Missouri Family Law Blog

It has been a long four months at the Corley Law Firm. We tried eight or nine cases in two months, which each required weeks upon weeks of preparation. We are exhausted.

I like what I do; but there comes a time in every divorce lawyer’s life when they ask themselves, Why do I do this? It’s a tremendous opportunity in many ways. We can help people create futures for themselves. When we “win” (a word which used here means ‘get everything our clients want’), we feel as though we can never be as high. When we “lose” (a word which used here means ‘get nothing our clients want’), we feel as though we are, indeed, the scum of the earth.

A man sat in my office today and listened to me try to justify a court’s decision. This is a man who has custody of his 17-year-old, whose wife left him and his daughter and seems to feel she is entitled to a lot more than he is even able to give. The judge did what I can only describe as reaching a compromise — which is classically defined as “the choice no one wants”. I tried to explain how the court thought it was being fair, giving him less than he thought he should get and making him pay her less than she thought he should have to pay. He looked tired, though; and I felt a bit less than successful, even though on several major points, we had actually prevailed.

Another man warmly clasped my hand last week and thanked me for all I had done for him. I had managed to convince his wife and her lawyer that she should return to Kansas City. It is possible that not everything will go his way from here on out, but the children are back in the metro area, and he will be a half-time dad instead of a 1/8-time dad. That’s a victory, in my book.

I tried a case several weeks ago in which a 21-year-old man fought to keep his parental rights. The child’s mother had lost custody to the state because someone in her home had burned the child. My client, a mere 18 years of age at the time to the mother’s 17, had never been given a chance to have the child and desperately wanted to do so. No ruling in that case, yet. I am hopeful.

A month or more ago, I got custody restored for the mother of a seven-year-old after the father abruptly moved the child to the Lake. The mother, who has a drug-abuse history, fought to prove that she had been clean for two years and should be allowed to have custody of her child. The father bad-mouthed and slammed with no real evidence. The court saw through his blustering accusations, and gave the child to the mother full-time. But the real victory was the light in her eyes when she sat on the witness stand and acknowledged her old ways, and firmly testified that she had overcome her problems, with the love of her family and the grace of God.

I’m not sure what my record is now, unless I get credit for effort. I like what I do. I like helping people. Breaking up is hard to do, and I enjoy any chance I have to make it even just a bit easier for my clients.

Corinne Corley

The other day, a salesperson really ticked me off. This was one of those faceless customer service people on the phone. After an hour of not getting what I needed, I escalated the call to the next level, then the next level. Several days passed, without resolution. Finally, a week later, I got the issue resolved.

The entire time that I was dealing with these folks, each one “apologizing” for the inability of the one before to assist me, I thought about my own profession and the requirement that each of us delivers competent service. Yes, yes, I know: you have your own horror story about your divorce lawyer and the failures that you perceive in his or her conduct of you divorce or custody case.

The difference is that in my profession, we have an ethical standard, and if we do not meet that standard, you can complain to an official board that will investigate and levy punishment if we have not fulfilled our ethical mandate. Make no mistake about it: Lawyers are punished. Each month, when the Missouri Bar Journal arrives in the mail, I turn first to the “Disciplinary Actions” section to see who is listed. It’s a bit like reading the obituaries: If my name does not appear, I go ahead and eat breakfast.

No, it doesn’t come as a surprise — you get warning first. A letter, containing a copy of the complaint. You answer. You are obligated to make your file open to the committee. They send your answer to the complainant. They make an initial decision. Sometimes it escalates to the next level, which functions as a prosecutorial body. It’s scary, I assure you. I have had 2 or 3 complaints against me, all resolved in my favor — but each of which I took very seriously.

Divorce lawyers are subject to more complaints than most, I suspect because divorce clients need a lot of attention and don’t always feel as though it is given. Then, too, there are some complicated features of divorce, especially where pensions, investment plans, and business evaluations are concerned.

