We both wanted out of the marriage, but we didn’t want our children to “pay” for our mistakes. … The “process” allowed my ex and I to remain focused on this goal, rather than being focused on “getting” the other person. … Once we started working together to craft a solution we both thought was fair, we had incentive to work together – giving and taking – to reach a truly fair outcome.  Through the collaborative divorce process we learned many creative ways to divide and preserve assets that we never would have thought possible.  For instance, keeping the only home that the boys had ever known was extremely important to me and my children, but less important to my ex.  Neither of us would have guessed that I could “buy” him out of his share of the equity in the house by giving him other assets that appeared on the balance sheet – achieving both of our goals (mine to keep the house, his to get rid of it). …Through our realtor and mortgage expert we learned how we could refinance our current house to a lower interest rate, and still allow my ex to purchase another house.  I sincerely believe that we would not have known about or explored ANY of these options (and many more) unless we had used the collaborative divorce process….I was burdened by both personal health issues and family health issues during our divorce.  The collaborative process allowed us to craft our solution on our own timeline – around my chaotic and unpredictable schedule.  This took a horrible burden off of my shoulders at a time that I *really* needed that flexibility and understanding from the divorce process. … Neither of us felt that anyone was out to “get” us.  I never felt that my ex’s lawyer was looking for ways to exploit me:  she focused on both of our stated goals, as did my lawyer.  “Everyone” was looking for a win-win outcome for every topic we had to address.  I can’t emphasize enough how much this meant to me during what was a terribly difficult transition in my life!

Remember, not every attorney is trained or appropriate to represent someone in a Collaborative Divorce. Contact The Shea Law Firm at (832) 592-7913 to speak with a Collaborative Divorce attorney in The Woodlands or locate a trained collaborative divorce attorney near you at http://www.collablawtexas.com/locate-a-collaborative-law-professional

Confused? Learn the differences between an uncontested divorce, a litigated divorce, and a collaborative divorce in my free Woodlands Divorce Guide

Background

On November 6, 2007, Mother filed a petition to modify the child custody arrangement. Mother’s petition to modify followed Father’s earlier petition for enforcement and access after Mother denied him access to their child. The judge ruled for Father on his petition for enforcement and access.

In her later petition, Mother alleged that K.T.W.’s circumstances had materially and substantially changed since the entry of the previous order. She requested that Father’s “terms and conditions for access to and possession of the child be modified… to reflect visitation in regard to the over 100 mile visitation,” and that, since Father resided in Houston, he should “be responsible for pickup and return for visitation of the child.” Mother further pleaded that Father’s “change of address had caused [her] to incur increased costs.” Father answered and denied that there had been any “change of circumstances which would be grounds for any modification of the present Orders regarding access and possession.”

Discussion

At the trial court level Mother won her case and the judge modified custody to restrict Father’s access to his child. The Father appealed the ruling.

On appeal, Father claimed the trial court abused its discretion in signing the modification order because the record is devoid of evidence that the modification order was in the best interest of the child.

Pursuant to the modification order, the trial court reduced K.T.W.’s visitation with Father to only one weekend per month. To support the change, the trial court found the limitation was in K.T.W.’s best interest because of the “distance and travel time” from Mother’s residence to Father’s residence. The record of the hearing, however, shows that Father had lived in Houston continuously since 2002, when K.T.W. was born. Moreover, while Mother noted that she had moved to Allen from McKinney, Texas prior to the hearing, she agreed the move actually reduced the distance between her and Father. Mother also testified regarding alleged hardships in weekend travel and scheduling K.T.W.’s Taekwondo classes, but her testimony showed the Taekwondo lessons had been successfully rearranged to accommodate the visitation schedule. There is no other evidence regarding any extracurricular, sports, or school-related scheduling conflicts or difficulties. Mother acknowledged that the only change in K.T.W.’s circumstances since the entry of the previous order was that he had grown older. As for the “sporadic and unpredictable behavior” noted in the trial court’s findings, the evidence showed that Father had been late to pre-arranged pick-ups on two occasions, and that on each occasion he attempted, without success, to contact Mother to update her on the status of his arrival.

