If your young teen was at someone’s. . .

[prairiewindmomma]

I am sorry that happened.

I would probably suggest hanging out at public places for a while; I wouldn’t directly say “not at x’s house”. 

[Drama Llama]

I guess I don't really see being in a public place as better.  This happened at my SIL's house, so there were multiple adults there, which helped.  In public the kids won't have that support.

 

[prairiewindmomma]

3 minutes ago, BandH said:

I guess I don't really see being in a public place as better.  This happened at my SIL's house, so there were multiple adults there, which helped.  In public the kids won't have that support.

 

Fwiw, my thought process is this:

1. Noncustodial parent is less likely to randomly show up. Only custodial parent has phone tracking.

2. Public places are absolutely places where my kid can seek help more easily than in someone else’s house. 

3. Odds are I will be there as a driver anyway—laser tag arena, cafe where I can hang at a back table, etc. 

4. Here, nearly every public place is wired with cameras. There is evidence a police officer can access to document violations.

I have a kid who has a couple of friends who have unstable parents. This is how we handle it. Friends are welcome to come here but my kid doesn’t go there. It’s not as awkward as it sounds as the friends are all aware of the challenges and this was what the teens worked out as acceptable. 

[Drama Llama]

See, my thought process is like this:
 

14 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:

Fwiw, my thought process is this:

1. Noncustodial parent is less likely to randomly show up. Only custodial parent has phone tracking.

He's shown that he's crafty in this manner.  

14 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:

2. Public places are absolutely places where my kid can seek help more easily than in someone else’s house. 

I trust family members (well, most of them) more than I trust random strangers.  

14 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:

3. Odds are I will be there as a driver anyway—laser tag arena, cafe where I can hang at a back table, etc. 

I'm not the best protection.  But, parent drivers are not really the norm for teenagers in my area.  My kids ride their bikes, or take the subway, or walk places.  I could, of course, drive this pair when they go places, but it's back to the fact that he doesn't respect my boundaries. 

14 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:

4. Here, nearly every public place is wired with cameras. There is evidence a police officer can access to document violations.

We have cameras.  It's much harder to prove a violation in a random public place.  He can claim that he didn't know kid would be there, and proof that he did is very challenging.  Even tonight, because we were at a relative's house, we'd need to prove that he knew we were there before he came. 

14 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:

I have a kid who has a couple of friends who have unstable parents. This is how we handle it. Friends are welcome to come here but my kid doesn’t go there. It’s not as awkward as it sounds as the friends are all aware of the challenges and this was what the teens worked out as acceptable. 

I'n not saying I'm right, my gut is just that pubic isn't always better. 

[prairiewindmomma]

I am not trying to say I am right, either…just for the circumstances I am dealing with, this is how we handle it. My child doesn’t want to be in someone’s home if there is potential for drama. They feel safer in a public space where they are freer to make decisions for themselves. It’s way easier for them to walk away in a cafe and get help than to try to leave someone’s home in the middle of something, and they don’t want to be in the same space as a dispute.

(I thought the question was from the perspective of how we would handle things as the friend/friend’s parent as the result of what happened….) 

[Scarlett]

5 hours ago, BandH said:

I guess I don't really see being in a public place as better.  

 

Agree.

[hshibley]

5 hours ago, BandH said:

 

I'n not saying I'm right, my gut is just that pubic isn't always better. 

I was assuming that you were the target of the verbal abuse not your son. Given that the child is the target of abuse and the one that the restraining order is protecting there’s no way my child would be allowed over to a private home (yours and especially not your in-laws) with your child. Your child would be welcome at my home as long as we agreed your dh was not notified of the visit. Even if he is not violent by your standards now this is the United States he can get a gun tomorrow if he wants. 

[marbel]

I'm sorry, I would probably not have my kid visit. The fact that there has been no physical violence wouldn't matter to me - we all know things can escalate. 

When I was a kid, I was present at friends' houses during parental fights (loud arguments, not physical) a few times. Once was in the middle of the night, at a sleepover. It was terrifying. My own parents had had loud verbal fights on occasion, but never when someone was over at the house.  That to me is a serious boundary - a guest in the house should not be exposed to family troubles like that, even if they know troubles exist. 

I'm really sorry this is happening. 