When I hear a “lawyer joke”, I cringe. Only blondes have a worse reputation than lawyers, I think; and with just as little rational basis. Most lawyers are good, honest, hard-working people who care about their clients. Many of us, myself included, awaken in the night worrying about our cases and whether we have done what needed to be done that day. Solo practitioners such as myself rarely get a vacation, and those of us who do custody cases really stress out about the outcomes. Believe me — I’ve been doing this for a long time, and I still worry about cases that I did years ago.

Lawyers are held to a very high ethical standard. If you feel your divorce or custody lawyer has not done what he or she is supposed to do, by all means, file a complaint with the Missouri Bar. Bear in mind that successful outcome is not necessarily the determinant. In every contested divorce or custody case, there will be a winner or loser. Your lawyer can do a very conscientious job, perform admirably, and honor his or her ethical mandate, but still lose.

Lawyers’ ethics are important. I, for one, strive at all times to return calls or answer e-mails, treat each client as though they are the most important client that I have, and treat the client, the opposing side and the court with respect, dignity and honor. I hope each of your lawyers does the same.

Someone recently asked me if I did complicated property cases. I’ve done them, of course; after 25 years of practicing family law, of course most every kind of case has come my way. But I don’t like them. Why not? Well, because they involve fights over stuff.

Nobody should fight about stuff. Oh, come to think of it, they shouldn’t fight about their children, either; but at least children are important.

What’s my advice about “stuff”? Simple. You’ve got to make a detailed list of everything that the two of you own, in order to complete the property statements. So, when you are making that list, break it down into two categories. Those categories are as follows:

STUFF I WOULD HATE TO LOSE IN A FIRE
and
STUFF THAT I CAN EASILY REPLACE AND IS NOT WORTH A FIGHT.

In the first list, you should put things such as “my dead grandmother’s lace handkerchiefs”. In the second list, you should put — well, most everything.

Here’s my message: Stuff is not worth a fight.

Make your list, and then ask yourself this: What’s more important, this stuff, or this person to whom I was married, and for whom I have at some point felt love?

Then offer to give your soon-to-be-ex-spouse first pick over the half of the stuff he or she wants, and offer to take the other half.

You can replace couches, pots, pans and dinnerware. You can never replace your self-respect.

Will I fight for my clients’ “stuff” if they direct me to do so? Yes, I suppose. But I don’t really take cases that are about “stuff”. When there is personal or real property involved in a case that I am handling, I counsel my client to be fair, reasonable, and not to spend their children’s college savings fighting over furniture.

They usually take my advice, and we can usually work out the property issues, and move on to what is really important — the children.

When I represent people who don’t have children, I counsel them to make the argument over the “stuff” as reasonable and easy for both as possible, and I have even been known to send a client to another lawyer if they wanted a widely disparate property distribution without even an arguably justifiable basis.

Because when it comes down to it, there are legally defensible reasons for a disparate property distribution, and those legally defensible reasons are grounded in logic and reason. They include a greater contribution to the acquisition of the asset by one party, a greater financial need by one party, and secondary financial resources that enable one party to re-acquire property more easily than the other party. Egregious fault on the part of one party could also lead to a disparate distribution, though I have always found this provision to be ironic, since the emotional devastation can hardly be assuaged by getting a greater share of the “stuff”.

Absent a legally defensible basis for an unequal property distribution, I usually counsel fairness and as close to a 50/50 share as possible. I encourage my clients to understand that being fair, and reasonable, and civil, will ultimately enable them to heal more quickly than being vindictive and hateful. Most of my clients listen to this, and understand what I am trying to tell them.

Divorce is a hard thing to endure. In the final analysis, divorcing parties should do what they can to make it easier on everyone — because in so doing, they enable themselves to heal. And healing is the real stuff of which divorce, and recovery from its pain, is all about.

