The Psycho Ex Wife

Have your own psycho ex? Get a FREE Report on "Why Co-Parenting Doesn't Work", or learn how to win child custody with a custody coach.

Ten years ago if you had told me I’d be a stepmother one day I would have laughed at you. I had my list of “wants” in a man if I was ever in a long term relationship again, which always began with him having NO children. He would also have to be financially secure, have no tattoos, not ride a motorcycle, and not own guns. LM, is not that man, he’s the complete opposite. Our second date was at the tattoo parlor as I watched him get his family crest with S2’s birth date on his upper arm. Yet, that explains exactly why I’m with him, his sense of family.

Everyday I struggle with being a good stepmother, what does that entail, where are my boundaries since I’m in the precarious position of providing for my stepsons while having no legal rights. How do I protect myself and my children? Everyday we get emails asking how I handle these situations, so I decided to respond today, and also ask on our message boards to see if there were any other questions you wanted answered. This is going to be a long post, so sit back, enjoy, and please leave a comment if you have any other questions!

How in the name of God is someone supposed to parent four teenaged boys and deal with a PEW, and keep their sense of humor? I can’t predict the future, but I’m going to guess it involves narcotics and a few vacations at a psych ward. We are heading there ourselves with 3 boys and 1 girl, who have barely 2.5 years between them. We will have 4 kids in high school at one time, and then college. I’m scared, hold me? What I’ve always said, ever since my ex was scared of bringing our daughter home, is that you have to take it one day at a time and you grow along with your children. You aren’t going to be thrown 4 teenagers without having the experience of knowing who they are. I thought it was important to be there for my kids when they were little, but I’m beginning to think that parents should actually work more when they are little and be there when they are hitting this age! This is where they can make the biggest mistakes of their lives. We are working on keeping the lines of communication open, my kids actually beg us to have family talk hour every night where we discuss the issues they could face in middle school next year. With the kids it’s all about trust, BOTH ways, not just you trusting them. Continue Reading…

Ah, the great irony with a foundation of another husband’s lifeless body. Too bad Anthony Rankins didn’t have any of the help that is afforded female victims of domestic violence. Perhaps he would be alive today. The Violence Against Women’s Act is a scourge on society. Our Federal tax dollars, numbering into the multiple billions, are allocated to help one gender against domestic violence - women - to the exclusion of men and boys. While this should be unconstitutional, it continues to fester, sucking the life out of men and boys unable to obtain meaningful help from Federally funded DV shelters (because for all intents and purposes - they simply don’t exist). It also sucks billions in federal tax dollars that already being wasted on an industry that has been shown to be ineffective, has little to no oversight, and cannot even begin to justify their existence.

One of those fighting on Capitol Hill, or at least she was before being taken into custody for murdering her husband of only 5-days - Arelisha Bridges - a registered lobbyist with the group called National Declaration of Domestic Violence Order. Anthony Rankins, presumably extracting himself from a situation that was escalating at the hands of this murderous woman, was gunned down in the street, having been followed there by a nightgown-clad Arelisha Bridges. The same Arelisha Bridges who reportedly is a champion fighting to stop domestic violence against women (only).

From the article in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

Witnesses told police that Bridges was wearing a nightgown and a shower cap as she argued with Rankins on the sidewalk on North Avenue near West Peachtree Street around 10:45 p.m. Monday.

And moments later, witnesses said, they heard shots. They said she then “calmly walked away.”

A MARTA police officer stopped her as she was getting into her car, perhaps to return to her home nearby on Centennial Olympic Park Drive.

So, it would appear she traveled some distance in order to cold-bloodedly gun down her husband and “calmly walk away.”  A representative for the Georgia Commission on Family Violence, ironically enough named Kirsten Rambo, was quick to distance Bridges and her organization from the cause, claiming that she hadn’t previously heard of Bridges’ organization.

Too bad for Anthony Rankins.  How soon before we hear how oppressive and violent he was and that Arelisha Bridges had no choice but to dress in her finest nightgown and shower-cap, drive across town, and ambush Anthony Rankins right on the street in front of witnesses?  I’d say if Arelisha Bridges hasn’t already done it, she will be doing it shortly.  After all, dead men don’t make good witnesses.  When a husband or boyfriend has been gunned down in cold blood, the stories of untold violence come out of the wood work.  I’m sure the defense will spit on Anthony Rankins’ grave soon enough.

We’ve seen it countless times before and we’ll see it countless more times in the future until society begins to accept that women initiate domestic violence at least as often as men… and then actually do something about protecting men and boys equally with women who are actual victims.

It’s hard for me to convey just how exasperating it is when something that should be so simple can be blown up for the most specious of reasons.  It’s hard for me to justify on behalf of the court why things cannot simply be kept simple.

Here’s a summary of what should have happened and what actually did happen.

The Facts as We Know Them:

PEW and I now make fairly close to the same income.  The disparity is so slight that the income “equalizes” at approximately $130.00, which is how much money I have to pay in order for both households to have the same income, which is what sometimes happens when the custody arrangement is 50/50.  Due to this reality, the burden for all of the other necessary expenses (childcare and healthcare) are shared equally.

There is no disputing this.

Regarding childcare for the school year, now that I have an actual total for the actual costs for the school year from the provider, we are in agreement that the figure is what I presented to the court.

There is no disputing this.

Regarding health insurance for the children, we disagree on which health insurance should cover the children.  However, we are in agreement as to the costs associated with the state’s health insurance plan and my employment health insurance plan.  I know that the plan offered by the job is far superior to the plan offered by the state, not that the state plan isn’t wonderful when you have no other opportunities to obtain insurance at reasonable cost.

While we disagree on the cost/benefit associated with each plan, there is no disputing the costs for one or the other.

