Father's Failure to Visit

My question involves a child custody case from the State of: Colorado

Background: 8 months pregnant, the mother left the father due to compulsive lying and his infidelity and moved three hours away to live with family.

Around the due date, the father claimed the child was not his and that a paternity test would have to take place before he would "do anything."

A week after the child was born, the father visited and voiced a desire to visit every other week and then changed it to every week stating that he just couldn't do the one week (instead of saying, "I can't visit next week, but would like to visit every week". He made it complicated). He was inconsistent with visitation and made several excuses to miss two weeks and showed up an hour late for his fourth and final visit. During that visit, papers for the Petition of Allocation were served.

A petition for paternity was rolled into the case and was not set up until just before the court's "due date". The father waited until three weeks after the results came in, verifying that the child was his by 99.9999% probability, to ask for visitation. He asked for two days a week and that the mother (who has no vehicle or income presently) to meet him halfway, an hour and a half away from the child's home. It is important to note that the child is almost 5 months of age and even if constant travel were possible, it would greatly interrupt the child's schedule. The father was asked to resume his original once a week schedule to start and go from there (as advised by mother's attorney). No response.

It has been 3.5 months since the father has seen his child in total, and 5 weeks since the return of the DNA results with no effort for a visit.

My question is: Is there any reason anyone can think of that a father might be advised not to visit his child? Is there any logical explanation for failure to visit?

The mother has in no way shape or form withheld visitation and while the ending of the relationship was somewhat volatile, there was never any abuse by either party. The father does not work a job that does not allow for some schedule adjustments to be made if needed and has plenty of hours through his week with which to accommodate visitation.

How does this behavior affect the outcome of the case? Colorado is generally considered a "50/50" state and so it is unlikely that the mother will be able to push for sole custody, but what are the more likely outcomes? Will his failure to visit or make any effort hold significant weight?

The mother wishes sole custody were possible as these types of inconsistencies and empty words greatly affect a child's emotional well-being and positive development but as the father does not have a violent or abusive past and is not considered an "addict" (though he regularly smokes marijuana and drinks alcohol) and he has maintained the same stable low-income job for the past year, it is unlikely he will be fully seen as "unfit". He does have his own car and his own apartment through low-income qualification. The mother doesn't wish in any shape or form to block visitation or a meaningful relationship but requests consistency for the sake of the child. Unfortunately, it is unlikely this consistency and follow through is something that can be enforced.

Does anyone have any experience with similar? How do courts generally look at a "deadbeat" dad? Are there any logical reasons why he would not be visiting his child while in the middle of a custody case (where he will have to prove his desire to be in his child's life)? Are there any reasons an attorney would advise a client to not show up to visitations?

And not a direct legal question but just as an aside, why are mothers and fathers who are, for lack of better terms, "deadbeat losers" not held more accountable for their actions?? I have known both mothers and fathers who just don't step up to the plate because their tiny personal desires are far more important to them. Why is this not considered a crime?

Visitation is a RIGHT, not an OBLIGATION. Child Support, however is an OBLIGATION.

There is also a difference between LEGAL and PHYSICAL custody. Most state prefer JOINT LEGAL CUSTODY, where the parents must make the major child-raising decisions together; education, medical, etc. JOINT PHYSICAL CUSTODY does not infer 50/50 parenting time.

http://www.courts.state.co.us/Forms/...orm_Type_ID=15
https://childsupport.state.co.us/sit...e=/cm:home.jsp

Quote:

---

Quoting MomMeredith

---

How does this behavior affect the outcome of the case?

---

If a father is not even exercising the visitation he has asked for and been granted by the mother and then asks a court for even more, it will affect the outcome in that it will be denied IF the mother and her attorney make the point that he doesn't even show up for less visitation than he is currently petitioning the court for, i.e., if dad asked for 1 day a week and mom said fine and he doesn't even show up 1 day a week and then asks a court for 2 days a week visitation.

Make that point to the court.

Quote:

---

Quoting JulesJam

---

If a father is not even exercising the visitation he has asked for and been granted by the mother and then asks a court for even more, it will affect the outcome in that it will be denied IF the mother and her attorney make the point that he doesn't even show up for less visitation than he is currently petitioning the court for, i.e., if dad asked for 1 day a week and mom said fine and he doesn't even show up 1 day a week and then asks a court for 2 days a week visitation.

Make that point to the court.

---

To what end, exactly? Tell us your rationale here please. I'm sure I'm not the only one excited to hear your response.

That seems to be precisely the direction things are headed. The father has showed up to ZERO visitation of any kind in almost 4 months (75% of the child's life) nor has he engaged in discussing any terms he may or may not agree with. He has done nearly nothing. Which seems peculiar as he has an attorney. One would think that his attorney would have advised him that avoiding all contact with his child would work against him. Unless there is some reason that I could not think of that may work out in his favor in the long run, but that tactic doesn't seem to be in my scope of logical deduction if any such reason exists.

Quote:

---

Quoting MomMeredith

---

That seems to be precisely the direction things are headed. The father has showed up to ZERO visitation of any kind in almost 4 months (75% of the child's life) nor has he engaged in discussing any terms he may or may not agree with. He has done nearly nothing. Which seems peculiar as he has an attorney. One would think that his attorney would have advised him that avoiding all contact with his child would work against him. Unless there is some reason that I could not think of that may work out in his favor in the long run, but that tactic doesn't seem to be in my scope of logical deduction if any such reason exists.