One of my favorite comics once remarked that she judges her dates by asking herself, “Is this the man with whom I want my children to spend every other weekend?” A good laugh-line, yes, but sadly somewhat indicative of American life in the 20th and now 21st century.

Statisticians tell us that 50% of American marriages end in divorce. Sad to contemplate, this statistic also illustrates a very important principle: Americans should plan for divorce.

You are aghast at the thought? When, you ask, do I begin this preparation? Do I discuss it with the wedding planner? We already pre-plan our divorces with respect to property and debt, by way of pre-nuptial agreements that provide for the disposition of previously acquired property or the accumulation of value on such property. We plan for the disposition of our wealth and our minor children in the event of our deaths. Why is it less desirable to plan for the parenting of our children in the event of divorce?

In the state of Missouri, a parenting plan is not legally binding until approved by the court. I’m not advocating that this law be changed — calmer heads should prevail and often, the judge is the only calm person in a courtroom while a divorce is being tried. But while we are still in love, while the bloom of our affection is still rosy and fragrant, what better time to sit and reflect on how we would like to manage our children’s times in the event that our love should wane? The resultant document would only be persuasive evidence, subject to equally persuasive, credible evidence of later events changing the reasonableness of the parenting arrangements contained within the pre-divorce planning document created by the parents before the family began to disintegrate.

But absent those serious and egregious hallmarks of a failed parent that I often warn you to consider — alcohol and drug abuse, violence, gambling — wouldn’t a document created from the posture of mutual respect tell the court what we often surmise but cannot prove: That once upon a time, these now snarling partners actually loved each other and viewed each other as viable candidates for co-parenting?

Many, if not all, of my blog entries focus on parenting. This is because most of my work is in contested custody situations. The division of property and debt holds little interest for me as an academic consideration — what is important is how we parent our children. Society lives and dies by this one consideration. And so, what better focus than the parenting of our children in the event that we no longer function inside of a marital or co-habitative relationship? Look at your partner and consider: – At this date, now, as I view you, would you be the better principal residential custodian? Would I? How would we divide the children’s time? Which of us is better equipped to provide health insurance — or is our financial position equal? What collateral relatives should we consider in the equation? Do our children spend each summer with Grandma, and should we make note of this tradition in our pre-divorce planning, so that neither of us can later deny our sons and daughters this adventure?

I would prefer that every marriage met with success. But since they don’t, I’d like you to consider asking yourself what parenting arrangements you would make with your partner — while you still view your partner with favor. Even if you don’t create a draft parenting plan with your partner; even if you just write your thoughts in your journal; undertake this query, and then, should the undesirable happen, take out that draft. Remind yourself that in better times, you considered this man, this woman, a viable candidate for meaningful co-parenting — and seriously consider whether your differing opinion now is valid, or merely the product of your own unhappiness and disappointment.

Another holiday season has come and gone. I have to admit that I made all arrangements for all holiday time that I could arrange for all my clients, and then — closed my office for two weeks! This was a first for me; although my capable assistant did go to the office one or two days during that time period just to forestall major disaster.

There was the usual panoply of complaint. Presumptive or actual principal-custodial parents hogging holiday happiness; disgruntled presumptive or actual non-principal-residential parents wanting more time, different time, better time. It amazes me that people who claimed to love one another enough to produce offspring can’t be cordial enough with each other to figure out how to make sure their children have wonderful holidays no matter where they are.

Listen, folks, in case you don’t get it yet: CHILDREN ARE NOT FOOTBALLS. They are not intended to be passed back and forth, held tightly in a tackle, or kicked over a goal post just so you can say you beat the other team. I cannot stress this enough. CHILDREN ARE PEOPLE. More than that, they are immature people, with limited understanding of the of the grown-up world, who just want to see their parents, uncles, aunts, grandparents and cousins. They don’t really care where this happens. If they had their way, they would sit in one place surrounded by everyone who rocks their world, grinning and grinning.

