Custody Evaluation #2 - Impressions & Observations of Children & DW
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.
In part 1, we covered the background information and the observations of both the psycho ex-wife and LM. Today, we’ll move onto the observations of the children (S1 and S2) and DW.
THE DETAILS (Significant Social History - Children):
S1, age 6, and S2, age 4. S1 has completed kindergarten. S2 has attended pre-school. For their session, the children arrived with their father from their paternal grandmother’s home. Both parents joined the children’s session at the start and close of the hour. Initially withholding, both children were able to participate fully in their session. S1 has somewhat of a stammer when confused or anxious. When his father was present, S1 sought him out for answers to perfunctory questions and engaged him in close, face-to-face dialogue. When their mother entered the session, both children responded with warmth toward her and engaged both parents equally.
Neither child exhibited significant stranger anxiety. S2 did exhibit low frustration tolerance. During the session, he would make demands of his brother and become tearful if not responded to immediately. S1 attempted to manage his brother’s demands by remaining calm and attempting explanations. In what appeared to be a maneuver to prevent confrontations, S1 would consistently yield to his younger brother.
S1’s play demonstrated an unwillingness to surrender his parental dream; that of his mother and father co-habitating again. When questioned further, he clearly demonstrated in play, and explained via his narrative, that he was comfortable in both of his parents’ homes but uncomfortable away from his father for long periods of time. Spontaneously, he attempted to develop a custody schedule which would allow him to see both parents daily. He became confounded when the logistics were brought to his attention and say, Oh, yeah, it’s a long ride so I guess we should see Mom in the mornings and Dad in the evenings.” It appears that LM’s relocation may be reviving the tensions from the initial breakup for S1, overwhelming his ability to conceptualize this new separation from his father.
Both children stated that their father comforts them when they first arrive in his home and that their mother and Psycho-SIL do likewise in PEW’s home. They eagerly told stories of spending time with their Psycho-FIL, Psycho-SIL, and their paternal grandmother.
S2 demonstrated no separation anxiety for either parent. During the session, he would alternately ask to see his mother and his father and when he overheard his father from the waiting room, he asked to leave the session stating, “I want to see if he wants to talk to me now.”
S1 is overweight for his age and seemed uncomfortable when physically active in the session. Throughout the session when S1’s states or actions were validated, he exhibited certain facial movements ostensibly serving to discharge some anxiety. It is possible that this child will tend to overeat in an attempt to assuage overwhelming emotions now and in the future.
Despite his mood fluctuations, S2 responded to redirection when supported and comforted; with a less than optimum parental response, however, it is likely that he would easily escalate with negative behaviors, as was reported by PEW. S2 appears to be expressing the anger in this sibling ground and S1 appears to be attempting to manage his own anxiety and depression and that of his brother as well.
There is no doubt in my mind that she has a really great read on both the boys at this time in their lives. S1 has a lot of my personality at that age, one of trying to be peacemaker and a strong feeling of family bond. They can both demonstrate an intelligence beyond their years. S1, particular in the younger years, was very loyal and protective of S2 and, as described in the short session by Gloria with the children, he was often taking a caretaker role when S2 was upset about anything.
Of course, she also recognizes S1’s heavily emotional personality and his weight, which would, without a doubt, contributing to further weight gain. What Gloria couldn’t know at the time - was the lack of meaningful healthy food options for him/them at PEW’s home and their tendency to be “snacked to death” on a daily basis.
“Less than optimal parental response.” Interesting.
THE DETAILS (Significant Social History - DW):
DW is [age and divorced]. She was married [date] and has to children SD aged 6 and SS aged 5. Her children alternate weeks with their father and the parties live nearby one another in [home state]. She reports that her co-parenting with her former spouse [POE] has been successful and that LM and POE have had cooperative interactions, too.
DW [employment details]. She and POE have shared the costs of a nany who travels to both homes on their respective custody weeks. DW has arranged for her children to be with her and LM has custody of his children, S1 and S2. She added that all 4 children have become very close friends.
