If there is nothing in your court papers about phone calls then I would just not tell sd when bm calls your house during your visitation.

As for these planned sleepovers when sd is supposed to be with you have dh tell her to knock it off since it is his court ordered visitation. She has plenty of time during her weekends to schedule these things!

A birthday party or something like that is one thing, but a random sleepover is another.

I agree with you! it's not good to continue like this, but at the same time it's annoying if we have to say 'no' to SD10 seeing her friend because of BM, you know what I mean?

We have decided to limit phonecalls to 15 minutes from now on, and only once a day. I know already how that will go down though. BM just bought them another cell phone so she can reach them whenever she wants. If we restrict use of cell phone at our house than skids get in trouble when they go back to BM, even though it was FDH's decision.
This makes FDH reluctant to enforce rules on use of cell phones. He believes that it's best to let it go, skids will figure out for themselves one day what BM is doing, and he does not want to be the bad guy restricting them. BM plays it well and gets her way every time, knowing that FDH will enable her to play these games.
I would handle it differently but talk is cheap I suppose; they are not my kids and she is not my ex.

Yikes Liesbeth, I know that whispering too..And she knows all the parents and they all stare after the whispering..Lord knows what she s saying to them....Just have to keep our heads up and bolt when the games over...We cant stop the calls,he has his own cell, DH did think about asking SS to stop accepting the calls, but I told him dont bother, thats what she wants, an issue...Bet to let it slide and let her think we dont care...

There was another thread where a SM complained that mom wouldnt allow 2 calls a day, and many people jumped all over the mom. Frankly I dont think it overstepping when FSM gets involved as to limiting phone calls.

I am curious what liebeth means when she says mom is only involved with kids when they are with dad? How do you know?

If my X sent his SO to pick up my DD from a sleepover, my reaction would have been he wouldnt have had time for her anyway that morning, so why shouldnt she have sleepovers on "his" time.

mom2eamll,
when in a recent thread dad and SM called kids all the time and BM didn't like it, everyone was in support of dad and SM. "They can call any time they want to". Now you are saying BM should not call kids on dad's time? but it is OK for dad and SM to call on mom's time?

hahah kkny, it is funny I saw your post after I posted mine. i wondered am I the only one who noticed the hypocricy?

so it is OK to limit mom's phone calls to one a day, but dad should be allowed to call when and how often he wants to? haha This is so funny.

haha mom2emall goes as far as to say BM should not call at all. Oh my. but dad and SM could call when they want to.

Well that was a 50/50 split this is a 10/4 split so dad's time is limited with his children.... If I remember right you both said dad and sm had 50/50 and enough time with the kids they shouldn't have to call even though dad had been doing it for over 2 years it was routine you both said no.

but this is a dad who gets 4 days while mom gets every 10 I think mom has enough time that she can go 4 days with out constantly calling her child.

and I also think dad should be able to call since he only gets 4 days out of 14.

And I would still welcome ONLY TWO phone calls a day ... that would be one of the best days ever.

SD was here from 1pm to 5 pm yesterday ... she was on the phone for almost an hour then 2 30 minute phone calls then another 20 minute call until mom showed up ... yeah thats quality time with dad.... then the boys got home at 5pm from 5 to 8pm there was 3 phone calls and I don't have a clue how many text messages. Two more phone calls between 8 and 9:30pm when hubby told him to shut his phone off.

Quote from kkny: "I am curious what liebeth means when she says mom is only involved with kids when they are with dad? How do you know?"
BM is more interested in trying to get a reaction from FDH than she is in her own kids. So when they are with us BM will invite her family over, plan outings to the movies etc etc. Anything to get the kids to want to go back to her. It's probably always a win-win situation for her so there's a big incentive for BM to keep doing this. Because if FDH lets kids go back to BM he looses time with kids, if he says 'no' we have two angry kids. And BM is loving it, either way.
Whenever it's BM's time she will still make these promises to the kids, but then she always gets a headache. Even the kids already say prior to the event that it probably won't happen anyway when mum gets a headache, so that is what I mean.

