Messages

CFC,

Thank you for the information.  I am curious, does your order specifically state that you have "shared physical custody" or does the order simply provide both of you with 50/50 possession/access?  I ask because there are many ways to word an order such that on the surface it "appears" to provide both parties with shared physical custody when in reality one parent is actually the primary custodial parent and the other simply has liberal (50%) possession and access to the child.  In TX for example, the parent with the "exclusive right" to designate the primary residence of the child is also considered the primary custodial parent unless explicitly stated otherwise.

In general, I do not think Parent (B) will be able to change the custody order unless there has been a change in the circumstances that substantially affect the welfare of the child.  Parent (A) sounds like a responsible and concerned parent whose sole purpose is to ensure the health and wellbeing of the child.  

If I was Parent (A) I would take the offensive and pay special attention to the items in the order that are of special interest to the courts.  For example, if both Parent (A) and Parent (B) are ordered to pay 50% of all medical expenses, and Parent (B) has not paid his/her portion, the ramifications are just as bad, if not worse, than failure to pay child-support.  If Parent (A) identifies a consistent pattern, such as the aforementioned example of not paying medical expenses, then Parent (A) could go back to court and request a change in the custody arrangement with a high level of confidence of it being awarded.

-Jeff

CFC,

Thank you for qualifying your definitions.   You made an interesting comment regarding the child's school district.  Does the child go to school in your district?  Does it say anything in your order regarding who has the exclusive right to designate the primary residence of the child within the school district?  Please elaborate.  Also, do either of you pay child support?

-Jeff

I believe the judge made a sound decision.  You have had six different attorneys, at the taxpayer's expense, and are clearly still unsatisfied.

I am not implying that your cause is in err; Rather I am suggesting that you seek an alternate solution.  For example, have you ever considered getting a job (or second job) to help support your legal en devours? By doing so you would be able to pick your own attorney (which by the way, will probably be about as good as the others that you have dealt with).  

I do not believe that any legal representation will be adequate (in your eyes) until you realize that the system is not against you.  The truth is that the players in the system are extremely busy, lawyers overloaded with cases, judges with dockets coming out their ears, etc.  When someone like yourself pops in, after going through six different attorneys, I don't believe that it is unreasonable for a  judge to ask you to either get your own lawyer or represent yourself.  I think that given your history it may be in your best interest.

-Jeff

.... and unfortunately many (not all!) mothers expect the father to continue paying the mortgage, phone bill, car payment and more.... I digress.

In truth, the courts do not care what the mother does with the child support money.  The mother could purchase lotto tickets with the money, be it wrong, right or indifferent, the court does not care.  There are many fathers that need to get that fact though their heads and learn to deal with it.

Regards,
-Jeff


>I second that. You do make a good point. But you helped
>create this child(ren). If you were still with the mother,
>your income and hers would be supporting the children. Just
>because you aren't together anymore doesn't mean that you
>shouldn't support their livelihood. Child support isn't just
>for the child but also, the shelter, electric and food.
>
>My dad used to always say, "I wish I could just give you guys
>[my sister and I] the money." Well, that is stupid to say. If
>he and my mother were together, he wouldn't be handing us $300
>a month, would he? No, he would be paying the mortgage, the
>phone bill, the car payment and more.
>
>Good Luck!

JK,

I'm sorry to hear about your situation.  It looks like your ex had put some strategic thought into her move.   For starters, a biological father in FL has a LOT more leverage than a father in CT.  Actually, there is no comparison with respect to the court system.  In CT, it takes an act of God for a father to be viewed as anything more than a paycheck.  In FL on the other hand, the laws are more conservative and many fathers actually have primary custody of their children (which is almost unheard of in CT).  In short, your ex has put herself in a very good starting position.

Secondly, it was a big mistake on your part to allow this to continue for eight months.  The child is now a residence of CT.  To make matters worse, there is not a court order in place that provides you with any legal rights to the child.  I'm not sure why your ex is even considering going to the mediation in FL; I'm sure her legal counsel would advise her otherwise.

In addition, the courts typically will not allow extended possession of a child until he/she is at least three years old.  This isn't set in stone, but is a general rule.  So any notion of you being able to keep the child in FL, away from the mother in CT, should be expelled quickly.

So how do you fix this? You need to start by getting in front of a judge in CT (unless you can somehow convince the ex to do it in FL) , get paternity established and get some rights to your child (preferably join-custody).  You need to make this happen ASAP.  If the ex is dragging her feet, then find out where she lives (county, etc) in CT and start the process there.  I'm sure you can call around, speak with some attorneys, explain your situation and make it happen (over the phone) once you pay the retainer, etc.  Either way, and however you do it, you absolutely must get some rights to your child ASAP.  You have nothing otherwise.

Best Regards,
-Jeff

Have you been documenting everything over years?  Has Parent (B) been consistent in exercising his/her share of the possession agreement?

You said that the child reports frequent verbal and mental abuse; To who? Is your definition of mental abuse consistent with the laws in your state?

Define "physical abuse".  If your definition is consistent with the legal definition, then you need to take action NOW (i.e. yesterday).  You can not sit back and wait for months/years to pass and expect it to be a valid argument in the courtroom.  In fact, it would probably work against you.  The reasoning? If you, being a concerned parent, knew that abuse was taking place then why didn't you intervene immediately?  Why are you bringing it up months/years later? Now YOU are the one that looks bad.

I would check with the laws in your state to determine the legality of recording conversations.  If both Parent (A) and Parent (B) are in Georgia, then all that is required is one party notification and so I would start recording EVERY conversation that you have with Parent (B).  Afterwards create transcripts of the conversation and the archive the source recording.  [Be smart and use a digital recorder so that you can save the files onto disk.]

If your child is really serious about what he/she feels is abuse, it may be prudent to have him/her do some recording as well.  

-Jeff