OW called to tell H that she wants him to have as much to do with the baby as he wants, but that he wouldn't be able to have overnight visits until she's at least a year old. In other words, OW just called to check in with H. I told H that there was absolutely no sense in her calling him to talk about visitation with the baby -- or how much, or how little, H wants to do with the baby -- because all that needs to be worked out with lawyers, and in writing, anyway.
I got the distinct sense, though, that OW was either recording the phone conversation or had someone -- perhaps an atty?? -- listening in. NC is a one-party state, meaning as long as one party knows a conversation is being recorded, it is legal.
OW, as I figured, danced circles around my H. When it comes to tactic and strategy, he's lost. Seeing as how I have to use that almost daily in my job, it's obviously my forte, which is why H wanted my input into what he should tell her. But it proved very difficult to try to "coach" him on what to say while OW continued spouting off.
Actually, she was very calm and accommodating, which added to my suspicion that she was recording the call to later use against my H.
Our strategy, since H couldn't hold a candle to what she was saying, was to simply make H seem as confused as he can be re: his potential role in the baby's life.
He asked her if she would be willing to let him relinquish his paternal rights, pending, of course, the results of a paternity test showing H is the father. While she's very agreeable to the paternity test, she said she is "not emotionally ready" to let him sign his rights over.
In other words, she's not ready to let go of the possibility of raking us for everything we have.
But she didn't say it like that. She said the reason she's not "emotionally ready" to let him sign over his rights is because she fears he will someday want to have something to do with the baby. H said, "Well that would be my fault, not yours." Obviously, that was BS on OW's part.
H told her that I was totally supportive of helping raise the baby, and that we are discussing either joint or full custody. OW said, "You can try if that's what you want to do, but I don't think it will happen." H brought up that he and I are now in MC, we both have stable jobs and stable incomes, whereas OW is divorced with two children, self-employed and a full-time student. OW said that due to what my H had told her about me during their 4-month fling, she would have reservations about *my* ability to help raise her child. Puhleeze.
H reminded her that she's not innocent in the sitch. It's not like, if we *have* to go to court, that a judge is going to only look down on H and me because our M faltered a little and OW is going to be looked at as some sort of innocent victim; she is a bona fide "homewrecker," after all.
She told H that she doesn't regret what she did (sleeping with a married man and getting pregnant). She said, "Well, from what you told me, I really thought your relationship with P&DB was over." H responded that he was certainly guilty of painting that picture to her; however, he said, "When you sleep with a married man, that's a chance you take." He used the same response when she alluded to the fact that she's not comfortable with me being Mom #2 to her baby. Too freakin' bad.
OW told H that she thinks they can informally work out an agreement for visitation; she thinks he should keep the baby during the days she can't take her to preschool.
H refused to an informal agreement and said *anything* and *everything* they agree on will be in writing. Obviously.
OW asked H if he wants to know when she's on her way to the hospital. He said no and told her to simply send him legal paperwork after the baby's born. He told her that he and I would gladly pay for a paternity test.
At the end of the day, the entire phone conversation was pointless. And I'm still sure it was used as a guise for something else. Especially considering how polite and agreeable she was -- when H says that's not her nature -- I know she's up to something. And unfortunately, she holds all the cards.
That's one thing I'm *not* used to: someone else holding all the cards. Our hands are so very tied at this point.
And you know what I -- the infamous "femi-nazi" -- have learned over the course of these awful past nine months? A father's rights are so, so very limited. He gets someone preggo and has absolutely *no* say-so whatsoever in if that pregnancy will continue or if it will be terminated. Granted, that's a risk a man takes. But once he gets a woman preggo, that's the end of his decision-making power. From that point on, the woman calls all the shots.
That made me happy when I was preggo with all my children; after all -- and I reminded my H of this last night -- when he was leaving me in Sept., he told *me* to abort my son. Obviously, I didn't listen, and he's very grateful for that now.
But it's still very aggravating, from a man's perspective, that they can make *one* mistake and pay for it the rest of their lives. The woman -- many of whom attempt to "trick" a man into getting her preggo (by saying she's on birth control or can't get preggo, etc.) --at least has the ability to terminate the pregnancy if she chooses. And if she chooses to keep the baby, she can make darn sure the father -- who hasn't had the first say-so -- pays.
In other words, OW just called to check in with H. I told H that there was absolutely no sense in her calling him to talk about visitation with the baby -- or how much, or how little, H wants to do with the baby -- because all that needs to be worked out with lawyers, and in writing, anyway.
