Messages

>>If you don't have a court order parenting plan none of this even matters , You have to have a court order to enforce , My best tool so Far is be nice let them screw up and ambush unexpectadly . It just seems like more fun to wonder what she will be thinking when she gets the unexpected legal service And has to go see her atty !!<<

This is brilliant advice. Seems to ge on target and I hope to learn a lot from your postings.

>>My ex-girlfriend and her now current husband have done nothing but try to alienate my daughter from me for the last year. They are constantly telling me that I am trying to cause trouble for them when all I want to do is see my daughter and try to plan a portion of my own life.<<

Transference is the most common initial attack, and emotional stability are where they will hit you second.  Finances first emotions second.

>>If plans get changed or things are to be different they go through my daughter. My ex use to talk to me and now is not allowed to via her husband. His exact words, "She now married and is my wife and we bought a new home together and she has a new truck I bought her for her birthday and we are happy and do not want you to cause us problems.<<

The common vernacular use by The Courts is:

"Both parties enjoined to communicate amicably between them as regards to health, well being and transference of minor child".

The FACT is that The Court generally ORDERS the parties to communicate with one another, and while I am not a lawyer, I don't think that a newlywed necessarily buys out the judges order no matter how hot a commodity he fancies himself, or how much he invests in "His Woman".

>>All I wanted was an extra two days because I lost 5 in the beginning of my vistitation for summer because I was nice and let her mother have her for the 4th.<<

First of all, as my Dad used to tell me: "If you don't know your rights, you haven't got any".

Being "nice" and "letting mom" this, that and the other... doesn't mean squat.  Sure you hear all about it, but when it comes to court, it's just more mind f*ck intended to soothe your out of standing up for your rights.

YOU HAVE A RIGHT to see your child as much as that ORDER grants you, and if you plan to give ANY of it up, you better submit in writting to the courts the fact that you are doing so in agreement that it gets made up elsewhere.

OTHERWISE, they WILL come back with: "Your Honor, he doesn't even use the visitation time he has, let me tell you a l l  about it..."

>>I was suppose to get her on the 1st. Well anyway I have had it being the nice guy.<<

Now you sound like you are ready to start WINNING A CASE, as opposed to cooperating with your own downfall.

>>This woman has had our daughter in 5 schools and she is just starting 6th grade. On top of that the school she will be going to is not the one she is suppose to be in. Her mother and stepdad moved out of her school district and now reside in another and her mother is going to lie and say she is living at an address within the limits.<<

I recommend that you document all of this, staple it to a declaration page and them submit it to the courts so they can assess it when the time comes that they must.

>>If she is caught my she will have to pay tuition and she knows that I know what she is doing.<<

Does she look at these websites?

>>Well is she wants to lie thats one thing but I am tired of being part of the lie.<<

Never miss the chance the nail the opposition at EVERY chance.

UNLESS YOU ARE THE CUSTODIAL PARENT AND CAN AFFORD TO PLAY THE BELEVOLENT ALTRUISTIC ONE, DON'T.

Cooperate, do whats best for the child, but NEVER allow yourself to be duped into thinking that being the nice guy will win you points with the mom later.

>>The part that makes me sick is that she has taught my daughter that if you can not get what you want by telling the truth you lie.<<

This is argument number one as to why a man like youself needs to secure with 100% assurance that you will have full influence over your daughter's perception of her Father.

>>Which is one of the reasons we are not together. I kept hoping that her mother's habitual lying would not pass on to our child but I can see thats hopeless.<<

Children learn by example.  That is WHY a man in a child's life is so important - a mom cannot SHOW BY EXAMPLE what a child learns from their father - becuase the mother is the mother and the father the father.

The natural order is supreme.

>>Now she not only has a mother who lies but a stepdad who embellishes stories that anyone would question. So what would you do?<<

GOOD QUESTION, AND I AM GLAD YOU ASKED!  I would motion that the court stipulate in an order that transference of the child be mandated to occur by the mother bringing the child to a nuetral place where objective observers will stand gaurd until you can safely pick the child up.

This way there will be objective observers who will see exactly what is taking place AND only the mother and father of the child will be involved.

