Custody Wars: Why High-Conflict Cases Get So Ugly and How to Keep Yours From Spiraling with Attorney Lindsay Belmont

Episode Notes

Transcript

Lindsay Belmont [00:00:00]:
I’ve had some of the hardest consults in my career where the person is disclosing absolutely abhorrent behavior by their spouse, abuse, just horrible, horrible things. And the person consulting with me says, I can’t leave the kids alone with him though. Or, I just needed somebody to know that this is happening in case something happens to me. So in those types of situations— Wow. You know, first I try not to cry during the consult because it’s just unbelievable. Like, there just aren’t words. Um, but we do see people, or a parent, stay in that situation solely so they can protect the children.

David Crum [00:00:41]:
Welcome to the show, everybody. I am your super talented divorce lawyer and host, David Crumb, and with me always is the very trustworthy and lovely Brooke Matthew. Brooke, are you ready to talk about this tonight?

Brooke Mathieu [00:00:53]:
Hey, everybody. Let’s talk about it. This one is a— it’s a hard subject, but I think it’s something, a hard thing you got to talk about.

David Crum [00:01:02]:
I don’t know if I’m ready to talk about this. I, uh, I’m both excited because it’s an important topic, and I’m a little sad, and I’m a little depressed. You know why?

Brooke Mathieu [00:01:10]:
I don’t know if I would say I’m excited, but why?

David Crum [00:01:13]:
I’m a little depressed because in these cases, and I handle a lot of them, I’ve sometimes been the hero, Brooke. Certainly been the hero. But sometimes I’ve also been the villain in this case. And that’s got me a little blue today.

Brooke Mathieu [00:01:26]:
Not surprising.

David Crum [00:01:28]:
So what do you want to hear about first? You want to hear the hero or you want to hear the villain?

Brooke Mathieu [00:01:32]:
Ooh, let’s hear the bad and then we’ll let you redeem yourself.

David Crum [00:01:38]:
Oh my God. All right. Representing a case. This is a man and a woman getting divorced and they have a son. And one of the first— and this is the most toxic case I’ve ever seen. Okay, toxic case on all fronts, including custody. And the first thing that we have to do is the other side, who’s representing mom and the boys living with mom, and I’m representing the man, and she asks the court to let her and the son stay in the house. Right.

David Crum [00:02:06]:
Reasonable request.

Brooke Mathieu [00:02:07]:
Yeah, you think?

David Crum [00:02:08]:
My client says no. So we have to go to court on this. And I asked opposing counsel, hey, can we just talk about this? No, she will not talk about it. So we go in. We make our arguments. Now, the, the— my client had— was running, kind of running a business out of the home. So that’s what I glommed onto. And despite the fact that it was mom and son and my husband— or my client living in the house, the judge said, yeah, Mr.

David Crum [00:02:35]:
Crumb, I think Mr. Crumb’s right. And he kicked out the wife and the son, and my husband stayed in the house.

Brooke Mathieu [00:02:42]:
You’re the worst.

David Crum [00:02:42]:
Oh my God. I’m like the Darth Vader of divorce cases.

Brooke Mathieu [00:02:47]:
Well, let’s see if you can redeem yourself.

David Crum [00:02:48]:
And I hate doing this because I know how much you admire me, so I hate telling you these kind of stories, but they’re important. They’re important to hear. All right, hero case. This is in your favorite state, my favorite state, New Mexico. I am representing mom, and dad lives in New Mexico, and he’s got the daughter for the summer, and he’s supposed to give her back at the end of the summer. And lo and behold, He just disappears with the daughter, and they disappear.

Brooke Mathieu [00:03:19]:
So he kidnapped her?

David Crum [00:03:21]:
Well, yes, and disappeared to one of our favorite places, Estancia, New Mexico.

Brooke Mathieu [00:03:29]:
I don’t even know where that is.

David Crum [00:03:30]:
I don’t even know where that is. I’d have to look on a map. But what I do know is I hired a private investigator. I figured out where this guy was, filed an emergency motion, got his ass into court. He threatened to fight me in court. I declined and said, why don’t we just let the judge hear it and figure it out? I stopped on the way, by the way, to get some red chili because Estancia has amazing red chili. So it was worth the trip.

Brooke Mathieu [00:03:52]:
Red chili pit stop. Get the chili.

David Crum [00:03:54]:
Red chili pit stop. I don’t remember the place, but it was awesome. All right, stop for the red chili. Then I go to court, and I’ve never had this in my life happen. I get done and the judge goes, hmm. And he looks at the other thing and he goes, Right there. Don’t move. And then he goes, Sheriff so-and-so, come over here for a second.

David Crum [00:04:14]:
So they went and they lined up. They got— it was 6 cop cars, took the guy, and we followed him to where he was hiding with the kid, which was in like some little trailer house. It was like 6 cop cars, me with my client in the back. The red lights are on. And then they go in and get the kid and then bring the kid out, hand the kid over to the mom. It was a Hollywood ending, Brooke.

Brooke Mathieu [00:04:38]:
That sounds traumatic for the kid. Oh,

David Crum [00:04:41]:
I’m sure.

Brooke Mathieu [00:04:41]:
I mean, I’m glad you got, got them back. But yeah, that, that does sound like straight out of a movie.

David Crum [00:04:47]:
So, so this is what I’m talking about. Custody cases, they can be so emotionally up and down for the attorneys as well, but especially for the kids and especially for the parties going through them. So that’s what we’re going to talk about today. Like, we’re going to try to make some sense about these custody cases. What’s important? What do people need to focus on? What really happens? And we’ve got some questions, as we often do, right? So let’s pose these questions right now before we get into the interview. And here’s, here’s the first questions I want to ask, and I know you have one too. So right now, courts are supposed to— Brooke, when you go to court, they’re supposed to look at and determine custody by asking this question: what is in the best interest of the kids? Right? That is what we call the presumption that the court makes. That’s what they have to determine.

David Crum [00:05:38]:
There are a lot of people out there, mostly men, who think that that standard should change. And they’ve been going to their legislatures and trying to change this. Hasn’t changed yet, but they’re making progress every year. And what they want the courts to do, or the law to say, is, listen, when you file a divorce case, the judge assumes, presumes, you’re each gonna get equal custody of the kid, physical custody. Mom, 50% of the time. dad 50% of the time. I don’t care how little the father or one of the parents was involved with the child, um, it’s going to be 50/50 unless you prove to me that it shouldn’t be. So I want to hear what, what people have to say.

