Who Should My Child Speak with to Have a Voice in the Courtroom

[PandorasBox]

Warning: This is not my normal area. I am not a lawyer.

(1) Do you have record of the dog biting your son? Medical records?

Lots of parents take their children to the liquor store. Maybe not stellar parenting, but you're not going to show it DAMAGES the child, so still not impactful for custody, yet.

But...she also said: then proceeding to drink the contents of the "little bottles" he buys in front of my son before driving home. If it is a 50 ml bottle, that is the equivalent of 2 shots.

So dad is drinking and driving with son in car....I would have a lawyer check into if he has been busted on any alcohol related charges lately. I'd also be asking the lawyer if a hair sample drug/alc test could be obtained.

[Dogmatique]

This is a 7 year old. How does the 7 year old know what Dad is drinking?

The reality is that a 7 year old's testimony is not likely to count for anything.

And adultery is rarely an issue when it comes to custody, simply because it does not reflect on the parent's ability to actually parent. That's how it is in most states (though granted, there are a few southern states which take it more seriously).

By the way, it's not that Wyoming simply allows parents to up and leave - the reality is that the burden of proof (yes, you actually did have a chance to object - you might want to ask that lawyer about that, if s/he didn't bother to mention it) is on the non-relocating parent to show that the move would be detrimental to the child and/or would impact visitation so greatly as to hurt the bond between parent and child.

If the attorney didn't tell you that, I'm genuinely sorry because you always - in every state - have the right to object to the child being relocated out of state.

- - - Updated - - -

@Pandy - the court will not order any sort of testing unless there is actually proof of wrongdoing. As in recent DUIs. (With the child present)

[FatherWhoWon]

Oh my goodness, there are so many little details in this thread that I stopped and thought of this or that comment that could be shared (and many certainly have), but I think the biggest thing I'm thinking through all of this is that, although dad very likely has his faults, we are getting an extremely one-sided perspective here.

OP, I'm not going to comment on all of the things you've posted about dad here, and I'm sure you have some legitimate gripes. I will recommend, however, that you consider what dad is going to have to say in a courtroom and how you are going to respond to that. You haven't painted dad in a very good light, but honestly most of it doesn't sound like its more than just whining. What is dad going to say about you? If its similar, then to me this sounds like its going to end up as one parent "bashing" the other, OP getting a few more explicit privileges like phone time, and otherwise just keeping things relatively the same with the judge sending both of you away disgusted by yet another set of bickering parents.

Good wishes for your son.

[wolfcreekgal]

By the way, it's not that Wyoming simply allows parents to up and leave - the reality is that the burden of proof (yes, you actually did have a chance to object - you might want to ask that lawyer about that, if s/he didn't bother to mention it) is on the non-relocating parent to show that the move would be detrimental to the child and/or would impact visitation so greatly as to hurt the bond between parent and child.

If the attorney didn't tell you that, I'm genuinely sorry because you always - in every state - have the right to object to the child being relocated out of state.

This is yet another reason why I say Wyoming is a backwards state. For, in Wyoming, all the CP has to do is give the courts a written 30 day notice of an out of state relocation. I know this as I not only consulted one attorney, but TWO, and got verification of this from the court itself. Now, you tell me there isn't something fishy going on in Wyoming. I had NO legal rights at all to protest the move.

[aardvarc]

In fact, according to my research, almost 80% of fathers seeking custody win in that state. A great place for dad's wanting custody to reside, to be sure.

What those stats DON'T tell you though is that mothers pretty much always seek primary, while fathers don't seek primary custody, especially for children under 10, to nearly the same degree (in all 50 states) -instead they seek visitation. Wyoming is known somewhat for having "user friendly" family courts, as opposed to states where you really MUST have an attorney to get things done. It boils down that fathers who are willing to do the legwork in court have at least a fighting chance at custody, and because of this, more fathers who want to be active full time parents, or who have "beefs" against mom that could impact custody actually get into the "fight" as it were and attempt to seek primary custody. It really isn't that the courts are preferental to fathers. It's that more fathers fight, and are willing to challenge mothers who should be challenged than in other states.

Both of us were Pro se and neither of us had a clue what we doing.

That too plays a big factor. A good attorney can present even the worst case in the best light. Sometimes that can make a huge difference.

I thought my case would be cut and dry though as dad had left me for another woman

Unfortunately, not really relevant to custody as far as the courts are concerned. Courts look at things that directly impact the child, and while cheating isn't a great quality in a person, it doesn't directly impact their ability to meet minimums of parenting standards.

the night his big dog bit our son almost putting out his left eye. Dad did not go with me to the emergency room nor did he answer my calls after my son and I got back home.

All emotionally bad for you, but again, you're not looking at it as a COURT looks at it. The child DID get medical care and was in the company of a competent caregiver. That's all that the court needs. Again, doesn't make him a stellar parent, but parents don't need to be stellar, they only need to not be proven a danger to the child. Now if dad sat in the living room while the child ran around the house with an eye hanging by a thread, that would be a different matter. But if dad knew the child was being taken for medical care, he's off the hook on the incident.

In fact, I did not hear from him at all for a period of two weeks and then he only called to ask when he could pick up his belongings. I had photos and documentation of all of this.

A two week period won't bother even the sternest judge. Remember, the court isn't looking at how he's treated you, it's looking at the child, and really ONLY the child. The exception would be if there were documented incidents of domestic violence that occurred to you in front of the child. Short of that, the court looks at the parent/child relationship in a sort of vacuum - so dad could be the biggest heel, womanizer, even a criminal if it wasn't violent or directed at children, cheat on his taxes, or drink white wine with red meat, and it wouldn't have a negative impact on his chances of getting custody. Even registered sex offenders have won custody of their children. When bringing custody cases, this is why an attorney is so important - because they know what things the court won't care about (typically where pro se filers spend a lot of time), and what things the court WILL care about, and most importantly, how to PRESENT issues in such a way that shows DIRECT impact to the CHILD, since that's where the court's focus centers. (People complain at lot about their family law attorneys, irked that the lawyer didn't tell the court about a, b, c - and it's usually because a,b,and c won't be considered by the court anyway).