“The Texas Legislature has specifically stated that it is the public policy of the state to ‘encourage frequent contact between a child and each parent for periods of possession that optimize the development of a close and continuing relationship between each parent and child.’” “To achieve this end, the legislature established a presumption that a standard possession order provides the reasonable minimum possession of a child for a parent named as a joint managing conservator, as in the case here, and such order is in the best interest of the child.” Given this policy and the absence of any evidence to support a finding that it was in the best interest of K.T.W. to limit his weekend contact with Father to only one weekend per month, the Court of Appeals concluded the trial court abused its discretion in modifying the possession and visitation provisions of the previous order.

About The Author

The Woodlands Divorce Resource is here to help you with your divorce, child custody, or other family law issue in Montgomery County or Harris County. Many of our visitors come from the areas of The Woodlands, Conroe, Oak Ridge North, Cut and Shoot, and other communities in the Montgomery County area or Houston and North Harris County. If you need legal assistance with your family law issue call (832) 592-7913 to speak with a divorce lawyer in The Woodlands, TX today and protect your rights.

Unless limited by court order, each parent appointed as a conservator of a child has the following rights and duties during the time that the parent has possession of the child:

1. The duty of care, control, protection, and reasonable discipline of the child;
2. the duty to support the child, including providing the child with clothing, food, shelter, and medical and dental care not involving an invasive procedure;
3. the right to consent for the child to medical and dental care not involving an invasive procedure; and
4. the right to direct the moral and religious training of the child.

You will both have these rights and duties during possession unless additional restrictions are needed and included in your court orders. Speak with a Woodlands Divorce Lawyer today if you need help protecting your parental rights during or after your divorce.

About The Author

The Woodlands Divorce Resource is here to help you with your divorce, child custody, or other family law issue in Montgomery County or Harris County. Many of our visitors come from the areas of The Woodlands, Conroe, Spring, Oak Ridge North, Cut and Shoot, and other communities in the Montgomery County area or Houston and North Harris County. If you need legal assistance with your family law issue speak with a divorce lawyer in The Woodlands, TX today and protect your rights.

During your marriage you both had a voice in determining where you and your child would live. One of the changes that accompanies every divorce in Montgomery County is that only one parent will have the exclusive right to determine the primary residence of your child after your divorce is final. This has the potential to be very disruptive to maintaining a relationship with your child and is something you should discuss with your Woodlands Divorce Lawyer.

What If You Are Joint Managing Conservators?

The rule is the same. When the divorce court appoints joint managing conservators, the court must designate the conservator who has the exclusive right to determine the primary residence of the child and must either establish a geographic area within which the conservator shall maintain the child’s primary residence or specify that there are no geographic restrictions.

Speak with a Woodlands Divorce Lawyer if you have concerns about where your child will live after your divorce.

The Woodlands Divorce Resource is here to help you with your divorce, child custody, or other family law issue in Montgomery County or Harris County. Many of our visitors come from the areas of The Woodlands, Conroe, Oak Ridge North, Cut and Shoot, and other communities in the Montgomery County area or Houston and North Harris County. If you need legal assistance with your family law issue speak with a divorce lawyer in The Woodlands, TX today and protect your rights.

If the possessory conservator resides more than 100 miles from the residence of the child, the possessory conservator shall have the right to possession of the child as follows:

(1) either regular weekend possession beginning on the first, third, and fifth Friday as provided under the terms applicable to parents who reside 100 miles or less apart or not more than one weekend per month of the possessory conservator’s choice beginning at 6 p.m. on the day school recesses for the weekend and ending at 6 p.m. on the day before school resumes after the weekend, provided that the possessory conservator gives the managing conservator 14 days’ written or telephonic notice preceding a designated weekend, and provided that the possessory conservator elects an option for this alternative period of possession by written notice given to the managing conservator within 90 days after the parties begin to reside more than 100 miles apart, as applicable;

(2) each year beginning on the day the child is dismissed from school for the school’s spring vacation and ending at 6 p.m. on the day before school resumes after that vacation;

(3) if the possessory conservator:

