The newest installment

I took Monday off work and didn't drop Jacob off to day care until shortly after 10 a.m. Joe was pissed that the baby wasn't there when he stopped by, so now he isn't letting me take Jacob on our camping trip this weekend. I really debated with myself, whether to take the baby anyway, and decided that I just had to do the right thing and try not to be THE HUGE FUCKING ASSHOLE that Joe is being.

He is so very ill-equipped to raise a child.

Joe wrote:

If you don't think it's necessary to keep me apprised of where my son is, I don't think it's necessary to trade weekends with you.

I'll keep my weekend with Jacob this Friday afternoon to Monday morning.

____________________

Sirschy wrote:

I don't know what you mean. Jacob was in day care Monday.

If you are choosing to rescind our agreement, so be it. The question I have is: How does it benefit Jacob by preventing him from going on a family outing? I'm sure I'm not the only one who will see this as vindictive.

____________________

Joe wrote:

Jacob wasn't there at about 9:30 a.m. Monday, which is about the time I stop to see him on mornings when I don't take him to day care.

He was there only long enough to have two bottles, or maybe only one because one bottle didn't even look as though it was used. The log day care workers fill out seems to indicate that Jacob arrived shortly before noon Monday.

Or maybe day care workers don't change or feed him until midday.

I want to know when he's not going to be there or when he's going to be dropped off late, just as I tell you when my plans include keeping him out of day care.

I'm fed up with your arrogant disregard when it comes to giving me basic information about Jacob. That's all I want from you, basic information. Nothing else.

Have you not heard this before?

____________________

Sirschy wrote:

I'm sorry, I didn't realize I had to run my entire life past you. Did you get a court order for that? Because I didn't get a copy...

Nor do I have anything indicating that I'm supposed to drop him off at a specified time in order for you to waltz in at your convenience to see him.

For all the griping you do about the day care, I would think you'd be happy he spent a little more time with me in the morning.

Enjoy him this weekend. This will not happen again. I can see that achieving cooperation with you is an unreasonable expectation. Duly noted.

____________________

Joe wrote:

Oh, the righteous indignation. But look, don't flatter yourself, really. I wish you no harm, but I don't care about your life; I care about and have a right to know about Jacob's.

Why do you mix up the two? I could almost see it if he were solely dependent on you for nourishment.

Get a grip here: I'm not asking what you're doing, where you're going or who you're with. Let me repeat: I don't care. I want to know when/whether my son is going to be at a neutral place where I can see him. (And if he isn't, I want to know why.) Unfortunately, that place is, for now, a day care center I do not like.

You're the one who made a big issue of your earlier work hours when you and [your lawyer] persuaded my lawyer to agree to a breast-feeding court order that I knew was a sham.

And speaking of court orders, you're also the one who's ordaining a future of lawyers, courtrooms and judges by your arrogant and errant assumption that the law sees you as the default custodial parent because you're Jacob's mother. I mean, you don't even have the capability to breast-feed, so what makes you superior? Where's your inherent advantage?

You can't even keep your poor daughter healthy -- and now Jacob has to spend the night coughing and sneezing. Do you know how many times Zoe has been to the doctor this year? I do. (How do I know? Because you wanted and kept the kids' health care commingled, rather than separating it as I wanted.)

Sleep well as long as you can with your foolish notion of how this will turn out. The awakening is going to be rude indeed.

If the last paragraph of your e-mail suggests you're spoiling for a fight, you've already got one.

____________________

Sirschy wrote:

I have made clear my offer to have you over any time you would like to see Jacob. I don't know how much more transparent I can be. I will not stoop to your immature level and whine about neutrality. We are his parents -- grownups, I might add -- and you seem to want to be enemies. If that's how you would like me to deal with you, keep up this game. I am not looking for a fight at all.

When you start thinking about what's best for the baby and not what's best for you, I'm willing to talk about moving forward.

Incidentally, a quick call to the pediatrician revealed they have not distributed either Jacob's or Zoe's records to you. Are there any other bluffs I shall call you on?

When the baby is not at day care, he is with me. That is all you need to know, and it should be obvious. My work schedule is also none of your concern, and I do not need your approval to change it.

____________________

Joe wrote:

Have me over to your home? As though I'm a supplicant begging for time with my own son and you are the benevolent monarch who will grant me a few minutes' audience?

You've gone around the bend.

As a parent, I'm equal to you under Pennsylvania law. Further, what's best for Jacob is that he spend little time in your home, where someone always is sick.

By the way, the pediatrician's statement wasn't "distributed" to me; it was mailed to me. I'll make you a copy that shows your name, the name of the father of your daughter and my address.

Here's what you should understand when you see it, and I've said this before: There is no bluff in me. And even if I didn't have it, the information could be had by subpoena to prove my contention that you're not a competent guardian of a child's health.

To do what I believe is best for Jacob, I'm going to beat you legally in a public forum no matter how long it takes and no matter how much it costs.

That statement isn't born of anger or hatred.

And it's not a bluff.

____________________

Sirschy wrote:

Yes, have you over to my home when I have him. So you would have access to Jacob whenever you wanted. Like reasonable parents do when they love their children.

You knock yourself out with your one-sided fight, Joe. I'm sure a judge will be thrilled to learn you intend to deny a baby access to his mother and sister. Thrilled. I can only imagine the other conclusions he'll draw from your vitriol.

I am not the least bit concerned.