Can You Take Away an Irresponsible Father's Rights

BAD idea. You shouldn't ignore these requests, payments or no payments.

Ignoring this stuff will almost always come back to bite you in the butt.

Follow Tex's advice.

Quote:

---

Quoting EA1070a

---

BAD idea. You shouldn't ignore these requests, payments or no payments.

Ignoring this stuff will almost always come back to bite you in the butt.

Follow Tex's advice.

---

The requests, payments or no payments- are you talking about the administrative reviews? I guess I am not following here...


I guess I am to the point of just letting the whole idea go. His father is in jail and will be for a long time. Like someone has already mentioned by the time he gets out my son will be 18 and have his own decisions to make at that point. Till then I am going to let the CSEA know he is incarcerated right now and see if I can get these administrative reviews postponed till his release. I know deep down I will never receive a payment from him for child support and that it will continue to be owed even after my son is well over 18 (he already owes me over $25 grand). I would like to try to be positive about it and think he’d pay it which in turn could help put my son through college but that is not the case. He has let him down too many times to try to stay positive now.

I appreciate everyone’s advice and suggestions. I will keep them in mind in the days to come. Thank you.

Quote:

---

Quoting tex11

---

And adoption is probably the least likely to happen at this point, unless of course the father is ok with that.

---

You are stating that based upon what legal authority?

You appear to have it backwards. Mom appears to be stating that has been instructed that a court is not likely to terminate dad's rights without somebody willing to step in as father. In most states, it's difficult to impossible for one parent to terminate the other parent's rights except in the context of stepparent adoption. There's only one state I know of that creates a clear statutory regimen for the termination of one parent's rights in the absence of stepparent adoption.

Quote:

---

Quoting tex11

---

If you feel the fact the father is incarcerated and lacks funds to hire an attorney to contest an adoption will make your endeavor to terminate his parental rights easy, you are mistaken.

---

Have you ever been involved in such a proceeding? Last time I was, dad was represented at the hearing and on appeal. The child was roughly the same age. She now has a new legal father.

Quote:

---

Quoting tex11

---

Because while it is almost impossible to get an appeals court to overturn a normal custody ruling, many appeals courts are much more slap happy with overturning termination cases, and this for a number of reasons.

---

What courts in what states? Because in every state I've seen, 99.9% of termination cases are rubber-stamped "affirmed", and the exceptions are usually, "Fix the following technical error and we'll affirm termination if the case comes back to us."

Quote:

---

Quoting tex11

---

You already had your own attorney tell you that in your case it is impossible to take away the fathers rights.

---

Which is why we have shifted from "just because" to "stepparent adoption". Also, it appears that the attorney's comments were made prior to the father's long-term incarceration. Perhaps we could get some clarification.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

Then don't participate in the administrative reviews. Simply reply with the fact that dad is in jail and won't be getting out until XXXXX date, and therefore a review is irrelevant.

---

You are expected to provide your own financial information, so provide your own information. You can suggest that the agency suspend reviews due to dad's incarceration, and they would normally be ended by the completion of stepparent adoption (a few states permit post-termination support for cases in which the NCP's rights were terminated due to his own bad conduct), but as long as they're doing reviews you're expected to comply with their requests.

Re: not participating in the administrative reviews. Read what Mr. Knowitall wrote below.

Quote:

---

Quoting Mr. Knowitall

---

...in every state I've seen, 99.9% of termination cases are rubber-stamped "affirmed",
and the exceptions are usually, "Fix the following technical error and we'll affirm termination if the case comes back to us"...

---

Where did you pull that 99.9% figure from suggesting this is the percentage of cases rubberstamped on appeal :confused:, or the remark that fixing a technical error makes everything cool. While that percentage may be appropriate for most custody cases, my own research on appeals suggests otherwise with regards to termination cases.

The low "preponderance of the evidence" requirement makes an appeal of a custody dispute based on abuse of discretion almost impossible (or maybe 99.9% odds of losing), because short of a complete lack of evidence to support a ruling, appeals courts are simply not going to split hairs on disputed questions of fact.

On the other hand, for termination cases, the "clear and convincing" burden of proof raises the bar considerably, and allows an appeals court much more room to reverse and remand lower court rulings. Many state supreme courts continue to grant petitions for review on parental termination cases, and not ostensibly with an intention of giving the lower courts any attaboys or pats on the back. PA has notably ordered that parents have a constitutionally protected right in termination cases, and a right to an attorney if they cannot afford one. A common denominator on published opinions on termination cases accross many states is that constitutional arguments are made.

While there is no shortage of rubberstamping appeals court justices in my own jurisdiction, many (though not all) stop short of rubberstamping termination cases. But if they all got it right, there would be no need for state supreme courts to hear such cases.

