RE: joint medical, and D*' status

Oh, also. You said in your mail you wouldn't have agreed without
exclusive medical. You have a convenient memory. I refused to agree
with it and you crossed it out. I pointed out how you had freaked out
over some things (shall I list them) and then you agreed.

What is with you? Do you want everything? How long are you going to
keep up this hate campaign?

On Mon, 2004-09-20 at 18:51, tom lynch wrote:
> Please answer my medical questions, what have doctors been doing with
> D*? I want to see records and notes, know proceedures etc. I
> want to be informed. Also, when are you going to pick a pediatrician
> willing to work with both D* mom AND DAD?
> ..
>
> When we agreed on Dalton I wasn't aware that your attorney had been
> taking advantage of conflicts of interest. E.g. I was furious to
> discover that Peggy Farely was a former client of BrAn's. Did you
> know this? Now I know why she lied in court and then dropped out.
> Also, I have recently learned that you accused me of molesting D*
> and told some other lies. Thus, it is unreasonable to expect me to
> feel comfortable working with your attorney's new favorite psychologist.
>
> In my opinion, someone should be chosen outside of your attorneys circle
> of friends and we need to start together and fresh. From our
> conversation some weeks back, it was my understanding that you were
> going to do just this, i.e. identify someone without conflicts, and that
> I was to be included. I'm dissapointed that you went back to politics
> instead.
>
> You understand that our agreement is *our* agreement right? Anything we
> both agree on can be done. It was meant as a workable starting place.
> I fully expected to see us adapt to changes instead of trying to bull
> doze them over. In light of the BrAn conflicts, we can agree on
> another doctor.
>
> About your comment of keeping D* in mind - that is exactly what I
> am doing. In my opinion, the root of D*' behavioral issues have
> to do with him feeling you are not listening to him - especially when he
> wants to spend time with his father. This comes across clearly when you
> do things like last night. He wanted to finish working on a project, he
> called you to discuss this. He called both the home and cell phone.
> You did not call back, not even in the morning.
>
> You did not call back because, as you have said many times, and in front
> of him, you don't like me and you are trying to minimize our time
> together. In short you have been hatefull towards me, even in front of
> D*. He sees this, and he talks about it - and he acts out
> because of it. D* was upset this morning because you had not
> bothered to even answer or call back. He is not happy that you don't
> give him his calls or messages from me, or from his friends over here.
> They ask him why he didn't call and he has to say it is because his mom
> does not like his Dad.
>
> And ..the phone is but one example.
>
> Also, about the photo of you screaming that D* has apparently
> seen. This was not on purpose. He is still upset about it. He isn't
> upset because you screamed or pushed, etc. He is familiar with such
> childish behavior from other kids. He is upset because you are lying
> about it. I.e. your explanation doesn't even wash with a six year
> old. If you told him that you got upset sometimes, that you weren't
> perfect (as no one is), and that you regreted your mistake, and
> apologized. HE WOULD RESPOND TO THAT. I'm sure he would forgive you,
> and we could all move on.
>
> The last time we discussed D* behavior we were interrupted because
> you had not acknowledged receiving email. .. I know you probably don't
> believe this anyway, but D* behavior problems clear up a day or
> two after we get together. (This makes weekend visits heart breaking.
> He straightens up just to head back into it.) I partially suspect sleep
> and diet. I don't think he is getting enough sleep. You know how he
> never wants to miss anything. Also, he seems more settled after some
> solid meals.
>
> But also, there is another reason. D* and I are pretty good
> friends. We do a lot together. My chief method for dealing with an
> outburst is to have a discussion about what his feelings are, why he
> does something, and how such things blend in with school and the future.
> **I take his side, because, you know, he is a smart kid - I have yet to
> hear him say something that doesn't make sense from his point of
> view.** I also embrace his feelings instead of rejecting them. I call
> his outbursts protests. That is how we got into reading about Ghandi.
> You can change an outburst into laughter that way. He was thrilled to
> hear about Ghandi. (I learned a lot too. Ghandi wasn't really like how
> I had imagined.) .. He tole me he went back to your place and got
> blasted for trying it out.
>
> Also, about D*' behavior at school. This has to do with respect
> of authority and apparently your explanation of the photograph. It
> seems he is having difficulty sorting out what you have said because he
> knows he shouldn't believe all of it and he can't ask you because you
> don't admitt mistakes. I dealt with the treasure and color issues.
> Your point system and earning of toys gave him a lot of stress, so when
> they did something similar at school he freaked out. We now have a
> deal. If you or the school won't give the prize to him and he feels he
> deserves it - I will. I have made good on this a few times now and it
> really helps. You probably saw the glow in the dark stars. Also the
> school agreed to cut back on the tit for tat system they have. Also I
> observed class. Once when he was contemplating a fit, he turned and
> looked at me. That sorted it out. He knew it was wrong. He just
> stopped.
>
> Apparently, after this, you took him to Dalton. Since then he has shown
> some signs of swinging from sullen to manic. I want to know what you all