Holidays are SUPPOSED TO BE FUN. Don’t spoil it by insisting that you get 8.25 days and “he” or “she” (the other parent) only gets 6.75 days. Be mature. Be the adult. Heck, maybe one day your kids will make great parents, because YOU set a good example!!!

Happy New Year!

Corinne Corley

You will notice that most of my advice contains the caveat that it might not apply if there is abuse, alcohol or drug abuse, gambling, or problems of that nature.

The question often arises: What is abuse?

I have been known to argue that keeping a child from a caring parent can be abuse. That is not to say that I buy into the long-debunked “parental alienation syndrome”. I do not. However, it is true that emotional damage can be caused by the act of one parent standing in the way of a normal relationship with the other parent under circumstances where there is no reason to do so. Even if “there is reason to do so” — i.e., the other parent has some issues of their own which prevent their serving an active parental role — the parent with residential placement needs to take steps to assist the child in reconciling the absence of the dysfunctional parent.

These steps should include professional assistance, at least at first and ongoing if recommended. The residential parent should also take a very low-key attitude toward the other parent, using neutral language. Unacceptable: “Your mommy is bad.” Probably okay: “Your mommy is sick.” Better: “Your mommy loves you and will see you just as soon as she can.” Take your cues from the child’s therapist.

In non-dysfunctional situations, where each parent is capable of serving the parental role, allegations of abuse arise just as often as they do in what I would categorize as “genuine abuse” situations. These allegations involve one parent making choices the other parent does not condone. These allegations can range from allowing the child to stay up late or engage in activities that the other parent thinks are harmful, to allowing the child to ride a dirt bike or a three-wheel off-road vehicle. While it is good to attempt to be on the same page on major issues, two married parents are not always on the same page; it is likely that two non-married parents will often have divergent ideas about child-rearing.

I hear many such allegations of abuse that, in my opinion, are not actually abuse. I have heard parents condemn the other parent for allowing the child to use real terminology for body parts and for allowing the child to call a new boyfriend Uncle or a new girlfriend Auntie. I don’t consider these parental decisions to be emotional abuse. They are personal decisions that each parent should be free to make in their own home. They do not inherently threaten the child’s physical or emotional well-being.

Parents who spend a lot of time examining the child for bruises or marks where none have been or are found; parents who grill a child about what the other parent did during the child’s time with them; parents who ‘warn’ teachers or doctors about the other parent; these are parents who are often the same folks who make allegations of abuse where none have occurred and cause trauma to the child. That is not to say that a careful parent should not be alert for signs of abuse, but searching for evidence that abuse has occurred while the child is with your former spouse is often an unhealthy undertaking.

It is not necessarily true that parenting decisions not in line with your own are suspect. Be careful about suggesting to the child, directly or indirectly, that you do not trust the other parent to properly care for them. Educate yourself about parenting decisions that you might find objectionable but which are not patently abusive. Above all, keep your child out of the middle. If you suspect abuse, do not discuss it with or in front of your child. Don’t debate it with your sister, brother, new wife or mother while the child is playing in the next room.

Go to the child’s doctor or some other trusted professional, and discuss with that person what it is you think could be abusive. Be careful: False accusations can haunt YOU, because you can become known for making them, and, like the boy who cried wolf, might well be disbelieved at a time when it is necessary for you to be credible. Above all, be very careful that you are not making accusations from a place of vengeance, because doing so will ultimately hurt your child more than your child’s other parent, and your child does not deserve such pain.

I guess I have been lucky.

In twenty-five years of practicing law, I have never — before this week — been cursed out by a client. Oh, I’ve had clients use swear words when talking with me; that’s to be expected in the practice of Love’s Aftermath Law. But actually calling me names — that’s never happened. Until now.