What this new yo-yo doesn't get is that you and his new trophy bride share something that he and she never will - the child.  No SUV's or other "toys" will ever change that.

>>Turn her in?<<

Hell YES.  Think of it this way... you are not TURNING HER IN, you are motioning the court for a better way for the kid.  Does the kid deserve a better way? Hell YES!

>>Next day Dad sneaks kids out of her home.<<

Frowned upon no matter what.  Sneaks implies knowledge aforethough of correct and incorrect action, self incriminating.

>>Next day Dad gets served with papers for 2nd RO.<<

Judge will likely consider the child abduction in light of other allegations in RO.

>>BM not happy of course, but Dad is willing to do supervised visits.<<

Supervised visits should always be the last resort.  A father needs to protect the children from the emotional abuse of seeing him as a culprit or needing to be "watched".

It is the wrong signal to send our children that we men and father's are under the heel of a system where we are actually upright, law abiding citizens.

>>5 days later BM files violation of 2nd RO, and he gets picked up.<<

How did he get picked up?  If it was merely for the RO, then in court he must 1. fight the RO; 2. plead not guilty to any charges; 3. request that RO be granted him against the mother because of her frequent and beligerant harrassment as in her frequent filing of frivolous restraining orders; 4.) AND request that the arrest be expunged

>>Kids taken by their BM after writing 2 pages each of what kind of abuse they believed to have had at the hands of their mum.<<

The kids were taken by their mother after an account of abuse by the mother?

>>He is in county jail, no bond, has to stay there now for two weeks til the court date.<<

Two weeks till freedom, then he can use the time served and the fact that he was frivolously put in jail by a maliscous divorced mother, and in fact with the persumption that he can show that this was done mlisciously and without grounds, she may do time the next round.

But remember, the kids are the ones suffering the most.

>>In Florida they don't let you out, it seems!<<

There may be extenuating circumstances?

>>So, what is the go here? I thought papers were only valid when served?? Can someone explain this to me?<<

She may have alleged child abduction when he "snuck the children out".  No matter what, when a mom cries foul the system lavishes the ooprtunity to throw a dad in jail... it's how the system is built and it is a sham.

Time to change the system!

I think it is WONDERUFUL when these snakes slither out from under their rocks to start spitting venom at the decent fathers they so despise.

It goes to show how their stupid arguments must fail and are beginning to fail with more and more frequency.

SHe states that this is not an apppropriate site for father to... whatever, but notice the self evident facts:

A.  Feminazi's always go on and on about the brutalizing men and how we need to "communicate" rather than lashing out.

B.  Men, Fathers and concerned women and mom's get togehter to share intelligent though on how to solve the problems rather than just whining about them and we get attacked.

C. Circular reasoning is used in courts and always loops back to the stupid blank stare of a mom or a lawyer on a mom's bahlf who just got done saying (not in so many words) she's the dad, he's the mom... give her what she wants becuase he is somehow to... naughty to get what he's asking for.

OF course they talk themselves in circles... they are so used to the formulaic man hating jargon that they don't even realize the half of them that they are using antiquated loopholes in a system the most of which nobody even traces back to their origin in some antiquated reasoning.

>>Your web site is not the appropriate approach to helping dads fight for visitation and I am offended by what I have read.<<

I have gained great insights from this web-site over the past 5 years which have been directly instrumental in assisting me to win not only VISITION BUT CUSTODY of my child.  NO WONDER MONKEY LOVE HATES THE SITE!!!

>>If you want to help foster the parent ? child contact you should avoid words such as -bogus argument, her duty to the child and any other negative connotations.<<

What difference does it make what kind of verbiage is used on this web-site?  It is clear to all of us clear thinking men and fathers how we are to conduct ourselves in public and in court and we certainly do not neet some simpering "mommy" whiping our chins for us before we go into court where her first instinct is to bloody our noses in the eyes of the judge anyway.

"Avoid such words as..."  Jesus Holy Christ! Now I have to worry that I might offend a feminazi on a father's rights (or should I say parent's rights website)?