Another quote from KKNY: "If my X sent his SO to pick up my DD from a sleepover, my reaction would have been he wouldnt have had time for her anyway that morning, so why shouldnt she have sleepovers on "his" time. "
We do not object to the sleepovers, otherwise we wouldn't let her go, that is not the point kkny. When the skids are with us they go and see friends all the time, which is normal I think. They don't have to sit with us for those 4 days.
The point is that BM then goes to SD10's friends house as well and makes it a real drama when SD10 has to go back to our house. SD10 chose the pickup time herself the previous day by the way, and if she would've rang to ask if she could've stayed longer we would have let her anyway. BM just loves to create drama, so instead of encouraging SD10 to call us she'd rather do the whole teary goodbye thing and make us look like the people that tear them apart. She's a drama queen. An insecure one.
You know she will see SD10 the next day for 10 days again anyway.
And FDH was called into work for an hour, he does not leave it up to me to look after his kids. He loves to spend time with them.

About the phonecalls; shouldn't this just go both ways? BM has gone as far as to disconnect her home phone so FDH can't call the kids. Their cell phones have to be switched off when they are with her, she tells them that she only bought them so she can contact them when they are with us.
I think it's normal that both parents want to speak to their kids when they are with the other parent, and so they should. But in a healthy way, and for BM to extend the drama straight after we picked SD10 up from the sleepover is unnecessary and harmful Yes, harmful!! What information was exchanged in that call? Anything new happened in those 10 minutes while we were driving home? In case I didn't make it clear; when SD10 was at friends place BM was there the whole night, AND brought her own mum along for another visit that following morning. I wonder if SD10 had time for her friend at all.
We already knew this would happen before we let SD10 go to friends place, and we will let her go again next time. We are not the ones that restrict the kids in that way, AT ALL.

And you can't tell me that it's ok for BM to ring every day and question the kids till they are in tears, and then hang up the phone quickly cause she has to go somewhere. it's not normal to do that to your own kids. She doesn't give a sh*t about their feelings, she's only interested in her own, and they are feelings of anger, hate, insecurity and most of all fear.

nope. It is not what i said. I never said dad shouldn't call his kids. I said that it is important for dad to call the kids, but once a day is enough especially if the second time is late at night. two phone calls a day could be disruptive.

Also if mom says not to call later than 8PM (disrupts family routine)that dad should respect mom's household and stop pushing. If mom's multiple phone calls are disruptive, so are dad's. But one a day is acceptable(not at bed time though).

I'm confused finedreams; who is saying that dad is pushing for phonecalls after 8pm? In our situation FDH can't even reach the kids when they are with BM, phone being disconnected and all..

Oh I see, that was pseudo-mom. I think pseudo-mom is in a similar situation to us, all the texting and calling is not normal

SD10 crying in the car on the way home of course, asking me why I was the one that picked her up. Her mum had whispered in her ear that it is always me that wants to break them up.. pfff

Once we were home the phone rang and of course it was BM, talking to SD10 some more about how sad they were that SD10 already had to go home. SD10 in tears again

liesbeth,

That is so sick that just reading about it makes me want to vomit! You know, NORMAL mothers would do just about anything to protect their children from sorrow and pain. When their child is suffering, most mothers wish they could take the burden of their children's pain upon their own shoulders, and would gladly even give up their own lives. There is no sacrifice too great for the sake of their children's happiness.

And then we have THIS sick little puppy, who seems to derive some kind of sadistic pleasure out of deliberately torturing her daughter! Relentlessly tormenting her until she breaks down in tears, and probably won't be satisfied until she's turned her daughter into a complete basketcase. Maybe if "mommy dearest" keeps heaping on those "guilt trips" day and night, her daughter will have a complete nervous breakdown! Boy, wouldn't THAT be great revenge on daddy!

It would undoubtably be far kinder if she'd just kick her daughter in the head a few times a day. Less cowardly and deceitful too. After all, a good "kick in the head" would make it pretty obvious to scapegoat SD that she's being punished for her parents' divorce! And maybe give her a fighting chance at defending herself?

But I guess that would be far too much to expect from a snake, and I've no doubt that right now, BM, otherwise known as, "Slitherette," and her mom, "Slitherella" are have a wonderful time congratulating each other on their brilliant performance!

Oh, but who cares about that kid anyway? It's far more important to provide continuous access during the brainwashing process, to ensure the victim identifies and bonds properly with her abuser. It's unfortunate this child has to spend a WHOLE 4 days at your house, but with constant phone communication, the desired, "Stockholm Symdrome" effect can still be acheived.