(A) gives the managing conservator written notice by April 1 of each year specifying an extended period or periods of summer possession, the possessory conservator shall have possession of the child for 42 days beginning not earlier than the day after the child’s school is dismissed for the summer vacation and ending not later than seven days before school resumes at the end of the summer vacation, to be exercised in not more than two separate periods of at least seven consecutive days each; or

(B) does not give the managing conservator written notice by April 1 of each year specifying an extended period or periods of summer possession, the possessory conservator shall have possession of the child for 42 consecutive days beginning at 6 p.m. on June 15 and ending at 6 p.m. on July 27;

(4) if the managing conservator gives the possessory conservator written notice by April 15 of each year the managing conservator shall have possession of the child on one weekend beginning Friday at 6 p.m. and ending at 6 p.m. on the following Sunday during one period of possession by the possessory conservator under Subdivision (3), provided that if a period of possession by the possessory conservator exceeds 30 days, the managing conservator may have possession of the child under the terms of this subdivision on two nonconsecutive weekends during that time period, and further provided that the managing conservator picks up the child from the possessory conservator and returns the child to that same place; and

(5) if the managing conservator gives the possessory conservator written notice by April 15 of each year, the managing conservator may designate 21 days beginning not earlier than the day after the child’s school is dismissed for the summer vacation and ending not later than seven days before school resumes at the end of the summer vacation, to be exercised in not more than two separate periods of at least seven consecutive days each, during which the possessory conservator may not have possession of the child, provided that the period or periods so designated do not interfere with the possessory conservator’s period or periods of extended summer possession or with Father’s Day if the possessory conservator is the father of the child.

Is The Standard Order Right For You?

The Standard Possession Order is what it is, a standard order that may or may not be appropriate for your child and for you. It is not perfect, and in some cases it may be flat out wrong. Unfortunately many judges rely on the standard order when they are left to make a decision on visitation. If you want to keep this vital decision in your hands and not the hands of a judge that knows nothing about you then Collaborative Divorce may be an option for you. Speak with a Woodlands Divorce Attorney and start working towards your goals today.

The Woodlands Divorce Resource is here to help you with your divorce, child custody, or other family law issue in Montgomery County or Harris County. Many of our visitors come from the areas of The Woodlands, Spring, Montgomery, Conroe, Oak Ridge North, Cut and Shoot, and other communities in the Montgomery County area or Houston and North Harris County. If you need legal assistance with your family law issue speak with a divorce lawyer in The Woodlands, TX today and protect your rights.

When will your ex-spouse get to see your child?

These are very important questions for anybody going through divorce in Montgomery County, Texas. Whenever possible, your Woodlands Divorce Attorney will work to reach an agreement that you can be satisfied with. If your divorce attorney cannot negotiate an agreement with your ex-spouse then the final decision will likely be made by the divorce court judge. In those cases, the judge will be guided by the Standard Possession Order that lawmakers put in place as presumptively in the best interest of your child (whom they know nothing about).

For Parents Who Reside 100 Miles or Less Apart

(a)  If the possessory conservator resides 100 miles or less from the primary residence of the child, the possessory conservator shall have the right to possession of the child as follows:

(1)  on weekends throughout the year beginning at 6 p.m. on the first, third, and fifth Friday of each month and ending at 6 p.m. on the following Sunday except that, at the possessory conservator’s election made before or at the time of the rendition of the original or modification order, and as specified in the original or modification order, the weekend periods of possession specified by this subdivision that occur during the regular school term shall begin at the time the child’s school is regularly dismissed and end at 6 p.m. on the following Sunday; and

(2)  on Thursdays of each week during the regular school term beginning at 6 p.m. and ending at 8 p.m., or, at the possessory conservator’s election made before or at the time of the rendition of the original or modification order, and as specified in the original or modification order, beginning at the time the child’s school is regularly dismissed and ending at the time the child’s school resumes, unless the court finds that visitation under this subdivision is not in the best interest of the child.