 

[Terabith]

Honestly, I would feel absolutely terrible for all the kids involved, but I probably wouldn’t allow them to visit at your house or a family member’s house.  And if he’s showing up at public events that he was not informed of, I would probably decide not to allow my kid to see your kid in public either.   We might even discuss forbidding the relationship at all, and we aren’t a family that forbids anything after about age ten.  But if he’s crafty or using tools to figure out random public appearances, I would kinda figure nothing was off the table in terms of his behavior, and at that point our house wouldn’t be safe either.  

[cintinative]

A broken restraining order tells me the the violator is motivated and doesn't care about the consequences. I would not allow my child into that home knowing that. I had a friend once whose husband tried to play that game. Eventually he threatened to kill her and was put in jail. Just no, no, no. 

I think I have missed a lot of other information that other people are working off of--if public is not safe either, that reads to me that this person with the restraining order is extremely unstable (if he wouldn't care about doing something in public, that is huge).  In that case, this poor family might need to have another conversation with the police. That is truly, truly awful.

[Dmmetler]

I have one friend who I trust,but who I wouldn't let L go to her house without me there because of her XDH, and that only during the day when XDH was at work. He's just plain too volatile (he has pulled a gun on his older DD's boyfriend before). They come here a lot, or we meet at other places. From what she's said, almost none of her friends let their kids come there without being there as well, and that she can understand it-she hates that her kids are stuck visiting him (supervised by his parents,  who she really doesn't trust, but the court apparently does). 

 

So yeah, I think that other parents are likely to be wary. Which stinks for the kids. 

[Mrs Tiggywinkle Again]

I would not.  To be honest, and I know it’s unfair, but if I know someone in the home has any kind of a restraining or protection order, I would rather my kids just weren’t there.  Because those things are generally just pieces of paper and get violated all the time.  We don’t yell in my home and they have never witnessed DH and I fight(because it’s usually over text and we move on pretty quickly, not that we never argue), so even someone showing up and yelling would be confusing and upsetting to my kids.

I extended this even when my sister had a protection order against one of her ex husbands despite my kids being close with hers.  Nobody was happy about it but he violated that order frequently and nothing was ever really done.

One caveat is that my kids are all 12 and under. I may have a different view when they are older.

[teachermom2834]

I know this is a super lame suggestion and I probably wouldn’t be up for it as either parental party but possibly the only way this would work is to go with family socializing. In our homeschool circles we would get roped into having to socialize with the other parents when kids wanted to “date” or sometimes parents just wouldn’t let their kids visit with other families they didn’t know. So we would have to do getting to know you family dates. I didn’t enjoy it and it’s not really my thing. But it is possible that I might let my kid hang out if I was going to be present. It would depend on how dangerous I truly perceived the situation to be. Yelling I wouldn’t want my kid trapped with no “out” but I might feel okay if I was there to take kid and go. It would really depend on the specifics I knew of the situation and the vibe I got from you and your family in person and how much I valued the friendship for my kid. So I can’t say for sure. So it is possible I might be willing to do that sort of thing. Which is a big hassle for everyone- as entertaining adults is a whole extra energy and consideration- and weird to a lot of social groups. But that is a possibility that might or might not make socializing ok. 
 

Sorry you are in such a tough spot. 

[Lecka]

I agree that a public place is no guarantee, and I think there are good points in favor of the private home.

But in general this would not be compelling to me.

In general, number one, now an incident has already happened at the private home.  
 

Number two, people are usually on better behavior in public than in private.

 

Number three, a public place would be more neutral.  I think there is a lot of added emotion for people when they are standing outside their kids’ house not allowed inside.  I think that is just a more emotional space where something would be more likely to happen.

 

Number four, I would not trust a teen to immediately call in a restraining order violation on a parent.  There is too much that could be going on.  I wouldn’t trust a teen to do that.  I also would not trust a “separated mom” to be guaranteed to call in a violation of a restraining order.  I understand this is not your situation — but it’s still something I doubt I would trust.

 

However it sounds like I would be hearing my son’s version of events plus his friend’s version of events.  So, I don’t know.  There could also be specific things about the location that would make it seem safer to me.

 

If the incident itself didn’t seem like a very big deal, like — if it was “a raised voice,” the kids felt safe, the police just came to calm things down (and the dad left then), there was no confrontation, then that would seem a lot more minor.  Then say — if somebody was beating on the door and the kids were locked in the bathroom.  
 

