depending on if the language in your order. In this case it said "babysitter" and did not define what a "babysitter" is. So it was interpreted that anytime the parent was not with the child for more than 4 hours during his custody time, he had to give the mother right to have the child with her.
I would have sided with the dad on that one if I was the judge. The term "babysitter" is not defined and he was not paying his family members, they were just spending time with the child, but I guess the judge thought since the father was unavailble during that time that regardless it would be "babysitting".