And notice she insists that we refrain from usage of "her duty to the child" which she goes on to equate with a "negative connotation".

What rubbish spit up out of the old whittened sepulcher!

>>You should emphasize the best interest of the child.<<

Yes, yes, yes, we have learned how the feminist front manipulates the courts through devisive usage of verbiage: "The Best Interest of THe Child" ONLY WHEN IT APPLIES TO BENDING DAD OVER AND LETTING MOM STEAL HIS LIVELIHOOD AND HIS CHILDREN.  What best interest of the child!

>>I am a breastfeeding mother with no objections to letting a dead beat dad have his day in court<<

Ah, wonderful, somehow her learning how to lay back and let the biological process of motherhood run it's course has been confused with justification of raping the father of her child in a court of law and refusing to acknowledge the basic rights of his part of the process she wants us to applaud her for enjoying.

PIG.

>>but I don?t agree with the bogus argument of breastfeeding and did not use it as an excuse.<<

You even bring it up (which you did) and it is the same as the evangilist who afer handling snakes, and being moved by the holy ghost now waves the crutches of the "faith-healed" child in our faces demaning our CONTRIBUTIONS.

In short, it is a confidence game.  I breatfeed, therefore I provide, therefore I am good and worhty, so let's stone the "Dead-Beat".

With logic like that who needs lukemia.

>>If you really want to foster a good relationship with both parents<<

I'm sorry I forgot to observe the "Let's All Group Hug And Love One ANother" sign over the door.  Unless I am mistaken, it is wrong to expect a battered woman to stay in a blindly abusive relationship, and likewise I think it is WRONG and NEGATIVE to insist that father's pretend to think fondly of the way we are beaten into the dirt by a system which is cold anc calcualting.

>>tell the guy to keep his dick in his pants<<

Sweety, one round in family law court with the likes of you and nobody has to tell dad nothing about keeping his dick in his trousers.

>>and his fists of the woman<<

See, I dind't even see anywhere where this woman even alleges to have been stricken by her man... did she, or am I blind?

No, rather she examplifies that EVEN THOUGH STATISITCS SPEAK TO MORE MEN BEING HOSPITALIZED AND KILLED IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CALLS (probalby because our society has accepted the emasculation of our men) all one has to do is suggest that a man has hit a woman and suddenly that wins the case and there goes the baby with the bath water.

P.T. BARNUM SAID IT BEST!

>>and for Christ?s sake<<

There it is... the Holy Ghost Spirit Money Shot.

>>love and adore the child, not foster the hate relationship.<<

LOVE prevails when BOTH parents participate equally in the life of their child or children.  Statistiacally we have found irrefutably that it is detrimental to the best interest of any child and all parties involved to allow the mindless perpetuation of the current gender-bias which permates our so-called Family Law system.

Children need their fathers as much if not more now in this day and age than ever before.

Anyone who so glibly recommends the blame be put on the penis of the father needs to seriously consider raising their point of reasoning above the waist and stop the blame-game.  Otherwise that's no mom at all.

>>Dh is ordered to pay 75% of medical bills for ss. Bm sent bills: one receipt simply had dept. 1, dept. 1, dept 1......no info.<<

You will only be required by the courts to make payments on reasonably presented invoices USUALLY stipulated to be presented within a specified amount of time following the visit.

I'm no lawyer, and this is not legal advice, H O W E V E R . . .  I would document it as such: Day - Date - Time - Item Recieved - Percieved Defficiencies in item postponing payment.  Staple it to a Declaration form and file it with the courts then serve it on the party.

>>as to what these items were. DH has requested this information twice and she has ignored each request. She also 'added' wrong and tried to charge him the entire amt instead of his part....it was within pennies of the total amt....ironic, huh?<<

Regardless of sex or even wheter or not we are the CP, we have THE RIGHT to request and recieve vital documentation as regards our children.

DEMAND the proper invoices from the MD and to hell with the BM.

