sunnyday
member
Reged: 05/16/07
Posts: 150
|
|
hello -
My kids have always gotten regular dental cleanings. Well, my kids teeth are gossing me out so I wrote ex and told him since it had been so long I was going to make an appointment for them to go. Ex wrote back that he wants me to switch dentists to one he has a credit with. Normally I wouldnt care but I have been to him and he is the worst dentist on the planet. seriously I went to him pre-divorce and I felt like I was going to a dentist in pioneer days. Also, the kids went once a long time ago and it went terribly and for the past few years I have been taking the kids to the nicest kids dentist. It is so nice to have them go and not have them freak about about a teeth cleaning.
He claims that since he is paying more of a percentage he gets to pick. Just seems so harsh to have to move the kids from a dentist they actually like seeing to one I know they dont like at all.
Can he do this?
|
DeeCan
veteran
Reged: 04/05/08
Posts: 1266
|
|
What exactly does your CO say about who gets to make the decisions regarding dental and medical care? If it's joint, I would think the status quo outweighs where his "credit" is.
Besides, can he not establish an account with the current dentist?
--------------------
Don't drink and park, accidents cause people.
|
sunnyday
member
Reged: 05/16/07
Posts: 150
|
|
It says joint. My kids have been going to their current dentist for about 5 years. We are very much established there as far as they know us and get us right in. Dentist even rushed over when they were closed one evening to fix a chipped tooth on son. That happened before the divorce.
|
Maury
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/02/04
Posts: 8146
Loc: This Asylum --->
|
|
It is a joint decision. Not yours and not his.
|
Relayer
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 03/13/07
Posts: 9506
Loc: Moorglade Mover
|
|
A lot of NCP's fail to pay. Since he meets his obligation, you should go to his dentist or you'll end up with unpaid bills and a court date.
--------------------
GO CUBBIES!!!!
|
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
|
|
Unless the court order grants him the right to pick, no he can't. The CP gets that right. In joint legal situations, the CP gets the deciding vote when they can't agree. In the end, if the CP is deciding unfairly, the court may rule against them if the NCP takes it back to court. But as long as you're using one they've BEEN seeing, one who isn't charging an unheard of exhorbitant amount, one who is in-network if they have insurance to cover it, etc., then the judge wouldn't rule against you.
I assume if he's paying more of a percentage, you pay the other part of the percentage? Meaning you ALSO are paying more of a percentage. I'd email him (so its in writing) that you're going to keep the kids with the dentist they know, the one you trust more, and the one that does a better job. And remind him that you are BOTH paying a higher percentage but that your kids are worth better than substandard work.
--------------------
Char Fox
|
almostheaven
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 10468
Loc: West Virginia
|
|
The judge would side with her on this one. They've been going to this dentist for 5 years. The judge would EASILY side with her, and he'd likely have to pay the court costs as the judge would most likely rule it as frivolous anyway. So if she goes to court, it simply means she's going to likely get the order ammended to specify that she gets to choose the dentist and therefore, it wouldn't be in dad's best interest to take it to court.
--------------------
Char Fox
|
Relayer
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 03/13/07
Posts: 9506
Loc: Moorglade Mover
|
|
[quote]Unless the court order grants him the right to pick, no he can't. The CP gets that right. In joint legal situations, the CP gets the deciding vote when they can't agree. [/quote]
What planet are you from? Thats not how it is with me. My say is exaclty equal. That is why they call it "joint". So me a statute where it says the CP gets to decide. If we can't agree, the judge decides.
--------------------
GO CUBBIES!!!!
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30195
|
|
...validated by the courts that in a joint situation, all the CP has to do is do what they want, and a court will rubber stamp it. Unfortunately, this mindset is reinforced by the courts as they DO rubber stamp and give the CP break after break.
And, of course, we will hear from the CP's about the way the courts let "deadbeats" get by, yet they fail to add that while the NCP may not always be CRIMINALLY punished for failure to pay support, the support owed is still recorded and listed as due, along with interest and penalties. Violations by the CP are RARELY even ACKNOWLEDGED, much less accounted for or criminally punished. We hear, "Well, if you put the CP in jail, what about the kids!" or "If you charge the CP a FINE, it REALLY impacts the children..." Shame we don't hear the same about child support INTEREST.
Until the courts begin treating BOTH sides the same, and PUNISHING, with jail time or monetary fines, you will ALWAYS have the sides at opposition. And rightly so, because NCP's are treated unfairly, and deserve equal rights under the law.
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
Relayer
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 03/13/07
Posts: 9506
Loc: Moorglade Mover
|
|
Of course you are right but saying: "In joint legal situations, the CP gets the deciding vote when they can't agree" is completely wrong in a legal context. Joint is joint. Sole is sole. I agree the court would probably rubber stamp it to to make a legal pronouncement that is completely incorrect is a big problem on this board. The CO would have to say the CP has the right to decide who treats the child, otherwise, both sides have (legally and supposedly) equal say.
--------------------
GO CUBBIES!!!!
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
