Yes, I can't quite believe he thought it appropriate to respond to my L in that manner.

Here are the facts about the issue he is so angry about.

1) The current arrangement, which has been in place since August, had his visitation time occur at my/S2's house. Since I stopped allowing him in the house in November, these visits have taken place at the park, at his parents' or sister's place, or just out and about. There was never a discussion about visitation occurring at his place because he refused to share his address whenever I raised it.

2) He was forced to share his address in order to complete the consent orders two weeks ago. Other than the general suburb information, I had no knowledge of where he lived. My proposed compromise to the current arrangement was sent to him in January, well before I had this information, and at the time I declined his request for overnights at his place because I wasn't comfortable with my 2 year old child staying at an unknown location.

3) Now that I have his address, I said I was happy for daytime visitation to occur at his place. I agreed to the overnight visit he asked for, but stipulated it take place at his parents' or sisters' place initially because it's a familiar setting for S2 with familiar people. I specified this was a transitional arrangement, giving S2 time to adjust to his father's residence during daytime visits, and that overnights would occur at his place following an adjustment period for S2.

This was all spelled out very clearly in the letter. The actual schedule hasn't changed from the compromise I proposed in January, in which I agreed with 90% of his request for increased time. The purpose of the letter was to couch my proposal in legal and psychological terms in support of S2's developmental needs, and to explicitly say it would be a transitional arrangement that we would work together to implement.

I know, MLCers are emotional. Yeesh.


W32
X30
S2

June 2019 | Runaway husband
May 2020 | Legal separation
Xmas 2020 | Divorce hearing