Gabriel's medical insurance information

Desiree:

Thank you for the insurance information.

You seem to be taking this as some sort of personal attack.  You really
shouldn't.  I believe I am only stating facts.  I have made no
accusations against you.


You are incorrect about my past insurance coverage of Gabriel.  The
reason it has become an issue as of late is that California requires the
parent(s) to provide health insurance for the child if they have it;
and, it is in Gabriel's best interest to be covered and for me to have
immediate access to the information should a need for it arise.


Regarding us being married: again, you are incorrect.  Assuming
arguendo, your claim of me already being married were true, under
California law, if two parties enter into a marriage in good faith then
the marriage is legitimate.  At the time we married (as well as now) I
have no knowledge of ever being married to anyone else; we had a child
together; we resided together; I provided for you; I've had no contact
with a person named Kim Baker...I think the good faith is quite clear.
Also, by filing for divorce in Arizona in August you conceded that you
agree that the marriage is legitimate.  Furthermore, and again, this is
assuming arguendo, you keep saying I was already married - but do you
know for a fact that I had not terminated the marriage at any point
prior to marrying you?  Perhaps Miss Baker had terminated the marriage;
perhaps she passed away before you and I were married.  Have you
confirmed any of these possibilities before making claims?

As for your new claim that we're not married because it was not you that
I married on August 29, 2000: 1) you've already initiated divorce
proceedings in Arizona in August 2011, therefore, you conceded on record
that we are, in fact, married; 2) you've admitted it in at least one of
your letters to me; 3) you've stated under oath in your written
declarations to the court in both Arizona and California that we are
married.  There is no question that you and I did get married.  We lived
together; you were on my medical insurance (the Blue Cross that covered
you and Gabriel); the Chevy Tracker was under both our names; and most
significantly, you've already admitted it before the court.


I am not in contempt of court.  I filed a request for an extension of
time prior to the deadline, and I provided multiple reasonable
explanations for why I have not been able to provide the requested
documentation.


You cannot say that your contribution started the moment you were put in
touch with Gabriel because we have yet to receive a penny from you.  The
non-custodial parent has a legal obligation to contribute half of the
child's living expenses.  You have been in contact with Gabriel for 10
months and have still not done so.  Even while you had him there for 3
months you clothed him with the stuff that Liz, her family, and I
provided him.  Regarding his travel expenses for periods of visitation
with you, I am sure the court will take that into consideration.  But it
IS "visitation", not shared custody.  The norm is for the parent with
visitation to cover the travel costs for that visitation.


Your ongoing claims that I hid Gabriel from you still do not stand up to
the simplest scrutiny.  We've been over this already and I'm not going
to bother with it again, here.  Unless you can provide a reasonable
explanation for why you did not notify the court that you believed I was
withholding Gabriel then it is not a credible claim and it just makes
you look foolish by continually repeating it.


The insurance information is for Gabriel's benefit.  You're required to
pay half of all of his medical expenses not covered by insurance so if
you didn't provide the information then you would just end up having to
reimburse me for out of pocket expenses.  Providing the information is
really in your best interest.  Whatever child support the court is going
to order you to pay is also for Gabriel's benefit.


Sincerely,
Fox