5: "We'll Just Fix It Later" — Why That's a Lie copertina

5: "We'll Just Fix It Later" — Why That's a Lie

5: "We'll Just Fix It Later" — Why That's a Lie

Ascolta gratuitamente

Vedi i dettagli del titolo

A proposito di questo titolo

 "We'll just fix it later."That's the lie everyone believes when they sign a shitty parenting plan. Bullshit. Courts don't work that way.Once the plan is signed, you're stuck unless you can prove a "material and substantial change in circumstances." And guess what? Two hours late every Sunday for two years? Not substantial enough.Episode 5 breaks down why modification is almost impossible, and why you get ONE SHOT at getting this right.The dangerous assumption: Parents think if something doesn't work, they can just go back and change it. Wrong. The bar for modification is SO high, most violations don't qualify.The garbage modification clauses:"Court shall not modify absent material change in circumstance" (What's "material"? Nobody defines it)"Change must be substantial and continuing in nature" (How substantial? How long? Judge decides, after you've paid thousands)"Party seeking modification bears burden of proving" (You prove it. With facts, pictures, data. Not feelings) Real example:Client documented violations for six months. Judge: "Come back at 18 months."She did. Ex had been squeaky clean for six weeks before court. Judge: "Why are we even here? He's improving."Why contempt is a joke:You document for months. File contempt. They behave for six weeks before court. You look crazy. They look improved.You spent thousands for: "Don't do that again, sir."Three weeks later? Back to violating. No consequences. No penalties.Courts favor stability over safety:Kids passing school despite chaos? No modification. Courts say "doing okay" = not bad enough to change.What actually protects you:Built-in consequences, automatic penalties, review periods, defined modification triggers, all written into the plan UPFRONT.Without these? You're stuck for 18 years with whatever garbage Larry wrote.The reality:You don't get a do-over. You don't get to "fix it later." You get ONE shot. Make it count.Don't count on modification to save you.The Parenting Plan Masterclass teaches you how to build protection INTO the plan from day one: automatic consequences for violations, built-in review periods every 2 years, clear modification triggers (relocation, job change, remarriage)—so you never have to prove "material and substantial change" to a skeptical judge.Get it right the first time: Parenting Plan MasterclassOne shot. Make it count.Here’s What You Can Actually Take Away: "We'll fix it later" is a dangerous lie — Courts require "material and substantial change" to modify plans. That bar is ridiculously high. You don't get do-overs. "Material and substantial" is intentionally vague — What's substantial? Three times? Six? A year of violations? Nobody defines it. Judges decide case by case, usually against you. "Continuing in nature" means ongoing pattern — One violation isn't enough. Six months of documentation? Judge says "come back at 18." You're constantly proving instead of parenting. Burden of proof is on YOU — You have to prove with facts, pictures, data—not feelings. "I think they're talking shit to the kids" = worthless without proof. Contempt is a joke — You document for months. File contempt. They behave for six weeks before court. Judge: "Why are we here? They're improving." You spent thousands for a finger shake. Courts favor stability over safety — Kids passing school despite chaos? Modification denied. Courts interpret "doing okay" as "not bad enough to change." High-conflict exes game the system — They violate for months. You file. They become squeaky clean before court. Then you look crazy. Then they go right back to violating. You get ONE SHOT — Write the plan right the first time with built-in consequences, automatic penalties, review periods, and defined modification triggers. Don't count on fixing it later.The Truth Bombs"Parents assume they can just fix any parenting plan later. 'We'll just go back and change it.' No. It's not that simple. Courts don't work that way.""'Material and substantial change'—what the fuck does that even mean? Is three times enough? Six? Once a week? It's not measurable. And if you can't measure it, you can't enforce it.""Client documented violations for six months. Judge said 'come back at 18 months.' She did. Ex had been squeaky clean for six weeks before court. Judge: 'Why are we even here?'""Contempt is a joke. You spend thousands for a finger shake. 'Don't do that again, sir.' Three weeks later? They're back to violating. No consequences. No penalties. Just document it.""Two hours late every Sunday for two years? Judge: 'But aren't the kids thriving at school?' Yes, but I'm missing two hours. 'Not substantial enough.'""Courts favor stability over safety. Kids doing okay in school despite chaos? That's 'stable.' You want to change it? Prove it's harming them. Good luck.""High-conflict people violate for months, then become squeaky clean before court. You look crazy. They look improved. Then they go right back to it.""You get ONE SHOT at this. Write it ...
Ancora nessuna recensione