DW has experience with co-parenting successfully and appeared to have proper boundaries for managing all four children stating, “We bathe our own children at different times and he disciplines his and I discipline mine.” She reported thath S1 and S2 have not demonstrated any negative behaviors while with her.
DW stated that she and LM have no immediate plans to wed, but that they will jointly own their new home and split all expenses equally.
Nothing earth-shattering in either report on Gloria’s observations. At this point, let’s move onto the overall observations…
THE DETAILS (Overall Impressions and Observations):
Both parents have served as primary caretakers of the children since their births. Prior to their separation, PEW would work overnight shifts on weekends as a [job description] in a group home and Father would manage all of the children’s care in her absence. Evidence of this team-approach to parenting their children was obvious by the strong bond S1 and S2 have with both parents.
Both parents struggle with anxiety when separated from the children for any significant period of time. Due to her anger, PEW found it difficult to believe that LM struggled with missing his children because he was able to move 4-hours away. She feels alone in parenting the children and overwhelmed when eitherh of the children exhibit any aggression. Her parenting effectiveness has therefore been diminished since the loss of the co-parenting arrangement that the parties enjoyed throughout their marriage, and their separation, prior to LM’s move.
LM was forthcoming that the primary impetus behind his move was what he felt to be “survival” as he put it. He struggled to adjust to the reduction in his buying power his income brought after the adjustment for child support. LM stated that he could not meet his obligations and provide for the children “in a manner to which they had become accustomed” he said, if he remained in the area. He stated that the growth potential at his long-standing job in [custody state] was no longer satisfactory. LM’s income at his new position is not substantially higher than that of his prior job. It appears that his chief economic gain was greater due to the lower real estate prices in [home state]. Co-terminously with these financial changes, LM met DW and the two began to plan a future. DW, as stated above, is unwilling to relocate due to the shared custody arrangement that she has with her former spouse.
As a result, LM drives four hours on a Friday afternoon to retrieve the children and four hours back to his home. He must leave his home at 3PM on Sundays to reach PEW’s home by 8PM to return the children to her. He then returns to his home, arriving after midnight. Despite this schedule, he was adamant that the children should be with him on alternate weekends throughout the school year. He felt that a reversal of primary custody during the summer break could address the children’s loss of contact with him through the year. He tended to minimize the significance to the children of the loss of weekly contact with him and the impact that being separated from their mother for long periods during the summer would have on them. He denied that the children’s behaviors may indicate adaptation problems and stated “PEW has always had problems managing the children because she is so inconsistent.”
LM’s love and bond with the children appeared genuine. He is an intense person with a strong work ethic and excellent parenting strengths. He has a history of making long commitments both in work and in personal relationships. He has had two long-term jobs since graduating high school. In the year following the termination of his first marriage he was married to PEW. In the year of their separation, he has begun to rebuild with DW. Part of what he appears to need to “survive” post-divorce is a strong connection with a female in his life. His relationship with DW began in August of 2004 and the job search apparently sometime thereafter. LM is willing to make the sacrifices necessary to be able to be with DW and his children as evidenced by the grueling commute he has to make every other weekend. What is troubling is that LM’s relocation does not appear to provide S1 and S2 with any clear benefits.
PEW likewise is struggling with adapting to post-divorce life. She has managed to purchase a single-family dwelling, but by the end of the Custody Evaluations, Inc. process, she reported that it is necessary that her sister reside with her in the new home to assist her with household expenses. Further, while her parenting style may be materially different from LM’s, his absence creates a void where the children can, and will, challenge her authority more vigorously, thus, reducing her effectiveness. Her sense of powerlessness was evident as her problem-solving ability around this issue was stunted. She recommended that LM simply move back to the area.
So again, the report comes back materially different from what was expected, but worse - some of the critically important issues that Gloria herself told us all were going to be a part of the report, namely - her serious concerns about Psycho-SIL’s mental stability around the children - was completely absent.
Now, in a later segment, I will break-down this portion of the report as was done for my attorney in preparation for the court hearing that would be forthcoming. However, in the meantime, I want to give you a spot-on indictment about the cottage industry that are “Custody Evaluations.”