A client called post-trial but pre-judgment, asking me to work a miracle. Odds are, we’ll get an outcome not favorable to my client’s position. If that occurs, it will largely be because the facts of my client’s life can easily be interpreted by an objective observer in a negative way. I did my best. I found, and presented, as many positive witnesses as the court would tolerate hearing in the several-day trial. I argued and cross-examined; schemed and plotted. And I did so despite the fact that even now, after the 4-day trial, my client still owes me about 1/3 of the very reasonable flat-fee that I charged for two years of diligent service.

When the client called, what was being requested was that I file a motion to re-open evidence in the form of records that my client thought would be helpful. I had tried to get the records before the trial, but the entity from whom they were sought claimed none existed. My client had no money to pay for the records anyway, but there apparently were none to acquire.

This week, for the first time, my client said that the entity had advised my client — not me — that the records do exist, but that my client did not tell me, lacking funds with which to pay for the records. Now, mind: I don’t think these records would be as much help as my client does, but still — as far as I knew, they did not exist.

I told my client that the records might or might not be allowed into evidence on a motion to re-open, but I also said that I needed to be paid the rest of my fee before I would do more work. I could have withdrawn from representation. Most lawyers would have done so months ago. But I did not; I stayed in the case through trial.

My client began yelling at me, raising the voice so loud that I put the phone a foot or more away from my ear. The client said that payments would be made — $100/month on a balance due of $3,750. I tried to quietly advise that I could not any longer work without being paid. The client got louder and louder and finally proclaimed: “Why are you being such a bitch!!!”

And then hung up.

I was stunned. I guess I should have thicker skin. I guess I should know that stress makes people act oddly. I guess I should expect that people will dump venom on the heads of the closest victims when they feel that things have not gone their way. But I did not expect any of that. I expected, I think, gratitude.

Love’s Aftermath Law is a dicey area. We who practice it see people at their worst. We see them when the blissful “I Do’s” have become the baleful “I Don’t’s”. We see them when anger, shame, and disappointment hold them in a tight grip, squeezing with relentless strength. Many of them cry in our offices, pace our hallways, and, at times, berate our support staffs.

My fees are more than reasonable. I don’t make a luxurious living, as my family can attest. I represent real people, people who can’t write large checks for retainers. I am okay with that. But no amount of money is enough to induce me to allow a client to scream and swear at me.

When my mother was dying of cancer, she called me from her hospital bed in St. Louis to ask me to talk to the nursing staff about keeping her room clean. I drove five hours that day to visit her, and found dirty sheets, discarded Kleenexes on the floor, and my mother lying in her own sweat and excrement. After I pleaded, begged, cajoled and finally demanded, the room got cleaned.

My mother quietly urged me to be respectful in my entreaties. When I expressed dismay that she was so willing to let the nurses off the hook for their complete failure to provide essential care, my mother replied: “Even brain cancer is no excuse for rudeness.”

I remember that any time I myself am rude — and in her honor, I go back to the person whom I have wronged, if I can find them, and apologize. If they are faceless — on the phone, in a busy store — I internalize the event and “pay it forward” — being extra nice to the next person. I’m no saint — don’t misunderstand me — but I try to live up to my mother’s standards.

I did not raise my voice in response to my client. I did not call my client back and express outrage or disgust. But I know that my client’s behavior was over the top even for a Love’s Aftermath litigant, and I know that I did not deserve my client’s fury.

The lesson to be learned: Thou shalt not swear, even at your divorce lawyer.

Have a great weekend, everyone!

Corinne Corley

A client recently asked how to deal with his children’s questions about the break-up — or breakdown — of their parents’ marriage.

“Easy and hard,” I told him. “Easy rules, hard implementation.”

The rules are two: Reassure, and re-direct.

Reassure your children that you and their other parent love them. Lie if you must — by which I mean, even if you don’t believe the other parent loves them, tell your kids he/she does. Then, re-direct. Depending on the age of your child, this will be of varying degrees of difficulty. The older the child is, the harder it is to re-direct them. If the break-up — or the marriage — has been loud and noisy, it will be harder also. But it can be done.

