Tester
A KC would see two distinct pathways here — both legitimate, but each serving slightly different purposes:
---
### Option 1: The “Plain Cover” Approach
This is the version I gave you first. It is neutral, professional, and non-argumentative:
*Why a KC might recommend it:**
* Keeps the email short so the substantive letter speaks for itself.
* Avoids tipping strategy or appearing adversarial in what should be a collaborative topic.
* Puts the onus on them to respond without giving them hooks to argue about tone.
This is especially strong if you want to keep the temperature down, avoid side-skirmishes, and make it hard for Lisa to paint you as “combative.”
"Thanks for the fun!"
---
### Option 2: The “Subtle Frame-Setter” Approach
This inserts one KC-style sentence linking your action to Zen’s best interests and the CIR themes. For example:
> Subject: Zen’s Schooling Options for 2026
>
> Dear Ms Taylor,
>
> Please see the attached letter regarding Zen’s schooling. In raising this now, I am mindful of the Child Impact Report’s emphasis on reducing uncertainty and supporting Zen’s stability, and I consider it in his best interests that both parents begin this discussion early.
>
> Kind regards,
> Mathieu Bankes
*Why a KC might recommend this:**
* Frames you as the parent acting consistently with the CIR’s guidance.
* Anticipates any pushback (“too early” / “leave it for mediation”) by pre-emptively justifying why you’re raising it now.
* Positions you as proactive and child-focused.
---
### KC’s Advice on Which to Choose
If your primary tactical goal right now is to *show willingness to consult and reduce conflict** (bolstering your PR argument), go with Option 2.
If your tactical goal is to *keep things icy, tight, and minimal** — to deprive Lisa of any wriggle room for narrative play — stick with Option 1.
Both are safe. Option 2 gives you more upside (framing yourself positively) but a tiny bit more surface area for Lisa to push back. Option 1 is bulletproof minimalist.
---
👉 Would you like me to prepare a KC-polished “best of both worlds” hybrid — one that is short like Option 1, but still sneaks in that subtle best-interests framing without giving Lisa an obvious target?