David Crum [00:06:18]:
So write in the comments, do you think that best interest of the child is better, or should, should we automatically just start by splitting the kid? Hey, it’s mom and dad, and they should have, uh, equal say or equal custody of the kid. That’s my question. I know you have a question too you want to ask.

Brooke Mathieu [00:06:33]:
What I want to know from the listeners is, do you think divorce hurts kids? Or does it just hurt the divorcing parties?

David Crum [00:06:42]:
And I would add, is it better to stay married for the kids? Or is it better to get divorced? What’s, what’s worse?

Brooke Mathieu [00:06:52]:
I don’t know. I tend to say it’s probably better to get the divorce. If you’re— if that’s the question, I think we know the answer. But Let’s let the listeners put their thoughts in the comments. And let’s see if you change your mind as you listen to this podcast.

David Crum [00:07:09]:
I’m sure that I will change my mind. I bet I change your mind.

Brooke Mathieu [00:07:12]:
We’ll find out.

David Crum [00:07:14]:
All right. So the good news is, we have someone who’s coming onto the show who, unlike me, is usually the hero in these cases. Her name is Lindsay Belmont, and she’s an attorney who’s going to come on and talk about high-conflict custody cases. She describes herself as somebody who loves handling high conflict, but the reasons will surprise most people. So Brooke, let’s go ahead and bring on our guest. Welcome to the show, everybody. It is my great pleasure to welcome one of the elite attorneys we have at Nebraska Legal Group. So coming onto the show today is Lindsay Belmont.

David Crum [00:07:57]:
Lindsay, thanks for coming.

Lindsay Belmont [00:07:59]:
Of course. Thanks for having me.

David Crum [00:08:02]:
And a few things about Lindsey. So Lindsey, born and raised in Nebraska, but decided briefly to abandon her state to go to undergrad at University of Kansas, came to her senses, and then went to University of Nebraska for law school. And then she’s in private practice. She’s been private practice for over a decade. Now, here’s what I really love about Lindsey Brooke. A lot of attorneys don’t love Handling custody cases, they’re hard. They’re emotionally draining. You got to be on your toes.

David Crum [00:08:33]:
But Lindsay describes herself as somebody who loves high-conflict custody cases.

Brooke Mathieu [00:08:38]:
That’s an interesting description, Lindsay.

Lindsay Belmont [00:08:42]:
Yes.

David Crum [00:08:43]:
Okay, so you’re actually serious about this. So why is it, Lindsay? What is it that you love about custody cases?

Lindsay Belmont [00:08:49]:
And I promise I’m not crazy, but I am drawn to the contentious custody cases mostly because it’s where I feel I can advocate the strongest for my clients. You know, in the family law world, we’re dealing with these everyday activities, things that impact people on a daily basis. And when I meet with my clients and I ask them, what’s the most important thing to you? Oftentimes they’re going to say their children. And knowing that I can really argue for and represent them well in the courtroom when it comes to their kids, that just makes me feel like— that makes me feel like I am working at my highest potential.

David Crum [00:09:28]:
Yeah, relatively speaking. It’s not that the other stuff isn’t important, because it is, but just relatively speaking, it just seems like custody would be the most, right?

Lindsay Belmont [00:09:36]:
Right.

David Crum [00:09:36]:
But people, but people don’t act like that. Let’s, let’s kind of zoom out before we get into some specifics here and, and talk just generally about these cases, because this is— everyone always says, oh, the custody, right? What, what do you think? What is it about that? Why are custody cases such a problem?

Lindsay Belmont [00:09:51]:
You know, thinking about it, A lot of it, I think, stems from parents’ fear of the unknown. They’ve lived in this family unit for however long, and now all of a sudden the worlds are being upended and they’re separating households. And maybe a parent who’s been with the kids day in and day out is now going to go a period of time without seeing their kids.

Brooke Mathieu [00:10:13]:
That would be so hard. I don’t have kids, but I couldn’t imagine what a big shift that would be for parents.

Lindsay Belmont [00:10:20]:
Right. And then, you know, when anxiety hits or that fear of the unknown hits, your brain just spirals into, well, what’s happening if I can’t see my kids all the time? What’s going on over there? And I feel like that’s where some of the contention lies because now there’s a distrust of the co-parent. It’s just being out of control. And unfortunately, that can result in parents losing sight of what, what they have said is most important. And that’s Really, you know, what, what do your kids need right now? What’s best for your kids?

David Crum [00:10:52]:
That’s an interesting take on it. So a lot, a lot of people think they’re fighting because the other parent is bad, or they think the other parent is bad. But what you’re saying, you know, I’ve never thought of it this way. What you’re saying is, it’s just not even because you don’t know. That’s really what the source of the anxiety is. And I would imagine that that kind of causes concern that’s not always valid. Is that kind of what you’re getting at?

Lindsay Belmont [00:11:16]:
I would say so. And you know, for an example, if mom is the parent who’s always scheduled the doctor’s appointments, always done the dentist, takes the children to the dentist, and now all of a sudden there’s a court order saying parents have to be in agreement, mom is saying, well, why did that just get taken away from me? I’m the one who’s always done it. But the fact of the matter is, well, again, you’re separating households, you’re co-parents, And your co-parent hopefully will step up and is also capable of calling the doctor and saying, Jimmy needs to be seen for his 5-year appointment. Courts are going to give co-parents or, you know, both parents the chance to do that, even though historically that may not have been how the division of responsibilities were.

Brooke Mathieu [00:12:02]:
Do you ever see the historical parent that maybe is not the one that’s most with the kids the most often. Do you ever see that parent like out of nowhere just like ready to step in? They want full custody, they want more custody than they even had when the kids were with them full-time.

Lindsay Belmont [00:12:22]:
Yes, that does happen. And what’s hard for the other parent to then come to terms with is, is this all a show? This is only happening because—

Brooke Mathieu [00:12:32]:
Yeah, I was gonna say, why does that happen? Like, What, what makes that? Is it a power play? Is it like strategy?

Lindsay Belmont [00:12:41]:
I think there’s ego involved and also insecurity.

Brooke Mathieu [00:12:45]:
That makes sense.

Lindsay Belmont [00:12:46]:
You know, if that parent isn’t the one who’s done, you know, kind of the day in and day out for the kids, and now all of a sudden there’s a judge scrutinizing how these people have lived their lives, that parent is, is motivated to step up and start doing the things. Which, you know, then can lead to more contention because the primary parent is now saying, well, this is all a show. This isn’t real.