Honestly if it seemed more minor, it would seem more like — the house is fine.  If it seemed more scary, it would make it seem less like the house is fine, while — yes, also meaning an incident could happen in public.  I think this is a Catch-22 to some extent, if your feeling is that home is safer than public.  I just don’t think it would come across that way to other people in general.  If there had already been — an incident at the skate park or basketball court or bike path (or whatever) your kids are known to go to, then — that would be different.  But that’s not what happened.  
 

But at the same time I think it is hard to know what all the details are and what the kids say about it!  So I think it could work out well and I hope it will work out well!!!!!

 

I think it’s also something where — if you as a parent said, your son has to stay home because you don’t think it’s safe for him to be in public, I think that is something you can do as a parent.  And then just see if other parents let kids come over.  I think it is something where each side has to do what they feel is right.  

[Bambam]

I think I'd be very concerned about how this person seems to know where either you or your sons are. How is that happening? Tracker? Someone telling him? Is he following you? I don't want to be paranoid, but I think I would be at this point. 

I'm so sorry this is happening.  I can't imagine the stress and concern as well as the effort of trying to figure out the right thing to do. 

[pinball]

IME, kids don’t want their friends to see stuff like this. It’s embarrassing and shameful to kids. I don’t think they should feel that way but feelings aren’t rational.

Would you WANT another kid at your house?

Do your KIDS want other kids over, knowing that their dad’s action might lead to the police being called?

[DawnM]

No.   Anything could happen.  As a school counselor and dealing with protective orders and rage and irrational parents......nope.  

[Grace Hopper]

45 minutes ago, Bambam said:

I think I'd be very concerned about how this person seems to know where either you or your sons are. How is that happening? Tracker? Someone telling him? Is he following you? I don't want to be paranoid, but I think I would be at this point. 

I'm so sorry this is happening.  I can't imagine the stress and concern as well as the effort of trying to figure out the right thing to do. 

Yeah, I’d also feel insecure with his “craftiness” at tracking you.

Have you told your lawyer about this latest incident? This has got to  have a negative effect on your kids. Seems like he’s not improved at all in his relational skills. Isn’t he is some kind of court ordered therapy plan? Can his therapist be notified of this behavior? For documentation purposes at the very least?

[pinball]

21 minutes ago, pinball said:

IME, kids don’t want their friends to see stuff like this. It’s embarrassing and shameful to kids. I don’t think they should feel that way but feelings aren’t rational.

Would you WANT another kid at your house?

Do your KIDS want other kids over, knowing that their dad’s action might lead to the police being called?

Edited to add: I think you’re asking the wrong question. It should be…how can I (or can I even) facilitate friendships without endangering my kids’ friends.

[fraidycat]

Hugs BandH.

My answer is "it depends". Teen is a wide range of ages, so my answer for 13 and 17 are not necessarily the same.

I would talk to my kid to get their impression of the incident that lead to the police presence and find out if they would even want to return.

And, I would probably talk to you directly because this incident did not happen at your home, but the home of a relative (Dh's relative?). Maybe I'm too naive/trusting, but my thought process is that he tried because he had the "advantage" of plausible deniability at his relative's house, whereas if it were your house it would be a direct and blatant violation, and one he might be less likely to engage in.

So, I might be comfortable with my kid spending a random afternoon at your place just hanging with your kids, but not at larger family gatherings with his family.

 

[hshibley]

1 hour ago, Bambam said:

I think I'd be very concerned about how this person seems to know where either you or your sons are. How is that happening? Tracker? Someone telling him? Is he following you? I don't want to be paranoid, but I think I would be at this point. 
 

It seems as if most of the time this is occurring when the kids are with the in-laws. It’s not necessarily that he’s crafty more likely the in-laws have poor/conflicted judgement. 
 

I’d cut the time with any of the in-laws to the legal minimum until the husband is stable and stops abusing the kids. 

[Harriet Vane]

@BandH I trust your assessment of what's actually safe versus not based on your interaction with the person in question.

However, other parents are less likely to be as nuanced in THEIR assessment of whether or not their kid hangs out with your kid. I think other parents are likely to perceive public places or their own homes to be safer than your home or your in-laws (whether or not that's actually true). I also think that elaborate explanations or discussions with those other parents are more likely to create distance rather than create trust with you. All you can really do is apologize for what was upsetting, emphasize how much your child values the friendship, and be as accommodating as you can be to what the other parent feels comfortable with.

As I said earlier, tell your lawyer.

