You were right what do I do now

[stillfighting]

<<<>>>

She is living proof, I admit that she may have stopped using drugs prior to the test, but she had used. Her son even said she had. Maybe you do not know of the kit that she used. It is a 7 day program that flushes the urine and has a shampoo that cleans the hair. It can be bought at any nutrition store.

<<>>

NO!!! She has a medically documented history of drug use that spans ten years. To include Marijuanna, cocain, and a morass of perscription drugs that were not hers.

<<>>

I have told everyone involved that I do not want to keep the children from her, that I want the children to know and love their mommy. My concern is that she will have a depression relapse, as she has had on numerous occasions in the past, and go balistic with no one there to help and my children may be the ones that pay the ultimate price.

<>

What of the Guardian issue?

Does it normally take so long to get one appointed?

<<>>

Do you think this will help?

Sorry for being a pain but, I have now been separated from my children longer than ever before and it hurts more than any pain I have ever felt before.

A RICH MAN IS ONE WHOM WHEN HIS POCKETS ARE EMPTY HIS CHILDREN FILL HIS ARMS

[socrateaser]

>What of the Guardian issue?
>
>Does it normally take so long to get one appointed?

Usually a GAL is appointed immediately, unless the orders expressly tell the parties to cooperate in obtaining one on their own. If you are concerned, there is nothing that would stop you from retaining a GAL to represent the child, and having that attorney motion the court to be appointed. Worst case, the court says no, and then appoints a different GAL immediately in order to "cover" the little "mixup." (which may be real or contrived, but who cares).

>Do you think this will help?

I don't know. Put yourself in the role of a reporter and read what you have. Ask yourself if an objective news reporter would find your evidence compelling enough to try to get it published. Furthermore, ask yourself if the reporter could gather enough facts to show that the reporter's belief in your story is not reckless indifference to the truth, which is what is necessary to protect the reporter's news organization from a defamation action, concerning a public figure, such as a judge. However, if your facts are about a private person, such as your wife, then the news story MUST be true, or the news organization could get sued, so your evidence must be extremely credible if your to get the media interested.

As your wife has passed the drug test, that would seem a point against you right at the start.