> did. I want to know about medication if any. I want to know which days
> he had Claritin also.
>
> In short you are screwing up big time with this hate campaign. Wasting
> a lot of money, hurting our future, and damaging our son. ..Then you
> go off and find some sycophant to justify the campaign. You are using
> a simple basis agreement as a weapon, and then you innocently ask me to
> keep D*' interest at heart. Hah. I can't imagine what is going
> through your head, or where you think you are going with this.
>
> Now, earlier you said that arbitration is not binding for you.
> Apparently you are arguing this based on the number of millimeters
> between your initials and where they are written. Is this still your
> argument? I.e. if I spend money on arbitration, if you don't like the
> result, are you going to just turn around and say, oh that doesn't apply
> to me because of the distance between the writing and the initials"?
> I.e. is arbitration to be one more hurdle for you to get your way, or is
> it to be binding? If it isn't binding we don't have an arbitration
> agreement. And really, don't you think arbitration is in your interest
> too? Why don't you want to kick in? I'm tired of this threat of yours
> "if you don't like it go to arbitration and pay for it [and if I don't
> like the results I won't do it anyway]".
>
> You know, if you grow up, our son will have an easier time with it too.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 2004-09-20 at 15:41, H* Lynch wrote:
> > O.K., other copy shows that the word "exclusive" is scrached out. If I had known this when we had reached agreement, I would never sign the decree. Divorce agreement was made in very hectic and exhausting way, so I had overlooked this. Well, the damage is done. In any case, the court assigned Caryl Dalton to be a D*'s phychiatrist and I don't have any intension to change the doctor at this point. If you don't agree with this, you can initiate the mediation which our agreement says you will pay all costs.
> >
> > I really think this is not necessary, because D* is behaving very well last three weeks with the counselling and my care. What can be better explanation than these efforts actually are working with D*, which he had been awarded a Principle's Pride for his improved behavior about a week ago.
> >
> > Please think about D*'s best interest, not your own interest.
> >
> >
> > --H*
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: tom lynch [mailto:tom.lynch@somedomain]
> > Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 2:24 PM
> > To: H* Lynch
> > Subject: RE: joint medical, and D*' status
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 2004-09-20 at 09:50, H* Lynch wrote:
> > > Tom,
> > >
> > > As for medical decision for D*, I have an exclusive right. Please
> > > read the decree carefully. This provision was made because your medical
> > > misuse over D* (changing doctors so many times, making D*
> > > going thru x-rays on his head when he was not even one year old....).
> > >
> >
> > We had an agreed settlment, there was no such order based on X-raying
> > anyone's head or changing doctors.
> >
> > I have read it, and I remember the negociation on this topic very
> > well. The word exclusive was crossed off as a requirement to conclude
> > the agreement. My copy shows this clearly. Do you need another copy?
> >
> > I have not been included in any discussions over D* with a doctor.
> >
> > !! Please inform me of what has been done, and what is being done!!
> >
> >
> > > In any case, I have already notified over the phone (few weeks ago over
> > > the phone after D* hit two of YMCA counselors) that D* is
> > > going to have counseling with Dr. Caryl Dalton. It is so ridiculous to
> >
> > On the phone you said that you intended to find someone we could all
> > work with. You implied this wasn't going to be your lawyer's hand
> > picked pyschologist this time. She hadn't worked out before. I did not
> > realize D* was seeing anyone. I want to know what is being done,
> > what proceedures are being used, and I would like copies of all medical
> > records. You may fax them to me (512-233-0770).
> >
> > Also, D* had good reason to be upset with the YMCA. Children don't
> > always communicate in words, but he was glad to explain it when I asked
> > him. Your failure to understand or to communicate with him has
> > frustrated him further. Imagine having a mother who would take you to
> > see a shrink over an incident rather than asking you what happened.
> >
> > > see that you don't know anything about this, especially last Friday I
> > > had a visit from Round Rock police officer following up your "strange"
> > > filing against me, that I allow the therapist to hypnotize D*. I
> > > assure you that no hypnosis with D* and no medication given to
> > > D*.
> >
> > H*, what have you done? Don't you see the damage you are
> > creating? Don't you think it is time to stop being vindicative?
> >
> > >
> > > I think I have elaborated enough, and please don't misuse Round Rock
> > > Police Department to harass me. This is being recorded and can be
> > > considered as indirect harassment.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the cooperation.
> > >
> > > --H*
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: tom lynch [mailto:tom.lynch@somedomain]
> > > Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 12:55 AM
> > > To: H* Lynch
> > > Subject: joint medical, and D*' status
> > >
> > > H*,
> > >
> > > Note, our decree is very clear about joint medical, and I have not heard
> > > anything from you, or agreed to anything yet D* seems to be
> > > indicating otherwise. Is D* taking any medication? Is he under
> > > going any therapy or proceedures of any kind? Have you been leaving me
> > > in the dark about something? Please elaborate.
> > >
> > > Tom
> > >
> >
Received on Mon Sep 20 18:54:18 2004