Also try to figure out how he's tracking you. Get a mechanic to check your car. Get someone with actual, serious tech skills and know-how to check your phone. Go over your apartment with a fine tooth comb, including clocks and vents and everything. Check your purse and check your children's backpacks and belongings with a fine tooth comb. It's entirely possible this person is simply good at figuring out where you will be, but you would be well advised to go the extra mile to make sure you are not being tracked with devices or software. 

And then check again in a couple months. Make it part of your regular safety maintenance. You know this person is clinically paranoid with tenuous connection to reality. 

I'm really sorry. I do pray for you.

Edited January 16, 2023 by Harriet Vane

[Spryte]

On the tracking end of things: I would also check the kids’ phones carefully, to see if those are trackable. I’m only familiar with IPhones, but are they sharing their location inadvertently? There are a few ways to set that up on iPhone. Is there an Air Tag traveling around with you or the kids?

Or it may just be a case of he has a good idea of the places you might be, and drives around till he finds you. 

[Faith-manor]

1 hour ago, Bambam said:

I think I'd be very concerned about how this person seems to know where either you or your sons are. How is that happening? Tracker? Someone telling him? Is he following you? I don't want to be paranoid, but I think I would be at this point. 

I'm so sorry this is happening.  I can't imagine the stress and concern as well as the effort of trying to figure out the right thing to do. 

I do not believe you are paranoid. I think he has some sort of pathology that makes him very, very dangerous. OP, I would hire a security expert, maybe ex military or retired FBI or something to come and sweep my home for devices, sweep the cars, the kids backpacks and bikes, etc. I would hire them to watch your home for a few days. I think he is stalking you and the kids, and I am very concerned this will escalate.

Since the custody order is for supervised visitation only, if you have any control of the where it happens, I think that I would insist upon it being not in his home because that allows him a lot of easy plotting about how to abuse the kids, and I would want a lot of witnesses which might make him less likely to escalate so instead of a park or somewhere with no guarantee of people close nearby, a restaurant or something similar that has a staff. The reason for this is that when these things happen inside a private home, the police often do not take it seriously. They see it as a he said/she said. When there are multiple witnesses who are not relatives, "Dude was seriously losing his mind, and I was scared for the child." "Dude was creepy, made me nervous..." Police, judges, and prosecutors take more notice. You are right, your kids are probably not safer in a public space if he decides to do something. Sad to say. But unrelated witnesses may make a difference going forward.

I feel his behavior is getting worse, and that makes me very nervous for your children.

[Drama Llama]

1 hour ago, hshibley said:

It seems as if most of the time this is occurring when the kids are with the in-laws. It’s not necessarily that he’s crafty more likely the in-laws have poor/conflicted judgement. 
 

I’d cut the time with any of the in-laws to the legal minimum until the husband is stable and stops abusing the kids. 

The court order says that my kids can only see him when certain in laws are there.  So, most of the incidents have happened in that context.   That doesn't mean that they are the cause of the incidents.  It's just that he doesn't see them when the in laws aren't around.  

I don't think anyone would try harder to protect my kids than their relatives have.  

[Drama Llama]

1 hour ago, Faith-manor said:

I do not believe you are paranoid. I think he has some sort of pathology that makes him very, very dangerous. OP, I would hire a security expert, maybe ex military or retired FBI or something to come and sweep my home for devices, sweep the cars, the kids backpacks and bikes, etc. I would hire them to watch your home for a few days. I think he is stalking you and the kids, and I am very concerned this will escalate.

We have the protective order because of stalking.   We've done a lot of what you suggest.  

1 hour ago, Faith-manor said:

Since the custody order is for supervised visitation only, if you have any control of the where it happens, I think that I would insist upon it being not in his home because that allows him a lot of easy plotting about how to abuse the kids, and I would want a lot of witnesses which might make him less likely to escalate so instead of a park or somewhere with no guarantee of people close nearby, a restaurant or something similar that has a staff. The reason for this is that when these things happen inside a private home, the police often do not take it seriously. They see it as a he said/she said. When there are multiple witnesses who are not relatives, "Dude was seriously losing his mind, and I was scared for the child." "Dude was creepy, made me nervous..." Police, judges, and prosecutors take more notice. You are right, your kids are probably not safer in a public space if he decides to do something. Sad to say. But unrelated witnesses may make a difference going forward.

I feel his behavior is getting worse, and that makes me very nervous for your children.

