Q: Re Refusing Medical Treatment, moving medical treatment

[BothSides]

This is also for my fiances current case.

History:
Waiting on a final hearing,
BM is primary Residential parent, Fiance is SRP.  He gets visitation every 3rd weekend due to the 8 hours of travel between them.  She moved 8 hours away within 2 days of being served motion to establish paternity and visitation (child was less than a year old, she refused to legalize anything).

Now, child is 19 months old, and suffering from "bottle rot" due to Bio Mom putting him to bed with a milk bottle and alowing him to drink juice (high in sugar) from a bottle all day.  

She refused to have child seen by a dentist, so Bio Father (SRP) made an appt that was to occur during his visitation time, which included one day of makeup visitation from thanksgiving (she denied him thanksgiving and still owes him 2 days of makeup visitation).

She denied him the makeup visitation, and at the last minute did show up to the dentist appt hoping to prove bio dad wrong.  Dentist informed Bio Mom and Bio Dad that child needed treatment immediately for moderate decay on 4 teeth.  He would need tooth restructuring, requiring two visits for treatment.

Angry, the Bio Mom left without signing anything, and without reviewing hte treatment plan.

Bio dad signed all paperwork, reviewed treatment plan, received a signed statement from dentist explaining the diagnosis and warning of the dangers of leaving it untreated.

Bio Mom agreed that treatment needed to be done, and stated that she was happy with the dentist ad would have it done here (mind you, its 8 hours away frmo her house).

Bio Dad scheduled the next available appointmnets for boht treatment, in line with the schedule that the Bio Mom recommended:  To occur on the wednesday or thursday before his next visitation in 3 weeks, and/or the week immediately following his visitation.

Appt was booked accordingly: first treatment on thurs prior to his visitation weekend and the second treatment on the following monday.

Now Bio mom is refusing to allow treatment, stating that if its to be done, she will have it done there to keep him from being able to be present, and wants to have valium administered to the child during treatment.  Bio Dad disagrees, and thinks treatment needs to be done with the dentist he currently sees.

Both parents live in Florida (8 hours apart).

What rights does he have in this matter including allowing his child to be given treatment under valium?  
Can he file contempt if she doesnt show up to the treatment they have scheduled since it was planned with her consent and knowledge, especially if she has not had treatment done by that time (since getting the child treated is the ultimate goal here)?


BothSides....

[socrateaser]

>What rights does he have in this matter including allowing his
>child to be given treatment under valium?

The dentist is in a better position to determine what sedative to administer to the child. The father has the right to ensure that the child receives reasonable care, and that the mother pay for half of that care, assuming that there is nothing in the court orders mandating that father pay more than 50%.

>Can he file contempt if she doesnt show up to the treatment
>they have scheduled since it was planned with her consent and
>knowledge, especially if she has not had treatment done by
>that time (since getting the child treated is the ultimate
>goal here)?

You have posted no facts to suggest that the mother is willfully violating any court order. Therefore, my answer is no contempt. There may be other facts that would lead to a different conclusion, but I'm not reading them here.

[BothSides]

Thank you.

The court order specifically states that the father provide medical and dental insurance, and that the mother pays all uninsured and unreimbursed medical expenses.

Now, if she doesnt have the child treated at all, can she still not be held in contempt even though the court order doesnt specifically state that she must ensure that the child is given proper medical treatment?  I would think as a parent, this is an implied responsibility?

What can be done to force her to get him treated?  We have a signed statement from the dentist outlining the severity of the condition, the need for immediate treatment, and the adverse results of leaving this condition untreated.  

Could a motion to compel be filed?  A request for a hearing?  Were now without an attorney, so were kind of unsure about this part of it.

Thank you,
BothSides

[socrateaser]

If the other parent is affirmatively acting against the child's best interests, then the proper motion is a motion for a new custody hearing.

If the parent's actions are causing "irreparable harm" to the child, then you can ask for emergency temporary sole custody in order to make sure that the child gets urgent care.

However, this doesn't appear to be quite that sort of an emergency.

A motion to compel is used to force the other party to produce documents or appear at a deposition.