"She starts all the fights. She is addicted to drama. Would a protective order be a bad thing?"
Chances are that it would impact you and not her. She is a 'ward of the State'. I'll address what this means later, but first try to recognize the mother of your children is analogously wearing a suit of teflon armor. Nothing is going to stick to her. All you are left with is getting along with her. You need to do this the best you can. Sometimes it will take avoiding talking with her....Answer with a letter. Forget texting.... I think it's a bad idea, especially when texts are poorly written and tends to inflame an already bad situation. She will most likely misinterpret your texts and may deny you of seeing your kids on visitation day. The best advice I can give is avoiding 'parental alienation' with your kids. If she denies you from seeing them....just record it and hope the following week it doesn't happen again. Avoid any abusive language and tone. Always be even keeled in front of her. You're going to have to show a long string of abuses before ever going into court. And going there is entering a lion's den. The court may at that time decide to review your child support and rule that you need to pay more. Recognize it for what it is --- It's a big EFF#n money bilking racket. The following is really a sad state of affairs in society. Know that the court does not care about you or your children. They just want the money.
If she has physical custody, it unfortunately means she holds the upper hand. It's very difficult to unseat the female once sole physical custody has been ruled upon. Most of the time the courts give sole physical custody to the mother, despite the original intent of the law wasn't ever suppose to be this way. Without getting into the history and the deceit behind all of this... (I'll address that later), ... the family court system is really a tribunal.... closer to a Star chamber than anything else in American jurisprudence. In Black's Law dictionary, you can get an idea of the long ago adoption of the British Accreditation Registry (BAR) in America. Accordingly, the courts view the female and children as wards of the State; also referred to as a "ward of the court". In many States, a "ward of the state" refers to individuals who are or were incarcerated. To emphasize, incarceration does not make one independent. And “not being independent” is the key phrase to understanding what is meant by being a ward of the state.
The legal definition of 'ward of the state' is:
"infants and persons of unsound mind placed by the court under the care of a guardian".
In legal terms, courts view "defendants" as 'wards of the court'. On the surface it appears as George Orwell's "Animal Farm" dictum in that, "All animal's are equal". This is what they want everyone to believe, but the reality of the family court is that "some animals are more equal than other animals." You will never hear this in court though. This is yet another example of two-tiered justice designed for bilking fathers of their money while holding his children hostage.. It's absolutely true though. This is why you are to be represented by the court officer; ergo, an attorney. Don't be fooled, your attorney ultimately works for the judge in the court room.
This means you are fighting against the State government instead of her. A very good article revealing the history of 'Parens Patriae' is Blair Adams wrote: **WHO OWNS THE CHILDREN? **(subtitled "Public Compulsion, Private Responsibility, and the Dilemma of Ultimate Authority," Waco, Texas: Truth Forum, 1991, Fifth edition). The author examines some of the court cases and legal precedents that shed light on this important question. In his "Preface" he writes:
[A]ccording to the courts of this land, ... "A child is primarily" not his parents' offspring but "a ward of the [S]tate"; ... parents hold relationship he owes allegiance to the government"; ... parents serve as a mere "guardianship" which "the government places [the child] under"; ... parental authority must be "at all times exercised in subordination to the paramount and overruling direction of the [S]tate"; ... "the natural rights of a parent to the custody and control of... his child are subordinate to the power of the [S]tate";... in deciding whether parent or State will control a child's education, the child's academic progress under the parents - even as measured by State-approved tests - has been termed by State prosecutors as "irrelevant and immaterial"; and finally ... such legal principles and policies form the basis of all this nation's compulsory education laws. (pp. Xix-xx)
In Black's Law Dictionary look up Parens Patriae. Parens Patriae means literally, “parent of the country.” It refers traditionally to the role of STATE as sovereign and guardian of persons under legal disability.
With the birth registration established, the federal government, under the doctrine of Parens Patriae, had the mechanism to take over all the assets of the American people and put them into debt into perpetuity. Under this doctrine, if one is born with a disability, the state, (the sovereign) has the responsibility to take care of you. This author believes that the disability you are born with is, in fact, the birth itself.
The attorney bar association has many secrets that they don't want you to know about. It's a big club and you are not part of it.
