| Jave |
| (recently joined) |
| 07/19/11 10:57 PM |
Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
I am here in utah and am the noncustodial parent. I would like to know if during my uninterrupted visitation time, i have to go to work, does the right of first refusal take effect or do i have the right to let my family watch my child during that time?
| cincsu |
| (Carpal \'Tunnel) |
| 07/20/11 12:59 AM |
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
it only applies if it is in your court order. does the order say when it applies and for how many hours? does the other parent work the same hours you do?
| annatof4 |
| (member) |
| 07/20/11 08:21 AM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
If it is in your CO. Right Of First Refusal means that before either parent can use the services of a baby-sitter or other third-party caregiver, the other parent must be given the opportunity to care for the child during that time. Whether CP or NCP. So, if you get called into work, you must contact the other parent and offer the time. IF that parent declines the time (plans, whatnot) then you can let your family care for the child. IF the ROFR is not written into the CO/parenting plan, then you can do whatever you like. There is usually a time frame of 24 hours, but it differs. If there isnt, I would get it in there and IF you have it in the CO. Either party can start arguing about any amount of time....then it can just get ridiculous.
| kkimberh |
| (enthusiast) |
| 07/20/11 11:30 AM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
However anna - Right of first refusal doesn't normally include family because the parent's family is supposed to see the child on that parent's time - therefore, the parent normally is allowed to use that time to allow family to spend time with the child.
| annatof4 |
| (member) |
| 07/20/11 07:45 PM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitnt must notify the other parent if first parent, for whatever reason, cannot be with the child during their parenting time. Im not saying that it is right....but that is the purpose of ROFR. In some states, maybe it is allowed, but to the best of my knowledge it is not. Or it is written in the ROFR revision. I have a ROFR with my ex. I wanted to do the same as I had a conference that was out of town. It was only around 10 hours of "my" time, but the ex had a tiff...therefore we have a ROFR revision.
| annatof4 |
| (member) |
| 07/20/11 07:59 PM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
Sorry, laptop had a hiccup. Lets start over.
I beg to differ kkimberh. ROFR does in fact only mean the parents. A parent must notify the other parent if the first parent, for whatever reason, cannot be with the child during their parenting time. Im not saying that it is right....but that is the purpose of ROFR. In some states, maybe it is allowed, but to the best of my knowledge it is not. Or it is written in the ROFR revision. I have a ROFR with my ex. I wanted to do the same as I had a conference that was out of town. It was only around 10 hours of "my" time, but the ex had a tiff...therefore we have a ROFR revision.
| MrsB |
| (Carpal \'Tunnel) |
| 07/20/11 08:02 PM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
It doesn't always only mean parents. Usually stepparents are not included in ROFR. It also depends on the cicunstances and what the CO reads and the laws in a particular state.
| annatof4 |
| (member) |
| 07/20/11 08:06 PM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
Here are some links to help better explain. [censored]://[censored].dadsdivorce.com/articles/ask-a-divorce-lawyer-right-of-first-refusal-clause-age-of-emancipation.html
[censored]://[censored].custodyxchange.com/blog/2010/06/right-of-first-refusal-in-your-parenting-plan-or-custody-agreement/
These sites do not seem to be state specific.
| M5M5 |
| (Carpal \'Tunnel) |
| 07/21/11 12:16 AM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
Anna, most of us have been around here (and the court systems) for years. Mrs. B and kkimber are correct in that the ROFR does not normally include step-parents. ROFR also normally has a time frame...such as if you need to seek a babysitter for more than 4 hours (example), then you will first offer the time to the other parent.
| annatof4 |
| (member) |
| 07/21/11 07:35 AM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
I am not saying that it does include step parents.....??? I am confused.
I responded to "However anna - Right of first refusal doesn't normally include family because the parent's family is supposed to see the child on that parent's time - therefore, the parent normally is allowed to use that time to allow family to spend time with the child." from kkimber. Which is NOT correct.
I am not sure where anyone got step parent included with my comments.
"ROFR is only for parents", where have I said differently? Parents does NOT mean Stepparents or Grandparents for that matter. The other parent must be given the opportunity to be with the child. Before step parents, family, friends, etc are even considered to care for the child. Hence, the right of first refusal. The PARENTS have the right to refuse the time if they choose too.
