Re: Fiance is Relocating to Different State for New Job.now What
kathy1981,you know your ex husband's history and his financials. You have an opportunity to better your daughter's life. You're not moving that far away. He can also relocate to find a job, for the best interest of his daughter. Have your lawyer explain to your ex the pros and cons of adoption. He may accept it, to get out of the legal and financial strain.
Re: Fiance is Relocating to Different State for New Job.now What
Quote:
Quoting
johnb123
kathy1981,you know your ex husband's history and his financials. You have an opportunity to better your daughter's life. You're not moving that far away. He can also relocate to find a job, for the best interest of his daughter. Have your lawyer explain to your ex the pros and cons of adoption. He may accept it, to get out of the legal and financial strain.
I agree. I will contact my attorney and discuss with her. I believe we can make a pretty compelling argument with the recent DV history, our future financial situation, his financial situation, the closer proximity to immediate family, reduced financial strain for my ex, area with less criminal activity, etc. It seams that I have everything to make a very very strong argument for the move.
Re: Fiance is Relocating to Different State for New Job.now What
Quote:
Quoting
kathy1981
I agree. I will contact my attorney and discuss with her. I believe we can make a pretty compelling argument with the recent DV history, our future financial situation, his financial situation, the closer proximity to immediate family, reduced financial strain for my ex, area with less criminal activity, etc. It seams that I have everything to make a very very strong argument for the move.
From experience, and based purely on what you've written here, I think you might be in for a major disappointment. You seem to be missing one vital point - DAD is her immediate family. Not your fiance. Not the other relatives.
But speak with your attorney.
Re: Fiance is Relocating to Different State for New Job.now What
Quote:
Quoting
Dogmatique
From experience, and based purely on what you've written here, I think you might be in for a major disappointment. You seem to be missing one vital point - DAD is her immediate family. Not your fiance. Not the other relatives.
But speak with your attorney.
Based on the definitions below, wouldn't one be able to make the argument that my fiance would become "immediate family" once we become married?
From NRS:
NRS 622.020 “Immediate relative” defined. “Immediate relative” means:
1. A spouse.
2. A parent, by blood, marriage or adoption.
3. A child, by blood, marriage or adoption.
NRS 678.130 “Immediate family” defined. “Immediate family” includes any relative, by consanguinity or marriage, of a member living in the member’s household and includes foster and adopted children.
Re: Fiance is Relocating to Different State for New Job.now What
But DAD is STILL family, regardless of that.
Kathy, Doggie and I are both stepparents, and we both have stepparents. We're quite aware that steps can be just as much family, in the emotional sense, as blood relatives. But we're not talking the emotional aspect - we're talking the LEGAL aspect. Providing a stepfather does NOT remove Dad as a family member.
Re: Fiance is Relocating to Different State for New Job.now What
Quote:
Quoting
cbg
But DAD is STILL family, regardless of that.
Kathy, Doggie and I are both stepparents, and we both have stepparents. We're quite aware that steps can be just as much family, in the emotional sense, as blood relatives. But we're not talking the emotional aspect - we're talking the LEGAL aspect. Providing a stepfather does NOT remove Dad as a family member.
Agreed. Not saying it would remove my ex. It was more just making a point that my fiance will be considered immediate family as well....just not the biological or legal family. And I understand that.
Re: Fiance is Relocating to Different State for New Job.now What
Dad has already WON the right to access and visitation to his child, DESPITE his past history with you. And like it or not, issues between you and dad, especially ones in the past, aren't going to cause a court to remove the CHILD'S right to her two parents at this point. Lots of people think, mistakenly, that domestic violence between the parents somehow means that once the parents are separated, this is ammo to keep the CHILD from the other parent. It just isn't so. As much as research might suggest otherwise, and common sense might agree, courts generally remain perfectly willing to accept that dad can both be a creep to you, even a violent one, AND STILL be able to be an acceptable parent to his child. That generally means UNTIL the occurrance of some incident where the child is INVOLVED, the court will be on dad's side, and the child's side, to keep the natural parent/child relationship intact. That's the reality. Decades of advocacy and research haven't changed it yet, and it's not likely to change in the next year or two for your case.