Brooke Mathieu [00:13:08]:
Do you ever see it like a vindictiveness? Is that ever part of it or not usually?

Lindsay Belmont [00:13:14]:
Sometimes. Sometimes, yeah, you see a parent all of a sudden doing things they didn’t do before and maybe there’s no need to do it. It’s just to kind of get back at the other parent and say, no, no. The way you’re painting me is not true.

David Crum [00:13:29]:
I have to say that I have seen surprisingly, some, especially fathers, like step up and actually really do some great parenting. On the other hand, I’ve also seen a lot of dudes who, who are really what they’re doing, I think, is looking at the child support worksheet and just figuring out how much time do I have to get so I don’t have to pay, pay the least amount of child support possible.

Brooke Mathieu [00:13:56]:
That’s horrible.

David Crum [00:13:57]:
Yeah, that’s horrible.

Brooke Mathieu [00:13:58]:
are you having kids then?

David Crum [00:14:00]:
Right. And the thing is that they don’t understand is that if you have a kid over at your house half, literally half the time, you know, in shared custody, that’s actually really expensive. They’ve got to have a bed and this and all the other stuff. And it’s just never computed.

Brooke Mathieu [00:14:14]:
Maybe it’s just because it’s just like, it’s at their house or it’s in their space. So that’s okay. But like, the fact that mom’s gonna have get to decide what to do with that money without any say. I bet you that’s probably like,

Lindsay Belmont [00:14:30]:
oh, she’s just gonna go on a shopping spree with my child support. Yeah,

Brooke Mathieu [00:14:33]:
yeah, yeah. And I mean, there are people that do that. I think there’s not so much of that, I would imagine. But

David Crum [00:14:41]:
yeah, and there’s nothing you can do. I’ve never seen a case, Lindsay, where the court looked at what child support was being spent on.

Lindsay Belmont [00:14:48]:
No, no,

Brooke Mathieu [00:14:49]:
they don’t monitor that.

Lindsay Belmont [00:14:51]:
No,

David Crum [00:14:51]:
no, not at all. And because people— men always want to do that. What, she’s buying with it, blah, blah, and they want you to go. And it’s like, there’s nothing to be done. Like, the court will not look at that. So anybody who’s watching, if you’re asking your attorney to do that, please—

Brooke Mathieu [00:15:05]:
Go on a shopping spree.

David Crum [00:15:06]:
You’re driving your attorney nuts. Yes. Do not do this. All right. Um, so you know that we entertain people, of course, on this, but also we like to educate. Brooke is huge on education. And, um, so, so I want to ask you, As talking to parents, if like you’re talking right to parents and they’re going to go into a custody case, what do you think is most important for them to focus on in the beginning? Like, what should they be thinking about as they go into these custody cases?

Lindsay Belmont [00:15:37]:
I think it’s important for parents to take a step back and see the bigger picture and really put their children and what their children need at the forefront. And even if that means what you think your children need is the same thing as your co-parent who you hate right now, set that hatred aside and do what you need to do for your children. If, you know, they’ve been participating in activities for a long amount of time and all of a sudden, you know, that’s going to take away from your parenting time, but you think it’s important, you know, your kids like being in those activities, leave them in there. So you get a little less parenting time. because of that. But, you know, we’ll see parents who totally upend their children’s lives too, when there is opportunity to keep that consistency for them.

David Crum [00:16:24]:
Yeah, I see that a lot too, where the child has a certain schedule they’re on, they might have swimming lessons or something like that. And then one of the parents doesn’t really seem to care about that. It truly, really upsets the kid. Yeah. What are some of the— what’s a case that stands out for you as being particularly troublesome? that you worked on in a custody case?

Lindsay Belmont [00:16:46]:
You know, some of the toughest cases, or I would say the toughest cases, are when there’s parental alienation happening. And, you know, parental alienation, that’s where there’s a parent who’s more or less brainwashing the child to turn against the targeted parent. You know, in those cases, it’s— you can, you can bring in all of the experts, you can bring in psychologists and attorneys for the child and make your strongest arguments. But if the damage has been done to the child, you know, a good legal outcome doesn’t really matter if the child’s going to be rejecting a parent.

Brooke Mathieu [00:17:23]:
That’s so sad.

Lindsay Belmont [00:17:24]:
It’s heartbreaking. It’s really messed up. Yeah. You know, you just see this child and they’re being torn away from one parent for no legitimate reason. They don’t— they’re too young to really comprehend what’s going on. But all of a sudden, they just want nothing to do with that parent.

David Crum [00:17:42]:
Yeah. Weren’t you telling— I think you had a case. I remember a case where you just destroyed the other side on paper.

Lindsay Belmont [00:17:48]:
Yeah.

David Crum [00:17:49]:
Right. Do you remember that? What was that one about?

Lindsay Belmont [00:17:51]:
Yeah. Yeah. So in that case, I represented mom. There was one child, and dad had a lot of issues. And he was the alienating parent in that case, taking things to the extreme, telling the child, you know, mom lies to you. She’s not going to keep you safe. You know, sometimes we see the alienating parent threaten self-harm if something doesn’t go their way. Just horrible comments to the child.

Lindsay Belmont [00:18:19]:
And we were able to prove all of this in court through our witnesses, through evidence, all of that. And the judge ruled in our favor on everything, set very strict parameters for dad, the alienating parent. But at the end of the day, they’re words on a piece of paper, unfortunately, in these cases. And Nothing changed. It only got worse for mom. I don’t know that she has any type of relationship with her son these days.

Brooke Mathieu [00:18:46]:
That is so sad.

Lindsay Belmont [00:18:47]:
It’s awful.

David Crum [00:18:48]:
If anybody’s got a case like that, they should go back. Adam Little also did one of these, one of our attorneys, and look at that episode. Because in those parental alienation cases, the extreme ones, the child has to be removed from that other parent. And sometimes, like, the therapy is intense.

Brooke Mathieu [00:19:05]:
Do they ever remove the child for multiple days, or is it just like a few hours? I feel like if it, if it was just for like a few hours or a couple sessions, that’s not really enough to stop that. Or like, I feel like you need to be out of the environment.

David Crum [00:19:21]:
They call for, they call for removal, like for a significant period of time from the other parent. And that’s why it’s so hard.

