Adrian Torres v. Lourdes Ufret (2012)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

This matter comes before the court by way of a postjudgment Motion for Modification filed on July 23, 2012 by the plaintiff father (146).   The father is seeking sole custody of the children of the parties, Adrian Sa‘id Torres and Naji Fabian Torres both born on January 26, 2006.

Pursuant to orders of the court entered on July 12, 2011, the parties have joint legal custody of the minor children.   The defendant mother has primary residence of the children and the father has parenting time which rotates on a two-month basis:  in month one, the father has the children every Tuesday after school until Wednesday drop off at school together with the first and third weekend of the month;  and during month two the father has the children every Tuesday after school until Wednesday drop off at school;  together with the first, second and fourth weekend of the month.

The mother and her significant other live in New Britain.   The father lives in Hartford.

The father is paying court-ordered child support pursuant to orders entered in docket number FA 07–4033158 and the two files have been companionized.   Medical orders have also been issued in the companionized file.

In the memorandum of decision filed on July 12, 2011, the court found that the parties are unable to communicate with each other on an amicable basis.   That significant barrier to effective co-parenting continues.   The plaintiff remains suspicious of the defendant and her paramour.   Father is concerned that the children are being abused while in their care as the children have presented to him with bruises and bumps.   To date there has been no determination by the SCAN program at Connecticut Children's Medical Center or the department of children and families that physical abuse has been the cause of the injuries.   The photographs submitted by the father as evidence of bruising on the children is not sufficient to demonstrate that the children have been physically abused by the mother and/or her paramour.   The court does not believe that the constant photographing of every bruise and scrape is in the best interest of the children.   The court has entered an order that no person is to use corporal force to discipline the children and that order continues to be in effect.

The defendant continues to act in such a way as to foment the father's suspicions and concerns.   The court finds that she continues to fail to follow court orders.   She failed to follow the existing court order requiring her to advise the father of her itinerary during her vacation with the children to Puerto Rico.

The court in the July 2011 decision ordered the parties to go to the Families in Transition program at the Children's Law Center.   The court finds the plaintiff to be credible in his statement that the parties were discharged from the program due in large part to the mother being uncooperative and inflexible.   The parties may have made a modicum of progress during their time at the program, but there is no evidence that the lessons learned have resulted in better co-parenting of the children.

The parties have difficulty agreeing on anything concerning the children and that is negatively affecting the children.   They have been unable to communicate and exchange accurate medical information.   The father claims the mother did not advise him of all of the hospital visits by the children, but he later admitted during the mother's cross examination that he was aware of one of the visits.   The credible evidence, however, remains that the mother has failed to keep the father advised of all appointments and medical treatment of the children and that she advised the pharmacy not to distribute medication to the father.   The records of the department of children and families submitted into evidence by father reflect that the father was following an outdated medical protocol with respect to the children's asthma treatment.   Both parties complain that the children are sick when returned to them by the other parent.

Due to the acrimonious nature of the interaction between the parties, the following orders regarding parental access shall be non-modifiable absent a court order.

The court finds that the parents are preoccupied finding fault with each other and doing so to the detriment of the children.   The court cannot find that one parent is necessarily the better parent for the children over the other, but does find that if the parents cannot put aside their animosity and subversiveness toward each other, the children are going to be the losers in this case.

The Court, having heard the testimony of both parties, and having considered the evidence presented at hearing, as well as the applicable common-law and statutory provisions, including, without limitation, the provisions of General Statutes in §§ 46b–56, 46b–56a, 46b–56c, and 46b–61 General Statutes, enters the following orders.

ORDERS

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

The parents shall continue to share joint legal custody of their children, Adrian Sa‘id Torres and Naji Fabian Torres, both born January 26, 2006.

The father and mother will discuss and confer with each other with reference to the important issues involving the health, education, and welfare of the minor children, including but not limited to, their residence, camps, schools, religious training, non-emergency medical attention, school records and activities and all other issues that significantly involve the health, welfare and education of the children.   The parties will attempt to adopt a harmonious policy suited to the best interests of the children.