(b)  The following provisions govern possession of the child for vacations and certain specific holidays and supersede conflicting weekend or Thursday periods of possession.  The possessory conservator and the managing conservator shall have rights of possession of the child as follows:

(1)  the possessory conservator shall have possession in even-numbered years, beginning at 6 p.m. on the day the child is dismissed from school for the school’s spring vacation and ending at 6 p.m. on the day before school resumes after that vacation, and the managing conservator shall have possession for the same period in odd-numbered years;

(2)  if a possessory conservator:

(A)  gives the managing conservator written notice by April 1 of each year specifying an extended period or periods of summer possession, the possessory conservator shall have possession of the child for 30 days beginning not earlier than the day after the child’s school is dismissed for the summer vacation and ending not later than seven days before school resumes at the end of the summer vacation, to be exercised in not more than two separate periods of at least seven consecutive days each; or

(B)  does not give the managing conservator written notice by April 1 of each year specifying an extended period or periods of summer possession, the possessory conservator shall have possession of the child for 30 consecutive days beginning at 6 p.m. on July 1 and ending at 6 p.m. on July 31;

(3)  if the managing conservator gives the possessory conservator written notice by April 15 of each year, the managing conservator shall have possession of the child on any one weekend beginning Friday at 6 p.m. and ending at 6 p.m. on the following Sunday during one period of possession by the possessory conservator under Subdivision (2), provided that the managing conservator picks up the child from the possessory conservator and returns the child to that same place; and

(4)  if the managing conservator gives the possessory conservator written notice by April 15 of each year or gives the possessory conservator 14 days’ written notice on or after April 16 of each year, the managing conservator may designate one weekend beginning not earlier than the day after the child’s school is dismissed for the summer vacation and ending not later than seven days before school resumes at the end of the summer vacation, during which an otherwise scheduled weekend period of possession by the possessory conservator will not take place, provided that the weekend designated does not interfere with the possessory conservator’s period or periods of extended summer possession or with Father’s Day if the possessory conservator is the father of the child.

Is The Standard Order Right For You?

The Standard Possession Order is what it is, a standard order that may or may not be appropriate for your child and for you. It is not perfect, and in some cases it may be flat out wrong. Unfortunately many judges rely on the standard order when they are left to make a decision on visitation. If you want to keep this vital decision in your hands and not the hands of a judge that knows nothing about you then Collaborative Divorce may be an option for you. Speak with a Woodlands Divorce Attorney and start working towards your goals today.

The Woodlands Divorce Resource is here to help you with your divorce, child custody, or other family law issue in Montgomery County or Harris County. Many of our visitors come from the areas of The Woodlands, Spring, Montgomery, Conroe, Oak Ridge North, Cut and Shoot, and other communities in the Montgomery County area or Houston and North Harris County. If you need legal assistance with your family law issue speak with a divorce lawyer in The Woodlands, TX today and protect your rights.

Texas law provides that each parent appointed as a conservator of a child has certain rights. Each parent has these rights unless they are limited by a court order. Specifically, a parent appointed as a conservator of a child has at all times the right:

(1) to receive information from any other conservator of the child concerning the health, education, and welfare of the child;

(2) to confer with the other parent to the extent possible before making a decision concerning the health, education, and welfare of the child;

(3) of access to medical, dental, psychological, and educational records of the child;

(4) to consult with a physician, dentist, or psychologist of the child;

(5) to consult with school officials concerning the child’s welfare and educational status, including school activities;

(6) to attend school activities;

(7) to be designated on the child’s records as a person to be notified in case of an emergency;

(8) to consent to medical, dental, and surgical treatment during an emergency involving an immediate danger to the health and safety of the child; and

(9) to manage the estate of the child to the extent the estate has been created by the parent or the parent’s family.

This is only the starting point. Each family is different and the allocation of parental rights that may be appropriate for one family is not appropriate for another family. Speak with a Woodlands Divorce Attorney today if you need help with parental rights in your Montgomery County divorce.

The Woodlands Divorce Resource is here to help you with your divorce, child custody, or other family law issue in Montgomery County or Harris County. Many of our visitors come from the areas of The Woodlands, Conroe, Oak Ridge North, Cut and Shoot, and other communities in the Montgomery County area or Houston and North Harris County. If you need legal assistance with your family law issue speak with a divorce lawyer in The Woodlands, TX today and protect your rights.

The best interest of the child is the primary consideration in determining conservatorship and possession of and access to the child.

