Melissa Isaak’s “Anatomy of a Custody Case” Part 8: Don’t Play the Games

Melissa Isaak’s “Anatomy of a Custody Case” workshop was a goldmine of tactical advice; her focus was on surviving the courtroom grind. In this next part, we explore her guidance on crafting exhibits, maintaining courtroom demeanor, and managing communications to avoid emotional pitfalls that can derail a case.

Isaak emphasized making exhibits judge-friendly. “You want to make things as easy for the judge as you can,” she said. For example, to prove parenting time, she suggested a clear chart: “Judge, since separation, I’ve had my child 65 percent of the time. I have them Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and I pick them up Sunday nights. Put all the dates out, dad column, mom column.” For expenses, she advised transparency: “Dad doesn’t contribute, doesn’t pay enough? I’ve got student loan debt, car payment, car insurance, $300 left over for disposable income, I spend about $350 on my child.” Attach bills, like a light bill, cable, childcare, etc, to show exact costs, avoiding “padding your expenses.”

Other exhibits, like canceled checks, refute non-payment claims. “If your ex is saying, ‘Judge, there’s a bill for $200, it’s been outstanding for three months,’ you say, ‘Yes, I did, here’s the canceled check, here’s the bill zeroing out the balance,’” Isaak said. Phone records can highlight disparities: “The boyfriend is highlighted in yellow, the husband’s in orange. There’s two calls in four days to dad, 78 calls to the boyfriend. The child is with dad, you calling the boyfriend to check on your child?” Text messages showing denied contact, 50 pages of unanswered requests, can prove alienation. “You say it and then you show it,” she stressed, urging fathers to back every claim with evidence.

Courtroom demeanor, Isaak said, is critical. “Dress for success,” she advised. “Dress like you’re going to church, show respect. In Montgomery County, you can’t have your shirt hung out, they wouldn’t let you in the courtroom.” She warned against letting opposing attorneys provoke: “Don’t let her lawyer rattle you, that’s their job.” Men face a double standard: “When you guys get angry, ‘He better take an anger class.’ If a woman gets upset, ‘What mother wouldn’t be upset?’” Her advice? “Yes sir, no sir, yes ma’am, no ma’am. Answer only the questions.” Sarcasm is a trap: “If the attorney asks, ‘You ever had an affair?’ don’t say, ‘I know you’ve had three, want me to name them?’ The judge got upset,” she recounted, noting it angers judges who see fathers as “on trial.”

Isaak also addressed antagonistic communications outside court. “Don’t engage,” she said. “If you get a text message, ‘You sorry SOB, you’re abusive, I’m gonna take you to the cleaners,’ your response is, ‘That is not true, and I’m not gonna argue, stop.’” She explained why: “Engagement is power. One thing about women that I found is proximity is power and engagement is power.” Emotional vulnerability amplifies the risk: “Husband comes in, he’s distraught, just found out about the affair. She says, ‘Let me come to your house, we’ll have a discussion.’ That man is vulnerable, this woman he still loves gets in his physical presence, there’s touching, ‘I love you so much.’ All of a sudden, we get into the forgiveness under the law thing.” This, she warned, can nullify adultery claims (e.g., Texas Family Code § 6.006 on condonation).

For manipulative tactics (threats, suicide claims, or pleading) Isaak advised stonewalling: “If she sends a message, ‘Our child needs this medication, it’s $12 at CVS,’ respond, ‘Certainly will.’ If she adds, ‘You were an SOB during the marriage,’ don’t respond.” Every message, she said, is a potential exhibit: “If this isn’t something you would text to the judge, you probably should not be sending it.”

Isaak’s focus on disengaging emotionally remains a shield against courtroom traps that I keep telling men to utilize. Though I must and do caution, it will probably get worse before it gets better; I’ve seen it firsthand. Remember, this person still knows you intimately and has more than one button as an option to push to get you to engage and assert their emotional and manipulative power: DON’T GIVE IT TO THEM. If you can remember they’re flanking you with their rigged game against you, then it’s easier to not engage in playing their game that distracts you from fortifying yourself in the war being waged. STAY THE COURSE, STAY STRONG.

In the final part we’ll cover things like Isaak’s appeal strategies, her constitutional arguments, and pitfalls to avoid, including a case study on fighting for shared custody of an infant.

-David B
Fathers Anonymous