Read the above again, particularly with regard to The Psycho Ex-Wife (what little there is of her, anyway). Then go back and re-read the observations of the PEW from Custody Evaluation #1. Here are two, well-educated, experienced “professionals.” They are working in the SAME organization - Custody Evaluations, Inc. They were appointed by the SAME judge. Yet, Sonya has depicted PEW as the paragon of virtue and parenthood, while Gloria declares her woefully inadequate and unprepared to perform effective parenting.
I will point out that they were consistent in one thing - easily finding ways to make a father out to be unworthy of real consideration to be a primary parent. When I say it’s a crap-shoot, folks… I mean it. These people, whether private or “court-ordered organizations” - can report whatever the hell they want and because they have a degree and experience performing their voodoo magic over people’s lives - they are afforded a “great deal of consideration” when their recommendations are put before the family court judges.
I will say this - while Sonya’s report was a fraudulent, one-sided whitewash, with lies directly from Sonya herself (let alone her validating PEW’s unsupported false claims)… Gloria did have the reality more pegged. For obvious, much-biased reasons, I’m less-than-thrilled with the backhanded compliments and her almost driven urge to portray normal situations as something more derogatory. I’ll detail the specific issues in the final installment.
Make you feel good about the process? I didn’t think so. Next: The Recommendation from the Evaluator.
October 14th, 2009 at 10:29 am
I just found your site and have been reading thru your back posts. I can’t believe the bitterness that you hold. I can see that things have been rough but I don’t see how bitterness has helped your kids at all. It’s just as bad for them as your ex’s craziness.
Every comment I’ve seen you leave on someone’s site has been tinted with that same bitterness towards both the system and your ex too. Although your low contact method is a great idea, it’s a shame that all your posts seems tainted with the same negativity.
My experience with the courts has been totally the opposite of yours. I can’t force my ex to see, visit, or acknowledge the existence of our children. The courts refuse to enforce any type of support or court order. He’s never showed for court ordered visits -either in person or of the phone variety. Every time we manage to get his phone number, he changes the number again. And, for your information, I don’t call him on it, the kids do. He hangs up on them and then changes the number. And yet the courts do nothing to this man. Nothing to help the kids. I would say that it’s men like this that make it hard on the rest of the men who are parents and want to actively parent their children. But, I don’t hate him for his choices. I feel pity for him for what he’s lost out on. Bitterness is like hate, it consumes you over time.
October 14th, 2009 at 10:52 am
AJ - you wouldn’t be the first and I’m sure you won’t be the last to toss out the “bitterness” adjective when it comes to reading and responding to the experiences we have had in our lives.
This is not uncommon by commenters who sincerely have absolutely no idea the kind of suffering someone has had to endure to try to obtain some peace in their lives and meaningful custody of their children.
I pray you never have to experience anything like we have - or a great many of our visitors have.
Let me make something abundantly clear - despite our experiences, DW and I lead a very happy life together. We have amazing times with one another, we have amazing times with our children. Telling our story and sharing our feelings about each particular story we choose to tell isn’t “bitterness” - it’s sharing how those experiences impacted our lives at that given moment.
I’m certain that if I walked up to you and smashed your face in - you might have some negative feelings towards me - at that moment - if not long after.
When you have someone spreading lies, committing perjury, filing false allegations with CPS against you and your partner and risking having your children taken away from you… and everything else that we’ve detailed here - I have to ask you - don’t those types of stories ring with negativity? How about if someone tried to remove your children from your lives with the full assistance of the family court system? Would you be pissed if someone tried to remove your children from your life in part or whole? How would you feel about someone filling your children’s heads with lies about you in an effort to get them to hate you and not want to be with you?
Do you think that if you were to write about those stories that they wouldn’t have a touch of “negative feelings” about them?
If you decide to come back, maybe you could teach me how to spin something like the police and child protective services coming to your door after attending the funeral for the death of your grandmother - into something sunshine and roses.
You see, I understand how some people can confuse sharing a story with “not moving on” or “holding onto anger and bitterness.” I assure you, those assumptions are widely held primarily by a few sets of people:
1 - People who have never gone through it and have zero understanding.