My kids aren't allowed in his home.  The order specifies that visitation happens at his Dad's or his sister's.  At this point, I think that's safer than in public,  although I will say that testimony of the school security guard was very helpful in getting the protective order, so I understand where you're coming from.   

[Faith-manor]

Sorry, Band! For some reason I thought he lived with his dad so therefore visitation at grandpa's house was also at his house.

[Drama Llama]

Just now, Faith-manor said:

Sorry, Band! For some reason I thought he lived with his dad so therefore visitation at grandpa's house was also at his house.

He used to.  When the kids and I moved out of the house we own jointly he moved in, which is better because it means my kids and their cousins can visit Grandpa and Pop.

[Faith-manor]

Just now, BandH said:

He used to.  When the kids and I moved out of the house we own jointly he moved in, which is better because it means my kids and their cousins can visit Grandpa and Pop.

Gotcha!

[Grace Hopper]

Not sure if it’s that his behavior is getting worse, or if there’s been no true effort to rehabilitate it. It seems that by now you’d have enough incidents recorded that you could maybe get full custody and leave the area, giving you and your kids a fresh start. 

[AmandaVT]

I hope there are legal repercussions for violating a restraining order! He may need to stew in a cell for a bit or pay a fine to understand that he needs to follow the law.

[Mrs Tiggywinkle Again]

1 minute ago, AmandaVT said:

I hope there are legal repercussions for violating a restraining order! He may need to stew in a cell for a bit or pay a fine to understand that he needs to follow the law.

If it’s anything like New York you’re just given a warning.  

 

42 minutes ago, Grace Hopper said:

Not sure if it’s that his behavior is getting worse, or if there’s been no true effort to rehabilitate it. It seems that by now you’d have enough incidents recorded that you could maybe get full custody and leave the area, giving you and your kids a fresh start. 

Her kids are so bonded to her in laws and their cousins that probably leaving would be emotionally worse.  Normally, though, that’s what I’d suggest. 
(and I speak as someone who would be much healthier physically and emotionally if we could move away, but my children are incredibly attached to grandparents and aunts that I feel it would be emotionally devastating to them; it’s much more than a normal grandparent attachment.)

[Lecka]

Nm

 

 

Edited January 16, 2023 by Lecka

[Drama Llama]

51 minutes ago, AmandaVT said:

I hope there are legal repercussions for violating a restraining order! He may need to stew in a cell for a bit or pay a fine to understand that he needs to follow the law.

I have filed for contempt on a different issue that might stick, but my evidence is stronger.  I can’t prove that he knew we were there when he showed up, and he can argue that he left as soon as he knew.

 

[Anne]

(((B&H)))

Praying for you and your children.

Anne

[Drama Llama]

51 minutes ago, Mrs Tiggywinkle Again said:

If it’s anything like New York you’re just given a warning.  

 

Her kids are so bonded to her in laws and their cousins that probably leaving would be emotionally worse.  Normally, though, that’s what I’d suggest. 
(and I speak as someone who would be much healthier physically and emotionally if we could move away, but my children are incredibly attached to grandparents and aunts that I feel it would be emotionally devastating to them; it’s much more than a normal grandparent attachment.)

Yeah my youngest in particular is super attached to his grandfather.  Even before my middle son arrived my boys were far more attached to their grandfather and pop than to their dad. And then those two basically raised them while we were busy with their brother and then when we were deep in the weeds with grief.

But he’d find us anyway.  

[cintinative]

6 minutes ago, BandH said:

 I can’t prove that he knew we were there when he showed up, and he can argue that he left as soon as he knew.

 

Can he really? Didn't you say the police had to come? That doesn't sound like "he left as soon as he knew."

I don't know you, and honestly, this might not be fair, but the friend I had in an abusive situation underwent so much trauma she could not really see the danger she and the children were in until way, way, way late in the game.  When you are in a constant state of vigilance, it can be hard to realize that each escalation is another leap away from normal.  Praying for your safety.

 

Edited January 16, 2023 by cintinative

[Drama Llama]

1 minute ago, cintinative said:

Can he really? Didn't you say the police had to come? That doesn't sound like "he left as soon as he knew."

I don't know you, and honestly, this might not be fair, but the friend I had in an abusive situation underwent so much trauma she could not really see the danger she and the children were in until way, way, way late in the game.  When you are in a constant state of vigilance, it can be hard to realize that each escalation is another leap away from normal. 

He was gone before the police arrived.