>>When ss was discharged from hospital, the instructions were to apply specific bandages and gauze. Three days later, he went for a check-up and instructions were to apply to small open wounds as necessary...it was after this that bm purchased enough items to use for 40 days. She was not even using gauze on him - she was using bikers shorts, but she still bought 28 rolls of gauze.<<

Playing devil's advocate, we do well to follow the doctor's orders so as not to render ourselves in neglegent.  It should not be surprising if someone goes to great lenghts to give the appearance of following directions even andespecially where such direcitons may be over-kill.

Better when dealing with a child to have too much and not need it - than to have too little and need it, right?

>>That day, my dh picked up ss for a visit, and she gave him an empty wrapper with instructions on things to buy for ss. She had 80 bandages and gave dh an empty wrapper - and lied saying she only bought 2-3 bandages.<<

If the doctor's order specified over 2-3 then they are negligent in buying only 2-3 and their admission should be integrated into a motion.

>>A week later is when she gave him the bills.<<

How long does the exhisting order give them?

>>She is still insisting that dh pay for these items even though he has pointed out all her crap...<<

She can insist on whatever she likes, H O W E V E R you can refuse to act on whatever you please.

What does the order say?

>>there is no proof one bill is for ss or that it was necessary,<<

Then it doesn't exist.

>>the other bills were far beyond what the doctor stated and she admitted in an earlier letter that she did not use them on ss...<<

If they were FAR BEYOND WHAT THE DOCTOR STATED then it might constitute a change of circumstances which may necessitate a return to court to better define this portion of the order.

In other words, you may have grounds to go back to court, using this as your "Change of Circumstances" (because these judges and their rulings are so scared that you must have a holy writ from moses before they consider you in posession of a proper voice to speak to them), then you want to state points and authorities in the opening of your motion, give the "change of circumstance" and then rip loose on your recollection of the incidents you state constitute a change of circumstances and asking for your relief...

>>DH offered to pay 75% only if she gave him 75% of the items - as he stated that they were purchased unnecessarily and never used.<<

Usually the court is more formulaic and less praSLURPic than that in their rulings.  From my experiance someone who states quid pro quo I'll give you % of this for a % of that is only successful in an agreeable negotiation.  

Otherwise you have to cram case law down them, force the issue of the best interest of the child, then roll the dice and hold on to your goodies.

>>So now she states that she donated the items!<<

Something tells me when people start donating items they are demanding payment for, a judge will often frown on that.  I mean one wants to have evidance that one has posession of what they are demanding money for, right?

>>This woman owes dh money for oss bills - she wont pay....<<

If she "OWES" according to the order then she owes.  And if she owes and wont pay, then the honorable judge presiding needs to do his or her job.

>>she order dh to pay for items when she had 80 in her possession and wanted him to pay for them....and then she donates the items!<<

IF she pays for them, and then requires payment, unless the order stipulates that with payment comes transference of items, then one better cover one's assets by doing what the order of the court ORDERS them to do.

>>Doesnt this sound like a load of crap?<<

Do you know where you are?  This whole so-called "Family Law" System is a load of crap.  It's an evil, vile, rotten swindle and even the meely mouthed snake-in-the-grass lawyers will cop to it.

So if you say load of crap, then you imply you are ready to do something to change it.  And if you are ready to do something to change it, you let me know, because I am organizing people right now who are through playing arm-chair activist and spending our hard earned tax payers dollars on a system that is bleeding us, dismantling our families and bleeding us.

When I say enough is enough, I mean to say ENOUGH.

>>Should we even respond anymore or just let it be worked out in court?<<

Your only response should be to work it out in court.  Don't wait for it to get better.  IT WONT.  Strike hard and low (figuratively of course) and through the kitchen sink at each and every problem, because in this so-called "Family Law" system, you really have to throw quite a bit against the wall before any sticks.

>Hope this was of some help. I would also check your statues
on parental kidnapping.<

What do you mean?

>Your lawyer sounds like they are full of sh!t.<

I had one lawyer that I hired because they were recommended to me by this loser I worked with 5 years ago.  I thought, damn, if that moron can afford to hire her, I KNOW I CAN AFFORD HER... and the guy swore to me that she had gotten him off some pretty tough raps/

Well, she did not know Family Law, and within the first month she was paralized with fear (or she sold out and just spun her wheels until I was forced to fire her).  Imagine a woman telling you that the fact that your kid was left to function 6 days on a broken wrist as NOT CONSTITUTING A SERIOUS MATTER.