2 - People who perpetrate such atrocities on others.
3 - People who support the people described in #2
I have no control over your perception of what I write and how I write it. I do urge you to close your eyes and try to imagine someone dedicating their lives to ruining your relationship with your children and ask you to consider, honestly, how you would share that experience in an effort to help others who have or may go through the same.
October 14th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
I have an unbelievable amount of sympathy for LM & DW, as I am smack in the middle of what feels like a never ending saga with my PEH. I think that “bitterness” is sometimes used to describe what is actually sad acceptance of the reality of a given situation. Someone who is not in a grave struggle for their family’s physical and mental survival might read some of these stories and easily come to the conclusion that it is yet another whining ex with a bad case of sour grapes. However, the reality of what Mr. M and DW write on this site is extraorinarily helpful for those of us who must take off our rose colored glasses and see what we need to see in order to fight for the health of our children and ourselves when surrounded by insanity from every angle. AJ, please keep an open mind and Mr. M/DW thank you so much for this site and for sharing your long and difficult story in order to help others.
October 14th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
My first impression readin AJ’s comment is that, she hasn’t really read the whole site,
Secondly, she is jealous that she doesn’t have her ex trying as hard as you do, to be a parent to their children,
And third, she is probably just one of PEW’s spies.
You are correct that only a person who has gone through this could truly know the fear of someone’s lies and manipulation fucking with your life, and your relationship with your children.
It’s reprehensible.
Fuck off AJ.
Mind your own business.
October 14th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
AJ — I know fathers like your ex exist. I hate them, because even though they are rare, they have become the accepted stereotype, and their existence makes things very hard for good fathers who want to actively parent their children despite the obstacles erected by a vindictive or mentally ill ex.
Bitterness and anger are not dirty words, though they are often used to “prove” that fathers (and fathers only) are unfit to parent.
When somebody is hitting you and your kids on the head with a hammer, it is natural to be angry. When a court system that is supposed be there to protect you and your kids just keeps handing your PEW/PEH new hammers and demanding that you pay for the hammers, it is natural to be bitter.
Baskerville points out a fascinating societal double-standard in “Taken Into Custody.” If somebody threatened to take away or harm the children of a married man, we expect that he become angry. If he doesn’t become angry, he is suspect, an uncaring father. However, when a father is divorced, and the mother or courts threaten to disrupt the family or take away the kids, the father’s naturally angry reaction is “proof” that he is unfit, needs “anger management classes,” and should only be allowed to see his children rarely, or under supervision, and instead pay “child support.”
AJ, the whole thing is a racket DESIGNED to make fathers angry so they will provide the necessary “proof” to further separate them from their children.
October 14th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
I don’t believe at this point that what AJ posted was intended to be malicious. I think that “first glances” will often result in just such a conclusion. When you add to the mix that many people who believe this site is simply sour grapes, not moving on from the past, and an effort to denigrate the PEW in an unhealthy way - can’t possibly begin to imagine what such experiences can do to a family’s life.
This is a fact - most people cannot comprehend that a fraction of what we go through is real. It’s especially hard for people who were close to a particular situation and just “never knew.”
Of course, they don’t know about mental illness, BPD in particular - and the “public persona vs. private persona” issues that come along with it.
AND… if I didn’t have all of this supporting documentation and voice mails and everything else - fewer people would be inclined to believe it. Most people don’t have all this shit to back up their stories.
October 14th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Kudos to you, Mister M.
Whenever I read the response of someone who has no experience with a bi-polar ex, and how we’re depicted as the bad guys because of our reactions, I can feel the frustration building up inside me. I used to be able to calmly state my case (as you can still so obviously do), but over time it’s getting harder and harder to keep a level head.
My hat goes off to you for your ability to remain calm in the voice of opposition and still present a logical, well-thoughout response.