Yes yes and yes! Disengaging, it also makes me furious, thank you for your reply!! What is the Stockholm Syndrome? I have heard that term before. Oh and do you think that we should not allow continues access? It's such a hard question you know. We will not unplug the phone or stop SD10 from going to her friends place, but at the same time we want to shelter her a bit from this destructive behavior. As Dotz said; we try to let it slide and not feed BM's need for conflict.
At the same time, now SD10 (and SD12) will still be manipulated while they are with us, but it's supposed to be their break from it.
This is where I feel torn; if we do restrict the phonecalls a bit (say to once a day for 15 minutes) than we have another battle on our hands. The kids already get it hammered into them that WE are the ones that try and keep them away from their mom: restricting phonecalls would confirm that for them. Also it would trigger BM to become even more difficult. She would retaliate in a big way. How dare FDH set rules regarding the contact with HER kids? BM feels that she is the only one to have the right to make decisions regarding the kids. She thinks that it is a privilege for FDH to see his kids. (She actually put that in writing believe it or not). Everything should be under her conditions, or they won't happen. Thank God we have the court order regarding visitation, but even with that she will still look for the sharp edge every time.
It's just a no-win situation..

In case you wonder how BM might retaliate: FDH and BM have a court order that states the kids have some flexibility regarding the visitation schedule. This is meant to be for the odd birthday, party or whatever else comes up as a one-off. So if the kids would want to go to nana's birthday at BM's in our weekend than they can. Which of course they can anyway, it's not as if we want to stop them from that. Funny though how BM will never allow the extra time to come our way. If we have nana's birthday in her weekend and FDH gives BM some notice of this; than she will organise something 'better' and tell FDH that it's the kids decision to stay with her. sorry!!
So the retaliation will probably be that next time we are supposed to see the skids BM will send FDH some kind of smart message saying 'the kids have decided to stay with me this time' and we won't see them at all. Do we take that back to court? And then what? 'Flexibility' and 'the kids having a say' are vague terms and last time the judge did not see anything wrong with the kids picking or choosing. The more we try to fight for some sanity, the worse it seems to get.

liesbeth, there was a thread recently. dad and SM had 50/50 custody and saw kids every few days, but dad called twice a day when they were at mom's. And he wanted to call after 8PM when kids have bed time routine. Also SM wanted to talk to kids and check up on their homework when they are at moms. it was disruptive and mom asked to call once a day and do not call after 8PM. SM was furious and everyone said that dad should call as much as he wants just because it means he is involved and SM can check up on homework if she wants to.

now they tell you that BM should not call at all on dad's time. Do you see a double standard here?

SMs here always complain that BMs call too much. But when Bms complain that dads call too much then the answer is: too bad, he has rights to call. Double standard.

again with the generalization of the SMs... I seem to remember a number of sm's (myself included) that said two phone calls a day were too much and probably disruptive... but whatever

And again with the reinterpreting to bolster your own slurs, finedreams....
In the case you state, BD had been in the habit of calling his children twice daily, once after school and once before bedtime, with BM's presumed OK, since he had been doing this for over a year. BM changed the rules only AFTER child ASKED to speak with SM on ONE of the phone calls. SM has NEVER stated she wanted to check up on homework or anything, this was one of the possible scenarios proposed by another poster as to WHY SM or BD MIGHT need to get in touch with child after 8pm (and it was NOT proposed as "checking up on homework", but as "what if SM finds child has left homework behind at their place, which might be needed at school the next day, and BM switched the phone off at 8pm?"). As usual, you and kkny were after the suggestions like a terrier after a rat and twisted and manipulated them until as far as you were concerned, SM had all kinds of nefarious intentions, NONE of which were what she had originally stated.
But of course, the only role SMs have is to not exist.

liesbeth,

Stockholm Syndrome is so named after a bank robbery that occured in Stockholm Sweden, in which the bank employees were held hostage and placed in mortal fear of their lives for six days. When finally freed, instead of being grateful for their salvation, they not only protected and defended their captors, but identified with them and had become so emotionally attached, that even long afterwards, voluntarily stood by their former abusers, pleading their case to gain public sympathy through the press, raising money for their legal defense, supporting them through the trial and subsequent jail sentences and one woman even ended up marrying one of them.

This phenomenon has been noted many times, and is believed to be a psychological response that arises in a victim who is lead to believe their very survival depends on "bonding" with their abuser. It is an automatic defense mechanism that goes way back to their first days of birth, similar to the bond infants form with their parents, which can subsequently be artificially developed, manipulated and intensified through the use of psychological "brainwashing" techniques, such as those employed by religious "cults", to strip their followers from their "freedom of choice", rendering them unable to make their own decisions, to keep them dependent on their cult leaders, for the purpose of turning them into their very own little "puppets".