If the American people actually knew the secrets that the court systems hide, they'd be marching in the streets.
See Corpus Juris Secundum (CJS), Volume 7, Section 4, Attorney & client: The attorney's first duty is to the courts and the public, not to the client, and wherever the duties to his client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the administration of justice, the former must yield to the latter. Clients are also called "wards" of the court in regard to their relationship with their attorneys. After you have read the foregoing, ask your attorney to see a copy of "regarding Lawyer Discipline & other rules" Also Canons 1 through 9.
Lawyers just process their clients through the money bilking operation. The better lawyers make you think it was money well spent.
One last thing.... Do you pay your child support directly to her or do you pay it to DHS (government)? There's no getting out of CS when you're already in the government system. Every dollar of child support is tied to three dollars of federal subsidies to the State. They want their money.
I haven't had time to fully read your response. I thank you for the information and will ingest it. I will read it all in the AM. You seem to have knowledge I don't but there are somethings that don't apply in your response. No offense it, it's just a different than normal divorce. Thank you.
I have 50/50 with her, one week with my kids then she gets the next week.
We had an MSA. The court isn't able to change it. Which I think she thought that they would give her child support but it was in the MSA that there is no child or spouse support.
I did pay $1500 to her a month after the divorce for one year, but that was direct payments via bank transfers(so that I had a record of it). I only did that because I knew she was used to a certain life style and would blow it all. Hence her asking her dad for rent money.
If she can't pay her own rent, does that play into my side of things? She can't afford to be a mother.
When you have time, go ahead and read the rest of what I wrote. You must understand that there is a trillion dollar industry dealing with marital dissolution and child custody. You want to stay out of the government snare.
"If she can't pay her own rent, does that play into my side of things? She can't afford to be a mother."
It could depending on the terms and conditions of your marital settlement agreement. Who presided over the MSA?
If it was a judge/magistrate, I'm questioning how the MSA was set up. Again, it depends on the terms and conditions. If there is no clause for remedying disagreements, then ostensibly she can sue for ameliorating the agreement. An unworkable agreement is no agreement. Your second question is that the family courts, through legal precedent, view the male, not her, as the financial obligator to raise those children. Typically, the mother is the one that has sole physical custody. It's something like 90% of the time.
Since you have a joint physical custody, that'a a very good situation. However, you need to protect this at all costs. It sounds like she is trying to change that. I'll tell you this. With women, there are many influences (mom, sister, friends, etc.) that will 'advise' her to take you to court. One of the pathways is through unsolvable disagreements. It's sounds like she might be on this path. The inside skinny on family attorneys is that their profits are far greater from acrimonious marital relationships than for easily resolvable cases. The more fighting, the more they profit. This goes on long after the dissolution papers have been drafted and issued until the kids are well in their teens. You have a really good deal and don't want any surprise motions to the court to happen. You said the following:
"I did pay $1500 to her a month after the divorce for one year, but that was direct payments via bank transfers(so that I had a record of it). I only did that because I knew she was used to a certain life style and would blow it all. Hence her asking her dad for rent money."
Could this be the issue at hand? She doesn't have money for the rent? Does her parents believe you should help her out financially? May be through a mutual friend you should ask her about it. The question is, What can you do to resolve the issues she has?
The most important thing you must do is to mitigate the fighting. You want to have a good relationship for your sake and your children.
I would consider where you live in addition to researching past court cases regarding family cases in your area. Talk to people, some good hearted lawyers may give you good advice without them lying just to get your $. Call around. See what they say. They almost always give free consultations. You're a smart man, I'm sure you can tell if they are bullshitting you or not just to get your business.
I can read con artists like a book. I talked to a lawyer once and I knew he was full of shit and just wanted my money. If you meet them in person for a consultation you can watch their body language and can tell if they are in it just for cash.
Regarding text messages, there are ways to save them off the phone. Also, your phone carrier should have your history, if you've ever deleted any. I would consider them vitally important if I were you and do everything to preserve them.
There are kids 13m and 11f. So I'm going to have deal with this woman for at least 7 & half more years.
She starts all the fights. She is addicted to drama.
Would a protective order be a bad thing? I just don't want to have to talk to her but she goes 'crazy' on the text messages.