Lots of people, myself included, take exception to the use of violence in lots of forms in dealing with relationships, but the reality you're up against is that the court isn't going to care about your ex and your fiance getting into it - since it doesn't have any SUBSTANTIAL or DIRECT impact on how he's expected to treat the CHILD. His issues aren't with the CHILD. You've got to remember that the courts don't operate on common sense, they operate on statutory law, administrative law, and case law, all under the watchful eye of the constitution - which dad has firmly in his corner, since the right to one's children is the most basic and fundamental right a person can have. Unless dad is shown as a danger to the child, that's his trump card against contested adoption.
On the issue of money....courts don't take away a CHILD'S right to their two parents due to financial reasons. Poor, homeless, parents that are $100's of thousands in arrears can have bonds of love with their children and be positive figures in their child's lives (even while being a seething mountain of agony for the other parent). That is what a parent's constutional right to their children covers, and you're realistically nowhere near getting a court to overcome that right at this point.
Quote:
He won't be able to afford to put our child in daycare while he works...it just won't be possible.
Then he'll have to come up with some other solution, maybe even not working once in a while. But the court isn't going to look at problems that haven't even HAPPENED yet. Courts work on evidence of what's CURRENTLY happening, and what's currently happening is that dad is actively exercising his visitation and that shows the court that he wants to remain in the child's life. The only way the court is going to terminate dad's parental rights AGAINST dad's wish to be involved is going to be under extremely DIRE (ie criminal) issues DIRECTLY related to his ability to parent (ie DUI with the child in the car, or a conviction for a crime against a child). If dad gets custody and you find out that the child is being left unsupervised, then there are avenues to deal with that - but UNTIL it happens, the court isn't in a position to play crystal ball, and shouldn't be expected to invent problems to consider.
Quote:
Also, with a continued history of domestic violence,
I sympathize with you here - but the courts WON'T. What happens between you and dad in no way impacts dad's ability to take his child to the zoo, to have an ice cream, and talk about their favorite stuffed animal/pet/classmate/teacher/sports team, etc.. THAT is how the courts see it. And, if you've taken steps regarding restraining orders, the court's position will be that you've already effectively taken action to solve the problem. Issues along these lines might get the court to consider altering language regarding things like the mechanics of visitation, such as how the exchance of the child occurs, but isn't going to terminate rights or remove visitation.
Quote:
his past history of being abused as a child,
Completely irrelevant.
Quote:
I don't see how the courts would agree that that would be in the best interest of our daughter.
Best interest is primarily important when the court is determining (a) which parent should have primary custody at the beginning of a custody case, and (b) if or at what level visitation should be awarded. In your case, even with all the dramatic past, the court has ALREADY determined that it's in the child's best interest to HAVE a relationship with her father. Termination/adoption isn't realistically on the table, which leaves us with possible modification to allow the child to be relocated.
States look at "best" differently - for Nevada, they consider status quo to be "best" and that removal of the child where they have an active bond with the other parent isn't in the "best" interest. The default "best" is staying. And, unlike some other states, moving the child so YOU can have a relationship, without employment, and without a VERY generous visitation plan designed to convince the court that you fully intend to foster a parent/child relationship with the father, isn't going to get a drop out of the can, much less grease any wheels with the court. That's why Doggie strongly encouraged you to propose as outlined above - to demonstrate to the court your devotion (under court order) to keep the child's father active and involved with the child. Short of that, consider this for a moment: you ask the court to take the child to a new state, and without such demonstration. Dad in turn then ask the court to order that child to live with him, because he's been an active part of his child's life and that he fears you will attempt to alienate him if the move is approved (finding/printing this thread would be a good start for his argument). Odds on a winner? Dad's the favorite. Then to add insult to injury, dad seeks child support from you, and since you're not working, he agrees for your amount to be subtracted from his arrears and further support to stop accruing. Stranger things have happened.
Quote:
Also, my fiance and I discussed the divorce aspect. He said in the event of a divorce, he would not try to gain custodial rights over my daughter.