The most recent attorney I had to fire I fired mostly becuase she ran up $10,000.00 in bills (after I paid $5,700.00) for which I got no further along than where I was before.

Then, they roled over stating "sorry man, your capped out and can't afford to do anything but plead on what you filed".

Then they started trying to have me talk to their husband (who also ran their "paralegal" service).  This person started telling me things like: "that's toughe, that's life, get used to it...".

Finally they started telling me, it is the CP's constitutional right to beat the child.

That's where I drew the line.  I may be stupid, but I am not crazy.

Nobody can convince me that after the other party AGREED in mediation to THE NO SPANK CLAUSE, then HAD THEIR LAWYER REVIEW IT, THEN ALLOWED THE JUDGE TO CONFORM IT INTO THE ORDER OF THE COURT - t h e n to turn around and plead "constitutional rights".  It just smacked of mental illness.

>Post your county and state.<

Northern California.  ANy closer and I may be liabeling myself.

>Maybe someone here is  in your area can direct you to an attorney who will fight for YOUR RIGHTS!<

Wouldn't that be something!?! You know the VERY FIRST SHAM I was subjected to in this whole matter was a FATHER'S RIGHTS PARALEGAL who went and spoke with my ex-wife's lawyer and NEGOTIATED that I would allow them to have the "restraining order" if they would allow me to see my child.

WHAT FATHER'S RIGHTS.  I haver discovered so many scams pretending to be setting out to help the little guy.  Just scam after scam feeding on our sense of helplessness.

>>There is also a list of Family attorneys listed on Sparc. I
beleive it is in the archive sections.<

The one closest to me is in Marysville and when I tried to see them a while back telling them I found them on the SPARC website their response was: "I want $7,000.00 - will that be a problem"  I said No, no problem - "I want to win my case, will that be a problem".  Their response, I can't promise you anything.

So I reiterated: "you want me to promise you $7,000.00 - but you will not promise me ANY advancements in my case?"

You get the idea.

>If your wanting to get involved to help make changes, I can
lead you to some groups who are very active in doing just
that.<

Yeah, well, I am more interested in organizing my own group because: A. I have had precious little practical help offered to me from any of these groups; B. I have encountered scams such as: "tell me about your problems, here are some idea's - now give us your credit card number so I can charge you for "donations" without ever letting yo confirm who I am or what I am doing to make change"; C. I want to impliment a full suite of Father's Rights Assistance C.1. Financial; C.2. Emotional; C.3. Legal.

>With it being in the CO, she is in contempt, if you can prove it.<

My last lawyer started saying: "Welllllllllll, suuuuuuuure, it IS a "TECHNICAL" Contempt... but will it win you as much ground as it will cause the judge to dislike you.... Yeeeeaaaahhhhh... I don't know...

I'm like - lady, what the hell are you talking about!?! SHE ADMITS IN HER RESPONSIVE DECLARATION THAT SHE RETURNS TO CORPORAL PUNISHMENT IN VIOLATION TO THE EXISTING ORDER - what the hell do I care if the judge likes me or not - mabey he hates my guts... all the more reason why they should uphold the law.  WHAT, WE ALLOW CHILDREN OF PEOPLE WE DON'T LIKE TO BE BEATEN!?!

What Democracy?

>If you have trouble getting these to come up, go to the
search engine and type in custodial interference. >1. Interference With Parental Rights Of Noncustodial Parent As Grounds For Modification Of Child Custody...2. Recent Case Law On Relocation Of The Custodial Parent STABILIZING FAMILIES IN A MOBILE SOCIETY...3. Criminal Custodial Interference Criminal Custodial Interference Criminal Custodial Interference...4. Management Of Visitation Interference
Divorced parents who interfere with child visitation pose special difficulties not only for the families involved, but also for the courts...5. Review Of the ''Custodial/Non-Custodial Parent Record Keeper''<<

THERE YOU GO... NOW IT'S STARTING TO LOOK LIKE A "MOVEMENT" PARENTS HELPING PARENTS HELPING CHILDREN!