Thanks for explaining what you did. I knew the courts love women and children more than men but I didn't know to the extent you explained.
I just want the harassment to stop.
Chances are that it would impact you and not her. She is a 'ward of the State'. I'll address what this means later, but first try to recognize the mother of your children is analogously wearing a suit of teflon armor. Nothing is going to stick to her. All you are left with is getting along with her. You need to do this the best you can. Sometimes it will take avoiding talking with her....Answer with a letter. Forget texting.... I think it's a bad idea, especially when texts are poorly written and tends to inflame an already bad situation. She will most likely misinterpret your texts and may deny you of seeing your kids on visitation day. The best advice I can give is avoiding 'parental alienation' with your kids. If she denies you from seeing them....just record it and hope the following week it doesn't happen again. Avoid any abusive language and tone. Always be even keeled in front of her. You're going to have to show a long string of abuses before ever going into court. And going there is entering a lion's den. The court may at that time decide to review your child support and rule that you need to pay more. Recognize it for what it is --- It's a big EFF#n money bilking racket. The following is really a sad state of affairs in society. Know that the court does not care about you or your children. They just want the money.
If she has physical custody, it unfortunately means she holds the upper hand. It's very difficult to unseat the female once sole physical custody has been ruled upon. Most of the time the courts give sole physical custody to the mother, despite the original intent of the law wasn't ever suppose to be this way. Without getting into the history and the deceit behind all of this... (I'll address that later), ... the family court system is really a tribunal.... closer to a Star chamber than anything else in American jurisprudence. In Black's Law dictionary, you can get an idea of the long ago adoption of the British Accreditation Registry (BAR) in America. Accordingly, the courts view the female and children as wards of the State; also referred to as a "ward of the court". In many States, a "ward of the state" refers to individuals who are or were incarcerated. To emphasize, incarceration does not make one independent. And “not being independent” is the key phrase to understanding what is meant by being a ward of the state.
The legal definition of 'ward of the state' is:
"infants and persons of unsound mind placed by the court under the care of a guardian".
In legal terms, courts view "defendants" as 'wards of the court'. On the surface it appears as George Orwell's "Animal Farm" dictum in that, "All animal's are equal". This is what they want everyone to believe, but the reality of the family court is that "some animals are more equal than other animals." You will never hear this in court though. This is yet another example of two-tiered justice designed for bilking fathers of their money while holding his children hostage.. It's absolutely true though. This is why you are to be represented by the court officer; ergo, an attorney. Don't be fooled, your attorney ultimately works for the judge in the court room.
This means you are fighting against the State government instead of her. A very good article revealing the history of 'Parens Patriae' is Blair Adams wrote: **WHO OWNS THE CHILDREN? **(subtitled "Public Compulsion, Private Responsibility, and the Dilemma of Ultimate Authority," Waco, Texas: Truth Forum, 1991, Fifth edition). The author examines some of the court cases and legal precedents that shed light on this important question. In his "Preface" he writes:
[A]ccording to the courts of this land, ... "A child is primarily" not his parents' offspring but "a ward of the [S]tate"; ... parents hold relationship he owes allegiance to the government"; ... parents serve as a mere "guardianship" which "the government places [the child] under"; ... parental authority must be "at all times exercised in subordination to the paramount and overruling direction of the [S]tate"; ... "the natural rights of a parent to the custody and control of... his child are subordinate to the power of the [S]tate";... in deciding whether parent or State will control a child's education, the child's academic progress under the parents - even as measured by State-approved tests - has been termed by State prosecutors as "irrelevant and immaterial"; and finally ... such legal principles and policies form the basis of all this nation's compulsory education laws. (pp. Xix-xx)
http://voluntaryist.com/backissues/059.pdf
In Black's Law Dictionary look up Parens Patriae. Parens Patriae means literally, “parent of the country.” It refers traditionally to the role of STATE as sovereign and guardian of persons under legal disability.
With the birth registration established, the federal government, under the doctrine of Parens Patriae, had the mechanism to take over all the assets of the American people and put them into debt into perpetuity. Under this doctrine, if one is born with a disability, the state, (the sovereign) has the responsibility to take care of you. This author believes that the disability you are born with is, in fact, the birth itself.