With a teenager, you’ll need to do a bit more re-assuring and a bit more strenuous re-directing, but the two rules work with teenagers also. Try it; you’ll see.

Another client asked, “Why should I agree to let my child live with my ex-spouse, when my child wants to live with me?”

Good question. Let me counter that question with some basic information gleaned from 25 years of practicing divorce law. Brace yourself:

Your child does not REALLY want to “live with” you. Your child wants only two things: To be loved, and to be safe.

If the child thinks she can achieve these goals by living with you, the child will gravitate toward you. If the child thinks she can achieve these goals by living with the other parent, guess what? That’s what she’ll say she wants. If the child thinks she can achieve these goals by refusing to express a preference, or by expressing whatever preference she thinks you want to hear, then by golly, guess what? That’s what she’ll do.

So — go back to rules number one and two: Reassure, and re-direct.

“Your mother and I love you. We’d love you if you lived with me, if you lived with her, if you lived under a rock on the moon. We love you. Now, wanna go get some ice cream?”

Or a pizza. Or go read a book. Or go to your BFF’s house. Fill in the blank.

Reassure, and re-direct.

Trust me. It works.

It is true that children do not come with manuals. It is also true that few people take lessons in parenting, although most states require divorcing parents to take short classes on parenting outside of marriage — “FOCIS” classes that are supposed to help parents learn to focus their attention on the needs of the child. Notwithstanding such classes, most parents struggle to properly parent their children after they become single parents through divorce or the break-up of the non-marital co-parenting relationship.

I am certainly not a perfect parent. But I have the benefit not only of my own mistakes, but of the mistakes that I have seen my clients make. I’ve got a few thoughts about how divorcing parents can turn that lens to sharpen their focus, and prioritize in a way that will help them both in the courtroom, where the judge has to assess who should be the residential custodian, and beyond, when the true test occurs: parenting without a partner and without the watchful eye of a judge or guardian ad litem.

Rule Number One: It’s all about the kids.

No, that does NOT mean give the kids everything they want. Nor does it mean that they get to call the shots, or that you should abandon your own needs, wants or desires. What it means is something more basic. It means parenting is about the KIDS, and the goal is to turn the kids into functional adults capable of meeting their own needs, recognizing their talents, identifying and correcting their mistakes, and, in general, sleeping peacefully each night secure in the knowledge that they are lovable and capable intelligent beings who make a respectable contribution to society. Parenting is not about proving you are wonderful, or creating a legacy — although both things will flow from good parenting.

Rule Number Two: It is NOT about the kids’ other parent.

And no, this does not mean that the other parent and that other parent’s role in your children’s life are not important. What it does mean is that your parenting decisions should not be made from the viewpoint of “out-parenting” your ex-spouse/partner. Put aside that competitive drive. Don’t seek revenge. Let the other parent concern themselves with their own performance. You focus your energy on being the best parent you can be, and only worry about the other parent when you see such obvious signs as large unexplained bruises on your child when they come from the other parent’s home. By and large, Rule Number Two also means not paying too much attention to most protestations from the child about not wanting to go to the other parent’s home. For the most part, such protests mean that the child thinks it’s his/her job to convince you that he/she loves you best. They do not usually mean that the child is being abused or neglected in the other parent’s home.

Following these rules should help you in your quest to be a good parent. This is Parenting 101; there are many more lessons to learn, but everyone has to start somewhere.

On my forum, at www.divorcenet.com, the Missouri Community Forum, a recent discussion centered on being involved in your child’s life after divorce. This prompts today’s blog entry.

