Ex-Wife Ordered to Provide Skype Access for Husband, Kids

www.law.com...

The decision marks the first reported New York case in which a judge has ordered a relocating parent to facilitate Skyping -- i.e., the use of Skype conferencing software -- between her children and her ex-spouse as a condition of her move, according to a Westlaw search.

Later the article states

"That was something the judge came up with himself to foster the relationship," Goody said. "I think the judge was trying to strike a balance to make sure the children have a relationship with their father."

This is a great idea, it's not the same as in-person visitation but it might be more personable then phone conversations.

As long as the mother, Debra Baker keeps to her word, and the father makes himself available then hopefully the children can continue to communicate with their dad.

Anyone with a yahoo account can video chat for free. Is skype something of the same thing? Is it free?

I disagree with the state being involved in any relationship, but we still have draconian family and child laws here in the US.

However, it is pathetic that this needs to be legislated in any case.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


Yes, Skype has a free program that allows people to talk, and also see each other, using computers.

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
Anyone with a yahoo account can video chat for free. Is skype something of the same thing? Is it free?

I disagree with the state being involved in any relationship, but we still have draconian family and child laws here in the US.

However, it is pathetic that this needs to be legislated in any case.

Yes, Skype is a free video conferencing program.

This isn't being legislated, by the way. It's an order, not a law, so it applies to this case only (though it sets a precedence, of course.) However, it's not burdensome and is probably better than simple phone calls and letters (who writes letters any more?) so I don't see it as being a bad idea. The judge could suggest it, which means it's not likely to be followed, or order it, in which case it is.

From the article:

The Bakers' marital home is in foreclosure and Ms. Baker, a bookkeeper, has been unemployed since she was laid off in December. Mr. Baker works for a construction company and has a take-home salary of $600 per month.

Earlier this year, Ms. Baker asked the court for permission to move to Venice Beach, Fla., to live with her parents and seek full-time employment.

While I agree with OP that moving the kids across the country prevents in person visits that are important for parental bonding, it sounds like she's got a whole lot of nothing going on in New York, and he's not going to be providing much child support if he earns $7200 a year. Would rather have her working in Florida than on the dole in New York.

I'm not a big fan of laws in general but I believe there ought to be a law or amendment saying people should never be obligated by force to purchase or use any specific product, or favor any specific company, with their purchases. Thats a law we should have in amendment form right now because it helps fight fascism, which is starting to dominate the US.

Of course Skype is free, but Skype is just one of many ways to video conference over the internet. What the judge should have said is "online video conference" rather than Skype. Of course I also know that he is probably unaware that Skype is just one of many ways to video conference over the internet and that is the reason he likely inadvertently forced favor on one specific company.

I like it.

I wish Skype had been aruond when I was first divorced and away from my little girl.

We would have talked all the time.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


Hello Hotbakedtater, I agree with you that the courts should not interfere with the families and their issues........except...lol, some parents use the children as a tool to "get back" at the other parent, sad to say.

In Florida, child visitation and child support are two separate issues but is still a tool used by one parent against the other, for example.
One parent withholds visitation from the other, this creating even more strife all the while the children are the one's who suffer in the long run.

The parent who was denied visitation can petition the courts for their right to be a part of the child's life, no matter how limited the visitation.
This may result in the other parent being held in contempt of court for interfering with visitation.
More than not, for the children's sake, the courts interfering is a good thing for the children (in this case).

Hopefully both parents will follow through with what they agreed to. Even making it fun for the children.
If the father doesn't keep up with his side of the visitation agreement, he is not held in contempt, (as per my personal case, in Florida).
Regardless of the secondary parent being available, the primary parent still has to make sure the children are available for phone calls or, in this case, video camera access.
As time goes by, the children will be able to adjust and know when it's "time" they can say hello and have an open communication with their Dad. In any case, as the children grow, they will remember which parent interfered and which didn't. Hopefully both foster feelings of affection for the sake of the children.

Thank you for posting.

sl




[edit on 12-8-2010 by sweetliberty]

reply to post by hotbakedtater

Anyone with a yahoo account can video chat for free.

And any parent with half a brain would keep their children as far from Yahoo Video chat as possible unless they want to have to monitor ever second of their child's computer time.

THUMBS UP for the Judge - Great 'call' that one. No pun intended.

peace

Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by hotbakedtater

 

Anyone with a yahoo account can video chat for free.

And any parent with half a brain would keep their children as far from Yahoo Video chat as possible unless they want to have to monitor ever second of their child's computer time.

THUMBS UP

for the Judge - Great 'call' that one. No pun intended.

peace

I would assume it was a monitored private chat, not unfettered access!!

Originally posted by elevatedone
I like it.

I wish Skype had been aruond when I was first divorced and away from my little girl.

We would have talked all the time.

Assuming you are male, this touches me. I would imagine you and your little girl would have had a great time interacting this way. Dad's are special, maybe more special then they realize.

I'm sure you still found a way to keep in touch.
Divorces are likened to a death. But, when the children still have both parents in their lives one way or another, when the bonds aren't torn, they can adjust to anything life throws at them much easier.

Thanks

sl

reply to post by sweetliberty


I'm a he

Yes, we stayed in contact. She lived, lives 5 hours away still, she just turned 18 last weekend. We call each other all the time, she would come visit for 2 weeks every summer and I'd go down for a weekend or two during the year. She would also come at Christmas time for a weekend.

Just this week, I started using Facebook more, and she added me as a friend, now I can "bug" her all the time.