I have downloaded the software - only mine is such an "involved" case, it's like doing trigonometry just entering the data I've got!  But the software is absolute genius.  The lawyer I just fired swore that it was useless because it doesn't properly represent the way the court looks at custodial versus non-custodial time (although, something tells me she was as full of it in this regard as well, since she told me NOT TO FILE CONTEMPT when in her own paperwork entered until penalty of purjury the ex admits to using corporal punishment in violation of current order - MY LAWYER STARTED TELLING ME IT IS THE EX'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO HIT MY KID!?!).

>I am in WA. so I don't know what the laws are there.  I would file all that you can even if that is criminal charges and apparently it is for the police to ask you in the first place.<

Right.  The las thing tha cops thought they were going to find was a dad with his ducks in line.  The cop told me he would take it back and have his superiors have a look at the report, and as he is saying this I am watering my well manicured lawn and there is my daughter's little bicycle and her puppy was playing with his lawn toy.

What can you do when it is all right there and plain to see?  

I'm sure the cop took it back and tried to find every possible way to get out of doing the paper-work.  But like he said, his superior told him send it across the street to the DA.

> Even though she is the "CP" doesn't matter, she took you kids
out of state without your permission and made you miss your
visitation!<

They are ONLY the CP on a technicality (or so I was told).  The mediator rattled off all kinds of rights and privileges and I was so stunned that they were going to let me father my child again that I just said GREAT!

If they had told me "you have pretty much 50/50 but the CP is now going to have primary authority as the key parent of the child" I would have said... how does that help my daughter?

The answer was, is and continues to be "IT SERVES THE CP (grants, social services money) - NOT THE CHILD (who has been subjected to destructive and even abusive behaviour".

>That is abduction.  File a contempt.  Contempt her for whatever you can, as long as it isn't petty.<

Frivolous, petty, thats what they will say.  I am just no longer afraid.  I have spent the past five years picking myself up out of the dirt that they keep knocking me down into - if I was going to run fearful, I'd of done it by now.

Understand that I have even had late night visits from cops who have carried messages to me about what to look out for.

This matter has attracted the attention of civil rights activists.

MY CHILD WILL NO LONGER BE LEVERAGED AS A PAWN AND MY FATHERHOOD WILL NO LONGER BE TREATED LIKE SOMETHING OPEN TO NEGOTIATION.

P  E  R  I  O  D (  .  )


  Who
>cares if the judge gets mad, these are YOUR CHILDREN!
>Eventually she will lose custody and have supervised visits to
>make sure she doesn't leave!!!
>Best of luck to you!  God Bless!

>I have played by the rules, I have done what is in the best interest of my children, I have tried to be cordial with my x and when we go to court I get raped again.<

There is only one fit end for a rapist... and I recommend an end to doing anything in court but WINNING YOUR CASE.

Learn from you adversary.  The Ends: WIN THE CASE.  The Means: THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD.  I thought I was wrong, or jaded about all this, come to realize a rats a rat and a hawks a hawk.

>I had concrete evidence.<

It's all in the delivery.

>They had nothing but lies with no evidence to back it up
with.<

I'd fire my lawyer... in fact I saw my last one in the unemployment doles recently.

>I have lost all faith in the system.<

PERFECT.  Now you are READY to start WINNING!

>I was once told the USA has the est justice system that money
can buy.<

There is money and then there is money.

>My children cry to stay with me and I have to turn them over to the one that has threatened to kill them.<

Love the children with everything you've got.  Anyone who threatens to kill children should fear the judge last.

"Illegitimi Non Carborundum" Latin for "Don't let the bastards grind you down"  But to clarify for the purposes of Political Correctness, I do not mean bastard as illegitmate child... because single mothers impart at least as much legitimacy upon their children as a fully funtioning Nuclear Family (I think the usage of Illegitmati/Bastard hails to an older day when marriages were considered holy instruments of sacntification, whereas today they are seen more as "business deals" and we all know who gets "the business" and who gets the "deal").

Fight The Good Fight.