Brooke Mathieu [00:19:29]:
Did that happen in your case?

Lindsay Belmont [00:19:30]:
No, unfortunately. the cost associated with something like that is significant. There aren’t many places across the country that even offer those services. But that ultimately was what the clinical psychologist who I had been consulting with said, that’s last resort. That’s what could hopefully salvage this relationship between mom and child. But logistically, financially, it wasn’t in the cards.

David Crum [00:19:57]:
Yeah. The good news is those cases are pretty rare, the extreme parental alienation. Most cases are just going to that there’s going to be a lot of disagreement about custody and visitation. So let’s, let’s clear some things up if we can, Lindsay, because, um, a lot of people have questions about this. I am certain there must be some expert opinions, some guidelines, generally speaking, about what people should be looking at based on the age of their kids. Like, can you talk a little bit about that? What, what should people understand when they’re trying to devise You know, like a visitation schedule for the kids?

Lindsay Belmont [00:20:35]:
Yeah, I would say age is definitely a consideration. You know, what experts say is when you have littles, they really shouldn’t go that long without seeing the other parent. So maybe, you know, if you’re under a joint schedule where there’s equal parenting time, doing a 2-2-3 where, you know, one parent has 2 days, the other has the next 2, and then they’re alternating weekends, just to make sure there is that constant access to the other parent. At such a crucial age. It’s important though then for parents to again put their kids at the forefront and think, okay, now I have an 8th grader. The 8th grader doesn’t want to be flip-flopping homes, you know, multiple times a week. Maybe going week on, week off is the better option. And that’s a good example too of, you know, for a parent, I don’t know many parents who would want to go 7 days without seeing their child.

Lindsay Belmont [00:21:26]:
I’m sure there are some. Um, but Putting the, the child’s needs first. And if that’s what’s going to help them with consistency, they know whose week it is, they’re not lugging stuff back and forth to school. Doing what’s best for your child and, and having a schedule in place that supports them.

David Crum [00:21:46]:
What are you seeing in that? Because I’ve heard differing opinions about the week on, week off. I think that only works if the child is older. I agree with that. If you have a 2-year-old, you should not be taking that child for 2 weeks away from one of the parents. But I’ve heard conflicting results on the week on, week off. What do you actually experience in your practice?

Lindsay Belmont [00:22:06]:
You know, what I hear from parents is the kids do well in week on, week off. Again, it’s not like, it’s Tuesday, am I with mom or am I with dad? Who— where am I going? Who’s picking me up? It’s Monday, dad dropped me off at school, now it’s mom’s week. Next Monday, mom dropped me off, now I go home with dad. So I’ve heard from clients that although that might not be what they prefer, it is working well for their child.

David Crum [00:22:32]:
Yeah. Yeah. So you would think that, that, that’s kind of how courts look at these things, right? Based on psychology guidelines, expert guidelines. But that’s not really what we get. Now, I, as you know, Brooke and I hail from New Mexico. We say this in every episode. I don’t know why. New Mexico is what I would call a liberal state or a progressive state when it comes to custody and family law cases.

David Crum [00:22:59]:
And what I mean by that is they really do look at the best interest of the child standard when they apply it, and they have all these different courts and they have all these different services. That doesn’t seem to be the case in more conservative states, right? So you’re in a more what would be described as a more conservative state. How do you— how have you seen that impact custody rulings that, that, that you’re— for, for cases you’re handling?

Lindsay Belmont [00:23:25]:
Sure. Yeah. And it’s interesting too, because there has been much more of a shift, um, in recent memory where although we have the best interest standard and that’s what should dictate custody arrangements, oftentimes joint custody is being treated as a presumption. That’s what should happen. Once parents separate. And, you know, I, I do take issue with that a bit because I don’t think one custody arrangement or the other should be presumed to be best for the kids. I think, like you’re saying, in New Mexico, you got to start with the best interests. You don’t know the circumstances leading up to the divorce, whether there was, unfortunately, domestic violence or what was going on in that household.

Lindsay Belmont [00:24:09]:
Let’s actually look at what the children need and then let that tell us what custody should be instead of, you know, starting in reverse?

David Crum [00:24:17]:
So you’re talking about— when you say joint custody, you’re talking about shared physical custody, right?

Lindsay Belmont [00:24:22]:
Yep, equal time.

David Crum [00:24:24]:
So Brooke, listen to this. So I go out to Nebraska. So we formed that— so I start the firm in Nebraska, and I’m out there, and I’m out there quite a bit working with the attorneys and listening to these cases. We have a case in which— we had a case in which the child was like 6 months old. And the parties lived 45 minutes apart, or it was like an hour and a half apart. And so we’re saying, hey, look, you know, this should be primarily with mom and the child’s breastfeeding and everything. And the judge goes, oh, no, no, no, no. 50/50 custody.

David Crum [00:24:56]:
They will exchange at the gas station, 45-minute drive for mom with the kid. And when the attorney argued, Judge, the child’s still breastfeeding, he said, that’s all right. I don’t care. He can have formula. He can have formula.

Brooke Mathieu [00:25:10]:
Well, obviously, we know the judge was a man. Was it because the husband was pushing, like, that he wanted 50/50 custody, or the judge was like, this is what it is?

David Crum [00:25:21]:
It’s because of what Lindsay was saying. The presumption is supposed to be best interests of the child, but the judges are starting to presume that equal custody is where they should start. Do you see the difference? You have to overcome that. They’re going to assume And you’ve got to prove that they shouldn’t. So I want to hear both of your takes on this. This is a pretty controversial topic. So what’s happening in a lot of states is, as Lindsay knows, because it happens in her state every year, they’re trying to change the law to say that that should be the presumption. The court should start by awarding 50/50 physical custody regardless of age, regardless of sex, regardless of the parents’ involvement, and that you have to prove that that’s not.

David Crum [00:26:09]:
appropriate. So let’s weigh in. Let— who should we start with, the legal or the non— let’s start with the non-legal. So Brooke, why wouldn’t this be fair? I mean, look, I’m dad, this is mom, and we’re the parents, and we should each get half the time, period.

