The standard judicial council forms (in CA) state that the first weekend of the month is the first weekend with a Saturday in it.

My opinion is that if the school year ends on a Friday, then Saturday is the first day of summer vacation and whatever the rules are for summer vacation apply. If she has to buy the first weekend ticket in summer, it's on her.

If it becomes a dispute, you might offer to split the cost of that one ticket.

We're in Tx. The decree states for weekends "beginning at the time school is dismissed" and for summer (if she gives notice) "beginning no earlier than the day after school dismissed for summer vacation". It just happens that this year IT'S THE SAME DAY! I know it seems like a little picky thing, but it's one she'll argue over. But then again if DH isn't suppose to pay for airline that would be nice. Tickets aren't cheap and it'd be nice to have that extra money to spend on the SS.

That agreement reads pretty clear and the girl is flying out the day school is dismissed, not the 'day after' so summer would not begin til Saturday if you stick to the decree as the basis.

Yeah, it'd be nice to have a bit extra, who doesn't wish for a bit extra now and then, kids are expensive and it just never ends with their needs and wants, but I think you buy this one. Or pick a fight that could start crap up with BM and likely loose in the end or cost you more if she fights you. You would have had to pay if daughter got out on Thursday anyway and I'm sure BM is thinking the same thing about wanting a bit extra in her pocket too, so if me, I'd buy the ticket and give BM one less thing to bicker over--the language seems to read in her favor this time.

You are saying she is causing problems but he is doing just the same trying to get out of paying his part just because school gets out on a different day. So who is trying to cause problems...

Thank you imamommy & justmetoo for your advise I found it very helpful. Finedreams, I did not say anyone was causing problems and DH has never tried to "get out" of paying his part (and I have a $10,000 attorney bill to prove it from the last time she tried to "cause problems). We pay for 1st weekend, Thanksgiving, Christmas & Spring Break (EVERY YEAR)and she pays 3rd,5th & all summer travel. It is about 50/50. Since we pay 1st and she pays summer I was merely asking advise as to what others might think the weekend would fall under. A school weekend or summer visitation? The BM is very difficult to deal with as it is and I was just looking for advise. If you didn't have anything constructive to say you should not have bother to post anything at all.

Colorado, as you say you were looking for advice. FD was giving it. Frankly, you seem to make things more difficult. fyi I am certain HIS divorce decree doesnt say YOU are to pay anything. What FD is saying is that if this is an example of the childs mother being difficult, then you are the same.

*FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS POST, "YOU" REFERS TO THE NCP'S COLLECTIVE HOME*

I totally understand where you are coming from. You are just wanting to be prepared and informed. Good for you for asking for advice! I think it's great that you have specific orders. It helps so much to have clear boundaries and guidelines.

I live in Texas and my orders are similar in that they begin at the time school is dismissed and end at the time school resumes. Mine also stipulate that X's visitation begins on the 1st, 3rd and 5th "Friday" of every month. I wanted it that way so there would be no disagreement on what day is the first day of the weekend. I would say that, in this unusual situation, you have 2 options:

1) Pay for the ticket as though it was the 1st weekend of the month. The problem with this is that BM get "jipped" out of the day she would normally get with SS before summer break. Sure it's just 1 day, but if BM is difficult, she will agrue.

2) Have BM pay for the ticket, but expect that SS won't arrive until Saturday, and possibly the latest possible flight on Saturday. This "jips" you out of the extra day you would normally get for a 1st weekend. You could be the bigger person and give her the extra day, but that may only enbolden her to try to complicate other things in the future to get you to give in.

3) As Ima said, suggest splitting the cost of the ticket. To me, this is the fairest solution. Likely, SS won't get to your place until late that Friday evening, anyway, (if it's anything like my SD), so it's not like you are getting much of "her time". The extra money she saves may be a good incentive for her to send SS on Friday instead of Saturday.

In my decree, Christmas, Thanksgiving and summer "trump" regular visitation. I am CP, but I get totally screwed during these times. For instance, X got 5 out of 6 weekends with DS this year AND all of Thanksgiving break. I figured it up to be that he had 20 days and I had 18 from October 30 to December 6. The thing that makes it hard for me is that I only got DS on school days during that time, while X got 20 non-school days. It's really hard to have quality time with your kid when you only see him for a little bit in the mornings and a couple hours after work and before bed.