I do not understand why people have to point out their history of this site and/or experience. If you have read what I have said, you would see that, we are on the same page M5M5.
| annieo |
| (veteran) |
| 07/21/11 11:03 AM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
I think they mean that ROFR is used for non-family members ie daycare, baby sitter (not family) and it seems as though (I could be wrong) that you are saying a stepparent, family member, grandparent - are not allowed to watch the child if the parent is not available for (example over 4 hours) and ROFR is to be utilized which is wrong.
That is how I read your information it but I could be wrong - wouldn't be the first time ;)
| Maury |
| (Carpal \'Tunnel) |
| 07/22/11 12:20 AM |
|
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
The answer depends on your order and what, if anything, it requires for a right of first refusal. they can be crafted to exclude family members or spouses or they can be crafted to include them.
| annatof4 |
| (member) |
| 07/22/11 07:30 AM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
I always thought that ROFR was meant to be used when either parent could not be with the kids during their "time", they would have to ask the other parent, BEFORE they considered family, step parent, friend, etc. Well, that is how mine is read. Maury is right, it could be whatever is written. I just thought that ROFR was standard.
If my ex were to be called into work during his weekend, he has to call me and ask if I can take lil man. If I cannot, that is when he can have whomever watch our lil man. And vice versa during my time.
| MrsB |
| (Carpal \'Tunnel) |
| 07/22/11 01:10 PM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
It's not always standard nor is it even in all CO's.
It could definitely depend on the state one lives in and what is agreed to or ordered and put in the decree. Usually IME Sp's aren't considered apart of it. In mine and X's CO his mother is not ever to be left alone with DS so ROFR always applies in that situation. For others it's 4 hours.
| annieo |
| (veteran) |
| 07/23/11 12:52 PM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
Considering the extended family is suppose to have time with the children on the parents time having a stipulation that extended family are not allowed is another way to exclude the children from the NCP's family after all they are just a "visitor" - unless there is a reason for a certain person the child should not be left with and they are specifically spelled out in the order then the NORM is that the extended family can take care of the child if parent in unavailable - I going on the parent is called to work or something along those lines - no reason the extended family couldn't see child.
Now if it is all summer or something like that - hopefully the CP would allow the child to spend time with the extended family - maybe not the whole summer but certainly some time - this is of course it the parent regularly exercises their time and not just hey I want to give all my time to extended family and not see the children - but then again that is where the cp needs to facilitate a way for the children to know the ncp side of the family - unless of course there are substantiated reasons as to danger or what have you.
| annatof4 |
| (member) |
| 07/24/11 07:52 AM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
I understand extended family and all....but, thats not what ROFR is. Unless otherwise written in the ROFR.
| annieo |
| (veteran) |
| 07/24/11 12:33 PM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
so if you are ncp and it is your time but you get called into work for say 5 hours and your mother is visiting or maybe you even live with her - she can't watch the child for that time period - I suppose it must go from state to state because if you took that to court to complain in my state you'd be told you were wasting the courts time because - ROFR is if the parent has to go outside the family to hire someone to watch the child if for some reason they have to be gone over the designated time period.
Another scenario - your the cp and you get called to the hospital for whatever reason (SO had a car accident etc...) and you live with or right next to your mother or sister etc... you would have to call the other parent to watch the child because the mother or sister cannot "fill in" for you because your definition is family can not help out. In all the orders I have seen it doesn't include the use of family as in you have to call the other parent - family can stand in - a stepparent would just watch the child until the parent returned - in your definition you would go get the child for the 5 hours - lots of times there are half-siblings that see each other on the other parents time - I don't want to be rude but you would take that time away because dad or mom had to go to work??
I am sure you can have your order to reflect that thinking but (at least in this state) it is NOT the meaning of ROFR.
The best interest of the child is not served if they are being taken for say the 5 hour time period out of their ncp home or even cp home and the taken back 5 hours later to fulfill a ROFR - family can stand and in the case of siblings that would be taking time away from them - not in the best interest - but I guess if the "real" reason is to lesson the time the child spends with the ncp and their family and siblings then by all means utilize that control and have it put in your order spelled out that way. This does not include dangerous family watching the child like in Mrs. B's case.