As set forth above, the parents shall confer concerning major education issues such as which school the children shall attend, repeating a grade, assessing for special education or gifted programs, but the Mother shall make the final decision.   Defendant's residence shall be used for school choice.

Further, the parents shall confer on major medical issues and non-emergency care and treatment, but the Father shall make the final decision.

School Term Parenting Time:  the parties shall share parenting time on a four-week rotating schedule as follows:

(i) Plaintiff shall have the children from pick up at school on Friday until drop-off at school on Tuesday morning on the first, second and third weekend of the four-week schedule.  (See Schedule A attached hereto which shows the four-week schedule.)   While school is in session, the plaintiff father shall be responsible for all transportation.

(ii) During the school year when school is not in session, the mother shall drop off the children at father's home on Fridays at 6:00 p.m. and the father shall drop off the children at the mother's home on Tuesdays at 8:00 a.m.

Defendant's regular parenting time will be at such other times not designated as plaintiff's parenting time as set forth herein.

Summer School Vacation Parenting Time:

(i) Plaintiff father shall have the children for the period from the day after school ends until 8:00 a.m. on July 1.

(ii) The defendant mother shall have the children for the month of July except that the plaintiff shall have parenting time alternating weekends on the first and third weekends of the month from Friday at 6:00 p.m. until Sunday at 6:00 p.m. The defendant shall drop off the children on Friday evening at father's residence and the plaintiff shall drop off the children at the mother's residence on Sunday evening.

(iii) The plaintiff father shall have the children for the month of August with defendant having parenting time alternating weekends on the first and third weekend of the month from Friday at 6:00 p.m. until Sunday at 6:00 p.m.

Each parent is to provide any child care necessary during such parent's respective parenting time and to take the children to their normally scheduled sports and extracurricular activities.

Holiday and Mid-school Year Vacation Parenting Time:  Shall be as set forth in the July 12, 2011 memorandum.

All holiday and vacation time shall supersede the regularly scheduled parenting time.

The plaintiff and the defendant shall both have the right to be present with the children for medical checkups and treatment.   Plaintiff shall notify defendant of regularly scheduled well care visits within forty-eight hours of making the appointment.   In case of an emergency, either parent shall take the children for treatment.   The other parent shall be notified as soon as practicable of the incident.

Information about the children's medication shall be exchanged by both parties.

The parties shall maintain an asthma journal in the format suggested to the parties by the department of children and families which journal shall accompany the children so that it shall be available to the parent having parenting time.   Plaintiff and defendant shall both be entitled to complete and full information from any physician, therapist, psychologist, psychiatrist or similar type professional attending the children for any reason and from any teacher or school giving instruction to the children.

The parties are ordered to sign up for the OurFamilyWizard.com web site within thirty days of the date of this memorandum.   The parties are to utilize the website and the asthma journal to communicate information regarding the minor children.   The parties are ordered to access the website not less than once midweek and once a weekend.   The parents are both ordered to use the web site for all non-emergency communications and for scheduling the children's activities.

Due to the prior failure of the defendant to comply with this order, the court reiterates the following:  Each party shall keep the other reasonably informed as to the whereabouts of the minor children at all times when they are with the plaintiff or the defendant, as the case may be.   The parties shall provide each other with an advance itinerary listing the dates, addresses and telephone numbers of each place he/she intends to take the minor children at any time the minor children do not sleep at their residence for two or more consecutive nights during any period.

Neither party shall move more than 20 miles from their current residence without the written consent of the other and if there is no agreement, after prior receipt of a court order.

Except to the extent modified above, the orders of July 12, 2011 remain in full force and effect.¹

SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT,

Olear, J.

SCHEDULE A

Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun

Week 1 F M M M F F F

Week 2 F M M M F F F

Week 3 F M M M F F F

Week 4 F M M M M M M

F represents Father's parenting time

M represents Mother's parenting time

FOOTNOTES

FN1. As no motion to modify child support has been filed or raised in the pending motion to modify custody, the orders in the companionized file remain in effect at this time..  FN1. As no motion to modify child support has been filed or raised in the pending motion to modify custody, the orders in the companionized file remain in effect at this time.

Olear, Leslie I., J.