I am not in denial.  

[Grace Hopper]

30 minutes ago, BandH said:

I have filed for contempt on a different issue that might stick, but my evidence is stronger.  I can’t prove that he knew we were there when he showed up, and he can argue that he left as soon as he knew.

 

Would hope that having witnesses that can attest that he did not leave without negatively engaging a minor would be a point in your favor. 

[Drama Llama]

43 minutes ago, Grace Hopper said:

Would hope that having witnesses that can attest that he did not leave without negatively engaging a minor would be a point in your favor. 

He didn’t engage with the kids.  There were a bunch of kids outside when he showed up,  but all but my oldest came inside.  I don’t know that they heard any yelling,  my impression is that as soon as they saw him walking up to the house, they ran inside.  

My oldest stayed and watched but the verbal altercation was between the adults.  

[bolt.]

4 minutes ago, BandH said:

He didn’t engage with the kids.  There were a bunch of kids outside when he showed up,  but all but my oldest came inside.  I don’t know that they heard any yelling,  my impression is that as soon as they saw him walking up to the house, they ran inside.  

My oldest stayed and watched but the verbal altercation was between the adults.  

That doesn't seem so bad. He came; adults stopped him from engaging with the kids (who witnessed nothing) and then he went away. The police arrived after, mostly just to document the transgression.

As the other parent, that wouldn't be an automatic "no" from me.

[Grace Hopper]

24 minutes ago, bolt. said:

That doesn't seem so bad. He came; adults stopped him from engaging with the kids (who witnessed nothing) and then he went away. The police arrived after, mostly just to document the transgression.

As the other parent, that wouldn't be an automatic "no" from me.

I think it is bad. Aside from most of the kids running into the house, he nearly accomplished what he likely set out to do - catch the kids when they were outside playing, possibly (probably? hopefully?) while adults were indoors and might not notice him right away. 

[livetoread]

52 minutes ago, bolt. said:

That doesn't seem so bad. He came; adults stopped him from engaging with the kids (who witnessed nothing) and then he went away. The police arrived after, mostly just to document the transgression.

As the other parent, that wouldn't be an automatic "no" from me.

If he had been following the protective order, he would have left as soon as he saw the kids. The fact that he didn't  - he stuck around long enough to get into it with the adults means he was not following the order. He knew kids were there and he stayed long enough to argue. Not safe IMO. Purposefully not following the order speaks to a state of mind that is not trustworthy.

[Drama Llama]

1 hour ago, Grace Hopper said:

I think it is bad. Aside from most of the kids running into the house, he nearly accomplished what he likely set out to do - catch the kids when they were outside playing, possibly (probably? hopefully?) while adults were indoors and might not notice him right away. 

I think the speed and urgency with which my kids and the adults reacted scared her.  

[freesia]

3 minutes ago, BandH said:

I think the speed and urgency with which my kids and the adults reacted scared her.  

The friend? Or their mom?

[freesia]

53 minutes ago, livetoread said:

If he had been following the protective order, he would have left as soon as he saw the kids. The fact that he didn't  - he stuck around long enough to get into it with the adults means he was not following the order. He knew kids were there and he stayed long enough to argue. Not safe IMO. Purposefully not following the order speaks to a state of mind that is not trustworthy.

I think the protective order is with BH not the kids. 

[Drama Llama]

1 minute ago, freesia said:

The friend? Or their mom?

The friend.  

[Harriet Vane]

1 hour ago, Grace Hopper said:

I think it is bad. Aside from most of the kids running into the house, he nearly accomplished what he likely set out to do - catch the kids when they were outside playing, possibly (probably? hopefully?) while adults were indoors and might not notice him right away. 

Yup. This brings back memories for me of someone who is dear to me and was taken by her father while playing outside with a friend. The father returned her the next day. It doesn't always happen that way, sadly. 

[Drama Llama]

1 minute ago, freesia said:

I think the protective order is with BH not the kids. 

We're all named, but there is an exception that allows him to see the kids under very specific visitation conditions.  There is no exception that allows him to be where I am. 

[freesia]

Just now, BandH said:

The friend.  

Ok, that helps. I’ve been trying to figure out what I would do in this situation. If the friend were my dd and she was scared, I probably would not let her come over. I’d want her to trust her instincts about these types of situations and honor that. If she were my child’s girlfriend, I would be very sad about that. I would probably try to brainstorm what would work.