ETA - if there is an older sibling to watch the younger one and you had to go to work or a baby shower or whatever - they older sibling cannot spend time with the child because they have to go to back to the other parent due to the over 4 hours or whatever - reeks of control on the cp's part - ncp would allow their family or older child to help out and utilize their time - however little time that may or may not be. I also don't see the CP calling the other parent either as a way of more control yet they would expect the NCP to give up time....
| annatof4 |
| (member) |
| 07/25/11 08:50 AM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
In the legal definition, "In general, the right of a person or company to purchase something before the offering is made available to others."
In family law, "The "Right Of First Refusal" is a provision frequently written into custody orders and parenting plans. The intent of a Right Of First Refusal provision is to maximize the time child spends with both parents (especially the non-custodial parent, whose time is normally limited to begin with). In its most basic form, Right Of First Refusal means that before either parent can use the services of a baby-sitter or other third-party caregiver, the other parent must be given the opportunity to care for the child during that time."
In my ROFR ordered in my state, If during my parenting time, I am called into work and expected to not be with the child for 3 hours or more, I am required to contact the other parent and offer the time to him BEFORE I seek any other person. If he declines the offer of time, I then can contact family, friends, etc. Vice versa during his parenting time.
As I have said, it could be written differently to include or exclude persons. I am NOT saying that it is right...or wrong.
I agree with you, it is all of "power/control", for both CP AND NCP.
I only have the ROFR revision in my CO because I was to go out of town during my time. I wanted my sister to watch our son. We lived on the same street and we are very close. It didnt seem like a big deal. I would have been gone for around 10 hours. The father said that he could have watched him and he should have been notified and given the opportunity.....thus, we now have the ROFR revision in the CO. :)
| c_jane |
| (Pooh-Bah) |
| 07/25/11 05:59 PM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
My ROFR specifically EXcluded the SM because our son had indicated to the GAL for our Mod. hearing that SM was the adult he spent the MOST time with. Dad (CP) had gladly given up his parental responsibilities to SM, who stayed home.
As we lived (and still do) less than a mile from each other, and I had off all school holidays/vacations, the ROFR was written so if Dad had to work on those holidays/vacations but I was off, DS would come to my house instead of staying w/SM.
Pissed them off no END as Dad wanted to 'replace' me with SM. Especially when I told them, yes I really TRULY wanted to invoke it instead of just leaving DS to stay with SM.
| annieo |
| (veteran) |
| 07/25/11 08:51 PM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
and that is why you and your ex continue to spar over who has control and the last laugh which will affect your son
your exercising of ROFR is in the spirit of ownership of your child and who can control who - such a sad situation - I feel sorry for your child every time you stick it to your ex and he sticks it to you - your son loses
| annatof4 |
| (member) |
| 07/25/11 11:51 PM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
There is no sparring with the ex's with a ROFR provision. It goes both ways.
The child suffers because the child will spend time with their parents instead of being pawned off on someone else? I think not.
There are several reasons why a ROFR might be in place and/or include/exclude any specific person. Point is, the only 2 people that a child NEEDS is their parents. Isnt that what we are suppose to be supporting? Parents actually being parents? Just curious.
| MrsB |
| (Carpal \'Tunnel) |
| 07/26/11 12:08 AM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
<<The child suffers because the child will spend time with their parents instead of being pawned off on someone else? I think not.>>
I don't consider a child's time spent with grandparents or family as "pawning" the child off. If it happens where every weekend the child is with family instead if the OP I can see it as a problem if the OP would rather have that time. However an overnight spent with family or friends IMO is certainly not owning the child off. Mayne I misunderstood your response?
| annatof4 |
| (member) |
| 07/26/11 07:38 AM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
Sorry MrsB, I was referring to c jane's comment "that SM was the adult he spent the MOST time with. Dad (CP) had gladly given up his parental responsibilities to SM, who stayed home." This to me is pawning the child off. Maybe the wrong word to use in a general statement.
