No way would I let the boys live with him for 2 years. He couldn't manage to inconvenience himself for 6 weeks for them or pay child support. Up to this point, all his "parenting" decisions have benefitted himself. There's no reason for him to feign parental concern at this point. The boys have been primarily living with you. If it aint broke, don't fix it.


----------



## kingsqueen

Scannerguard - Thank you for your perspective. It is helpful to hear from a father, especially from a non-residential father. I believe that you are fully right when you say that it is in the boy's best interest for them to have a good relationship with their father.

I will facilitate that through constant Skype and telephone contact and I will continue our current arrangement of visitation. If he decides to step up his involvement, that would be amazing, but I'm not going to count on it.

As for the retro-payments in child support, I am not going to pursue this. I recognize that he is genuinely in a bad financial position and I feel like any of his disposable income would be better utilized by funding visits with the kids in the future or to go back to school again so that he can change his situation.


----------



## Scannerguard

Kingsqueen:

I am going to speak to you like an attorney. . .and a good attorney isn't there to just do what you command, but rather to tell you when you are thinking right.

YOU AREN"T THINKING RIGHT.

I know it's very characteristic of all of us to feel some amount of compassion for our former spouses. After all, we were in love with them at one time or another.

But I kind of don't like the whole thought process behind this of just letting him kinda drift out there.

When you don't demand any kind of support, either in time/parenting or in money, you are effectively disconnecting your kids father from your kid's life. Yeah, technology is wonderful and does make co-parenting a lot easier and makes us feel closer to our kids. I am not poo-pooing Skype. But some regular or irregular hi-tech phone calls aren't enough.

And I get it - he needs to go to school and improve his employment situation. Don't we all? I have 8 years of college and I need to travel for post-grad seminars. School isn't necessarily the remedy any more for poor economic conditions anyway.

ANd I am not even telling you to seek remedy through the courts (necessarily) and be a hardass. . .but I think he needs to contribute "something", even if it isn't the legal amount.

I would try to negotiate with him.

Maybe tell him you need support, $50/week and in exchange, you'll drive the kids halfway or 2/3rds of the way to his place for 1 week every 3 months (1x/quarter). Something.

That is going to be a way that binds him to his kids a bit more. If he is paying let's say $50/week even, he'll want to know where that $215/month is going and be involved.

Right now, his kids and him being a father are only an abstract concept to him. 

Just hoping he gets involved, esp. with you moving further away, isn't proactive. Now, your reason may be perfectly justified in moving, and it seems you have the forum's blessing on that, but you can't sever the partnership the two of you are supposed to have.

The law is clear - he doesn't have to visit them one iaota. . .but he does have to pay. Back to my original opening statement. . .I think the law is instructive in these matters.


----------



## EnglishRose

I'm not in the US but I didn't want to read and run.

All through this, you have been the stable on, where as he up and left, took min. contact with the kids, making demands that you move to suit his needs. You have been good enough to accomodate him in many ways, when he has been less accomodating.

If the courts get involved, I can't see them granting him 100% access and moving the kids back and forth for a year. So please try not to worry x


----------

