Your husband, apparently, is not in the least bothered by the communication problems or he would communicate with your IM. The only person who is troubled here is you. if he wants to clear up the miscommunications, he knows how to do that.

I am really only worrying about this because he has brought it up to his lawyer and she has now told mine that I am refusing to communicate with him, and is being nasty about it. But you're right, Melody. If he needs me he knows how to reach me, and although I know my lawyer really doesn't understand, it's her job to stand up for me. She hasn't given me any indication that I need to be worried about this now. Thanks for talking me through it.

You can use your emails and your IM's emails to show you are cooperative and willing to communicate.

Take any emails you have gotten or get and put them in a folder marked "communications with WH".

That is a bald faced lie. You have been perfectly willing to communicate with him via your intermediary. The only person being "uncooperative" is your husband.

True. Anything he sends to me is automatically forwarded to my IM and deleted from my inbox. I never see it.

Thank you. I know this is true. I got worked up over this lie, but I have proof of my attempts to communicate. I do feel concern that he will say he tried to communicate with me directly and I didn't answer, and that the judge won't like that. On the other hand, he used the IM well over a year. I have been very cooperative. And every communication has been recorded electronically, so there's no room for his lies.

This past Sunday (Easter) WH sent me an email that got bounced to my IM, requesting a change in this week's visitation. My IM responded, asking for some clarification. She signed her name, as usual. He responded. I was so relieved that he had decided to use the IM.

We still don't have a parenting order in place - his lawyer seems to be overwhelmed or something. Anyway, the only issue that is still uncertain is what time and where he will get the toddler on Thursdays. So today I had my IM ask him. He responded with an email to me (that bounced to her) and he cc'ed her as well. In the email he thanked me for cooperating (I guess he thought the Easter message was from me, even though she signed her name) and told her he would file a harassment charge against her if she contacts him again. Now, I know he has no grounds for that, but he is a police officer and it freaked her out. He also said he didn't want any of my other friends to contact him.

So, I let my lawyer know what happened. She is trying to contact his lawyer to contact him. In the meantime, I have something for school tomorrow, so I arranged for my dad to watch her.

I just honestly don't know how to proceed with WH.

The definition of harassment is continued contact with no purpose. Her contact with him has a purpose, which is to be an intermediary for you. She doesn't contact him outside of that, which would be my argument. I can't imagine she would be prosecuted from that at all. Lawyers will always want you to be in contact with the other parent, because courts are ridiculous and think this is the "best for the child" even if one party is emotionally abusive or upsetting toward the other. Judges want everyone to get along, when in most cases that isn't possible. If everyone go along, there would be no divorce.

Again, you could try to do some sort of intermediary software that is admissible in court and just have a friend check it, which is what I have done. It has made life a lot easier; However, it is much better to have an open IM, which really strictly delineates boundaries.

Oh, I know she's not harassing him, she knows it, he knows it. He's just being as difficult as possible. I guess I could have her let him know that she is not harassing him, she is contacting him for the express purpose of communicating about his visitation with his children. I don't know if she is comfortable doing that or not, or how he would respond. I would much prefer him to know he isn't communicating directly with me, but my IM did say that she would be happy to switch to that software instead.

I didn't realize how stressful the situation was for me until I thought he was willing to work with the IM again, and was so relieved. Now the stress is back.

The software completely defeats the purpose because you still SEE the communication. You don't want to do the software system unless forced by the court. Your current works just fine and I would stick with it.

Your sister does not need to tell him she is not harassing him; he already knows it.


If you think that is stressful, just wait until you have to read all his direct communication.

ginger, don't allow a wayward to dictate how he will communicate with you. Just because he wants to be uncooperative does not mean that you have to give him control of the method of communication.

(I made this red, big, and bold to get your attention. If I could make it blink, turn cartwheels, and reach out of the screen and grab you, I'd do that, too.)

Just a note on software--you don't access it all. An IM does. You just have them change the password and not tell you what it is and you never have to see it. I was ordered to do this and that's how I get around seeing anything from him at all.

That said, listen to Markos. Chances are that nothing will actually happen and he won't do anything. He is just trying to scare and manipulate.If he doesn't know where to pick up the toddler, then oh well, he is unwilling to communicate with you.

