actively denying a childs relationship with the other parent

Brent - posted on 12/24/2013 ( 47 moms have responded )

13

0

0

Should a person be allowed to run away with a child and not allow that child to have a meaningful relationship with a parent just because abducting parent wants something? Left behind parent is no risk to the child emotionally or physically. Should abducting parent or parent denying a relationship lose rights as primary parent to the child? Is abducting parent thinking in the Childs best interests? Should parent be allowed to move to a place where neither parent lived prior to their relationship and take the child with?

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

Michelle - posted on 12/26/2013

3,622

8

3245

How about you come out and actually say what your situation is rather than talking in the 3rd person and having all these "what ifs".

This conversation has been closed to further comments

47 Comments

View replies by

Michelle - posted on 11/03/2015

3,622

8

3245

Locking due to being a very old post.
Please feel free to start your own.
Michelle,
WtCoM Mod.

Kimberly - posted on 07/21/2015

4

0

1

no there has to be some kind of legal rights fo children to see both of their parents

♫ Shawnn ♪♫♫ - posted on 03/12/2014

13,258

21

2015

Wow, the BS is getting thick in here...maybe I need my waders!

CK is clearly off base, but I do enjoy seeing how that particular troll's experience in the legal arena has grown from being a bitter ex to having a plethora of WORLDWIDE knowledge! LMAO.

Brent, you also need to face up to reality. No court that I've ever been to charges the parent who's awarded custody with having to pay legal bills and fees for their ex partner. The only time that is enforceable is if the debt was incurred jointly.

And, since you're speaking in the 3rd person, and not clarifying much except to jump on CK's bandwagon (with their questionable 'knowledge' of world legal affairs)...indicates another bitter ex.

Note that I'm not indicating gender, as bitter ex's can be of either gender. Parental alienation is enacted by either gender. Parental abduction of non custodial children is committed by either gender. Doesn't mean that ANY of it is legal...

One's best bet is to get yourself a good attorney, keep YOUR business straight, and your ass out of trouble, and pray for the best outcome for the children.

CK - posted on 01/01/2014

20

0

0

In family court, kinapping and child abduction are terms rarely used.

In criminal court, yes.

Thats why family court is separate from criminal court and civil court

As one lawyer told me about family court "anything goes". It took me a long time to figure out.

Kate - posted on 12/31/2013

4

0

0

I think we're getting confused because it sounds like you're speaking in 3rd person. We're trying to help and without the facts in the question above it was tough to answer. Now below, has more details. I'm still confused was there a visitation order already in place before the abduction occurred? If there was, a subpoena for a non-compliance was to be filed against her. Are you saying that she was found guilty, but still awarded primary custody? If you're still desiring to be custodial parent then you will need to go back to court to modify this custody order fighting for sole custody. You always can go back to fight for sole custody. At this point they will look into who is the most fitting parent for the child? They will look at who is the financial provider, who is covering doctor visits, who is participating more in the child's every day life, and needs; any crimes, alcohol abuse, etc. They dig in deep into all of that, but you have to be the one to push that information upon them. They won't ask unless you bring it up. I watched another case where the father ended up losing custody when this information was brought forth to the court by the mother. She was awarded sole custody and he ended up not having any visitation rights. Hope I helped.

Brent - posted on 12/31/2013

13

0

0

Ck is right. It is unfair. And not right just because someone has a good job and affords for the other parent to be home so that during the marriage the child would be raised by a parent and not a stranger. Is it fair that one automatically forfeits the role of primary parent because of working and providing for the family? If one does not work the family could not survive. Then after an abduction and a return ordered where the abducting parent is ordered to pay legal fees, the courts still award primary to the mother. After a very expensive international legal battle where mom is found guilty of international child abduction. The left behind parent once the case is brought home to the place of the Childs habitual residency is charged to pay moms legal bills. All under the plea that the abducting parent does not work and can not afford legal council. Not that she can not work. Plus left behind parent has to pay full child support that mom uses to pay the bills plus dad pays all insurance for mom and child and childs health care copayments.

Cktom - posted on 12/31/2013

1

0

0

Of course, courts will rarely say its "its ok for the mother to run away with the child". If the mother violates a court order by relocating the child and denying the father's relationship... (and she cannot be persuaded to come back any other way) the father must hire lawyers and take an application out in court to bring the child back and/or file contempt of court against the mother. This may be a fairly straightforward and simple process for some people (who I would really like to hear from). This can drag on for years without seeing your children.

A father's relationship with his children is not a basic right that is automatically preserved, protected, and upheld by anyone. Family Court custody/visitation orders are not enforceable by the court. Orders are supposed to be complied with... if not, it will have to go back to court.

