Witness:  Mrs. Courtney McGhee, Parent, St. Louis County

     Shortly after I met my husband, his ex-wife completed her residency in medical practice. Prior to this, my husband, Bill, had shared close to 50 percent custody arrangement and was very flexible and helpful with her pediatric residency schedule. The custody arrangement in the decree stated that they should attempt to maintain as close to 50/50 as possible.

     Upon completing her residency, there was allowed less and less time with his son. This intensified with our engagement and marriage. Within three months, Bill's time was reduced to less than 35 percent and his ex-wife wasn't willing to discuss any other options. It became very frustrating as we began seeking legal counsel, only to find out that little could be done to enforce the 50/50 arrangement without a trial. Our decision to pursue litigation was not lightly made. We did a lot of research and we also started talking with a child psychologist and felt that it was in the best interest of Ian to continue the 50/50 arrangement.

     18 months later, now faced with thousands of dollars in legal fees, and many very emotional and frustrating days, we went to trial. During this time of 18 months, we lost over 35 days that would have been ours if the 50/50 arrangement had been maintained. The whole process was extremely frustrating, and I had a very difficult time understanding why this was even happening. I come from a situation where my ex-husband is very minimally involved with our children, and I couldn't help but continue to think about all the times I wish he would have been there to help me or support me, and I also am hearing consistently about all the deadbeat dads, I have a husband now who is extremely supportive, very dedicated father, and had to go to trial to even try to maintain the 50/50 situation.

     Ian had two parents, both of whom loved him very much, and they were both good parents. He also has a stepbrother and stepsister, along with myself, who loved him very much and wanted him to be very much a part of our life. Perhaps, most importantly, Ian, himself, had expressed that he would like to spend equal time with his mom and dad. There was no evidence presented during the trial to say that Bill was a bad father, or why he should not maintain 50 percent, and yet we were awarded the standard one night a week, every other weekend schedule. Needless to say, the decision was devastating for our family. We were faced with questions from Ian, like, is it because you don't love me as much, is why you don't see me as often as you used to, daddy? Or why can't I spend equal time with my mommy and daddy? We saw behavior changes where he began acting out at school. He also openly talked about his anger, because his daddy didn't want him or couldn't be with him as much.

     Because our three children are within one year of age, they're very close. Ian not being there has been difficult for my son, who cries frequently during the week period that we do not get to see Ian. We try to call during this time, but we always get the answering machine, and most calls are not returned. Because we coach some of Ian's school sports, he misses practice on games that fall on his mother's time. Most of all, and the most difficult thing to deal with is not having Ian with us when something special happens and we do things with the family. The one night a week, every other weekend makes it extremely difficult to schedule weekly activities, and special events, and Ian's absence is felt very strongly throughout our family.
 
     I'd like to close by sharing one positive thing that did come out of our experience. The judge did rule that we are allowed to maintain visitation with Ian until Monday morning, and all exchanges happen at school, or at whatever the child care situation is during the summer. I think that this is a very positive thing for us. It certainly has been and it has kept Ian from being in a situation any longer if there should be a conflict that occur with his parents that now happens on the phone when he's not even around, if that should have to happen. Nothing will ever get us back the time we have lost and will continue to lose with Ian. We only hope that the future will allow us the opportunity to once again share as much of Ian's life as really is fair and we feel that really is fair, and that, we feel, is 50 percent.

      I feel from my experience and recommendation, and from listening to some other people here today, I think the idea of the exchanges outside the home is a very positive recommendation and should be, if nothing else, with Siegenfalther, they should be changed to at least continue until the Monday morning. I think that 50/50 visitation schedule should be assumed unless there's reason to show that it's detrimental for the parents.

     I think that it's very important there's quicker access to the court when needed to enforce a decree. We had to wait 18 months and lost all that time with Ian, and now have permanently lost the time unless something changes.

     I think it's also important that if there is a conflict, that if not assumed, or what happened with us, the judge ruled because his mother showed open hostility about a 50/50 arrangement, but yet she was the one who got most of the time. We didn't show any hostility. My husband was very supportive in the court trial, but she still - that's the way she ruled. So, it was a very frustrating experience.
 
     DOUGHERTY: Thank you, very much. May I ask who the judge was?

     MCGHEE: You know, I don't have it with me. I forgot to write it down, I'm sorry.

     DOUGHERTY: Not indelibly burned in your mind. Okay. Are there other questions.

     HOLLINGSWORTH: What county?

     DOUGHERTY: St. Louis County.

     MCGHEE: She was brand new to Family Court. I know that.

     We had another judge who was going to rule on 50/50 according to the old decree and then our trial date was the day before Thanksgiving, and they were running late, so we didn't get our trial, and it got moved to a new judge, at the turn of the year, and that's why we received a new judge.

     DOUGHERTY: Thank you, very much.

     Have a couple more witnesses. I want to tell the committee members that we'll need your calendars today before you leave, so we can set up future times. We need to do that before we leave today.

     Justin Minx? Marie Kenyon. This is the last witness that we have to speak for today.