He can say whatever he wants. If the time comes, that promise won't mean a thing in court, and no one can predict circumstances of the future when starting a relationship - if they could, lots of people wouldn't have a batterers as ex's and be embroiled in custody battles - they'd all be living peacefully together as a family. But alas, we know that doesn't happen. And you've seen it not happen first hand. The point being that you have no way of knowing the circumstances ahead of you in life and particulary in a relationship. Statistically, the most likely person to kill you is someone who has told you "I love you". But it's really a moot point, since the odds of the court terminating the rights of a participatory parent without direct child endangerment issues is incredibly small.
Quote:
If we had a child, he would pay child support for both kids as he has taken on the responsibility of my daughter if he does legally adopt her.
If adoption occurs, and if you are named the primary caretaker during some later divorce, yes, he'd be required by the court to pay support for both children. It wouldn't be a choice.
Termination:
The bottom line is that there is VERY little chance that the court is going to terminate dad's rights in this case if he wants to maintain them - and there's ZERO chance of a termination/adoption to a fiance. Remember how I mentioned above that the courts don't deal with problems that haven't happened yet? They also don't count on stability that hasn't occurred yet. Family law courts don't even want to hear the word "fiance". Might as well say "serial killer". THAT is how much creedence they give to "fiances". Get married. STAY married for a while without problems related to dysfunction. Remember, to the court you're 0 for 1 in the healthy, stable, marriage department, even if the demise of the first marriage wasn't your fault. The court wants to see that you're not just getting involved with the NEXT problematic relationship before even considering making your husband adoptive father, and no matter how long you've been "together" the clock that the COURT is interested in starts with "I do". Only THEN is there a chance - albeit a small one, unless dad has some major meltdown that directly impacts the child.
Relocation:
There IS a chance that the court could approve the move, but as Doggie pointed out to you Nevada is one of the states that favors the parent who STAYS. That means dad could drag out a court fight over the matter for a LONG time, even without having an attorney, and to have any real fighting chance to get what you're seeking, it's in your best interest to make dad happy with extended visitations and covering expenses, as much as that might pain you to do. The courts tend to wrinkle noses if you attempt to convince them that moving to a new state completely dependent on a new spouse for income somehow provides stability for the child. Unless you've got a year of salary in the bank, or your new hubby is making massive money yet you're living way below your means to conserve cash, your dependence means that you're only a couple of good fights away from the child being unstable, AGAIN. So while it's technically not impossible to get the court's blessing to move without having your OWN means of support, it's also not technically impossible to flip a coin and gets head 700 times in a row either, so you have to take that with a grain of salt (one of those "read between the lines" things).
On the plus side, you haven't taken any WRONG steps yet, or at least as far as I see, done anything to damage whatever case you might bring moving forward. Believe me, that's worth a lot to you - some people do impulsive or even destructive things that irreparibly damage their credibilty or standing with the courts, and if that happens, it can feel like an avalanche against you - taking all the gas out of your can and handing it to the other parent. Court isn't a fast process, and if you've got legal help, it can be an expensive process - but it's a proceess. That's why sitting down with an attorney experienced in your local courts and familiar with the personalities and quirks of your local judges is SO vital - even if you don't need them to walk your case through all the steps. Family law is like the big tractor that moves the space shuttles - it's heavy and slow, and if you start if off in a bad direction, it'll take heaven, earth, and lots of money/stress, to attempt to fix it. If you run it off into a ditch, it's effectively over. So the best thing you can do for yourself, is try to take the emotion out of it, just like the courts do. Try to look at what the court looks at - which won't be everything you want it to be. And get some local help to get you started in the right direction (relocation being a rough but maybe passable road, termination/adoption being the grand canyon). The more realistic sense of potential outcomes you have, the fewer surprises and disappointments you'll have.
Good luck!
Re: Fiance is Relocating to Different State for New Job.now What
*massive applause for Catherine*
Re: Fiance is Relocating to Different State for New Job.now What
In order to relocate a child, the custodial parent must notify the other parent, and they must also get a written order from Nevada family law court confirming that he or she can do so. The judge will look at five factors to determine whether the move is in the active best interest of the children:
Will the relocation improve the children's quality of life?
What is the parent's motive for the move?
Has the custodial parent been complying with visitation orders? Is the custodial parent likely to comply with a modified visitation order?
Does the noncustodial parent support or oppose the move? Is their opposition honorable?
Can there be adequate long-distance visitation?
