Mom is "missing", what can I do?

[missmyson]

Thank-you for your encouragement.  

I can't afford another lawyer.  The one that got me the mediated settlement 5 months ago is threatening to garnish my wages at 25% for the $8500 I owe her.  I can pay the bills fine, but with this threat on my income, I can't afford another lawyer.  I've already spent and borrowed all I could to get the settlement.  I'm tapped out.  

I would love to get my son and bring him home- but I have to go to work every day.  I can take 1 day off, but what about the next?  2 days would seriously jeopardize my earnings as I am a sales-rep for a major soda company.  They "adjust" routes (which means a paycut) all the time.
 
This is why I need the temporary custody- so that I can afford to pay for daycare 3 days a week.  I can't afford this while paying support.  

Do you think I would be able to succeed with an emergency motion for modification of custody (temporary) if I did it on my own (with GP's testimony)?  

I guess I could go under financially for a month while paying her support AND daycare.  (Unless the car breaks down, etc...).  But I will also have to reduce my route at work.  I am afraid that it will all be for nothing as the courts are so biased.  I will end up in a precarious financial position which would make me incapable of stepping up to the plate the next time.  

Do you know of anyone who has been through this and has entered an emergency motion?

[Davy]

THE DEMANDING PRIORITY IS TO PROTECT THE CHILD.

I am not an attorney.  This posting not be construed as legal advice.

Normally these matters originate with a  motion for a EX-PARTE'  Emergency Temporary Custody and Protective Order.  EX-PARTE' means without notice  and contains general statements ie mother whereabouts not known and has not maintained substantive contact with child or family members for a considerable lenght of time.  Mother's behavior is irrational, erratic and otherwise unpredictable.  Attach affidavits from maternal grandparents again containing general statements.

Of course CS will be suspended.  Mother must present herself to the court for evaluation prior to unsupervised access to the child.

Many jurisdictions will have the necessary forms and procedures.

The hearing should be brief and the court may question family members present.  

DO NOT wait until the mother is driving away with the child before calling the police to protect the child.

[mistoffolees]

>DO NOT wait until the mother is driving away with the child
>before calling the police to protect the child.


I agree with everything you said except this - perhaps you're just not wording your thoughts well.

The only time you CAN call the police is after the mother drives away with the child - and even then only if you have a valid court order preventing her from doing so. The police can not act until the law has been broken.

What you CAN do (and which you've already mentioned - which is why I think it's a matter of wording) is use the courts via an ex parte hearing to proactively take action to make it illegal for the mother to drive off with the kids. But even with that order, the police can't act until she attempts to violate the order.

[Giggles]

Everyone is right, file an ExParte order NOW!!!  Take the GP's to court with you if necessary!!  When I did mine, I spoke to the legal assistant there at the court house, hand wrote the motion and filed it that morning.  Within 2 hours I was before a judge who granted my motion!  My Son's father decided he wanted out and took off with our son with out notice, just dissapeared.  You have the ammo necessary...go do it!!!  In the motion ask that CS be suspended until the final court case and use those funds to secure child care...go NOW!!!

[Davy]

For the sake of clarity, what you posted is exactly the point I wanted to drive home.  In a previous post Missmyson indicated the maternal GP's  are SAYING their daughter, the child's mother, will not be welcome back in their house, and that if she tries to leave with the child, they will call the police.  

In brief, in my humble experience, and based on the postings in this entire thread I believe the mother's behavior constitutes an abrupt change and it's the family first exposure to such outrageousness.  Further, there is an aora of co-dependency. Since the mother has always been placed on a pedestal she is now so self-centered that she considers herself above God's laws and man's law.  To her unconscience, the existence of a child substantiated her as a woman and satisfied her insecurities.  Now REALITY has set in and she has no coping skills and passes responsilities of child rearing to her parents.

Missy is able to obtain illicit or pharmcutical drugs (in some states) with the CS $$$ and sex ... whatever she is unpredictable and not in control of her own faculties.  

BTW, the attorney threatening to garnish Missmyson's wages I think (hope) is total BS.  I hope attorneys can not garnish wages.  As a matter of human decency and as an officer of the court the attorney should intervene to correct a mistake.  The basic essence for the existence of the court is to protect children (and family; father left disabled my previous court orders) rather than a revenue source.

The system may continue to eat up and spit out the father no matter what but WILL RESPOND TO SOUND FEMALE VOICES.  I hope the maternal and paternal families colaborate for the well being of the baby until (IF and WHEN) Missy gets her shit together.    

[Davy]

I agree completely.   There is no contest.

It should be as easy as you described.  Due to dual standards it would be advisable to take a station wagon full of nuns with him to court.

The wording of any court order should be strong enough so that the mom can not manipulate the child caretakers or in any way gain possession of the child at this point.  

[mistoffolees]

>
>For the sake of clarity, what you posted is exactly the point
>I wanted to drive home.  In a previous post Missmyson
>indicated the maternal GP's  are SAYING their daughter, the
>child's mother, will not be welcome back in their house, and
>that if she tries to leave with the child, they will call the
>police.  

And they could find themselves in a lot of trouble if they do that without a court order.

Without a court order, the mother is free to take the child whenever and wherever she wants.

[Davy]

It seems you are completely missing the point !

If the father procrastrinates and DOES NOT get the court order

there is no use in calling the police ... the child is endangered at that point thanks to the system.

How can they be in a lot of trouble for calling the police ?

[mistoffolees]

>It seems you are completely missing the point !
>
>If the father procrastrinates and DOES NOT get the court order
>
>
>there is no use in calling the police ... the child is
>endangered at that point thanks to the system.
>
>How can they be in a lot of trouble for calling the police ?

If they try to stop the mother from leaving with the child when there's no court order preventing it, then they can be sued for violating her civil rights. Depending on how forcefully they try to restrain her, they can be charged with criminal restraint. Furthermore, they run the risk of alienating the police - who will then be less eager to come later even if a court order is in place.

WITHOUT A COURT ORDER, the mother can do whatever she wants. If they think the child is in danger, they need to get a court order (ex parte, if necessary). Until then, they don't have the right to stop the mother from taking the child.

[Davy]

My post and others are encouraging the father to obtain a court order to prevent the mother from just waltzing in and removing the child.  Once the order is in place the police can be called to prevent the removal.

Mist ... please stop your semantics ... especially those that are not true.

The mother can not do what ever she wants and one does not need a favorable court order to stop the mother from taking the child.  For example, let's just say the mother appears at the GP's house with or without her drug dealing pimp to take the child.  The mother has had virtually no contact for weeks, has no visible means to financially support the baby and is incoherent from drugs and/or alcohol.  I would not need government (court, CPS, etc) approval to use any reasonable, civilized, non-violent means to prevent the mother (or a father or anybody) from taking my child or your child or any child .............