Ohio Husband and Wife have Children. Husband and Wife divorce.
Wife and Children move to another state. Wife withholds timesharing and visitation from Husband starting in late 2006.
In Fall of 2009, there is a trial regarding Wife’s alleged noncompliance with visitation and timesharing ordered in Husband and Wife’s divorce.
Husband prevails at trial, and Wife is ordered to allow Husband makeup timesharing and visitation.
But Husband’s victory is hollow. In the intervening months and years, Wife has successfully alienated Children from Husband.
Husband is bitter.
Husband suggests that a presumption of rotating equal timesharing between the parents and expedited enforcement proceedings would have prevented his plight.
But is Husband’s perception correct? Or did Husband himself miss opportunities to avoid or promptly remedy the situation?
Nothing is known of Husband’s specific case beyond what was published in the attributed letter below. Rather, the remarks below are based on a composite of countless Husbands (and Wives) who have had similar experiences.
Husband indicates that timesharing was first denied after Wife and Children relocated.
Huh? How is it that Children relocated? Did Wife’s relocation with Children comply with Ohio law?
Did Husband timely challenge it legally? Had he done so, successfully, that might have solved the problem before it started.
And whatever one’s opinion about rotating equal timesharing may be, it simply is not practicable long distance. So such a presumption would not have helped Husband here.
Wife’s first alleged violation was in 2006. Trial was late in 2009.
While justice in family court is, admittedly, not especially swift, by the same token, three years seems like an excessive delay.
Was there really a three year wait for a trial date? Or did Husband delay pursuing enforcement through the courts, instead waiting and hoping that things would somehow just improve on their own?
An astonishing number of parties wait an astonishingly long time before taking enforcement action through the courts. And then chafe when resolution isn’t instantaneous when they finally do take legal action.