Would this be contempt or worse?

[rmccoy31170]

 Dear Socrateaser,

 This is actually for a friend who does not have computer access. But here are the details as I understand them.

      Case is in the jurisdiction of Kansas.  Parents share joint custody with primary residence in Kansas, NCP resides in Alaska and utilizes every opportunity of visitation (school breaks, alternating holidays) as well as twice weekly telephone contact and frequent mail contact.

       Court order that has been in effect for the past 4 years states "the parties shall share in the transportation of the children for parenting time, with the respondant providing transportation to his residence and the petitioner providing return transportation to her residence". This has always been accomplished by splitting the costs of round trip airline tickets, since the parents live so far away from each other.

       This year, CP has stated that she has no intentions of splitting the costs of transportation as she "cannot afford it this year". The financial situations of CP and NCP are nearly identical, so there is no reason that one should be "better able to afford" transportation. Since they are unable to agree on this, NCP would like to purchase one way tickets to his home and then leave the return trip up to CP's discretion. So my questions are:

1. If CP does not provide return transportation and the children remain with NCP past his designated dates, is NCP then in contempt of the  visitation order?

    1a. Is there any way that this could be construed as parental abduction by the NCP?

    1b. Would NCP be legally obligated to provide return transportation because the CP failed to do so?

2. If NCP provides  one way tickets to his home, and CP does not  allow the children to use them, is she in contempt of the visitation order?

    2a. Would CP be legally obligated to reimburse costs to NCP?

    2b. Is there any way this could be construed as parental abduction by the CP?

3. Is being "unable to afford it" a reasonable defense or a reasonable cause to seek modification of this clause?

    3a. In your opinion (as I understand you don't read tea leaves) would a judge likely make NCP soley responsible for costs of visitation merely at CP's request?

    3b. What would NCP need to document, if anything to defend against a modification of this clause?

Sorry this turned out to be much longer than I had planned. Thank you for any insight you can provide.

R. McCoy

[socrateaser]

> Dear Socrateaser,
>
> This is actually for a friend who does not have computer
>access. But here are the details as I understand them.
>
>      Case is in the jurisdiction of Kansas.  Parents share
>joint custody with primary residence in Kansas, NCP resides in
>Alaska and utilizes every opportunity of visitation (school
>breaks, alternating holidays) as well as twice weekly
>telephone contact and frequent mail contact.
>
>       Court order that has been in effect for the past 4
>years states "the parties shall share in the transportation of
>the children for parenting time, with the respondant
>providing transportation to his residence and the petitioner
>providing return transportation to her residence". This has
>always been accomplished by splitting the costs of round trip
>airline tickets, since the parents live so far away from each
>other.
>
>       This year, CP has stated that she has no intentions of
>splitting the costs of transportation as she "cannot afford it
>this year". The financial situations of CP and NCP are nearly
>identical, so there is no reason that one should be "better
>able to afford" transportation. Since they are unable to agree
>on this, NCP would like to purchase one way tickets to his
>home and then leave the return trip up to CP's discretion. So
>my questions are:
>
>1. If CP does not provide return transportation and the
>children remain with NCP past his designated dates, is NCP
>then in contempt of the  visitation order?

you have a prima facie case of contempt. It is then up to your opponent to show absolute inability to pay (very hard to do).

>
>    1a. Is there any way that this could be construed as
>parental abduction by the NCP?

No.
>
>    1b. Would NCP be legally obligated to provide return
>transportation because the CP failed to do so?

Up to the judge to order a remedy.

>
>2. If NCP provides  one way tickets to his home, and CP does
>not  allow the children to use them, is she in contempt of the
>visitation order?

Yep, unless the kids refuse to get on the plane.

>
>    2a. Would CP be legally obligated to reimburse costs to
>NCP?

Yep.

>
>    2b. Is there any way this could be construed as parental
>abduction by the CP?

Nope.

>
>3. Is being "unable to afford it" a reasonable defense or a
>reasonable cause to seek modification of this clause?

Only if CP has no reasonable means of obtaining the money (credit card, loan, pawn, etc.).

>
>    3a. In your opinion (as I understand you don't read tea
>leaves) would a judge likely make NCP soley responsible for
>costs of visitation merely at CP's request?

Not unless you move and make transport costs more expensive as the result of your move.

>
>    3b. What would NCP need to document, if anything to defend
>against a modification of this clause?

I wouldn't worry about it. If the judge changes your order, then you have a judge that won't find CP in contempt unless she attackes you with nuclear weapons.