October 15th, 2009 at 12:16 am
AJ, I would say Mr. M does a terrific job of holding back negativity. I’m fighting with an ex who has left (by mutual agreement) left our son with me, taken everything she deemed valuable (like the washer and dryer, when she had the option to rent them from her apartment complex), has minimal visitation (completely by her choice), badmouths my parenting, and still wants alimony and is willing to hold up our divorce because of it. Why is she entitled to alimony? Because she was married to me for 8 1/2 years (translation, because she is a woman and because the world should cater to her).
Let me a little loose with my negativity and I will offend a longshoreman.
October 15th, 2009 at 8:35 am
AJ, I am in a similar situation to yourself in that my ex-husband doesnt show much desire to spend time with our 2 sons, as he now has 3 younger children with someone else. However, I feel no bitterness towards him. I dont pity him. I feel nothing at all for him. My sons realise if he wanted to spend more time with them he would, and they make the decision whether to see him ever 2 weeks for 5 hours (as per his request). However, I have also been in a situation similar to Mr-M. My husband’s PEG made our lives so miserable for over a year by making up lies and allegations which were completely fabricated to try and turn the world against my husband and myself, which resulted in my husband not being allowed to see his own daughter, just because SHE was so bitter that he had left her and didnt want her anymore. Mr-M is not the bitter one here. Sorry but I think you have more bitterness inside you, not pity, towards your ex than Mr-M has ever shown towards PEW. I have been on both sides of your fence so I feel I can make a justified comment that Mr-M has shown no bitterness at all actually, just absolute frustration at that disgraceful way PEW, her family and the “justice” system has treated him and his family. And he is perfectly entitled to show that, along with any emotion he wants, and he does have the right to say it and not be called “bitter” by someone who obviously isnt up to date with the goings on of his dangerous, selfish PEW.
October 15th, 2009 at 10:55 am
In my personal life, the father of my children actually did abandon us. He ran away. He was mentally ill (not BPD), suicidal, abusive, and often had difficulty with reality. I am not saying those things to be mean or harsh, it simply was what it was.
Unfortunately, it is men such as my ex-husband, and AJ’s ex-husband, who perpetuate that stereotype of Dads as losers who abandon their families and move on with their new lives, all happy-go-lucky and “free”.
In reality — in my career as a Divorce Coach — I see nothing of the kind. I have NEVER had a client, not once, where the Dad wanted to leave his children. Not once. I’ve had many male clients who were willing to spend thousands in legal fees, all for the chance to have even a tiny amount of influence in their children’s lives.
Now, I have had more than a few clients (women), who wanted to claim that their husbands had “abandoned the family” … and yes, their claims are based on the fact that the ex-husband had had an affair, had left them, and had married someone else. And while I don’t condone adultery, I have seen enough of it (in both genders) to know that adultery is rarely the entire story. And to know that even when spouses cheat, they never intend to “divorce” the children.
But that’s how the stereotype gets perpetuated. Men are bad. Men are cheaters. Men abandon their families and start new families. Men want to get out of their “obligations”. Women are victims. Women are entitled to their ex-husband’s resources. Women are pitiable “single mothers”.
These biases are built in. They permeate the classrooms where psychology and social work students sit and learn how to become “custody evaluators”. They permeate the seminars that judges and family law attorneys attend for their CLE credits every year. They permeate the DV training that law enforcement officers and family mediators must attend. They permeate the research that gets funded and conducted by today’s grad students who will become tomorrow’s professors and trainers and seminar leaders.
This is why people like LM, Glenn Sacks, Warren Farrell, and Stephen Baskerville cry out — again and again — in an attempt to turn this false tide, change the perception, and return children into the lives of their fathers. It is not bitterness. It is a desperate plea.
October 15th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
When I first read this website that was my first thought - man, this guy is bitter but then I started reading more and more. I started to put myself into his shoes and I would have done and feel the same way a majority of the time. There are times that I have disagreed with something but all those times I could always see where he was coming from.
This is a wonderful site and it gives me some comfort to know that I am not alone with what is going on in my life with my PEB.
October 15th, 2009 at 10:33 pm
Granted, this evaluation may not have been everything you hoped it would be, I must say it paints your ability to parent beautifully whilst calling PEW out on her INability to handle the boys on her own thus unable to effectively parent.
