delia06
recently joined
Reged: 02/17/12
Posts: 2
|
|
I'm new here, so sorry if this has been talked about before. I have 2 children (10 and 13) with my ex-husband. Currently they live with me most of the time, and attend school in the same district they've been in since starting school. My ex moved to a town about 45 minutes away. The kids have been on the same visitation schedule since they've been 4 and 6 (one weeknight with my ex from 5:30-8:30 and every other weekend), except that in recent years my ex has dropped seeing them on the mid-week night, and often waits to get them Saturday morning instead of Friday night. He also does not use even close to all of his available parenting time during holidays or days off school.
Our oldest child will be entering high school in another year and a half. My ex husband happens to live near a high school that is considered one of the most competitive and best in the state. Our high school, in the district where the kids have always lived, is pretty good too, but obviously isn't ranked quite as high.
My ex is now starting to push the idea that when the oldest reaches high school, we should modify visitation so that this child would attend school and live most of the time with my ex, while the younger child would remain here. Presumably he'd also want the younger to eventually move in with him as well.
My ex is not the worst parent in the world, he is just a very hands-off parent. He has never chosen to be involved in the kids school life, he doesn't know their friends, he doesn't want to be inconvenienced by them. He loves them in his own way, and the visitation schedule we have settled into REALLY seems to make the kids happy. (When he saw them slightly more frequently, they complained/cried/got stressed about having to go visit him). But I would not trust him to be able to actually RAISE our children and help them through the teenage years by having them predominantly live with him, and I certainly don't want them to be split up, even for just a couple of years.
Has anybody had an battles with trying to modify visitation based on the quality of the school district? From what I have read, the quality of one school district over another is a legitimate concern to the courts. Our school district here is perfectly fine, but there is no way it can compete with the high school near my ex, and there is no way we can afford to live in his expensive area.
I know my ex, and I feel this will likely lead to a court battle, IF he can get his current wife in a battle mood and on board with the idea of being in charge of our oldest child while in high school (because there is no way he is going to take on that responsibility himself). Any experience or words of advice are welcome!
|
ssmom79
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/27/07
Posts: 7806
|
|
I have never experienced this, and I haven't heard it asked in my time here. Things like this will often depend on your state. What state are you in?
My state is FL. In my case, I would have to prove the current school district is not in the child's best interests and why. Not just because school A is a better school, but because school B is a HORRIBLE school. But a decent school versus a better school, eh, I just don't think that's a battle he would win. How much would he pay to win? A better school, I mean, yea it's a reason, but I don't think it's enough to warrant a change in custody, which is what he'd be requesting in the situation you mentioned.
Did he give reason why he wants them to attend the school? Aside from "it's better".
|
Terri1
journeyman
Reged: 06/03/05
Posts: 71
|
|
I can't believe that he would win on this one and I don't see where it would be in the best interest of your children. Leaving their home and friends could have a significant impact on them, academically and emotionally.
It is very difficult to truly determine that one high school is better than another. Test scores which are used as the usual measurement, quite frankly, don't tell the story. You mentioned that the high school was in a more expensive area. Generally, the more economically advantaged children do better in school for many reasons. This does not mean that the school is better. One big reason that they do better is parental involvement. They would be leaving you to go to a home with apparently minimal parent involvement which could significantly decrease their chances of doing well.
Or is the high school bigger and newer. That too doesn't make it better and, in fact, many of the more affluent high schools in our area have a higher incident of teen suicide, drug use, etc. than the inner city schools.
Unless your son needs a specialized program that is not offered at your local high school, no judge in their right mind would make him leave his current living arrangement with a caring parent. And with the minimal involvement of your ex, does he really want to spend the money to fight this or does he think you will just give in? I wouldn't.
|
Tweeby
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/05/04
Posts: 7100
|
|
My husband received custody of their YS due to educational neglect in 2004. During the case and the trial my husband was told NOT to bring up the 'level' of the schools involved. The Judge will NOT rule that one school or district is better than another. We lived in a rural area where the schools and district ranked high in State testings while the school his ex had the children in was one if not the worse in the State. It had no bearing at. My husband's ex lived in the city and county where the court was held and we lived in a neighboring county.
Can you imagine what the newpapers would report if a Judge rules that a child should be with one parent simply because the schools are better?
|
Buckeye
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 12/08/05
Posts: 7857
|
|
What does the oldest child want to do? Does he want go move in with father?
I think that would be more of what the judge would be interested in plus if your husband is going to "parent" the child.
|
Renny
addict
Reged: 09/24/11
Posts: 479
|
|
The mere claim that his school district is better than yours doesn't constitute a substantial change in circumstances to warrant granting a modifiction of custody. The oldest child must be around 14, and depending on what stte you are in, his desires to live with the father will have weight. Overall, though, if that child doesn't want to move in with the father rest assured that there won't be a change in custody based on the quality of one district versus another.
|
M5M5
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 07/29/05
Posts: 11736
|
|
Um...that's wrong. Where are you getting that as soon as they are 14, they can decide?
|
Goodmom
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 06/17/07
Posts: 2019
|
|
Given that the high school in the school district that they have always attended school in is good, your ex probably isn't going to win this one. Status quo is seriously going to work against your ex in this case.
|
LexieBelle
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 11/07/10
Posts: 3680
|
|
[quote]Um...that's wrong. Where are you getting that as soon as they are 14, they can decide? [/quote]
That IS true, depending on the state. The poster didn't say it was the do-all, end-all, but it DOES have weight.. Again, as the poster said DEPENDING ON THE STATE. I've seen this poster get criticized in another thread for making the statement as being false and it's NOT.
In NY? NO.. the child's opinion NEVER matters.
In RI? YES.. the child's opinion, I believe it's at age TWELVE, DOES CARRY WEIGHT. I believe they can actually "decide" where they want to live, if I'm not mistaken. Another poster here can confirm that as they have personal experience.
I'm quite sure RI is NOT the only state that is like this.
|
M5M5
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 07/29/05
Posts: 11736
|
|
Actually, what the poster said was "The oldest child must be around 14, and depending on what stte you are in, his desires to live with the father will have weight."
I'm only aware of ONE state where the child's opinion carries that much weight (to decide). My step-kids also had to speak to the judge (gave testimony) and also to give their opinions on where they wanted to live...at ages 6, 8 & 10. However, they were not allowed to decide. The judge merely heard them. It is ALWAYS up to the judge. Not the kids.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
