Continuing from Impressions & Observations, The PEW - comes the CE’s report on me.
Discussion of Mister-M:
The father presents with appropriate concerns about the children. He tends to be an intense individual who has some issues with control. This was evidenced by his request to have sole decision-making for the children.
There is no bias against a father here. I request primary custody (physical & legal) and I am an intense individual with control issues. However, PEW’s petition for sole custody, it would seem, does not make her an intense individual with control issues. Keep in mind now, my petition was a counter- to PEW’s initiation of this entire court & custody mess. From the outset, I was the only one who made overtures and arrangements for a shared-custody situation. It was PEW who scuttled that in June of 2004.
The father does appear to have a temper when angry with the mother; however, he is patient with the children, and I do not believe he would lose his temper with the children as he does with the mother.
On what basis, exactly, does the custody evaluator come to that conclusion? It doesn’t make sense. If I was this obvious monster to their mother, why wouldn’t I be the same monster to the children if they didn’t do as I demanded?
Folks, you only have my word on this, but I promise you as the good Lord above as my witness - this is a complete fabrication. At NO TIME did I EVER lose my temper in any of these sessions. On 1 occasion, I showed ‘controlled exasperation and impatience’ having to sit there in silence while the PEW went on and on and on with her false allegations while the CE (and I) sat and listened. I simply asked how long I was going to have to sit and entertain this reading of the list of accusations none of which could the PEW ever support as factual.
The only other time I showed any level of emotion was on the oft-repeated discussion of *my* unwillingness to settle the house. Without any anger, I turned to her and asked, “I’ve made 3 offers to you that were more than fair and each more lucrative than the next. Exactly how many offers have you made to settle the matter?” (The answer was none.) I asked her to stop lying about it and didn’t raise my voice or show anger. I was well aware of the pitfalls of a male getting too emotional in any capacity in a situation like that. In fact, I feared I might be *too* calm or stoic.
That the CE would portray me like this doesn’t surprise me today, though it really did at the time. It’s clear, now, the agenda here. Still, I was so utterly disheartened by the reality that PEW’s histrionics were not even mentioned once, though she raised her voice, pointed at me emphatically while reading from her lie-list, and was insistent on her fantasy that she and the children were systematically abused by me in any number of ways.
Most county custody evaluation programs are exempt from being called to testify regarding their reports. They can write whatever the hell they want and there is nothing you can do about it.
The father was initially interested in continuing the joint physical custody arrangement as long as he had sole decision making for the children. In particular, wanted to be able to decide where the children attended school. However, the father became very frustrated when the mother did not respond positively to a couple of different financial settlement proposals he made. As the father became more frustrated by this, his anger toward the mother increased. The level of contentiousness over the financial issues made it difficult for both parents to remain focused on the custody matter, and to co-parent at the time. It is my impression that these frustrations led the father to become more critical of the mother’s parenting and to raise concerns about her parenting.
Initially? Not only initially, but eventually at the end, too. Remember, the CE asked us to come up with shared custody parenting plans in each of the last two sessions. I did that, the “well-prepared” PEW didn’t. She refused to. She had no interest in it.
As far as the rest, it simply did not happen. It didn’t. We had a short disagreement over who wasn’t cooperating with whom regarding the settlement talks. It didn’t last very long and I asked PEW some pointed questions that she was simply unable to answer without exposing herself as the uncooperative one (though it should be patently obvious to any reasonable human being looking at who is making offers and who is not). The CE has me apparently a complete rage over the issue and her “impression” is that my concerns over PEW’s stability and parenting ability are fabricated and only exist because PEW wouldn’t settle on the house. That’s what this had boiled down to. This, after refusing to review any of the real, serious documented issues that I had come prepared to share. This, after accepting PEW’s hysterical, crying rants on her word alone.
It remains to be seen if the father is able to remain in the marital residence when a financial settlement is is reached between the parties. He would like to do so in order to provide the children with some stability at a time when they are adjusting to so many changes in their lives. The father initially supported the mother’s decision to put S1 in parochial school when they were still together. However, he believes that the children would do just as well in public school, and that at this time there was a benefit to S1 attending school with children from the neighborhood. The father is able to provide the children with a stable home. However, his work schedule makes him less available for the children than the mother during the school week.
Well, with a report like this, she all but guaranteed that it would not happen.
Her comment regarding my supporting the mother’s decision is a complete lie. Not only did I never claim any such thing, quite the contrary. The mother supported the decision for the children to attend public school. The fact was, the public school system is better. The fact was, even if together, the tuition costs for Catholic School was a burden our budget would be unable to bear. The fact was, I stated these reasons and more and it led to the decision in my favor during the court hearing on the subject back in the summer of 2004. The fact was, PEW actually took care of registering the boys for public school on February 4th, 2004 - AFTER initiating divorce proceedings - because we both agreed that it was the best choice and the best school. She only reversed course months later at the beginning of the summer.
As for the work schedule, I already had proof that my schedule was rather flexible. The kids would be at school for most of the day! What benefit to the children is there for PEW to be home while the kids are at school? How would my being at work while the kids are at school be any different? I would be home. I would cook dinner for them. I would care for them. I would bathe them. I would do all the things a loving single parent does for their children with a great deal of success - as I had done all throughout their lives on this earth to that point (and since then). The differences in my work schedule and PEW’s work schedule were completely irrelevant to the children except that PEW’s work schedule would make her completely unavailable during the longest periods of time where she could spend it with them one-on-one - the weekends! PEW would be home when the children mostly weren’t during the week and then completely unavailable for any weekend. This was beneficial for the children? I both worked and lived not longer than a 3-minute drive from their school and with the blessing of my workplace (as already shown in the months prior to the evaluation) could adjust my schedule and accommodate any special need that may arise involving my children. My work schedule made me far more available to the children than PEW’s could ever hope to! The evaluator just made up her own bullshit as she went along.
My destruction is complete. The solid, concrete foundation of my destruction is thick with lies and embellishments and all part of what is usual and customary in the divorce & family court system. Fathers don’t rate and the system will do whatever is necessary to ensure that fathers are separated from their children as much of the time as possible and made to pay a maximum amount of child support to keep the funds coming into the state governments from the federal government.
Be mindful, my comments made throughout these posts on the custody evaluation are made with “knowing now what I didn’t know then.” Despite some of the experiences I had at the time they occurred, I still believed I presented well and was confident of a positive outcome, especially given how PEW acted in the joint sessions. I have no idea how she acted in her one-on-ones.
Next segment - Conclusion and Recommendations.