Brooke Mathieu [00:26:25]:
I understand starting there, but staying there is what I don’t understand. It’s like starting there, okay, that could be a good starting point because you’re giving a fair chance to each side, but like, you need to look at the facts. You need to look at the reason. And I would think a 6-month-old to a breastfeeding mother, like, you don’t just pop a kid formula if you’re gonna breastfeed. There’s also like physical things that can happen to a woman when you’re not being able to get that milk out like that. There’s so much that you’re impacting, and to just be like inconsiderate of that, I feel like if there’s any reason. to say we’re not going to do 50/50 custody right now, that would be the reason. Is that crazy? I would think that would be the reason.

David Crum [00:27:15]:
You might make a good custody lawyer. Yeah. Lindsay, what’s the answer to this?

Lindsay Belmont [00:27:20]:
You know, I, I kind of like to turn that on its head too. If, if there are people saying joint physical equal parenting time should be the presumption, well, I’m— then You know, if— what was the problem then when the presumption was mom should have custody? Because that, that kind of is an older school of thought where mom would get primary custody, dads get every other weekend and one overnight a week. So I think starting with any presumption of what custody should be is inappropriate and unfair. And, you know, to Brooke’s point, when we’re looking at the realities, we’re looking at a baby who’s breastfeeding. You know, the decision to breastfeed or formula feed, that’s a big decision. You know, parents put thought into that. And for a judge to just come in and say, well, nope, equal time, I’m taking not only that decision, parenting time out of your hands, which of course, that’s what judges do, but also what you’re feeding your baby. Like, let’s— Yes.

Lindsay Belmont [00:28:21]:
Let’s think about this for a second.

Brooke Mathieu [00:28:23]:
A lot of people make that as a very intentional, specific choice and to like say like, no, if you just feed your baby formula, like,

Lindsay Belmont [00:28:34]:
right,

Brooke Mathieu [00:28:35]:
if you’re going the breastfeeding route, you’re doing it so you don’t have to give formula. Like, that’s the whole reason.

David Crum [00:28:43]:
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Go ahead.

Lindsay Belmont [00:28:45]:
Yeah. I

Brooke Mathieu [00:28:45]:
mean, right, David?

Lindsay Belmont [00:28:48]:
Then, you know, the argument becomes, well, mom’s just doing this to keep the baby from me. So there has to be—

Brooke Mathieu [00:28:54]:
I guess I could see that because then it could turn into this effect where like, you end up breastfeeding as long as you can. So you can do that. I mean, I could understand, like, I guess it’s a tricky subject. But I think at that age, that’s a very normal age to still be doing that. If it’s just like the kid’s turning several years, then maybe not, you know, I could understand if the judge put like maybe a a parameter on that, like, for this period of time, it’s going to be that way.

David Crum [00:29:26]:
It’s a seductive argument because it’s a seductive argument because you just say, hey, they’re both the parents, like, you should start and presume that they just split the child. The problem with this is this: in most of the cases, the majority, certainly the cases that I handle, one of the parents was the primary parent.

Lindsay Belmont [00:29:45]:
Yep.

David Crum [00:29:45]:
Like 80% of the time, taking the kids somewhere, doing this, doing that. And it’s so the other party wasn’t even capable of doing it, even if they wanted to. So, like, starting there, like, to me doesn’t make any sense. But look, I mean, you know, this— we’re going to argue till the day I die, probably, about this. And it’s going to play out the way it is.

Brooke Mathieu [00:30:06]:
Doesn’t that kind of, though, go along with, like, innocent until proven guilty? Like, you’re going to put both people at the same baseline and then it’s just— but then you go in and you look at the facts. Right? And so it’s— but now you gotta prove it that way.

David Crum [00:30:19]:
But now you gotta prove that it’s not somehow like right to have 50/50 rather than just start with the most important thing, which is the best interest.

Brooke Mathieu [00:30:28]:
Obviously, if one person is working 60 hours, like, I feel like starting there, okay. But then you’re like, okay.

David Crum [00:30:35]:
But you would still start there. So like all the facts would come in. Dad works 80 hours a week, blah, blah, blah, blah. And but you still start with the presumption of 50/50. Now, the mom’s now got to prove— she carries the burden of proof that it shouldn’t be that. That’s the problem with the presumption.

Lindsay Belmont [00:30:53]:
Well, what about in a case—

Brooke Mathieu [00:30:54]:
I just feel like that’s— I don’t— I mean, I feel like that does make sense to me. But what doesn’t make sense to me is the judge not looking at the facts. Is the judge, like, hearing the proof and be like, meh, meet 45 minutes away?

David Crum [00:31:11]:
Well, I think that’s a different story, right? Yeah. That’s a different story. What were you saying, Lindsay?

Lindsay Belmont [00:31:16]:
I’ll go to another extreme. Let’s say that Parent A is beating on the child every day. You know, there are cases where physical abuse is involved. And so Parent B says, I need to file, we need to separate, I need to protect my child. But we’re starting with a 50/50 presumption. You know, that’s, that’s where I go back to best interest should be the standard. And there has been a push in Nebraska, at least, to have that type of temporary order spring into effect once a filing is made. And there’s been a lot of pushback on that, too, for this very reason.

Lindsay Belmont [00:31:48]:
You don’t know.

Brooke Mathieu [00:31:48]:
You changed my mind, Lindsay. You changed my mind.

David Crum [00:31:51]:
Look at that.

Lindsay Belmont [00:31:52]:
Well, that’s her job.

David Crum [00:31:53]:
That’s what she does for a living, for God’s sake.

Lindsay Belmont [00:31:55]:
Yes.

David Crum [00:31:55]:
So, Brooke, you were— see how you were seduced into that? Brooke just got seduced into the 50/50 presumption. That’s how easy it was.

Brooke Mathieu [00:32:02]:
That was a pretty easy argument. Yeah. I mean—

David Crum [00:32:06]:
Well, that’s why Lindsay’s a superstar. All right, all right, all right, all right. I got some other hot-button issues that I got to— I gotta ask Lindsay because I’ve been dying to. So here’s another one that comes up that gets a little dicey, and that is corporal punishment. You just mentioned it. Is that appropriate? Where do you land on the corporal, the physical punishment for the kid?

Lindsay Belmont [00:32:31]:
I have my personal thoughts on it, which is that should never be used ever. But you know what courts are gonna do is say, Your house, your rules, to an extent. Now, of course, if there’s like egregious physical abuse happening, that hopefully they would put a stop to that. But, you know, when you get into some of those day-to-day things, how much can a court really police? And even if you have an enforcement action or something to say this parent’s violating it, what, they’re going to get a slap on the wrist from the judge and say, don’t do it again? So those types of provisions in a parenting plan regarding discipline or punishment, it’s just so hard to monitor or enforce. And unfortunately, sometimes the outcome is it’s parent’s house, parent’s going to do what they’re going to do.

