UPDATE Received a call from my paralegal with news about my wife's partially-executed stipulation and order (i.e. the legal document following the little private conversation my wife and I had about two weeks ago).
In short, I don't agree with a lot of the items that her lawyer wrote up, so my gut is still saying (like it has been for awhile): wait till the court hearing on 6/4 itself.
Mr. Bond, you were right on the money about her adding the playing on the driveway issue to that order. I knew that was coming too, but while the point is valid, the way and reason it's presented is stretching it. Here's the excerpt from her lawyer:
"On a final note, Wife has expressed to me her concern regarding E playing in a driveway. The provision regarding E not playing in a driveway is not intended to reflect on either parents' parenting skills; but rather, is based on statistics and professional experience by Wife regarding such accidents. Many times, even the most diligent parents are no match for the energetic, quick-footed and curious nature of children. An accident is just that--unplanned, expected or foreseeable. Wife and I hope that Alamo sees the wisdom and practicality of such a provision in the S&O."
There's so many ways to look at this, but it's almost a waste of my time. Statistically, falls are the the leading non-fatal (but seriously injuring) accidents to children in the US, while in-car accidents is the leading fatal accident for children. Perhaps maybe my wife should order me to stop driving, because (a) my car's crash test rating for rear passengers is not the best, or (b) that in-car accidents statistically is more dangerous than playing on a driveway or riding a bike.
Statistically, my wife has been in more accidents. I have been in none. Maybe I should counter with that.
Okay, okay, I'm ranting. I have a meeting with my lawyer on Friday, so hopefully we can "strategize" something.