Those words are repeated so often by local family court judges in Conroe and Houston that they eventually take on a legendary status. If you or your ex-spouse is behaving or used to behave in a way that allows a judge to question if being with you or your ex-spouse is in the best interest of the child then your access to your child may be restricted, severely in some cases.

Today we are going to look at the case of Richard Walters and his divorce from Deborah Walters. One of the issues in the Walters case was custody of their five year old son, Christopher.

Richard’s divorce attorney presented evidence at trial that:

1. Deborah was an alcoholic before and during the marriage;
2. Deborah concealed her alcohol consumption during the marriage;
3. On occasion Deborah’s behavior after alcohol consumption has placed Christopher in a potentially harmful position.

The divorce court granted Richard sole managing conservatorship of Christopher based on these facts. The trial Court also granted Deborah possessory conservatorship with the following possession order: “IT IS ORDERED AND DECREED that Deborah Walters, as a possessory conservator, shall have possession of the child at all times mutually agreed between the parties.” Unless Richard was in agreement with Deborah, she would not be able to see Christopher.

Deborah’s divorce lawer appealed the trial court’s order on several points. As part of her challenge she presented evidence on the following points:

1. Despite her alcoholism she has maintained employment with the same employer for over ten years.
2. She has no criminal record.
3. She attends counseling and A.A. meetings and claimed to be sober for almost a year.
4. Her counselor testified there was no evidence she had been drinking during that time.
5. Her counselor testified in his opinion she is not a danger to Christopher.

Was the divorce court correct in allowing Deborah as possessory conservator to only see Christopher when Richard agreed to visitation? Richard desired this order because the evidence showed that Deborah has placed Christopher at risk in the past and that he must have control so that if he sees abuse or neglect occurring he can take action immediately to protect Christopher. The appeals court decided to reverse the possession order because it was not specific as to the times when Deborah can see Christopher. The trial court’s order gave so much discretion to Richard that he could completely deny Deborah access to Christopher. The appeals court pointed out that supervised access may be a proper alternative.

Will you be able to get the same results in your case? There are no guarantees when a case goes to trial and a judge or jury makes the final decision. Your results may be very similar or very different from the Walters case based on how your Woodlands Divorce Attorney presents your case and how the judge or jury interprets the facts. Speak with a Montgomery County Divorce Attorney today if you are facing child custody or conservatorship issues with an ex-spouse who continues to have or previously had a substance abuse problem.

The Woodlands Divorce Resource is here to help you with your divorce, child custody, or other family law issue in Montgomery County or Harris County. Many of our visitors come from the areas of Conroe, Oak Ridge North, Cut and Shoot, and other communities in the Montgomery County area or Houston and North Harris County. If you need legal assistance with your family law issue speak with a Conroe Divorce Lawyer today

39 S.W.3d 280

The two terms you will hear often when discussing custody and children in your Montgomery County divorce are “Managing Conservator” and “Possessory Conservator.” The managing conservator essentially has all of the rights and responsibilities that every parent holds. A possessory conservator plays less and sometimes no role in decision making and only enjoys access to the child.

Texas Family Law requires that both parents be appointed as joint managing conservator of a child unless it would not be in the best interest of the child because doing so would significantly impair the child’s physical health or emotional development.

Is there any way to avoid having your ex-spouse appointed as Joint Managing Conservator in your Montgomery County Divorce case?

Yes, but it is not easy. Your Montgomery County Divorce Attorney will have to prove that having your ex-spouse appointed as joint managing conservator would significantly impair your child’s physical health or emotional development. It is not impossible, but it is an obstacle. In addition, if there is a history of family violence involving the parents then the Montgomery County Divorce Court does not assume that joint managing conservatorship is in the best interest of the child.

Contact me if you need help with a custody dispute or are concerned about how divorce may impact access to and visitation with your child.

The Woodlands Divorce Resource is here to help you with your divorce, child custody, or other family law issue in Montgomery County or Houston. Many of our visitors come from the areas of Conroe, Oak Ridge North, Cut and Shoot, and other communities in the Montgomery County area. If you need legal assistance with your family law issue speak with a Conroe Divorce Attorney today.