Mediation after coercion

[Stepuporstepaway]

So DP, who I don’t live with, has an exw who I think may be considered somewhat coercive.

Surprisingly after 5 years of uncooperative and controlling behaviour she has agreed mediation.

Can he expect to achieve anything from this?

If so what?

I would dearly like him to gain some power in his child and money arrangements as the control and counterparenting does affect me. It makes it very hard for me to be around his kids as blamelessly they are very challenging, makes it hard for us to plan joint lives together because I am scared of the exw targeting my assets, and impacts his mental health. But I also suspect this goes nowhere and perhaps makes everything worse.

What’s happened so far:

Exw has made a lot of unilateral decisions concerning the children. Where they attend school, whether or not they have therapy, what trips they go on and which dates. Has told them which secondaries they will be attending without agreement from DP.

Exw has used kids as pawns to manipulate DP into paying too much money.
They do 50/50 but exw still gets maintenance from when she had the kids more. Says if DP stops paying she’ll take the kids back. Says will give up work if necessary to keep him paying (I have seen this on email, phrased a bit less directly). They don’t have much of an income differential and exw via inheritance has no mortgage.

Counter parenting: DP does meals at table, bedtimes, behavior rewards, screen limits. Exw does unlimited screens and sweets and no bedtime. I know this because when kids - 9 and 11 - are told no by DP they ring mum and ask to go back to hers to get x thing and she says of course that’s fine. She then says get DP to drive you over. He usually refuses and then they tantrum at him. Everything seems to be set up to undermine and control him.

My question though is does any of this change via mediation?

DP ever the optimist reckons mediation will solve it all. He’ll get a clear parenting agreement, the kids will become easier, this will all be much easier for me to deal with, we can spend more time together, we can marry and buy a nice big house together and host his kids there with own rooms and give them a family life, without exw somehow destroying it.

Honestly I fear the mediation will be used by exw to maintain power money and control. I think people show you who they are and never change.

Anyone have any experience of any more positive outcome?

Ps if he has in writing that she threatened to take them back just for money then that's good eveidence for him. And also the children are now used to 50/50 so hard for her to argue it's in their best interest to go back to a full time worker full time over their dad suddenly for no reason.

What he has in writing is a very clever covert threat that read on the surface is an argument in favour of the maintenance continuing forever. Emails claiming that the 50-50 was naturally evolving back into the original 70-30 because children were now choosing to stay at their mum’s more. This was going to make it hard for mum to stay in full time work which she was willing to give up to focus on the children’s needs. I told DP to expect this around a year before the original maintenance order expired and of course the counter parenting has ramped up to ensure the kids ask to go back to mum’s to get more X box time. I could have written the entire script in advance.

So now when he tries to formalise the 50-50 in a CAO the exw will say this leaves her and the kids vulnerable. It won’t be possible to force the kids to live with dad as teenagers. Mum will end up housing them with dad paying nothing towards this and her unable to work. How could a mediator/court let that happen?

The current 50/50 is expensive for DP. He pays 2k mortgage, 1.5k nanny and 1.5k maintenance. He’s just exhausted all his savings.

If kids go back to exw he could drop nanny and afford continued maintenance. But if as I expect kids suddenly want to do 50-50 again once exw has secured continued payments he’ll be forced to sell his home and downsize to maintain the status quo. DP will have to choose between this or having the kids EoW to remain solvent. I’ve not said this out loud as I’d like to be wrong but I think I see where it’s going.

For my part I’ve decided just to stand back and let this happen. I don’t live with DP so my livelihood isn’t on the hook here. It would be a nightmare if it was. He’d end up wanting to sell ‘our’ home or ask me to help pay the maintenance.

I’m going to keep quiet and let it all play out. Tell DP he’s welcome to move in with me if exw forces him to keep paying but only if he promises not to try and get the 50-50 back if he’s still paying. He would be too financially risky to combine lives with in this case. I’d have to leave him to his financial fate.

Have I missed anything? Any further possibility I have overlooked?

I honestly think you're a bit over invested here and overthinking.

Your livelihood never has been, nor ever will be on the hook. Whether you live together or not, exw can't get a "hold of your assets". So forget that. A solicitor will confirm.

It's natural as kids get older to usually want to spend more time at one house, maybe closer to friends or they like the rules there better, as you say... there isn't really anything either of you can do about that. From around age 11 court will take children's wishes into account (it's about them after all!). They parent differently, and unless there are some serious safeguarding concerns a court won't be bothered if she gives them more screen time. It's not coercion.

My ex and I parent very differently, I definitely allow more screen time and later bedtimes. I think he's too strict but it's neither of our business how the other parents at their house. This is normal stuff that happens when relationships break down.

I do 50/50 as do quite a few of my friends and colleagues, honestly even with a good relationship between parents and between parents and children, it's tough on them. I wouldn't like living between two houses. I think as kids get older they do start to "buck up" a bit regarding 50/50 and gravitate towards one home, I've seen it a lot. It's hard not to take it personally.

It sounds like she has different standards to your DP. He will get laughed out of court if he says she tries to use "Xbox time" to coerce the kids. She just parents differently. Thats allowed, that's acceptable.

If he gets a CAO and kids are unhappy and ringing mum on his time, he just needs to be firm and say. Sorry, no, mum won't be collecting you. It's his contact time.

So if I am reading this right essentially he can have 50/50- and afford 50/50 (due to costs of nanny), if the global maintained order is dropped.

Or the other option is he pays the global maintenance but doesn't have 50/50, as he won't need the nanny with less contact time.

Both options will sort of leave him in a similar financial position.

The other alternative, which is what you seem to be thinking will happen, is that he has 50/50, pays for Nanny costs, and the maintenance costs. So double whammy. Leaving him less financially solvent.

I would consider if he has 50/50 does he really get more time with his children? Because of using nanny? Are the children happy with this arrangement too? Or are they happier being at mums more at their age (when they are becoming nearly old enough to decide.

What is best for the children and what would make them happiest?

It sounds like he is a high earner due to the amount of maintenance ordered. Did mum work when they had the children? Because there are going to be certain reasons why spousal maintenance is included, it's rare these days.

I feel like you've posted before. If you are the same poster you weren't living with your DP but were concerned about all of the maintenance because it left your DP with less money to spend on doing things with you.

Why is he so adamant on getting 50/50 back if he uses and nanny anyway and the kids seem unhappy?

Is it on principle as he resents paying the money to exw?

I have a feeling the ex's point of view would be painting a rather different picture here.

I cannot imagine at all a 9&11 yr old preferring to be with a nanny at their dads house, rather than at their mothers house, with her, and closer to their friends.

You have described it op as if she is the bad guy here, it's very possibly the other way round. A typical story of a man pretending to want 50/50 to avoid maintenance, when he can't actually deliver 50/50 and it isn't in the interest of his children anyway.

I used to have a nanny, shared with exh. I needed another adult to help me out in order to stay on the career ladder. So did he. Lots of married professionals have a nanny too. I don’t think I’d accuse them of not parenting properly because they used childcare.

OP what would your ideal outcome in this situation be?

Maybe if you explained that we could give some better advice?

The advice on this thread has been great.

Thanks all.

Will discuss with DP.

No. But that's childcare for work which is a totally different thing. Here we have a parent at home who could look after them, and instead the other parent has decided he'd rather pay a nanny. That must seem rather strange from a child's pov.