Why Would a Judge Allow Unsupervised Visitation to a Know Alcoholic, Criminal

My question involves a child custody case from the State of: PA
My question is how does a judge think it woul be in the best interest of a child to have unsupervised visits from a father that was in and out of jail his entire life, on crack cocaine and alcohol and in and out of rehab. He passed one urine test and now he is attomatically fit to be whith a child alone that he hasnt seen in 2 years. This man was a drug runner and has purchased several vehicles without evan working but that is not enough proof. WHAT DO I NEED TO HAVE THIS JUDGE UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS NOT IN MY DAUGHTERS BEST INTEREST TO GO AN HOUR AWAY FROM HOME TO SPEND TIME WITH THIS MAN. He has robbed a gas station in the past year is this judge against woman or what? Please help i have a lawyer and she just dont help she is pro bono.

you decided he was fit when you made a child with him.

you reaffirmed your decision when you kept that child.

a history of robbing a gas station, while it certainly does not show good judgement or character, is not an immediate threat to the child, unless you have reason to believe he will be teaching the child to be a lookout for future robberies.

Quote:

---

Quoting carmen1039

---

My question involves a child custody case from the State of: PA
My question is how does a judge think it woul be in the best interest of a child to have unsupervised visits from a father that was in and out of jail his entire life, on crack cocaine and alcohol and in and out of rehab. He passed one urine test and now he is attomatically fit to be whith a child alone that he hasnt seen in 2 years. This man was a drug runner and has purchased several vehicles without evan working but that is not enough proof. WHAT DO I NEED TO HAVE THIS JUDGE UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS NOT IN MY DAUGHTERS BEST INTEREST TO GO AN HOUR AWAY FROM HOME TO SPEND TIME WITH THIS MAN. He has robbed a gas station in the past year is this judge against woman or what? Please help i have a lawyer and she just dont help she is pro bono.

---

The simple answer is, Dad has a constitutional right to parent his child.

Evidently the Judge didn't think he represented a threat.

- - - Updated - - -

This isn't actually a legal question, btw.

Well let me just say YES it was my decision to keep my child. I raised my child on my own while i went to school and worked without child support. This man is and was a master of manipultaion. Why does he get to walk in and do as he pleases when he did nothing before to provide. And i didnt know everything about him he lied it was a mistake on my part for feeling sorry for him. All i asked was for supervised visitation to make sure my child is safe and i couldnt get that. oh and haha your funny, imature.

Why are you asking us what went wrong?

We weren't there. ONCE AGAIN, the judge evidently did not see Dad as a threat.

Well if you want a legal question here it is. Why cant i get a supervised visitation order for my child make sure she will be safe will be safe, he is a known criminal.

Because given the evidence provided to the court, the Judge decided supervised visitation wasn't necessary.

It's really that simple.

Do you realize that murderers and repeat felons can get unsupervised visitation with their kids?

Exactly he was judging by what he saw. Which was a man in a suit. He didnt bother to see anything or hear anything else. it was a 15 min court hearing. And im asking because i had a stack of papers with his charges and all i asked was for supervised visitation for my childs safety not to keep her from him but to keep her from harm. I have a custody confrence coming up and i dont know what to do.

Quote:

---

Quoting carmen1039

---

Exactly he was judging by what he saw. Which was a man in a suit. He didnt bother to see anything or hear anything else. it was a 15 min court hearing. And im asking because i had a stack of papers with his charges and all i asked was for supervised visitation for my childs safety not to keep her from him but to keep her from harm. I have a custody confrence coming up and i dont know what to do.

---

Even if the judge ordered supervised visitation, do you realize that it would have been very temporary?

- - - Updated - - -

Mom, you need to accept the fact that at some point Dad will be taking the child for extended periods without you being present. Think weeks at a time.

no i did not realize that and i do fear for my child to drive an hour away with a man with several speeding charges to a house where only GOD knows whats going on there.

- - - Updated - - -

with his alcohol and drug history cant he be made to prove he is off the drugs and booze with random testing.

It can be requested, sure. But given that the Judge has apparently already decided the case I'm not sure if you'd get far with it.

What i need to do is make sure that the child I raised is safe from harm.

Quote:

---

Quoting carmen1039

---

What i need to do is make sure that the child I raised is safe from harm.

---

How about giving Dad a chance?

Mom, you cannot control what Dad does and doesn't do. If he has parenting time, the court isn't going to care about "what ifs". The court cares about actual harm to do the child.

Well i did request it i also asked for a drug test to be done. The judge asked him if he would take one at that moment and he refused then the judge gave him a week to provide a urine test which he passed, but i have seem him pass a test before by drinking lots and lots of water i evan told the judge to please order a blood or hair sample test, its like everything i was saying was not important enough to hear.

- - - Updated - - -

like i said, i want my child to be safe. Its about her not me, would you want to send your child an hour away not knowing what kind of house or living situation she is going into? Have you seen or heard all the crazy shit people are doing to and around there children. Anyway im out of this blog no help at all, thats what i was looking for.

In other words, you weren't told what you want to hear.

Fair enough. We're not going to LIE to you.

Sorry.

Quote:

---

Quoting carmen1039

---

like i said, i want my child to be safe. Its about her not me, would you want to send your child an hour away not knowing what kind of house or living situation she is going into?

