A self-censored chronicle of family court dramas, lived by parents who lost all or some visitation with or custody of a child or children based on perjury and/or other false courtroom evidence
After the International Year of the Family in 1994 to remind us that the family is the basic unit of society and therefore deserves special attention,
Following the resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly entitled "A world fit for children" (S-27/2, 6 May 2002) which recognizes the shared responsibility of parents in the education and upbringing of their children, and the importance of making every effort to ensure that fathers have the opportunity to participate in the lives of their children,
In noting a transformation of family patterns in recent decades characterized among other things by an increase in the number of separated families and therefore the risk of disengagement of a parent,
we ask for :
An international year to increase the awareness of the general public and all the elected officials in every nation on the equal importance of the roles of both parents – be they together, separated or divorced – in the upbringing of their child(ren).
A year to create opportunities and find solutions to promote and above all value the commitment of each parent to their children); a year to focus on action and results, by the exchange of good practices.
A year to rethink greater equity (particularly in parenting time) between the two parents in case of separation / divorce in the best interest of the child.
A year to recognize the prime role of each parent and celebrate the commitment of both parents towards their (s) child (ren).
A year to remember that each child has two unique parents - father and mother – with the same rights and responsibilities to provide the best possible living conditions, to give him/her affection, assistance and protection, education, to encourage the development of his/her personality, to transmit values.
In this perspective, regardless of political allegiances, social or religious beliefs, father, mother, grandmother or grandfather, or just a citizen committed to human rights, we ask the General Assembly of the United Nations to declare 2017 : International Year of co-parenting.
Who is going to have custody of children when the couple separate or divorce? This decision has to be made along with, how the children will be taken care of and the visitation, the how of each parent spending time with the children. Relationships cause connectedness and there are orders to abide by. There are two types of custody orders.
There is also physical custody, ordering with whom the child will live. In joint custody the child can live with both. Under sole or primary custody the child will live with one parent much of the time and visits the other parent usually. There are cases of judges allowing parents joint legal custody and not joint physical custody, both parents share the responsibility in important decision making and the child lives with one parent and the other receives visitation right.
There is visitation plan to prevent and reduce confusion, anger and further conflict. Under supervised visitation, when the child's safety and well-being is at issue or if the child and the other parent would need gradual exposure, it is supervised by custodial parent, an adult, a professional agency or a mental health counselor. There is also a “no visitation” rule about that, even if with supervision, physical and/or emotional welfare of the child can be jeopardized. When visitation, custody or time share plan is drawn the above issues are clarified.
There are visitation guidelines, also known as time-share. Here a plan is set about how the both parents will share the time with the children. Either one (sole custody) or both parents (called shared custody) can have custody. Under normal circumstances, the judge consorts about arrangements with the parents and reaches a final decision about custody and visitation. If there is disagreement between the parents the judge will make that decision at a hearing. There is usually a mediator about custody and visitation. The family court services provide the mediator for the parents to reconcile.
Custody and visitation is decided considering the best interest of the child’s health, safety and wellbeing. Here history of abuse by either or both parents is considered.
After the International Year of the Family in 1994 to remind us that the family is the basic unit of society and therefore deserves special attention,
Following the resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly entitled "A world fit for children" (S-27/2, 6 May 2002) which recognizes the shared responsibility of parents in the education and upbringing of their children, and the importance of making every effort to ensure that fathers have the opportunity to participate in the lives of their children,
In noting a transformation of family patterns in recent decades characterized among other things by an increase in the number of separated families and therefore the risk of disengagement of a parent,
we ask for :
An international year to increase the awareness of the general public and all the elected officials in every nation on the equal importance of the roles of both parents – be they together, separated or divorced – in the upbringing of their child(ren).
A year to create opportunities and find solutions to promote and above all value the commitment of each parent to their children); a year to focus on action and results, by the exchange of good practices.
A year to rethink greater equity (particularly in parenting time) between the two parents in case of separation / divorce in the best interest of the child.
A year to recognize the prime role of each parent and celebrate the commitment of both parents towards their (s) child (ren).
A year to remember that each child has two unique parents - father and mother – with the same rights and responsibilities to provide the best possible living conditions, to give him/her affection, assistance and protection, education, to encourage the development of his/her personality, to transmit values.
In this perspective, regardless of political allegiances, social or religious beliefs, father, mother, grandmother or grandfather, or just a citizen committed to human rights, we ask the General Assembly of the United Nations to declare 2017 : International Year of co-parenting.
OK, OK, OK! That’s “3″ Okays for the “3″ people who sent me this story today. I am sharing the story but this is one of those stories that you just don’t share. THIS IS AN ACTION STORY! I mean how can you read this story and not do something? At the very least a letter must be written, there must be some additional attention to this case.
There are some stories that are just so outrageous that you can’t just simply share… you must take action!
That being said, none of us should ever forget William Reddie of Michigan. If you don’t remember what happened to William Reddie and his child, what are we doing here? United we could accomplish so much that every government agency or their representatives would think twice before abusing another one of our children anywhere ever.
Interference by one parent in the relationship of a child and the other parent is almost never in the child's best interests. In fact, in extreme cases, actions by one parent to alienate the affections of the child from the other parent, to interfere win the other parent's visitation rights, or to remove the child to a distant state or country can often lead to liability in tort. See generally E. Borris, "Torts Arising Out of Interference with Custody and Visitation," 7 Divorce Litigation 192 (1995). Tort liability is not always an option, however, as many courts refuse to award damages based upon interference with visitation rights. E.g., Cosner v. Ridinger, 882 P.2d 1243 (Wyo.1994).
A noncustodial parent is not always left without a remedy, however, simply because courts in that parent's jurisdiction refuse to recognize tort actions arising out of interference with his or her parental rights. This article discusses a different type of liability which may result from interference with the noncustodial parent's rights: loss of custody. The article will first discuss whether a party may generally obtain a change of custody based upon such interference. The article will then examine specific acts by a custodial parent which may cause a court to change custody, including denial of visitation rights, alienation of the child's affections away from the noncustodial parent, and removal of the child to a distant jurisdiction. The section on alienation of the child's affections includes a discussion of Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) and recent cases that have dealt with PAS. The article concludes with a suggestion of possible provisions that practitioners may insert in custody decrees in order to prevent future problems between custodial and noncustodial parents.
Interference Amounting to a Substantial Change in Circumstances
Most courts and experts agree that except in unusual cases it is most important for a child to have a strong relationship with both parents. Thus, courts will typically conclude that an award of custody to the parent who is most likely to foster a relationship between the child and the other parent is in the child's best interests. For this reason, if a custodial parent has demonstrated in the past a pattern of interference with the relationship between the child and the noncustodial parent, unless other facts dictate a different holding, courts will frequently conclude that a substantial change in circumstances justifying a change of custody has occurred.
Not surprisingly, there is a long-standing tradition of awarding a change of custody where the custodial parent has interfered with the parental rights of the other parent. The Court of Appeals of Maryland clearly established this point in Berlin v. Berlin, 239 Md. 52, 210 A.2d 380 (1965). In Berlin, the parties entered into a written separation agreement. Pursuant to the agreement, incorporated into the court's order, custody of the children was awarded to the mother, and the father received reasonable visitation rights. In addition, the parties also agreed that the mother would notify the father if the mother moved out of the Washington metropolitan area. Subsequently, the mother began denying the father his right to visitation. For this reason, the father requested a change in custody. The trial court granted the father's request, and the mother appealed.
Specific Acts of Interference Which May Cause a Court to Change Custody
After a practitioner determines whether the relevant jurisdiction may award a change of custody based upon acts of interference with the noncustodial parent's rights, it must be determined which particular acts will justify such a change. The relevant authority indicates that three distinct fact patterns may justify a change. First, courts often award a change of custody if the custodial parent repeatedly interferes with the noncustodial parent's court- ordered visitation rights. Second, courts are inclined to award a change of custody if the custodial parent alienates the child's affections away from the noncustodial parent. Third, if the custodial parent removes the child to a distant jurisdiction without informing the noncustodial parent of the move, courts frequently order a change of custody. Each of these scenarios will be addressed in turn.