IMO, summer vacation trumps 1st weekend visit. But BM may not see it that way.

kkny, the divorce decree may say HIS name and that HE has to pay... but let's be real here. When you get married or remarried, unless they have completely separate finances and hold their own money in separate accounts and split bills by both paying in the same amount... then it is THEIR money! Even if it's kept separate for the most part, if HE has to buy the ticket, it may mean THAT MUCH LESS money he can put in the general fund to pay the joint bills. Who makes that up? In my house, I DO. If it affects OUR household income, it is OUR money and WE bear the expense.

I think you are splitting hairs because she didn't care for FD's 'advice'.

I think by arguing over every little thing and overanalyzing every word in a decree people might be in a better situation financially, but in my books it is not worth it in a long run plus it hurts the kids, i prefer to let things go and keep peace. It is just me, maybe that's why i don't have much money LOL. My advice was simple: avoid causing problems. Now if OP does not care for that advice I certainly do not care, it is not my life and not my family. Like everything on this forum: take it or leave it.

FD, I sorta agree, but in this economy it is prudent to check it out first. I suggest splitting the cost if there is a dispute because that is fair. Parents should try to get along as much as they can and if dad is getting kids for summer & it really is mom's turn to buy ticket, then dad will have that much more money to spend on having fun with kids and it's the kid that benefits. Nothing wrong with checking the letter of the law. If money is not an issue for dad (if he has plenty of it) then he shouldn't be worried about every little thing, but there are very FEW, fortunate people that aren't watching expenses right now.

Your "advice" seemed more like an accusation that by asking the question, they are looking for any little reason to start a fight.

I totally agree with Ima that splitting seems to be the fairest option.

I also agree with FD that arguing and overanalyzing can cause problems. But I know, from first-hand experience, there are plenty of people who would use the kids' welfare to get what they want. That's why specificity is important.

SD's mom is that way. DH is worried about how getting modified papers will effect SD because BM has always made SD "pay" for her choices.

Case in point...big arguement with BM over SD coming for our wedding (BTW, we haven't seen her since August 6). BM did send SD, but cut visit short (from 7 days to 4) and all kinds of stuff to make it as unenjoyable for SD as possible (calling and texting all the time; communicating with DH's family, telling SD all the things she's missing, etc.). SD flew back the morning after the wedding with some...let's say souveniers she found. They had a certain unpleasant odor, but DH asked SD and she said wanted to take them and prepare them for keeping HERSELF. When she got off the plane, BM went ballistic. Yelling at SD and texting DH. Then she proceeded to grill SD about the trip. A week later, DH asked SD if she prepared the souveniers and she said "they are outside because my mom won't allow them in the house".

In DH's case, the only way to "keep the peace" is to let SD go.

So what's better:

1) DH dropping out of SD's life by not contacting her and not asking to see her so that SD doesn't have to put up with the daily grillings and rantings and guilt-trips from BM every time SD talks to him? Keeping the peace?

2) DH being involved in her life, but causing temporary discomfort to SD by filing papers so that specific times and dates are set as guidelines for DH to be with his daughter and get back their relationship?

ashley I am doing of curiosity what souvenirs? unpleasantly smelly? what are they? fish? LOL

Ashley,

Your DH should file papers, go to court, explain his desire to have time with his daughter & get an order. He could tell about all the trouble BM makes, but then it would probably result in retaliatory statements & a fight. He should get an order without criticizing or complaining about BM... just say "I want to see my daughter on a schedule we can stick to." It's important to have a schedule so everyone can plan their lives around it and knows what to expect. If your DH sticks to the issue of wanting to see his daughter and BM throws up diversions and roadblocks, the court should see through that. Accusations that are not true? Simply respond with "that's not true." and ask them to prove it. Getting defensive or calling them a liar only escalates the battle and the goal is to get an order to spend time with his DD. Let BM rant, let her rave... nobody can stop her from drilling her child after visits or from taking it out on her because she doesn't like things. That is only going to hurt HER relationship with her own daughter. My SD's mom is doing that to her daughter. The kids eventually grow up and make a decision on who did what... of course it's based on their own perceptions too. My sister insists she was spanked a lot. I never saw her spanked... she cried if she even thought she might get in trouble. My perception is that my mom put her kids low on her priority list, blamed my dad for all her problems that I could see she created for herself, and my other sister doesn't see it that way... but I would certainly think your DH should at least TRY to get an order. IF enforcing it causes his daughter to suffer too much, he can back off and offer to always be there for her when she needs him. She will grow up and have a relationship with him if that's what she wants... at least he can say he tried. She will know he tried and if she chooses to follow her mom's thinking, it's HER loss... but it's also her own fault. All he can do is try. right?