David Crum [00:33:22]:
Well, as somebody who got smacked around, like, not— it was never my dad. It was always my mother, which was quite hilarious, although sometimes she would like get in a couple of good shots. I am just adamantly opposed to it. I just think it is the worst thing you can do to your kids. I think that it’s just demoralizing and humiliating.

Brooke Mathieu [00:33:43]:
Especially more rebellious, I’ll say.

David Crum [00:33:45]:
Yeah, it made

Brooke Mathieu [00:33:46]:
me— I was like, okay, I’m gonna be worse.

David Crum [00:33:49]:
And especially in public, like, it’s humiliating. You see kids getting spanked in public, and you’re an adult, for God’s sake. Like, you can, you can take charge of this child without having to smack them.

Brooke Mathieu [00:34:01]:
The public is crazy. I feel like you don’t see that too much anymore, especially with cell phones,

Lindsay Belmont [00:34:07]:
right?

David Crum [00:34:08]:
Yeah. I’ll tell you a quick little story. I had a case, I represented the guy, and, um, he was— he disciplined his child like right out of the Bible, like spare the rod, spoil the child, and had a wooden rod and he was spanking the kid with it and he left marks on that kid and he got prosecuted for child abuse. child abuse.

Brooke Mathieu [00:34:32]:
As he should. That’s crazy.

David Crum [00:34:33]:
So, so, you know, if you’re thinking about— oh, and he would say the same, I can do what I want in my house. I’m like, uh, okay, well, you can tell that to the criminal court judge. And that was a, that was a difficult case for me to deal with. And, um, but as an attorney, I do make the decision. I tell them if I’m representing the case— and this isn’t a moral thing, and it’s not because that’s my belief— as an attorney, I just say there will be no corporal punishment happening when I’m on this case because all it’s going to lead to is a problem.

Lindsay Belmont [00:35:02]:
Yep.

David Crum [00:35:02]:
With the custody, and it always leads to a problem. So you’re a fool if you do this while you’re getting divorced because the, the, the person’s going to bring it up. And then how that lands on the judge, you have no idea. Maybe the judge was abused as a child that we— Yeah. Judges are people, you know what I mean?

Lindsay Belmont [00:35:19]:
Yep.

David Crum [00:35:20]:
And some of these arguments really land on judges in a surprising way. So anyway, that’s, that’s my take on it. Another one that comes up, I guess it’s surprising. Is counseling for kids while the case is pending, yes or no? Is this a good idea?

Lindsay Belmont [00:35:37]:
Yes. 100% yes.

David Crum [00:35:40]:
Yeah. Why do you say that?

Lindsay Belmont [00:35:41]:
Because these, these children are being put in the middle of adult chaos, essentially, and they need a safe person they can talk to. And there are counselors out there who specialize in this type of support for children going through divorce. And, you know, the courts are, at least here, they’re huge proponents of therapy. They want to see children getting help. They want to see the parents getting help too. So, you know, some parents think, oh, this is a weakness. This is going to hurt my case if I’m talking to a therapist. And thankfully, our courts, at least in my experience, see it only as a positive.

Brooke Mathieu [00:36:19]:
And I feel like in general, people are just starting to see therapy in a different light, which I’m so happy for because like I think sometimes we all just need a neutral party to vent to. So we’re not like handling it in toxic ways or going on social media or, you know, sending paragraphs to our ex going off and hurting our case. I think therapy is great for people probably in that situation. And I especially for kids, imagine being torn between your 2 parents. Yeah. You can’t really talk to either one about it, or you don’t want to hear them talk badly about the other parent. so hard not to. And I feel like it’s probably an easy situation for parents to get lost in this battle with the other party where it’s just like, you kind of don’t even realize it’s impacting kids.

Brooke Mathieu [00:37:11]:
And I think this is especially true probably for younger kids because I think a lot of time, you know, I’ll hear different adults and be like, oh, like they don’t understand, or like they don’t get it. Or I remember hearing that myself, you know, around adult conversations. I was like, I get it. I understand.

David Crum [00:37:29]:
So, Lindsay, so the judges will, will appoint, uh, they will order this over the parent’s objection or one of the parent’s objections?

Lindsay Belmont [00:37:36]:
They will. Yep.

David Crum [00:37:37]:
Okay, so is everybody listening to that? Who’s listening, um, don’t be afraid to ask the court for counseling. It’s not going to hurt your case unless you’re doing something really bad. That’s why a lot of parents don’t want kids talking to therapists, uh, but, but the court can order it over the objection, uh, and sometimes Over both parties’ objections. I’ve had that. This kid’s going to go into counseling, or, you know, they’re going to appoint a guardian ad litem. So, um, the judge has almost unlimited authority, um, on what they do.

Lindsay Belmont [00:38:08]:
Yep.

David Crum [00:38:09]:
Next topic, teenagers. This is another one. I want to make my teenager follow the court order. Like, what do you— what do we do with this? You got a teenager and you got a custody order. And the kid’s like, I’m not doing this. What? So what? What happens?

Lindsay Belmont [00:38:28]:
You know, that reminds me of a case that I had. This was one of— I mean, to me it was a little funny, but I had a client and teenage daughter did not want to go to dad’s house. Just didn’t want to, was refusing to go. Dad files a contempt against mom, and dad is testifying and blaming mom, saying mom’s not facilitating, mom’s not getting the child, encouraging her to come see me. And mind you, child’s like 16 years old, 15 or 16. And the judge just looks at dad and says, do you want her to drag her out by her hair? And the dad was kind of taken aback and he said, well, no. And judge said, well, do you want to go in the house and drag your daughter out by her hair? He said, of course not. And the judge just said, then what do you want me to do? And, you know, I know that’s, that’s

Brooke Mathieu [00:39:16]:
Fair.

Lindsay Belmont [00:39:17]:
Fair. Giving a little power to the child, but at the same time, parents have to be realistic. And, and what do you expect your co-parent to do? They’re not doing it usually to hurt you, but you have a strong-willed teenager who honestly probably wants to be with their friends and with neither parent. Um,

Brooke Mathieu [00:39:36]:
yeah, true.

Lindsay Belmont [00:39:37]:
But, you know, going after your co-parent, you kind of have to wave the white flag at some point, especially when you put car keys in that child’s hand.