The judge said and I quote: " Everyone cheats these days"

And, not DIRECTLY related to parenting the child.

and, looking at dad, "Keep a better eye on your dog."

Unless there were prior issues with the dog, where a reasonable person should have anticipated the dog being a dangerous biter, the court is generally willing to understand that things happen. If there wasn't a report to CPS about the child being improperly supervised, or a report from animal control about the dog being dangerous or some other indicator of a larger problem, then I'm surprised that the judge even commented on it.

Dad's evidence was a letter from our son's Day Care provider stating he appeared to be a better parent and he WON.

That evidence was DIRECTLY tied to the child, being the opinion of a secondary caregiver - so that can carry a lot of weight. An attorney would have challenged that up and down - starting with questioning the value of the opinion of a day care provider, who doesn't have direct exposure to witness the parenting of both parents, nor the training to make parenting evaluations, such as a social worker, CPS worker, or GAL might. If the statement wasn't properly objected, skillfully cross examined, or rebutted with the expert opinion of another witness, the court got to consider it at face value, which said "better parent".

It was that easy! Everyone has told me it makes no sense at all, but that is precisely what happened.

Who is "everyone", and what is their level of experience in family law cases or custody battles?

I walked out of that courtroom feeling like I'd just been struck by a train and, of course, dad is looking at me with a huge sh*& eating grin on his manipulative face.

I know that must have been very painful, when you were already hurting. I'm sorry.

And he has been controlling the situation ever since then, moving away to Illinois a mere three months after winning custody, successfully severing the bond I had established with my child.

Was there anything in the divorce settlement or custody order about moving, notice, court approval, etc? Did you petition the court and argue that moving wasn't in the child's best interest and ask the court to issue an injunction to block the move until the court could evaluate a new visitation plan?


How long has it been since the move?

[Dogmatique]

I'm not going to sit here and argue with you. Yes, you had the right to object. Even though the presumption is in favor of relocation, you could have objected.

I doubt you got verification from the court - they cannot do that, actually. That aside, it's a moot point - they moved. My previous post stands.

[wolfcreekgal]

Aardvark,
Thanks again for your wealth of information. I appreciate you taking the time to respond so thoroughly. People tell me all the time I am naive and I absolutely agree with them, especially when it comes to courtroom matters. I guess I look at the world through rose colored glasses and find it difficult to believe so many horrible things are simply just accepted these days, but that's a different matter entirely.

I would think, in my clearly jaded point of view, that a parent who doesn't contact his child for two weeks after a severe dog bite would be viewed poorly by a judge, but OK, that's no big deal. I get that. I just don't understand why.

As far as anything being in the court order about relocation, there is something very specific. It states that if either party moves more than 100 miles away, a thirty day written notice is required for both the court and the other parent. Also, the party who moves bears 100% of all travel costs. And, as I stated here before, there is absolutely nothing I could do to prevent the move. Wyoming allows the CP to move for any reason and anywhere they wish.

To clarify what you mentioned earlier in this thread about the length of time CP has had physical custody, he was awarded custody in December of 2008. So, he has had our son for almost four years. And yes, after that period of time, I am reluctant to believe I have any chance at all of gaining custody, but there was little I could do about that. I first had to hire an attorney to have the court order recognized in Illinois (where our child now resides) and, once that was done, I had to wait a year and half to even get a hearing.

The only thing I have going for me are what I have previously mentioned, which isn't a whole lot, certainly no "smoking gun" and that I have successfully raised two older children by myself. My older son will be testifying to my parenting techniques in court. Again, I'm not holding my breath nor expecting anything to change. If I can tell my little boy I tried my hardest, that might have to be good enough.

[Dogmatique]

Your older son's testimony won't matter, either. I'm sorry - I know this isn't what you want to read. But so far, I can see nothing that would justify changing custody.

You need a change in circumstance, and while I do understand your concerns (truly), I'm not seeing anything solid at all. Again your 7 year old's testimony likely won't even be considered, and your older son's testimony regarding your parenting won't matter because your parenting isn't on trial here.

Dad's parenting is what you're focusing on (and if you want to change custody that's what you should be focusing on so we're good there). This is no longer an initial determination where you both have to sort of play your hands; you're no longer equal to Dad and he has the upper hand. What you need now is actual proof that kiddo remaining with Dad is having a direct detrimental effect on the child.

A psychologist and a GAL can help. But still, you have to have something before you even get that far.

[wolfcreekgal]

Dogmatique,
I am not a quitter, but I have conceded to the idea of living out the duration of my son's childhood having his father listen in on our conversations, have our child call me back whenever he feels like it, plan visitation without my input, tell my child nasty things to say to me and then be heard laughing about it in the background, drinking and driving with our child in the car, etc. And the damned thing is, it won't be the judge suffering if my son is killed in a car accident someday, it will be me.

And yes, maybe my children won't be able to help in the courtroom, but I'll take my chances. What have I got to lose that I haven't already lost? And, believe me when I tell you I am aware of the fact dad has the upper hand. He always has. I simply don't get how an uneducated plumber can always manage to get everything he wants and then some.

[Dogmatique]

If he is actually going against court orders, file for contempt. THAT might be your answer - because if he is found in contempt often enough, THAT can be an easy way for custody to be changed.

If there is proof of him driving drunk with the child present, what is the proof?