“Her parenting effectiveness has therefore been diminished…”
“He is an intense person with a strong work ethic and excellent parenting strengths. ”
The fact that this evidence was given and yet the children remain mostly in her custody should be proof enough that BIOTCh is a facade.
So… what? You don’t get the kids because you moved? ‘Cause that seems to be the only reason Gloria gives. I guess in the courts eyes it’s better to keep the kids local and in the hands of a person with weak parenting skills than to relocate them to be with a parent who is willing to make great sacrifices to keep his children in his life.
Also, if I may, can I point out one inconsistency in her report? As I said above, it appears her only qualms with LM is his move
“What is troubling is that LM’s relocation does not appear to provide S1 and S2 with any clear benefits.”
YET, one paragraph earlier she clearly states
“his chief economic gain was greater due to the lower real estate prices in [home state].”
I’m no genius, but doesn’t
More$ = less chance to befall “Deadbeat Dad” status due to inability to pay egregious CS/alimony = Dad not in jail = better chance to see kids?
More$ = college fund/ clothes/ food/ shelter
and
staying local
less$ = well, all of that I stated above AND STILL not able to see the kids more than he is NOW??
Like I said, I’m no genius so please correct me if I’m sadly mistaken.
October 15th, 2009 at 11:54 pm
Hey, MostMom… you wanna write for the blog? You just kicked the ass right out of my CE2 post mortem that is scheduled to launch on Monday.
Did you hack the admin account or something?
October 16th, 2009 at 3:44 am
[...] from the prior installment, the observations of DW, the children, and the overall observations and impressions, comes the recommendation by Gloria, Custody Evaluator [...]
October 18th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Mister M: read AJ’s post: “The courts refuse to enforce any type of support or court order” - you know this is not true, unles she is writing from Bolivia, not from US. Any state in US enforcing support and you CAN NOT get out of it.Read further: “Every time we manage to get his phone number, he changes the number again. And, for your information, I don’t call him on it, the kids do” - kids also find his phone # after he changes it? sounds more like not a full story - she has done something to this man and he afraid or just decided to have NO contact with her. She IS PEW.
October 19th, 2009 at 11:39 am
seems pretty darn fair to me. how would you get the kids to their school living a state away? and both parents need their weekend time with the children…that’s important to have that down time. 3 weeks on (with You), 1 week off during the summer…pretty good deal as well. do you really expect them to go 3 months without seeing their other parent?
i don’t understand what the raw deal attitude is about. if you were in the same city you could have shared physical custody i’m sure during the school year and wipe out the summer problem by just doing that 50-50 as well.
yeah yeah it’s not your fault you had to move a state away to be jobless. but how else do you think they could’ve worked with that? what do you think they could’ve proposed as an alternative?
October 19th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
All very good questions, what.
I wanted primary custody. They would go to school while with me, not PEW.
A couple of points to make, perhaps you haven’t been keeping up (and much of it is explained in the “post-mortem” article).
Given my potential living locations within the custody-state, I would have been too far away from the school to have overnights during the week. I wouldn’t have gotten much more, if any more, custody time given my options in custody-state than I would be afforded in home-state.
I had already suffered an unfavorable recommendation in the first evaluation.
If I was willing to remain a non-custodial parent, except for having to spend every-other-weekend in custody-state, it was a pretty good CP/NCP arrangement, with the bulk of the summer time with me, the bulk of any extra opportunities during the school year with me, and alternating holidays, etc. However, that’s not what I was going for.
The reason I was going for primary custody was PEW’s escalation, the escalation and threats from her family, dealing with parental alienation (which I haven’t yet detailed for the summer of 2005 yet), and I was prepared to encourage, make arrangements for, and cultivate a good loving relationship between the children and their mother - something that was most definitely not happening the roles being opposite.
At no time had anything I proposed involved PEW not seeing the children for months at a time.
Finally - if PEW had just stuck with our “pre-lawyer” shared-parenting promise to one another and not embarked on this mess of litigation, this blog wouldn’t exist.