Brooke Mathieu [00:39:45]:
And I feel like with teenagers, like, even not even thinking about who, what parent they want to live with, it’s like, what do they want to do or not do? How do they want to live their life? They’re starting to make these decisions. And you can suggest things, you can say, oh, you’re gonna do this. Typically, that doesn’t go over well. So it’s like, beyond just you or me, it’s just that they’re on their way to adulthood. They’re forming their own opinions, decisions, how they want to live their life. And there’s only so much you can do.

David Crum [00:40:17]:
I tell you, that was my experience. Once your kid starts at 14, 15-year-old age, guess what parent they want to be with? Neither. They want to be with their friends. And, you know, and when they get the car, yeah, it’s like, good night. It’s— it’s so— but at some point, like, talk a little bit about— so people understand this, there’s a lot of confusion about this. At what point will the court start listening to what the kid wants? And are they— and how are they— are they bound by this? Like, what, what do people need to understand about that?

Lindsay Belmont [00:40:50]:
You know, I, I came across a case the other day where the court talked to an 8-year-old. I think that is quite young.

Brooke Mathieu [00:40:57]:
Yeah, I, I would think so too.

Lindsay Belmont [00:40:59]:
Yes. Oftentimes, you know, the earliest a court’s going to talk to a child is maybe 10 to 12 years old. No matter what though, the child could be 17 or 13 or what have you, it’s a consideration. You know, it’s only one part of the analysis for a judge if they’re going to change custody or leave custody or determine custody. They can consider the child’s wishes. We have language in Nebraska where they have to be of a— they have to be mature, they have to be exercising sound reasoning. often not going to be able to dictate what they want. The court doesn’t have to do what they want, but the court will consider it.

Lindsay Belmont [00:41:41]:
And what one thing the court can do is talk to the child. And we see that happen in some of these contentious custody cases where one parent or both parents want the judge to interview the child and just hear from, from the child directly. in their own ways of asking, what do you want? You know, the child oftentimes will open up and say what they want, and then the court can consider that when it— when they’re making their decision.

David Crum [00:42:10]:
Oh, it’s super awkward.

Lindsay Belmont [00:42:12]:
So awkward.

David Crum [00:42:14]:
It’s heartbreaking, actually. Yeah, I, I fought against this whenever I could. Like, I, you know, taking the kids— so this is called an in-camera review where they, they bring the child into the back out of court with the— into the judge’s chambers. And the attorneys are like a couple of dopes, like, standing there. And usually the judge— sometimes the attorneys question the child, but usually the judge will kind of question. And just think about this. You’re a little kid and you’re like picking mom, or like— they don’t do it like that. Which one do you want?

Lindsay Belmont [00:42:45]:
Right.

David Crum [00:42:45]:
But yeah, they— but, but think about being put in that position. I always fight against it unless it’s necessary.

Brooke Mathieu [00:42:51]:
Have you been in that situation, like, on the attorney side?

David Crum [00:42:55]:
Yes, it’s super awkward. You just sit there and it’s like, oh my God, you feel like an asshole.

Lindsay Belmont [00:43:00]:
Yes.

David Crum [00:43:01]:
I swear to God. But brilliantly, of course, I’m going to segue this into like situations where, where it is necessary to bring kids in. So for people listening, whatever, take my opinion with a grain of salt. I think it’s super damaging to have your kid go and testify. Unless— and this is what we’re going to get into— these are cases involving child abuse, right? And you’ve handled a number of them. You just got done handling one of them where you had to bring the child in.

Lindsay Belmont [00:43:32]:
Yep.

David Crum [00:43:33]:
Talk to us a little bit about that. How do these cases arise? And, you know, what is Child Protective Services or health, whatever they call it? What’s their involvement typically? And is that something

Lindsay Belmont [00:43:48]:
Yeah, and unfortunately, in some of these contentious custody cases, it is because there are allegations of abuse. And again, going to that presumption— well, that there shouldn’t be a presumption of equal custody because let’s look at what’s actually happening here. What’s hard about those cases is a lot of the times it’s the child disclosing what’s happening. And if you’re in a courtroom setting, we have rules of evidence, so neither parent can get up there and say, Well, Susie told me Dad hits her every night, because under our evidence rules, that’s hearsay. That can’t be something that the court can consider. When you have a case where it’s a child who’s making these disclosures as a way to prove that that’s happening, you ask the judge to talk to the child and hear it from the child what’s going on. Other times when we see CPS or the Department of Health and Human Services get involved, It’s because somebody has made a mandatory report or has called the child abuse hotline to say, I observed this, I’m concerned about this child, and CPS will investigate it. They’ll see— they’ll do home visits, they’ll talk to the child, and they make their own findings as to whether they think the child is safe or not safe.

Lindsay Belmont [00:45:13]:
Sometimes they can implement safety plans. Mm-hmm. We do often see CPS involvement when, when a parent thinks there’s abuse happening, or even, you know, if a teacher thinks it’s happening or the therapist thinks it’s happening, whoever. And in Nebraska, you know, all adults are mandatory reporters. So, you know, technically, if you become aware that there may be abuse, you should be reporting it.

David Crum [00:45:39]:
Oh, I want to— I want to stress that to people that are watching and listening, because there’s a lot of people who think that you only have that responsibility responsibility if you’re like a teacher or you’re a caregiver, like, or you’re in some— you have a position that, that puts that— everybody has the responsibility. If you think a child is reasonably being abused, you must report, right? There are criminal consequences for that. Um, and people don’t realize it. So when Lindsay says everybody’s a reporter, that’s what she means,

Lindsay Belmont [00:46:08]:
right?

David Crum [00:46:08]:
Um, is that the end of the story? Because so look at this, I mean, CPS will a couple times— sometimes it’ll be like It’s bullshit. You know, the other party is calling to get the parent in trouble or doing a welfare check or whatever. But there are other times when it seems clear that abuse is happening and there’s not a finding. What do you do in that situation? Do people just give up?

Lindsay Belmont [00:46:29]:
Some do. And it’s, it’s a big hurdle that, you know, the parent has to overcome if the basis of wanting to change custody or have sole custody is concerns of abuse. And that’s where the advocacy really comes into place. To me, having a CPS report that says insufficient evidence, that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. It just means maybe the bruise is healed. They don’t have enough to go off of to make a finding of unsafe or whatever they would deem it to be. If it comes back unfounded, you know, I’d want to talk to the caseworker and See, did you talk to the child while their abuser was sitting next to them? What were the circumstances of this interview? Who all did you consult? So I think oftentimes attorneys and/or parents will say, well, it says unfounded, so obviously nothing’s happening. To me, that’s not what that letter means, the letter that comes back and says it’s unfounded.