Frustration of Visitation Rights
The most common form of interference with parental rights which is remedied by courts occurs when custodial parents consistently refuse to turn children over to the noncustodial parents for court-ordered visitation. The fact that courts frequently order changes of custody in this circumstance is perfectly understandable, since court-ordered visitation is often the noncustodial parent's only connection to his or her children. If this visitation is frustrated, the child's best interests are clearly injured because the child will be completely deprived of a relationship with the noncustodial parent.
What is the research that supports such a schedule? Where is the data
that confirms that such a plan is in the best interest of the child?
Well, reader, you can spend your time from now until eternity
researching the literature, and YOU WILL NOT DISCOVER ANY SUPPORTING DATA for the
typical visitation arrangement with the non-residential parent! The reality is
that this arrangement is based solely on custom. And just like the short story,
"The Lottery," in which the prizewinner is stoned to death, the
message is that deeds and judgments are frequently arrived at based on nothing
more than habit, fantasy, prejudice, and yes, on "junk science."
This family therapist upholds the importance of both parents playing an
active and substantial role in their children's lives----especially in
situations when the parents are apart. In order to support the goal for each
parent to provide a meaningfully and considerable involvement in the lives of
their children, I affirm that the resolution to custody requires an arrangement
for joint legal custody and physical custody that maximizes the time with the
non-residential----with the optimal arrangement being 50-50, whenever
practical. It is my professional opinion that the customary visitation
arrangement for non-residential parents to visit every other weekend and one
night during the week is not sufficient to maintain a consequential
relationship with their children. Although I have heard matrimonial attorneys,
children's attorneys, and judges assert that the child needs the consistency of
the same residence, I deem this assumption to be nonsense. I cannot be
convinced that the consistency with one's bed trumps consistency with a parent!
Should the reader question how such an arrangement can be judiciously
implemented which maximizes the child's time---even in a 50-50
arrangement----with the non-residential parent, I direct the reader to the
book, Mom's House, Dads House, by the Isolina Ricci, PhD.
Indeed, the research that we do have supports the serious consequences
to children when the father, who is generally the non-residential parent, does
not play a meaningful role in lives of his children. The book, Fatherneed,
(2000) by Dr. Kyle Pruitt, summarizes the research atYale University about the
importance of fathers to their children. And another post on this page
summarizes an extensive list of other research.
Children of divorce or separation of their parents previously had each
parent 100% of the time and obviously cannot have the same arrangement
subsequent to their parents' separation. But it makes no sense to this family
therapist that the result of parental separation is that the child is accorded
only 20% time with one parent and 80% with the other. What rational person
could possibly justify this?
We only support organizations who show an understanding that children need both parents, and that either parent is equally capable of the choice to perpetrate hate or declare peace.
All were familiar with alienation and it's results. Everyone was not only gratified to see PAAO at the event, they all also acknowledged that PA is either a form of Domestic violence or on the continuum of Domestic Violence behaviors.
Un Estado-niñera, controlador, interventor y protector - 26-4 PADRES ARGENTINOS AUTOCONVOCADOS - 26-4 Padres de parana por la custodia compartida Año 2013 - 26-4 ASSOCIATION - ROBERTO TERRILE - CONVOCATORIA PARA EL 26 DE ABRIL 2013 A LOS TRIBUNALES DE FAMILIA - 26-4, 2013 Padres de la Guarda - 26-4 DERECHOS DE LA NIÑEZ Y ADOLESCENCIA, POLITICA DE ESTADO, YA! - Cibercampaña "vírica" de apoyo al 26-4 más enlaces al final de la entrada El 26 de Abril es el Día Internacional de la Igualdad Parental y la Corresponsabilidad Familiar. Por ello, el mejor...more »
In this perspective, regardless of political allegiances, social or religious beliefs, father, mother, grandmother or grandfather, or just a citizen committed to human rights, we ask the General Assembly of the United Nations to declare 2017 : International Year of co-parenting.