@FD - LOL! Close! On our "wedcation", as I like to call it, we took a guided trip to a secluded island. The guide took us to a place where we could find our own sanddollars. Until they are prepared, sanddollars REALLY stink. LOL! We tried to minimize the stink for her as much as possible and even offered to take them with us and do them for her. But she found them herself and she wanted to prepare them herself. I think she knew it would be a long time until she saw us again.

@Ima - that's very good advice, and thank you! DH is scared to death because BM makes more money and says things like "I've already consulted an attorney".

@OP - sorry for the hijack...totally unintentional.

"BM makes more money and says things like "I've already consulted an attorney"."

Call her bluff... say "so have we"

She may have consulted an attorney, but it is a tactic she is using to intimidate your DH into relenting and not going after his rights. For YEARS, BM told DH that she had called "J", her attorney that handled her divorce...(remember, the divorce she still hasn't had FINALIZED!) DH didn't have money for an attorney & didn't think a father would be heard... he envisioned himself getting to see his daughter every other weekend and paying a hefty child support to BM, while their agreement outside of court at the time was they shared 50/50 with no support... each paid for her expenses when she was with them. IF BM needed anything for SD, she'd tell DH and he would pay if he could. If he couldn't, she would threaten to call "J". It worked for years and when I met him, I told him what the law is.. that courts WANT both parents involved if they want to be and are good parents. He asked for an order after her last threat and she automatically asked for full custody and support. We were living in a house & SD had her own room, BM was living with her mom & sharing a room with both of her daughters... and having her boyfriend stay when he came to town. After a trial, the court gave DH his order to continue the 50/50 arrangement and ordered him to pay her a small amount of child support because he works & she doesn't. (I thought it was wrong, only because she was living with her mom & testified she paid no rent, utilities or groceries... and we bought SD's clothes & school stuff) But the point is that the court didn't care that she is the mother (that didn't get special consideration); but the court also didn't seem to care that she had men sleeping with her in front of her girls... the court stated that it was best for SD to have as much involvement by both parents. BTW, BM had tried to complain to the court about MY involvement with HER daughter and in his ruling, the Judge told her that she is lucky that her daughter has a SM like me.. and he went on to praise all I do for SD, which infuriated BM & she stormed out of the courtroom. DH was thrilled to have an order that BM couldn't threaten him with "J" ever again. [of course, she moved away three weeks later & left SD with us, but she still threatens to take him back to court.. now he tells her 'go ahead' but we are following the order until then]

Courts only care about the CHILD'S best interest.. not how it makes the other parent FEEL... the other parent's FEARS are usually irrelevant unless they can show an actual threat to the CHILD. Such in an abused wife's fear he will mistreat the child without her there to protect the child. The court may recognize that a husband that may abuse his wife/ex, but not his children. The abuse against the wife is relevant if it is in front of the children or it can be proven that he also abuses the children. Of course, every state has their own laws and courts are sometimes allowed to use broad discretion.... so I am speaking in general.

" he envisioned himself getting to see his daughter every other weekend and paying a hefty child support to BM, while their agreement outside of court at the time was they shared 50/50 with no support... each paid for her expenses when she was with them"

That is so similar to my DH, Ima, and how he was *afraid* of BM. He and BM split up when SS was not quite 1 year old. Right from the start, DH had his son on Tuesdays and Thursdays and every other weekend, which amounts to 50% custody. He didn't pay child support directly to BM but he paid 100% of daycare from that day until SS started full-day kindergarten. (And even though BM was rarely working, save for a stint here and there, she took full advantage of the daycare, sending SS because she liked to have her days free.) Daycare was about $200/wk on average (it was more when he was younger) so I think DH actually wound up paying MORE this way than he would have had he gone to court and had child support set. I think if c/s had been set, it would have been less than $800 a month. He also paid for all the other little things over the years, like weekly swim lessons, tumbling class at the Y, portrait sessions every few months, med. expenses, etc.

BUT everytime BM got mad, which was often, she would threatend DH with "I'm taking you to court, you will get EOW, etc etc.) In retrospect, DH should have called her bluff and fought for his rights, but he didn't. He was so scared of losing his 50-50 arrangement that he preferred to stay at BM's mercy. He KNEW that BM wouldn't really with-hold his time with his son because back then she was drinking/partying hardcore, and went out EVERY SINGLE NIGHT she didn't have her son. She NEEDED/WANTED that time off!

In hindsight, if DH had just stood up to her then and taken HER to court to establish HIS rights, I think he would have gotten exactly what he wanted. AS it was, it took 5 years before they finally went to court. Of course, DH did get his 50-50 custody in writing, but I just look back and wonder how much heartache he could have saved by doing it in the beginning!