While you may argue that a case you once had ended differently, or implicate the courts in your jurisdiction with running slipshod on constitutional protections, that does not suggest this applies everywhere else. And the case you alluded to must have been quite a long time ago, cause any attorney with a real practice does not have the time or inclination to generate even a tenth of over 10,000 posts per year on just one public forum alone.

As a practical matter, Looking4advice seems intent on wasting a lot of time and money for what really amounts to nothing. If father will be incarcerated until the child is 18, "depriving" him of his rights is pretty moot.

After the father is released from jail, there is asbolutely nothing mom can do to prevent the father from approaching his adult child and trying to establish a relationship. And that decision will rest entirely upon his child. If mom files suit now to terminate his rights, and dad challenges this from prison, even if dad loses he will be in a position of being able to tell his child that at least HE TRIED, which might arguably put dad in a better position in his child's eyes than if mom just let him quietly sit in jail without stirring up the pot

Quote:

---

Quoting tex11

---

As a practical matter, Looking4advice seems intent on wasting a lot of time and money for what really amounts to nothing. If father will be incarcerated until the child is 18, "depriving" him of his rights is pretty moot.

After the father is released from jail, there is asbolutely nothing mom can do to prevent the father from approaching his adult child and trying to establish a relationship. And that decision will rest entirely upon his child. If mom files suit now to terminate his rights, and dad challenges this from prison, even if dad loses he will be in a position of being able to tell his child that at least HE TRIED, which might arguably put dad in a better position in his child's eyes than if mom just let him quietly sit in jail without stirring up the pot

---

Lets get one thing straight... the "Looking4advice" that you speak of is me... and I am the child's mother! What I have seen the Father do over the past 14 years is FAR more than you can even believe of. For example.... four days after I gave birth (which by the way his Father was locked up at that point and never took part in that either- till at least two days later he was released ...) his Father decided he accomplished something by getting a "job" within one day and gained the right to drink heavily beyond recognition. He then decided a neighbor has stepped too closely and he then hit the neighbor over the head with a Jake Daniels bottle. By the time I made it outside after hearing all the noise I seen his FATHER pacing back and forth chanting hateful and crude things stepping over the body as if it were just a piece of trash laying on the ground. As I approached I noticed the neighbors BRAINS laying on the ground covered with blood as if some sort of horror story. What happened next I am sure you can figure out since you seem to have all the answers.

Now you tell me tex11..... would you want your child associated with such person? Quit trying to make his Father's case seem so "right" and mine so "impossible and worth no effort." I have done my best to stay on the side lines and not take complete control thus giving him chance after chance to clean up his act. His father has failed every time. Despite what you or anyone on here thinks this is our life you are talking about and no matter how much it seems that I am "wasting time and money" I will do whatever it takes to get his father OUT of his life- for good.

Thanks and have a good day!

This is all very intense and personal for you. I get it. However, courts deal with cases just like yours (and honestly much much worse) on a daily basis.

YOU chose dad. Nobody here did - you did. And Tex is right - from a practical standpoint it seems that you have very little to gain by moving forward at this time given his incarceration. That's an objective opinion. What are you ultimately hoping to gain by taking this before the Court? This is a serious question.

You should, however, comply with the administrative reviews and not blow them off. At a minimum contact the agency, inform them about the situation, and seek their input. Let them decide how to handle it.

I'm not trying to be combative here. It just seems as if this situation has sorted itself out due to his incarceration and from an objective POV rather than emotional POV, I can't see that returning to Court will have any impact.

Quote:

---

Quoting tex11

---

Where did you pull that 99.9% figure from suggesting this is the percentage of cases rubberstamped on appeal :confused:, or the remark that fixing a technical error makes everything cool.

---

I got it from reading hundreds and hundreds of cases over a period of years.

You say you have research to the contrary - great. Please share it with us. Thanks.

Quote:

---

Quoting EA1070a

---

What are you ultimately hoping to gain by taking this before the Court? This is a serious question.

---

The obvious answer is that she's hoping to terminate the biological father's rights. Stepparent adoption in this type of context can be beneficial to a child, and sometimes it's desperately wanted by the child.

Quote:

---

Quoting Mr. Knowitall

---

I got it from reading hundreds and hundreds of cases over a period of years.

You say you have research to the contrary - great.
Please share it with us. Thanks.

---

Grand claims from anonymous sources that one has read "hundreds and hundreds" of appeals of termination cases over a period of years are often highly questionable... and this is no exception.
Especially when only supported by anecdotal comments that appeals courts typically "rubberstamp" such cases with with a gist of "fix a technical error and we will affirm if appealed again".

You challenged my statements based upon your own research - great.
Please back that up with cites to relevant cases... and I will respond in kind... thanks :)

In other words you can't substantiate a word of what you said. Thanks for confirming that you were making stuff up. No, your silly ad hominem attack doesn't impress. Back to the regularly scheduled programming.