That’s all that needs to be considered.  Armed with this information, here are what should have been the possible outcomes:

OPTION 1: This was what I intended to request of the court for reasons that will be summarized after…

1. $130.00 dollars flows from me to PEW due to the income difference.
2. I am given responsibility for paying the childcare provider.  Half of the cost flows from PEW to me.
3. I cover the children with my excellent work plan.  Half of the cost flows from PEW to me.

With Item 1, there is no issue.  With item 2, the issue is that she has been in arrears for fully 2 years, sometimes quite substantially - we’re talking many months behind.  I believe I can keep current with the provider and eliminate any risks that childcare will no longer be offered because PEW won’t pay.  With Item 3, it’s a simple dispute.  My plan offers superior coverage, but comes at a cost that is approximately $200/month more than the state plan.  The end result is that PEW would pay me some form of “child support” in the form of her half of the costs of the childcare and health insurance less the amount above for the difference in income.  For the sake of round figures, that amount would be approximately $125/month.

Pretty sound reasoning.  If the court disagreed with my reasoning, then…

OPTION 2:

Continue Reading…

Child support modifications.

Whether you have to pay more or pay less, few things are as frustrating as the dog-and-pony show that is going through a child support modification with a psycho ex.  My psycho ex-wife is no different.  When you’re high-conflict and your psycho ex-wife is money-focused and can’t function without it, not that they could really financially function all that well with it, the child support modification becomes a long, drawn-out process.  I really believe the courts should have a streamlined option.  The streamlined option would be one where they show which party wanted to go to hearing how many times and just skip straight to the hearing.  Stop with the “child support conferences” which only prolong the agony.  We know we’re going to a hearing.

Our last update on this issue came way back in August of 2009: Job Loss/Child Support Update 8/7/09 - Hearing Loss. While it was more a hearing “concede” than it was a loss, I was spending $2,000 either way… testifying or in the child support, assuming I could find a job sooner rather than later. To this day, there is no question in my mind that “averaging” my income is a misapplication of the statute regarding imputed income. However, judges and their boundless “discretion” really can do whatever they want. I simply wasn’t going to participate in a hearing in order to give me an appeal opportunity that I couldn’t afford to see through.  That’s why so many of these child support modifications are wars of financial attrition.  The cost-benefit associated with fighting for what is truly right - fails.  Last year, too much money I didn’t have was spent to have the end result be - keep paying the same.  Of course, this was my fault as I didn’t handle the situation properly, but that’s water under the bridge.

A chance meeting at an internet cafe yielded me an exciting new job with wonderful new people and opportunities.  This job takes advantage of long dormant skills and has me working on projects that are not only interesting to cover, but fun to cover, too.  Though it came with a downgrade in income compared to the arrangement I had at the previous job, in this economy one doesn’t refuse a job when offered.  I’m more excited for this job opportunity than I’ve been about any other in my adult life.  Of course, this means an adjustment to child support.  It should mean a downward modification based upon the state guidelines, but that, as always, remains to be seen.

So, job started January 4th.  I filed for the modification on January 4th.  The child support modification “conference” was scheduled for January 29th.  Situations like this is akin to watching the movie Titanic over and over and over again.  You know the ship is going to strike the iceberg and most on board will die - but there isn’t anything you’re going to do to stop it from happening again.

I found out before the holiday and shared the news with the children who, in turn, let PEW know.  This prompted an email:

Continue Reading…

Folks, this is a really long one.  If you think you’re going to try to do this all in one sitting, better wrap yourself in a Snuggie and have a nice, strong drink at the ready.

Go on, take your time… I’ll wait…

-

-

-

(This is me, waiting…)

-

-

-

We often fail to realize “things” when we’re right in the thick of it.  Thus, comes the beauty of hindsight.  You see, PEWs like mine never learn from the past and therefore are always doomed to repeat it.  I annoyingly speak of projection when it comes to PEW, but it simply cannot be helped.  One of the unfortunate by-products of my long layoff in 2007 and my long layoff last year is the dreaded trips to the courthouse for the waste-of-time conferences followed by the inevitable hearings.  Child support has to be adjusted one way or the other (and sometimes not) and this gives PEW the opportunity for PEW to recycle her old tricks, like her magical math that grossly over-inflates child care expenses and health care expenses and whatever else it is she can fabricate in an effort to maximize the child support number.  It’s especially nice for her when her fictional figures get rolled into the equation by the courts, because when she doesn’t actually incur those expenses, that’s cash-money directly into her pocket.

Dateline, early 2006. As discussed in general many times in the past, I had grown tired of being “ripped off” by PEW’s magical math.  I also had grown tired of “taking the (bullshit) high road” and simply sacrificing substantial credits due me when things were to be righted, just to avoid going to court.  While I wasn’t particularly smart and certainly not in low-contact mode, I was definitely trying to rattle the cage by calling her on her fuzzy math, even when it was just blowing smoke to expose her lies.

It was tax time and I was foolishly relying on PEW for some information I needed to do taxes.  I requested the tax ID numbers of the school, the church (for S2’s pre-k), and the babysitter she reportedly was paying $165/week to watch S2 for three half-days per week.  This was not good for either PEW or “Janice” because I was blustering about claiming my percentage of childcare costs that were part of the CS figure.

PEW wasn’t giving it, not only because she flat-out didn’t pay Janice what she had told the court, but Janice would also have to report the amount PEW told the court, every single week, as income… did I mention every single week for the school year?  Looks like this was a serious catch-22.  While ultimately I let it drop, her lies to compound her lies might make for great reading.  At the same time, you can have a chuckle about how ridiculous high-contact continued to make me look.  We’ll pick it up after the initial requests and back-and-forth…  I had called her on the figures she gave to the court and she replied:

Continue Reading…