Katherine C. Stenman v. Richard S. Stenman (2012)

ORDER RE MOTION FOR MODIFICATION # 277

The plaintiff in the above captioned matter seeks some form of relief concerning the transportation and weekend visitation that has been an on-going source of dispute and confrontation between both of these parents.¹  The marriage was dissolved on June 2, 2005.   There were two children that were adopted into the family, Victoria, D.O.B. 2/1999 and Michael D.O.B. 6/1999.   Both children reside on a custodial basis with the plaintiff-mother with alternate weekend visitation with the father who resides out of state in Western New Jersey, approximately a 2 1/2– to 3–hour drive from the current residence of the plaintiff.

Both parties are presently self-represented and have been self-representing on and off throughout the history of these post-judgment proceedings.   The Court can conclude only that it is the churlish attitude and compulsive conduct of both parents that has brought us to this point of frustration, not only for the parties, but also for the Court.²  The Court has indicated that it is the parties' conduct that ultimately will become the focal point of these two children as they become older and reach maturity.   The realization will occur to them that neither parent was looking out for either child's best interests.

The immediate issue with the transportation from Connecticut to New Jersey is that the mother, who is self-employed as a therapist, needs to be engaged in her private practice on Friday p.m. and cannot drive to New Jersey on alternate weekends.   The Sunday return of the children to Connecticut appears to be less problematic.

The defendant father, who appears to take some relish in obstructing the intents of the plaintiff mother, nonetheless has proposed a possible solution in which he does all of the Friday driving and will be financially compensated for that drive.   Such compensation is to be awarded regardless of whether one or both children return to his home in New Jersey with him for that particular weekend.   The mother will still have the Sunday obligation of bringing the children back under the original plan.   As cumbersome and troublesome as this arrangement seems to be for the children, who are thirteen and twelve years respectively, each parent must recognize that at some point another configuration of this parenting schedule needs to be adopted by both parents in a mature fashion so as not to create unnecessary disruption for these two minor children.

The rate of compensation for the father's driving on Fridays thereby relieving the mother of that driving duty during her visitation weekends will be in the amount of $85.00 payable by the mother one week in advance before the scheduled pick-up is to occur.   All other terms and conditions concerning parenting schedules to include vacations, holidays, and all other weekends involving holidays is left unchanged and is not being addressed by the Court at this time.   The advice to the parents is to make all accommodations between themselves in an orderly and in an adult-like fashion and do not engage in any conduct by insinuation or otherwise that would in any way have a negative impact upon the children during this transitional period.

BY THE COURT,

Roche, J.

FOOTNOTES

FN1. The fountainhead of the immediate consternation is contained in a “Stipulation (# 215) dated October 18, 2007 relating to the original decree under a paragraph entitled “Shared Transportation.”.  FN1. The fountainhead of the immediate consternation is contained in a “Stipulation (# 215) dated October 18, 2007 relating to the original decree under a paragraph entitled “Shared Transportation.”

FN2. The number of filings between # 215 and the subject motion # 277 illustrate the scope and breadth of the selfish attitude and lack of understanding and compassion overpowering these two parents..  FN2. The number of filings between # 215 and the subject motion # 277 illustrate the scope and breadth of the selfish attitude and lack of understanding and compassion overpowering these two parents.

Roche, Vincent E., J.