The attorney bar association has many secrets that they don't want you to know about. It's a big club and you are not part of it.
If the American people actually knew the secrets that the court systems hide, they'd be marching in the streets.
SEVEN ELEMENTS OF JURISDICTION
See Corpus Juris Secundum (CJS), Volume 7, Section 4, Attorney & client: The attorney's first duty is to the courts and the public, not to the client, and wherever the duties to his client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the administration of justice, the former must yield to the latter. Clients are also called "wards" of the court in regard to their relationship with their attorneys. After you have read the foregoing, ask your attorney to see a copy of "regarding Lawyer Discipline & other rules" Also Canons 1 through 9.
Lawyers just process their clients through the money bilking operation. The better lawyers make you think it was money well spent.
One last thing.... Do you pay your child support directly to her or do you pay it to DHS (government)? There's no getting out of CS when you're already in the government system. Every dollar of child support is tied to three dollars of federal subsidies to the State. They want their money.
I haven't had time to fully read your response. I thank you for the information and will ingest it. I will read it all in the AM. You seem to have knowledge I don't but there are somethings that don't apply in your response. No offense it, it's just a different than normal divorce. Thank you.
I have 50/50 with her, one week with my kids then she gets the next week.
We had an MSA. The court isn't able to change it. Which I think she thought that they would give her child support but it was in the MSA that there is no child or spouse support.
I did pay $1500 to her a month after the divorce for one year, but that was direct payments via bank transfers(so that I had a record of it). I only did that because I knew she was used to a certain life style and would blow it all. Hence her asking her dad for rent money.
If she can't pay her own rent, does that play into my side of things? She can't afford to be a mother.
When you have time, go ahead and read the rest of what I wrote. You must understand that there is a trillion dollar industry dealing with marital dissolution and child custody. You want to stay out of the government snare.
"If she can't pay her own rent, does that play into my side of things? She can't afford to be a mother."
It could depending on the terms and conditions of your marital settlement agreement. Who presided over the MSA?
If it was a judge/magistrate, I'm questioning how the MSA was set up. Again, it depends on the terms and conditions. If there is no clause for remedying disagreements, then ostensibly she can sue for ameliorating the agreement. An unworkable agreement is no agreement. Your second question is that the family courts, through legal precedent, view the male, not her, as the financial obligator to raise those children. Typically, the mother is the one that has sole physical custody. It's something like 90% of the time.
Since you have a joint physical custody, that'a a very good situation. However, you need to protect this at all costs. It sounds like she is trying to change that. I'll tell you this. With women, there are many influences (mom, sister, friends, etc.) that will 'advise' her to take you to court. One of the pathways is through unsolvable disagreements. It's sounds like she might be on this path. The inside skinny on family attorneys is that their profits are far greater from acrimonious marital relationships than for easily resolvable cases. The more fighting, the more they profit. This goes on long after the dissolution papers have been drafted and issued until the kids are well in their teens. You have a really good deal and don't want any surprise motions to the court to happen. You said the following:
"I did pay $1500 to her a month after the divorce for one year, but that was direct payments via bank transfers(so that I had a record of it). I only did that because I knew she was used to a certain life style and would blow it all. Hence her asking her dad for rent money."
Could this be the issue at hand? She doesn't have money for the rent? Does her parents believe you should help her out financially? May be through a mutual friend you should ask her about it. The question is, What can you do to resolve the issues she has?
The most important thing you must do is to mitigate the fighting. You want to have a good relationship for your sake and your children.
I would consider where you live in addition to researching past court cases regarding family cases in your area. Talk to people, some good hearted lawyers may give you good advice without them lying just to get your $. Call around. See what they say. They almost always give free consultations. You're a smart man, I'm sure you can tell if they are bullshitting you or not just to get your business.
I can read con artists like a book. I talked to a lawyer once and I knew he was full of shit and just wanted my money. If you meet them in person for a consultation you can watch their body language and can tell if they are in it just for cash.
Regarding text messages, there are ways to save them off the phone. Also, your phone carrier should have your history, if you've ever deleted any. I would consider them vitally important if I were you and do everything to preserve them.