Granted most ROFR revisions are not put into place until a parent has not been given the opportunity to be with the child on multiple occasions or it is a control/power issue.
| c_jane |
| (Pooh-Bah) |
| 07/26/11 11:29 AM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
And the GAL was 'horrified' (her words) to find that DS admitted he spent MOST of his time with SM. And I HAD no reciprocal ROFR because of my work schedule and being off MUCH more time than Ex-.
To the professionals in the mediation, it made absolutely NO sense for DS to be sitting @ Dad's house with SM on Columbus Day/President's Day, etc. while Dad worked, when I was 5 blocks away and also at home.
It make any sense to you??
| annatof4 |
| (member) |
| 07/26/11 12:02 PM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
No. Other than him trying to keep him from you? Sheesh, I dont know. My ex always had the mindset "it is my time, I can do with it what I want". Even though I agree with it to an extent, if he wasnt with our child, what was the problem if I spent that time with the child? It was a control thing for my ex. He wanted the time if I wasnt with our child...but then he didnt want to give me the time when he couldnt be with our child. Its a crazy thing. Even if you want there to be a good relationship with the other parent, you cant force them to want it as well. Seemed like no matter how many times I would bend for him, it was never enough.
| annieo |
| (veteran) |
| 07/26/11 12:28 PM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
annatof4
my comments to cjane are because she and her ex spar over the child - this is one instance - they use the child as a pawn - I wasn't referring to a "normal" situation - their situation is so contentious and cjane and her ex make everything a tit for tat and use the child to get to one another - they use the thinking that "my time is my time and you will get none of it"
If the child is spending every waking hour with the SM and the two are not getting along and in cjanes case they live really close to one another - I can see why they child should spend some of that time with the parent (whos time it isn't and the other parent is unavailable - cjane is NCP) but again cjane and her ex do things to "ha ha I win this one" and the child is the one who loses cause his parents are always including him etc...
| MrsB |
| (Carpal \'Tunnel) |
| 07/26/11 12:41 PM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
Oh I gotcha :). Thanks for clarifying!
Personally unless it's ALL the time (i.e. The child is with the SP more than the BP) I don't think SP's should be included in ROFR. My husband spends a lot if one on one time with my son when he's able. And they both love it. Can't imagine not being able to allow that to happen.
| 3years |
| (recently joined) |
| 12/30/11 03:26 PM |
|
Re: Right of first refusal and uninterrupted visitatio
|
I understand the view here. But I am a mother with PC and my x has "taken" my son while I am at work.
We previously agreed DS (3) would be in day care. Then he lost his job and began watching DS three days/ week. BUT the GAL gave me and extra night.
September he finds a job working 12am-8am. and insists DS will ONLY go to pre-school 2 days and one morning 6:30-8:30 (we have joint legal).
So he has been watching DS every WED. Thurs. Fri. since Sept. 7 2011 under 4-hour ROFR AND meanwhile denies me the opportunity to have DS overnight, when I am otherwise alone, and he is at work leaving DS with SM for 9 hours.
I have filed a petition for violation of the custody agreement
He STILL will not give DS to me at 7 pm or even 8 pm. He insists that DS should sleep in his bed at dad's and that dad should be able to put him to bed and lay with him each night.
Other than the fact that he is DENYING me, (yet I can't deny him?!) is my question of his fitness to watch DS all day Wed. for example, state that he, does not sleep when DS is awake, put DS to bed at 8pm, then work 12 am to 8 am, pick up DS and watch DS for 8 hours (or more). As PC I feel that I should have the right to choose someone to care for DS whom I fully trust to be alert.
Secondly X refuses to communicate what DS eats, and what medications he is administering, or when or how mush sleep he is getting, and flaunts to me that I have no right to know what goes on when DS is in his care, and that DS does not have the same nap schedule with him (I keep naps consistent with day care).
I know this is a lot, but I visited:
[censored]://[censored].thelizlibrary.org/liz/right-of-first-refusal.html
and found that we are NOT good candidates for ROFR. (which I asked my attorney to remove several times as we went through settlement, but she said would be hard to remove.)
If X works 12-8 am