---

If he isn't showing up for visitation now, there is no reason to give him more. You have a good argument. He's basically a stranger to the child.

A good argument for what?

That is a word that was used, "stranger" and it was suggested that the father come get to know the child, that the mother had every intention to be cooperative with that effort and thus far, no effort.

But again, I am wondering if there is any good reason NOT to visit for the father. Is there any strange tactic where completely avoiding the child works for him in anyway whatsoever? What could the father be after by keeping silent and distant? Or would it simply be reasonable to conclude laziness, selfishness or other similar conclusions?

Quote:

---

Quoting MomMeredith

---

But again, I am wondering if there is any good reason NOT to visit for the father. Is there any strange tactic where completely avoiding the child works for him in anyway whatsoever?

---

No.

Quote:

---

Quoting MomMeredith

---

What could the father be after by keeping silent and distant? Or would it simply be reasonable to conclude laziness, selfishness or other similar conclusions?

---

Yes, and he is delusional if he thinks his failure to visit with the child won't hurt him and that he will be entitled to more custody than he is willing to actually utilize. But lots of men think that by threatening mom that they will go for more custody that they can get the mom to give up some of the child support they owe.

Don't fall for it.

No, not falling for anything and not making any moves without attorney approval.

So far nobody has come up with any logical reason so I suppose we should feel reasonably confident that there won't be some crazy maneuver pulled out of the hat at last moment. It is just baffling, really.

Quote:

---

Quoting MomMeredith

---

No, not falling for anything and not making any moves without attorney approval.

So far nobody has come up with any logical reason so I suppose we should feel reasonably confident that there won't be some crazy maneuver pulled out of the hat at last moment. It is just baffling, really.

---

It's not baffling at all. He is an ahole who doesn't care about his child and is posturing to try to scare mom to back down on child support. He is unfortunately for the kid, a typical deadbeat dad.

He was given the option in the beginning and will be given the option one more time to give up all rights in exchange for no child support (he isn't on the bc at this point anyway). But if he chooses to assert rights, all possible child support will be sought after. The sense I get is that he is only trying to assert any rights because of either family pressure or to satisfy a delusional sense of self. He's been given the choice to cut and run.

I have always felt that it would be better for the child to have consistency and be surrounded by solid and committed family rather than years of off and on periods of absence and inconsistency. Psychologists would agree. Courts do not. Conundrum.

It is unfortunate for the child. It really truly is. But the kid will be shown a whole world of love from a big family in effort to heal some of that.

If he wants it, he'll generally get joint legal (decision making) custody.

He'll also - if he asks - eventually end up with the standard NCP plan, including overnights, weekends and entire months in the summer.

And that's basically the bottom line.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Quoting MomMeredith

---

He was given the option in the beginning and will be given the option one more time to give up all rights in exchange for no child support (he isn't on the bc at this point anyway). But if he chooses to assert rights, all possible child support will be sought after. The sense I get is that he is only trying to assert any rights because of either family pressure or to satisfy a delusional sense of self. He's been given the choice to cut and run.

I have always felt that it would be better for the child to have consistency and be surrounded by solid and committed family rather than years of off and on periods of absence and inconsistency. Psychologists would agree. Courts do not. Conundrum.

It is unfortunate for the child. It really truly is. But the kid will be shown a whole world of love from a big family in effort to heal some of that.

---

Quoting for posterity.

Quote:

---

Quoting MomMeredith

---

He was given the option in the beginning and will be given the option one more time to give up all rights in exchange for no child support (he isn't on the bc at this point anyway).

---

He can't by private agreement give up all rights in exchange for no child support. No matter what mom signs saying she won't go after child support, she can still go after him for child support at a later date because the child support is to benefit the child. And if mom, who has no income, applies for government aid, the government can go after him for reimbursement.

Even if dad signs some private agreement now, that doesn't bar him from going to court to get visitation later.

No, he cannot magically give up rights, he would have to voluntarily relinquish them to someone else and that would have to be approved by all parties and the court.

The cards will fall where they may.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Quoting Dogmatique

---

If he wants it, he'll generally get joint legal (decision making) custody.

He'll also - if he asks - eventually end up with the standard NCP plan, including overnights, weekends and entire months in the summer.

And that's basically the bottom line.

- - - Updated - - -



Quoting for posterity.

---

Key word: "Eventually". It'll be a slow process.

Quote:

---

Quoting MomMeredith

---

he would have to voluntarily relinquish them to someone else

---

it would need to be a step-parent adoption and the termination of his parental rights could be voluntary or involuntary depending on the circumstances.

Quote:

---

Quoting MomMeredith

---

and that would have to be approved by all parties and the court.

---

For an involuntary termination of parental rights, no, by definition he would not need to consent. But yes, it would need to be done by a court.

Quote:

---

Quoting MomMeredith

---

No, he cannot magically give up rights, he would have to voluntarily relinquish them to someone else and that would have to be approved by all parties and the court.

The cards will fall where they may.

- - - Updated - - -




Key word: "Eventually". It'll be a slow process.

---

If all goes well, you can expect "regular" visitation within 6 months or so. Sometimes more, sometimes less.

This isn't legal advice or advice in any form... But this story sounds eerily similar to my situation. Just had to say it.

Quote:

---

Quoting Needlegaladvice77

---

This isn't legal advice or advice in any form... But this story sounds eerily similar to my situation. Just had to say it.

---

You're not such a speshul snowflake after all. :encouragement: