Chapter 17 - The custody trial My lawyer asked what I wanted.
“Primary custody.”
“Meaning?”
“Ottilie lives with me most school nights.”
“Decision-making?”
“Shared for major issues if Cedric can follow boundaries.”
Naomi looked surprised.
“You trust him?”
“No.”
“Then why shared?”
“Because he is her father and he has been involved.”
Good.
I did not ask to erase him.
Cedric requested equal parenting time eventually.
Not immediately.
He acknowledged a transition period.
At trial, Dr. Monroe testified.
Ottilie had secure attachments to both parents.
Fear specific to Barton and removal of possessions.
Cedric’s earlier conduct damaged trust.
His recent behavior had been appropriate.
No evidence he physically abused Ottilie.
No evidence I coached her.
My conflict reaction toward Barton was situational, not a broader pattern of violence based on available evidence.
Good.
Then child-welfare worker Laura Chen testified.
Cedric’s major failure:
He subordinated Ottilie’s emotional safety to litigation/business strategy.
My major concern:
I could become hypervigilant and overinterpret ordinary frustration as danger.
Fair.
No perfect parent certificate.
Cedric testified.
“What do you think was your worst decision?”
I expected:
HELOC.
He said:
“Seeing Ottilie wet in the driveway and looking at my father first.”
Silence.
“Why?”
“Because for several seconds I was still inside the plan instead of inside my daughter’s fear.”
That answer mattered.
Then:
“Do you blame Barton?”
“For the hose.”
“For your decisions?”
“No.”
Good.
My cross-examination:
“Would you ever allow Barton unsupervised contact if his criminal order ended?”
“No.”
“Ever?”
Cedric stopped.
“I won’t make an absolute promise about decades. I will follow Ottilie’s therapist, her wishes as she grows, and safety evidence. I will not impose him.”
Annoying.
Responsible.
Then I testified.
Cedric’s lawyer asked:
“Did you kick Barton?”
“Yes.”
“Would you do it again?”
I thought.
“If he were actively hurting my child and I reasonably believed force was necessary, I would protect her. I would also try to use the least force necessary.”
Conflict course had not been useless.
Then the HELOC.
They could not use financial wrongdoing as automatic custody disqualification.
But judgment mattered.
I said:
“I do not trust Cedric with my signature. That is different from whether he can make Ottilie dinner.”
Good.
Final order:
Primary residential parent for school purposes: me.
Parenting time:
Cedric three weekends per month? Too much maybe. Let's say alternating weekends plus one weekday overnight, expanding in summer.
Shared major decisions with tie-breaking mechanisms.
Financial decisions involving my property separated.
No Barton contact with Ottilie during his probation and afterward only by mutual parental agreement or court order, subject to child safety.
No using third parties to discipline beyond ordinary childcare without agreed parameters.
No removal/disposal of sentimental belongings as punishment.
That last one unusually specific because facts justified it.
Cedric did not appeal.
Barton’s lawyer called order “maternal control.”
Nobody cared.
Then divorce property trial remained.
Custody was settled.
May you like
Money was not.
Active conflict continued.
