Really, David?! That's a HUGE relief to know. So she can...er, complain (I'm trying to damn hard to be fair-minded and objective) all she wants, and it won't matter?

Just think about it for a second. She doesn't have to share her will with Dan after she divorces him. She's leading a separate life. So why would that be legally binding on him if he's still got parental rights? She can state her wishes but as long as he has a legal status as a parent then he's fine.

The important thing to remember is that there are two elements to custody. One is legal custody and the other is physical custody.

Almost all divorces grant 50/50 legal custody unless one parent was abusive, or has specifically abandoned their rights to the child. That means that both parents have a say in matters of schooling, education, religion and healthcare. As a matter of practical function, the parent who has the greater physical custody will be making most of those decisions but the other parent still has a legal right to the child even if they don't have primary physical custody.

Wow, Ginger, and ouch.

Another way to think of it Erin is that the same part of the law that made life hellish for Dan because she could move anywhere and take her son with him, works for him in this instance.

He had no say in where she lives.

She has no say in where her son goes after she dies, as long as Dan has legal rights as a parent.

The fact that he's supporting his son financially and seeing him regularly despite the distance would only prove that he's an interested parent in the court's eyes.

Almost all divorces grant 50/50 legal custody unless one parent was abusive, or has specifically abandoned their rights to the child. That means that both parents have a say in matters of schooling, education, religion and healthcare. As a matter of practical function, the parent who has the greater physical custody will be making most of those decisions but the other parent still has a legal right to the child even if they don't have primary physical custody.

That makes sense; I was kind of wigging because she really like to whip around the L word (er, lawyer) whenever she doesn't get her way. D is more non-confrontational, because that's his nature AND he really, truly puts M's emotional well-being first and knows that having parents in a litigious sitch is stressful and confusing. (She ALSO knows this, dammit.)

I agree with him -- to a point. Part of me just wants to get the most bloodthirsty lawyer we can,a la Lila, and get all BACK THE FUCK OFF but that won't make her reasonable, which is all I truly want.

WS, a friend of mine is a caregiver for developmentally disabled adults also, and it is grueling. What a day. I am sorry it was so, er, craptastic.

I feel MUCH less panicky and mind-clogged. I think I can go to bed now so I can get up early and recoup some lost work time.

Thanks a lot!

ma ~~~sj, to you and the family

That makes sense; I was kind of wigging because she really like to whip around the L word (er, lawyer) whenever she doesn't get her way.

I hope you understand what an empty threat this is. Judges do not take kindly to revisiting custody arrangements after the divorce unless something drastic has occurred. And by drastic we're talking about: suicide, drug dealing, going to jail. Not, "He's not accommodating my vacation schedule."

Also, it's really expensive. Since Dan is doing way more than most fathers who don't have weekly access to their kids, she wouldn't win.

OTOH, he may be non-confrontational but it sounds like he didn't have any legal counsel at all about his rights during the divorce. And that was a fuck-up on his part and you all just have to live with Things As They Are now.

But just remember, she's got no leverage except being a bitch. (That doesn't mean challenge her to a bitch fight!)

She's mostly bullshit and bluster and puffed up feathers at this point and Dan just has to keep a steady course. At this point, non-confrontational is the better strategy. (During the divorce it would've been better for him to have gotten a decent lawyer.)

Frankly, Erin, I'd recommend you take the custody arrangement and reviewing it with a family lawyer just so you understand Dan's rights because it doesn't sound like he does.

But I'm also a little worried that he got fucked over on the custody arrangement and doesn't really know what his leverage is.

Anyway, I know money's tight but there's a lot of pro bono counsel for family law stuff.

Windsparrow,

good grief. I hope you get some rest tonight.

Erin, what she puts in her will may be considered by the family court, but it has no binding effect. Generally, unless your DH is ruled an unfit parent, his parental rights would supersede her wishes.

Honestly, you don't really need to worry about it.

Thanks for the support, folks. I wish I had the wherewithal to render it back immediately.

Did I mention, I probably have caused some serious bruising for this person? Not abusively - it's just that I had the choice between allowing a fall (and I know darn well that I can't lift this person from the floor on my own) or hauling bodily with significant power to the bed. The transfer belt that was around the person's waist slipped up to the chest in the process, and I felt really bad about that. As I was documenting on what happened though, going through it step by step, I felt some better - there's a fair bit of "Ha! I did it! I got you safely into bed when you almost fell" mixed in with the, "Oh, gosh, I didn't mean to hurt you, are you ok?"