In crafting your parenting plan, be sure to include these provisions:

1. Each parent may contact the child while the child is in the other parent’s home. This should include phone and e-mail contact where possible. If either parent fears the other parent will claim harassment, the provision should recite the minimum frequency and duration of telephone contact. Hence, the provision could say, “Each parent may contact the child by telephone while the child is in the other parent’s home. Such contact may, at a minimum, and at the contacting parent’s discretion, be one call per each day on which the child spends an overnight in the other parent’s home, between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., and may last, at a minimum, 15 minutes per call. If the contacting parent reaches voice mail or answering machine, the parent at whose home a message is left shall facilitate a return call within the same day as the message is left.”

2. Each parent shall have the right to attend all doctors, dentists, eye examiner, mental health, and other health care appointments. Each parent shall provide advance notice to the other parent of at least seven days of any scheduled appointment so that the other parent may attend. Each parent shall provide immediate telephone notice of emergency appointments or appointments to address illnesses, not susceptible of advance notice.

3. Either parent may attend school functions, or functions for an extra-curricular activity at which family members are welcome. The parent receiving notice of such functions or schedules for such functions shall provide the other parent with copies of such notices or schedules as soon as practicable after receipt of them. However, if the school or extra-curricular activity allows for each parent to make arrangements for direct receipt of such notices or schedules, then each parent shall make individual arrangements to directly receive such notices of schedules. If either parent experiences difficulties or delays in the direct receipt of such notices or schedules after making arrangements for such receipt, the parents shall work together to insure that such difficulties or delays are resolved. The goal is to insure that both parents are fully informed of the events in the child’s life so as to foster the parent/child relationship between the child and each parent.

4. The parents acknowledge that this parenting plan provides that the child principally resides in one of their households. The public policy of the state of Missouri is to promote frequent, continuing and meaningful contact between the child and each parent; and to encourage each parent to foster the parent/child relationship between the child and each parent. Neither parent’s household shall be referred to as a home that the child “visits”, to or in front of the child. Each parent’s household shall be referenced as the child’s home to or in front of the child. Each parent shall encourage the child to think of each parent’s home as a “home” of the child, rather than one parent’s home as the child’s “home” and the other parent’s home as somewhere the child “visits”. Time that the child spends with each parent is “parenting time”, and the word “visitation” or “visits” or any derivation of those words, discourages the child from thinking of the other parent and time spent with the parent as being a critical and important part of the child’s life, so the use of “visits” or “visitation” shall be discouraged. The child shall be encouraged to think of time with his/her parents as “my time with Mom” or “my time with Dad”.

Before, after and during divorce or the break-up of your household with your child’s other parent, be sure that you:

* Attend all doctor’s appointments.
* Meet and familiarize yourself with your child’s teachers or daycare providers.
* Find out the names of your child’s preferred playmates, the playmates’ parents, and the playmates addresses and telephone numbers.
* Arrange for the child to have play-time with those playmates while on your time or at your home, to encourage continuity in the child’s life.
* Visit the child’s school.
* Email the child’s teachers and/or principals on a regular basis.
* Schedule your social calendar so that your time spent with your child is maximized and quality. Do not leave the child with a babysitter any more often than absolutely necessary at the initial stages of the breakup. This is important for two reasons: First, the child needs to know you are still his/her parent and are not surrendering or abandoning your role. Second, the other parent needs to get the same message.
* Send your child birthday cards and celebrate birthday, Christmas, and other holidays in a regular and routine way. This establishes your household as a place where the child will still have routines for holidays with which the child can feel comfortable and about which the child can be excited.
* Involve your extended family in the child’s life.
* Honor the child’s other parent and treat the child’s other parent with respect.
* If the relationship between you and the child’s other parent is poor, get the two of you into counseling. Ask for it at the litigation phase. Insist on it if you must. Use it.
* Let go of your hostility toward the other parent.
* If you are the principal residence of the child, foster a situation in which both parents can be active in the child’s life. Your child will be a better person if you do.

If your lawyer will not work towards a parenting plan that honors you as a parent, get a new lawyer.

Good luck!!!! Remember: Children need PARENTS, not VISITORS.