Custody Rights of a Separated Couple

[llworking]

IF this goes to court, the judge will have to weigh the mother's desire to breastfeed against the father's right to develop a bond with his child. So, no, the interests and rights aren't "secondary" but are a crucial factor. The goal is to foster a relationship with the child unless it isn't in the best interests of the child (NCP presents a danger to the child, has drug problems, etc.).

I actually read an answer to this question on Just Answer written by a lawyer in NC who stated that the Courts there are less likely to accept the breastfeeding argument when weighed against dad's right to bond with and spend time with his child.

What I'm curious about is this - although OP probably won't answer because it doesn't appear as if she's posted since this whole debate really started - what does the current visitation order state?

There isn't one. The are separated only.

My entire issue on this thread was my belief that a 3 day trip, for a breastfeeding 11 week old is a bad idea. I was not commenting on visitation at all...just the 3 day trip.

[Mephis]

If this is dad's first baby, and he has 0 experience, he may want to break himself in a bit before going on a 3 day road trip with an infant.

[Dogmatique]

NC is a "best interest of the child" state, as most now are. Switching a baby back and forth between breast milk and formula is not in the best interest of the child even if the baby "WILL take the bottle". Adopted babies are not switched back and forth to accommodate the desires of adults. They are on formula. That's not what is to be examined here. Now, whether enough milk could be pumped for a three-day separation might be considered by a court in ruling on this. That would require a lot of milk while still supplying the baby's immediate needs. I don't know how long it would take to get that, and whether it can be kept long enough and so forth. But ultimately a judge would decide what is in the best interest of the baby. The interests and rights of the adults would come secondary to that.

Best interest = access to both parents on a regular, consistent basis.

Seriously - breast feeding has become, for the most part, an absolute NON-ISSUE. So if that's not the question...what exactly does Mom have again?

And I don't want to hear "OMGZ they'll be driving for hours!" from anyone here. You all know better than that.

[Bubba Jimmy]

There is no axiom that says access to both parents is always in the best interest of every child at every age under all circumstances. A judge will balance the competing needs, rights, desires, and hardships. Changing the diet of a young baby abruptly can cause many problems. Breast feeding is not the issue, the abrupt change is the issue. Switching back and forth is not good for babies. Heck, just changing a dog's diet abruptly causes all sorts of abdominal discomfort at time. A father has many opportunities to bond without forcing a potentially harmful change like that. A judge very likely would not go along with such a plan - in the best interest of the child. Many courts do not order over night visits for babies with the non-custodial parent until they are over 6 months for exactly this kind of reason.

[Dogmatique]

There is no axiom that says access to both parents is always in the best interest of every child at every age under all circumstances. A judge will balance the competing needs, rights, desires, and hardships. Changing the diet of a young baby abruptly can cause many problems. Breast feeding is not the issue, the abrupt change is the issue. Switching back and forth is not good for babies. Heck, just changing a dog's diet abruptly causes all sorts of abdominal discomfort at time. A father has many opportunities to bond without forcing a potentially harmful change like that. A judge very likely would not go along with such a plan - in the best interest of the child. Many courts do not order over night visits for babies with the non-custodial parent until they are over 6 months for exactly this kind of reason.

Sigh.

Okay. Silly me assumed people would actually realize that I was referring to 2 fit parents. You should also note that NOWHERE has Dad EVER been deemed unfit.

Then we get dietary issues. Discomfort ONLY lasts while the baby is getting used to formula unless there's a medical issue and I'd like to think we'd know that from what the poster stated, given that it's..well..y'know, kinda important.

Finally - thankfully, the "tender years" doctrine is falling by the wayside. Further, are you suggesting that a divorcing father shouldn't have his child overnights for no other reason that he doesn't lactate?

I know you're trying. But even the professionals recognize that some Moms can't breastfeed. Also, you may surprised at how many courts will award overnights INSTANTLY.

[EA1070a]

Baby is 11 weeks old. They separated a month ago. OP didn't indicate he was unfit in any way.

As for the "digestive" issues, you sound like a La Leche League loony. I was read the riot act by those idiots when I called for help to stop lactating because my milk never fully came in. I had no idea they were hardcore extremists. All I needed was help and they were complete jerks.

Because of all the problems I was having my kid's pediatrician told me to switch it Isomil. Guess what? NO digestive problems whatsoever.