I'm sorry I didn't reply sooner. Thank you all for your input.

I asked my lawyer to tell his that I plan to continue communicating through an IM only. I told her that his lawyer may feel the same way she does, but as neither of them have to live with it nor have they ever experienced it, she'll just have to trust me that this is best for me and the kids.

Then I asked my IM (not my sister - he pitched a fit before about communicating through her and I got a different IM) if she would be willing to keep trying with him, and told her I would understand if she didn't want to since he threatened her. She said that she thinks the threat is just him trying to get his way and she would be happy to continue as IM. So I guess we'll see what happens. My oldest wants his dad to take him on a scout camping trip this weekend, and he apparently asked WH before he talked to me. I let kiddo know that I'll have to work out details with his dad, and my IM has attempted, but he hasn't responded about that yet. I understand he did respond, which means he didn't block her email like he said he did.

The only one who stands to be hurt by his refusing to communicate is the kiddo. I can't take him to the scout trip. It has to be dad, because it's backpacking and kiddo has a concert the evening they are leaving and will have to catch up. I can't just take him out to meet the rest of the troop, he'll need someone to hike in with him and stay.

Many, many Mothers attended both Cub Scout campouts and Boy Scout campouts with me and my Sons Pack and Troop.

I was incapable of joining the groups on the hikes for the past 2 years due to needing both of my knees getting replaced, yet that did not prevent me, nor my Son from having a Great Time.

Contact your Sons Scout Troop Leader and see how You can sign up and be involved.

Often times, some of the Boys have neither Parent with, yet they still can go and have fun.

LTL

Yes, LTL. I am permitted to go but still have a nursling that I can't leave, and they are going to already be in the woods so I can't drop him off for this particular campout. He has to hike in to where they will have already set up camp. In general I have been able to work out the scout stuff between myself and some of the other scout parents. It's just that this backpacking trip, WH is apparently already planning to go on this trip, and kiddo asked him if he'd drive him to the trip and hike in with him, because I'd told him that he would have to miss the trip because he has a concert.

Does that make sense?

Haha yes Markos. That's why I didn't switch again. I probably should have said that my IM, who was my sister, asked me to switch to a new IM. She thought he was making things more difficult just because it was her, and she wanted to be able to talk freely to me. She didn't want to know more than I did about what he was doing.

This came today. From my lawyer, forwarded from his lawyer, with a note from mine saying that this isn't anything we want in front of our particular judge and she is urging me to find a way at least via text or email.

"Things are getting worse by the day in this case. I am very close to having to be forced to file a motion requiring Ms. XXXXX to communicate with Mr. XXXXX even if it is just via email. This is creating unnecessary expense and moreover confusion regarding the parenting time exchanges. Mr. XXXXX cannot be forced to communicate with someone that is contributing to the problem." (I assume this means the IM?)
"Furthermore, Ms. XXXXX's unwillingness to communicate with Mr. XXXXX goes directly towards one of the most compelling parenting factors, the parent's willingness to facilitate the other parent's relationship with the children. Her refusal to speak to him would also, if presented to the court, affect the decision making provisions, which if they went in favor of Ms. XXXXX would affect Mr. XXXXX's contribution to things like extracurriculars. I cannot imagine how it is in the best interests of the children for the parties not to communicate whatsoever and for each parent not to have a say in major decisions involving the children.

I don't think I have a had a case where one of the spouses was so obstinate in refusing to communicate with the other spouse even over things like time and place.

I plead with you to talk some sense into Ms. XXXXX and let's get this case done.

I will proceed with moving the court for relief if we do not have this remedied by the end of the week."

Did you have a question?

Do you suggest I let it go to court? Can you help me with what to say to my lawyer?

My immediate response to my lawyer was that a) I am not refusing to communicate. B) my IM is not part of any problem, she acts as a filter so that if I sound crabby she makes it neutral and if he says anything inappropriate or unreasonable she doesn't tell me. c) the reason I don't want to talk to him directly is because any time he is nasty or pushy or even if he's nice to me the harder it is for me to not be hurt and not take it out on him. It's for all of our benefit. His, mine, the kids.