---

That situation is set up whenever one has children with a person and the relationship splits up - for ANY reason. Short of you and dad living together, you'll never have the level of information or control you'd wish over dad's actions or what happens during visitation. The only true way to have that level of knowledge is to live as a unified family unit. As Doggie has already pointed out, the courts don't work on "what ifs". If dad's past wasn't enough to deter you from making a child with him, and if his criminal history didn't DIRECTLY involve crimes against children or with children present who were put in imminent danger, dad is likely going to get and keep unsupervised visiting time. Yes, even if he'd been a drug user. Yes, even with felony convictions (if they didn't involve children). Had you checked with us before having a child with dad, we'd have given you this information then so you'd be better prepared to understand the ramifications of what you'd be facing if you chose to make him a co-parent. Alas, all we can do at this stage of the game is point out the legal realities, as unpalatable as they may be.

Quote:

---

Have you seen or heard all the crazy shit people are doing to and around there children

---

Yep. Every day. More than you probably realize. And we wonder "who the hell thought it was a good idea to make children with these people". You chose him as the father, even in light of the extensive issues and criminal history you were aware of. The government doesn't screen people before allowing or licensing them to make children together - so the courts work on the presumption that as a functional adult, the parties involved have already done their due diligence on their partners BEFORE having children with them. Thus individuals have complete control in seeking partners with the characteristics they want or don't want in choosing who they make children with. Some people set their standards high, others don't set standards at all - most are somewhere in the middle. But the court is in no position to second guess your choices, until and unless there is DIRECT evidence that he poses a specific danger to the child. Parents have CONSTITUTIONAL rights regarding their children. Once you imbued him with those rights, it takes some ACTUAL incident involving this child or some other child, before those rights are going to be curbed by the government.

For your info I wasn't aware of his criminal history and once I was I left. ok? So don't judge me when all the Hell I'm trying to do is prevent my child from being involved in his life style . Why the Hell isn't anyone thinking of the Child. Pity party for ****ed up daddy.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't need legal advice on a choice I made to keep my child I need advice on how to keep that child from harm. I'm not perfect. But I'm not a drug addict or alcoholic who feeds of of other people with manipulation. Y is everyone bashing me for getting pregnant I took care of my child. No one else.

No one is bashing you. You asked a question. You didn't understand why this happened. We are telling you why. You simply still do not understand. If the child is ever in DANGER, you can call CPS. Dad has equal rights to you and he has the right to be a parent to your MUTUAL child. If you ever have a legitimate concern that the child is in immediate danger with dad, you'll be able to call CPS or the police. It's not like you're sending your child off to the streets.

And now, you don't have to take care of your child alone. Now you have help. You'll get to enjoy some "you" time while the child is with Daddy.

AARDVARC-
Could you please expound on this:

Parents have CONSTITUTIONAL rights regarding their children. Once you imbued him with those rights, it takes some ACTUAL incident involving this child or some other child, before those rights are going to be curbed by the government.[/QUOTE]

It applies to my case as well and the attorney for the NCP cited this in her email to me and stated that I needed a lawyer to explain it to me. I do not have funds for a lwayer so I am trying to prepare myself the best I can.

Thanks-

Several portions of the Constitution and it's Amendments apply, but the key one is the 14th Amendment - particularly the Due Process Cause and the Equal Protection Clause. The rights of a parent fall under the basics of "life and liberty", which the government doesn't get to interfere with, without there being an OVERWHELMING reason for the court to impede. Other than the right to breathe and eat, the most basic and fundamental right a person has is rights regarding their children. That's why the courts look for DIRECT and APPARANT dangers, things such as crimes committed against children, or with children present. That's why even drug users, convicted felons, and all manner of persons with issues and troubles not only get visitation, but can even get primary custody of their children. Even accused rapists have succeeded in securing parental rights. Because while those things may not be the "best" or undesireable, until and unless they can be SHOWN, with actual incidents, to have endangered the child, parents have the right to be parents, including the right to spend time and develop relationships with their children, even if those parents are drug-addected, criminal, non-support paying, crappy ones. The courts look at it like this: what you see is what you get. When a person chooses to have sex and children with criminals and drug users and person with other problems, they assume the burden of potentially making that criminal or drug user a parent, and have effectively told the court "that'll be ok with me". After that, there aren't any taksie-backsies. That person has effectively set the bar for the standard of what they're looking for in a parent, and they don't get to come back later and demand that the bar be raised. Rather, as many parents find out to their dismay down the road, the bar that the COURTS set is often even lower (really, the LEGAL standard for parental behavior and performance is INCREDIBLY low, exactly because the rights of parents is SO fundamental). Every state has their own benchmarks of what makes a parent LEGALLY unfit, which is NOT the same as morally or otherwise unfit and those benchmarks are so low, as you'll see described over and over as "so low, you'd have to struggle to trip over them". But generally, they require conduct or condition SEROIUSLY detrimental to the child, or actual actions (not what ifs) that substantially and continuously or repeatedly result in failure to give the child care and protection. So if dad is able to feed the child, shelter the child, and appropriately dress the child, AND doesn't have documented history of neglect or crimes against children or other condition that would prevent the required sheltering, feeding, and clothing or the child, then he passes the most basic test of "fit" and some other issue will generally have to ACTUALLY interfere with the child's direct safety before additional intervention or curbing of parental rights comes into play.

If you're looking for case law or references, here's a good starting point:

http://familyrights.us/bin/Constitut...ts_Parents.htm

Very simply, "the court will rarely act on "ifs and ands" "

In other words - the legal parents have the RIGHT to parent their child. Unless there is actual proof of imminent harm, the court doesn't want to listen to "oh s/he is such a bad person and what if.....?"