Also at issue will be if you're moving out of state. It's not just about moving, but if you're staying within Nevada, that will also be an issue.
Re: Fiance is Relocating to Different State for New Job.now What
Quote:
Quoting
johnb123
In order to relocate a child, the custodial parent must notify the other parent, and they must also get a written order from Nevada family law court confirming that he or she can do so. The judge will look at five factors to determine whether the move is in the active best interest of the children:
Will the relocation improve the children's quality of life?
What is the parent's motive for the move?
Has the custodial parent been complying with visitation orders? Is the custodial parent likely to comply with a modified visitation order?
Does the noncustodial parent support or oppose the move? Is their opposition honorable?
Can there be adequate long-distance visitation?
Also at issue will be if you're moving out of state. It's not just about moving, but if you're staying within Nevada, that will also be an issue.
You're repeating information already discussed.
(If you read the links, that is)
Re: Fiance is Relocating to Different State for New Job.now What
Quote:
Quoting
kathy1981
So, just out of curiosity...I can move anywhere I want in the state of Nevada...even if I move to the very norther tip which is Jackpot, NV. That's only 3 hours less distance than the place I will be moving to.
Also, I would be willing to drive and meet my ex at the half way point on the weekend visits...even though there is the risk of DV happening.
Pursuant to Nevada Law, a parent must obtain express written consent from the other parent or the Court prior to relocating outside the State of Nevada.
Yes, it appears you can move anywhere within the state. The laws seem to only cover moving out of state. You also mentioned your ex has also said several times he might move out of state. If you move, he could follow and perhaps find a better job or get a new start.
Re: Fiance is Relocating to Different State for New Job.now What
I have decided that I'm going to try to set up a meeting with my ex and myself with a mediator prior to going to court. Try and do it the easy way first. I think the following schedule would be a pretty good option:
Option #1: I wave child support and my ex pays for transportation costs
He will have (1) weekend per month, alternate christmas and thanksgiving, have spring break, and (1) full month of summer. Plus he will have (2) weeks of vacation per year to use with her.
Option #2: He continues to pay child support and I pay transportation costs.
He will have (1) weekend per month, alternate christmas and thanksgiving, have spring break, and (1) full month of summer. Plus he will have (2) weeks of vacation per year to use with her.
That seams reasonable. He will never go a month without seeing her, he gets vacation time as well, and major holidays. I won't move for my fiance to adopt. It might be a good opportunity for both my ex and I to move out of Las Vegas as he has discussed moving out in the past.
Re: Fiance is Relocating to Different State for New Job.now What
Quote:
Quoting
kathy1981
I have decided that I'm going to try to set up a meeting with my ex and myself with a mediator prior to going to court. Try and do it the easy way first. I think the following schedule would be a pretty good option:
Option #1: I wave child support and my ex pays for transportation costs
He will have (1) weekend per month, alternate christmas and thanksgiving, have spring break, and (1) full month of summer. Plus he will have (2) weeks of vacation per year to use with her.
Option #2: He continues to pay child support and I pay transportation costs.
He will have (1) weekend per month, alternate christmas and thanksgiving, have spring break, and (1) full month of summer. Plus he will have (2) weeks of vacation per year to use with her.
That seams reasonable. He will never go a month without seeing her, he gets vacation time as well, and major holidays. I won't move for my fiance to adopt. It might be a good opportunity for both my ex and I to move out of Las Vegas as he has discussed moving out in the past.
Sounds like a good plan. As I said, since he's also interested in moving out of state, this just might happen.
Re: Fiance is Relocating to Different State for New Job.now What
Quote:
Quoting
kathy1981
I have decided that I'm going to try to set up a meeting with my ex and myself with a mediator prior to going to court.
That sounds like a good idea. What I think you have to keep in mind is that you saying "fiance" is going to be heard by the court as "boyfriend" until you get married. Because until you get married that is all he is - your boyfriend.
And what you would be saying to the court is this - I would like to move my child out of state away from her dad to follow my boyfriend and oh by the way, I would be quitting my job and so neither of her parents then would have the ability to support her. She and I would be entirely dependent on my boyfriend's completely voluntary generosity.
Get married, let your husband support you and your child for a period of time, then it is different.