If anyone can't see yet just how abusive, manipulative, and psychologically damaging this is to proper development and well being of a child, I'll be glad to elaborate further, but I have to go visit a client right now.

I'm not really sure what advice, if any I can give you liesbeth, my husband and I are actually seeing a therapist right now, who specializes in "cult deprogramming", partially to see if there's anything we can do to stop the stalking and harrassment from his nutzoid BM without having to completely remove ourselves from the lives of his children and family who she's managed to recruit, but also for the sake of his daughters, especially since his oldest daughter already HAD a complete and total nervous breakdown, to the point where she became completely nonfunctional. Only her whackjob of a mother has been doing this to her, not as a child, but after she became a married adult with the responsibility of for raising 3 toddler babies.

And before anyone here even attempts to try to defend this BM's actions, this isn't MY opinion, it is the opinion of the licensed, professional psychiatrist, who referred us to our current therapist because it was beyond his field of expertise.

take care,

you are wrong coleen. Someone asked what is there for SM to discuss wiht kids daily, and OP did say that she follows or checks up on their homework when they are at moms.

Discussion about calling after 8PM was a different discussion. I agree that in case of emergency parents could call after 8Pm (and homework issue could be an emergency), but emergency does not happen every day. that's why calling every day late is unecessary. Unless of course one deliberatelly disrupts the other parent's household. We heard how some BMs do that, so I supects some dads are guilty of that too.

"again with the generalization of the SMs... I seem to remember a number of sm's (myself included) that said two phone calls a day were too much and probably disruptive... but whatever"

Exactly! Many of us said it was a bit much to call twice a day. However, I see that KK and FD think that all SMs feel the same way about everything.

You guys should try to remember that we may be evil SMs but we don't all share the same brain!!!

Disengaging,

I totally agree most mothers would not act that way! It is very childish.

I don't think the question is to Call or not to call but if the calls are upsetting the child then it shouldn't be. I am a Mom and a Step-Mom and I'll be darn if I allow anyone to call the kids and upset them when it is our time. I don't care if it is my place or not. I have told my EX and my DH EX to back off when it comes to upsetting the kids. They are all kids I love it doesn't matter how they came to be in my life. I don't care if the EX's like me or not. That is how they got to be EX's. Then with my DH, he can still be the good guy with his EX and she gets her reality check when it needs to be.

Yesterday FDH tried to ring the kids to wish them a good holiday. They are going away with their mom. No home phone so he tried their mobile phones but were switched off, of course, and there is no voicemail so FDH sent them a text message instead. Of course he didn't hear anything back, he hasn't spoken to the kids for almost 2 weeks now.

The point (I think) is that it's normal for any parent to want to speak to his/her child when they are with the other parent. No matter if they are BM or DH's. Equal rights. My concern is with the parent that displays the emotionally manipulative behavior which is harmful to the kids, in our case that is BM but that doesn't make all BM's the bad guys; It's only our specific situation. As I said before BM will not allow FDH to speak to the kids when they are with her. Unlesssss, she wants to tell him something (never ask, always tell!), then suddenly we get a call from SD12, who will within the minute put her mom on the phone. If only BM were brave enough to call herself...

It's summer holidays here so kids are spending half the holidays at mums which is 4 continuous weeks. This pretty much means that FDH will not speak to kids for 4 weeks, but he will still try to ring them about once a week. At least they'll know that he's tried.

Liesbeth - we have the same thing with my BF's DD.

She moved about 9 months ago to another state with BM, SF and sister. It's been very tough for my BF to handle and we haven't seen her very much. At one point it was 13 weeks between visits, a 36 hour visit, and then another 6 weeks, and 4-1/2 days.

She's having a great time and doing great in school and making a ton of friends. She's very happy there. When she comes here she fills us in on all the fun she's having and even that all her auntie's and uncles and cousins will be waiting at the wirport for her to return. BM calls and tells her about all the wonderful things they will do together when she gets back.

We just found out that all these great things she's doing are due to her aunt taking her to and from them. And she spends every day before and after school at her aunt's house. Come to find out, she actually spends very little time at home with BM and SF and sister. She is even attending church with her aunt and about to start a ritual for a church BM doesn't attend.

And the times BM has brought her home early is because she wants to spend time with her (i.e. take her to the movies). So when she's home, BM chooses to pawn her off on her family (which she was never able to do while living here), but shortens BF's time so SHE can shend time with her.

So wrong.........