Lindsay Belmont [00:47:31]:
There’s still— there’s still more investigating to do and more questions to be asked.

David Crum [00:47:35]:
Talk to us about the case that you just got done handling, because this is similar to this, right? This was a case where you had to call the child to testify.

Lindsay Belmont [00:47:42]:
Yeah. And I will say that this case is still pending. It does involve disclosures being made from the child that stuff was happening at one parent’s house. There were multiple adults who were making these mandatory reports to CPS. CPS would do their investigation and either find that there wasn’t enough evidence or that it was unfounded. So when you then try one of these cases in front of a judge, you bring in whoever, whoever has information to paint the whole picture because, like I said, the CPS caseworker is not the whole picture. You can bring in the people who also heard the child make these disclosures. You can bring in anybody who’s had observations of the child before, during, after they’ve made a disclosure.

Lindsay Belmont [00:48:31]:
So there’s just so much more than what one caseworker on a certain day types up in their report.

David Crum [00:48:36]:
Yeah, I can testify that. We— I had a case where the grandmother— I was representing the grandmother and CPS had been called multiple times and it was all— it was obvious that this was happening. And there was a finding, no, no finding, we don’t have enough. So I said, give me that. Took the file. I took all the evidence, all the witnesses to court, and the court found that there was abuse and made a ruling. And then I don’t remember if this was a kinship guardianship or whatever it was, but that the grandparents got custody after that, probably temporarily while they figured out how to reunite, if possible, the parents. But yeah, for people listening, don’t give up hope.

David Crum [00:49:14]:
You know, that’s my experience, that it’s more likely that the mistake is going to be that there is a non-finding than there is a finding. Right? Yeah. And so don’t give up hope. Your attorney can still go in and prove that. Um, but it’s difficult and it shouldn’t be that way, but it is, right? Um, as we kind of get toward the end of this, um, I wanted to discuss something with you, um, because we, we were talking about this earlier and it’s, um, a straight question for you is, and I asked you this, does divorce, in your opinion, does divorce hurt kids?

Lindsay Belmont [00:49:54]:
And I still have the same reaction to the word hurts. I think I think it does. I think it can also help kids.

Brooke Mathieu [00:50:02]:
It’s got to, right?

Lindsay Belmont [00:50:03]:
Yeah.

Brooke Mathieu [00:50:04]:
I mean, to an extent, even though maybe it does end up end result being better initially, it’s got to hurt.

Lindsay Belmont [00:50:12]:
Yeah.

David Crum [00:50:13]:
Yeah. The reason I ask is I used to work with a psychologist who testified in a lot of our cases, and he said that to me. He said, Dave, I just want to tell you something. All divorces hurt kids. All of them. And he said to them, it’s to the extent that there is animosity will determine how badly those kids are hurt.

Brooke Mathieu [00:50:31]:
Yeah.

David Crum [00:50:31]:
In the process of that divorce. And I always took that to heart and try to tell my clients, like, why fight? You know, if you’re going to end up resolving this case at some point, why not skip all the fighting?

Lindsay Belmont [00:50:40]:
Yeah.

David Crum [00:50:41]:
And all the hurting. But let’s talk about the opposite of this. Staying together for the kids. Have you seen this? What— talk about that a little bit. That happens a lot.

Lindsay Belmont [00:50:49]:
It does. And I’ve had some of the hardest consults in my career where the person is disclosing absolutely abhorrent behavior by their spouse, abuse, just horrible, horrible things. And the, the person consulting with me says, I can’t leave the kids alone with them though. Or I just, I just needed somebody to know that this is happening in case something happens to me. So in those types of situations— Wow. you know, first, I try not to cry during the consult because it’s just unbelievable. Like, there just aren’t words. But we do see people or a parent stay in that situation solely so they can protect the children.

David Crum [00:51:32]:
I’ve heard a lot too, that we’re— or they stay together until the children are 18, as if somehow that’s going to be a great thing. Here, my thoughts on this are pretty simple. You know, while divorce hurts kids, I believe in that. So if you can stay together healthy, in a healthy way, you should work on relationship. People don’t work enough on their damn relationships, right? They spend money on an expert to fix their car, do their taxes, work on their house, but they won’t spend any money on their relationship.

Lindsay Belmont [00:52:00]:
Yeah.

David Crum [00:52:01]:
And so the staying together thing, a lot of times, in my opinion, all it does is it models poor relationships. You’re showing your kids what it’s like to be in a non-loving relationship or an abusive relationship or whatever relationship. And then they grow up and they do the same thing.

Brooke Mathieu [00:52:20]:
It just is normal. You normalize it.

Lindsay Belmont [00:52:22]:
And then sometimes you have the kids say, just divorce already. You know, the home life is so toxic. Just divorce. It’ll be better for all of us.

David Crum [00:52:31]:
I’ve seen that where the kids are like, thank God. Yeah. What took you so long?

Lindsay Belmont [00:52:34]:
Right?

Brooke Mathieu [00:52:35]:
Yeah.

David Crum [00:52:36]:
Oh, listen, we’re getting to the end of the hour, the end of the interview. So I have one last question for you. It’s more of an opportunity for you. And this is your opportunity to just look right at the audience. And if they have a case, like, what do you want people to know at the end of the day about custody cases?

Lindsay Belmont [00:52:54]:
What I want people to know at the end of the day, the dust will settle. You will get through this. Your children will get through this. And as long as you’re keeping what you’ve said is most important to you at the forefront of your mind, you will be okay and your kids will be okay.

Brooke Mathieu [00:53:10]:
Nice, Lindsay.

David Crum [00:53:12]:
Yeah, that was great. Lindsay, thank you so much for coming on. As I say to everybody, Everybody has a super busy schedule over there, so we appreciate you taking the time. Brooke, lovely to see you as always. Everybody, thank you for watching. Please leave your comments. We’re gonna— we’ve asked you to answer some questions in the beginning. We’d love to hear from you.

David Crum [00:53:30]:
Keep your eye out for our next amazing episode, and I’ll see y’all guys all later.