I myself dislike what I am saying. When I hear other people say what I am saying I tell them they are morons and that they live in the dark ages

Kate - posted on 12/31/2013

4

0

0

Absolutely not allowed. Any court I've been in seeing these cases, the judges have all stated a parent just cannot run off with the child no matter what reason they feel justifies it. Not only that, a parent cannot say, "You cannot visit with the child," because they're angry at the other person. A lot of mothers feel because they gave birth to the child they have permission to control the situation and gives them primary custody that they can say when visitation is allowed. That is the misconception here. Even if there is a custody and visitation decree established it can be considered a non-compliance violation by the parent who ran off with the child. This can lead to arrest of that parent. If there isn't any of that established, a custody/visitation order must be established by the court when there is a divorce and separation of parents or it is considered kidnapping. Even if the other parent is safe and not a threat it's still a law in juvenile court. The parent that moved to the other state where none of you lived, they can still live there. However, the court will place a custody battle to determine who is the primary custodial parent and the non-custodial parent along with a right's to visitation for the non-custodial parent. There will have to be some sort of agreement made in arranging for visitation with the child. Like for example, you both drive half way to the state and meet somewhere for drop off or pick up. Or you can drive all the way and they can drive back. These cases can be traumatic and cause headaches. There are ways to go about this peacefully without the pain. One of you will have to start the process in court. I wish you luck. I speak from many years of experience in juvenile law and custody battles as an advocate. Can you help me with my issue?

CK - posted on 12/30/2013

20

0

0

I am not an expert, but I do have many, many years of experience in this matter. Australia, UK, Eu, Singapore, Hong Kong, North America/Canada, South America...

Women who are determined to actively deny the father a relationship with his child will overwhelmingly succeed in doing this. Even in the minority of custody cases that actually go before a court, the mother will mostly prevail (if she is determined to deny the relationship).

IF there has been a reported case of a mother not succeeding in doing this, it is usually worthy of international news.

It is not international news to report about fathers and children who have not seen each other for months, decades, years or a lifetime.

Unless you are inferring there is something different about separated Australian mothers, the same thing happens everywhere.

It's not about laws, rights, or how family legal systems operate. It's about how determined the mother is in actively denying the father a relationship with his child.

It is terrible and I commend you for attempting to say it is somehow different somewhere. It is no different in Australia.

For mothers who are so passionate about doing this and for cases that go before a court, eventually the fathers just give up or run out of energy and money.

Jodi - posted on 12/29/2013

3,558

36

3907

Whatever CK, you are clearly some sort of expert who think she knows everything. I will agree to disagree with you.

CK - posted on 12/29/2013

20

0

0

For every 1 case that you may have heard about in court, there are 1000 other cases that are settled out of court. No lawyers, no court, no paperwork, no judge.

CK - posted on 12/29/2013

20

0

0

I have experience with these matters. I have experienced this all over the world, Including Australia.

If the mother is has an ambition to prevent the child from seeing the father, this is what will happen.

There are always cases that are exceptions. These are the cases that are sensational.

Jodi - posted on 12/29/2013

3,558

36

3907

I fail to see how you can possibly be an authority on every court system in the world, CK. You clearly don't know anything about ours.

Please, tell me why you are so bitter about it. You have not elaborated as to why you are so disillusioned with the entire process. I certainly don't believe it is perfect, but it is not generally the picture you paint.

CK - posted on 12/29/2013

20

0

0

The only way a father has any chance of having a meaningful relationship with the child is If the parents get along.

If mother is inclined to deny the child a relationship with the father, the only relationship or contact the father and child will have will be, at best, complicated, costly, and meaningless. At worst it will be a source of daily terror and fear and/or non-existent.

If the father goes to court to fight the mother he may get some type of court ordered contact, but in most cases it will be too complicated, costly and stressful to maintain.

Again, if the mother is determined to do this, this is what is going to happen. Anywhere.

LuCkY - posted on 12/29/2013

54

0

1

I just wrote about something similar. My sons dad dosnt look for him his mom sees him more then him and I've been to court a few times with proof he dosnt care about my son or sees him. He missed court 3times and they still wontngive me sold custody. I want to move out of state and need advice.


Anywho I feel if the other parents active in their child's life not in n out of it then the other parent shouldn't move that's crazy. Now if the other parent isn't helping in any way shape or form or even around the child like that then the other parent has every right to get up and move of they feel it's a better choice and future for them. That's just me. Anyone with advice about a similar situation comment on my post please.

Jodi - posted on 12/29/2013

3,558

36

3907

I think that is part of the problem in the US - jurisdiction with all the different laws in different states, etc. From what I gather there are even jurisdiction issues within counties.

In Australia, the laws are national, not state based. The Family Court is a federal court with total federal jurisdiction. Much more amenable to fairness, and less open to playing games with each other.

Vanessa - posted on 12/29/2013

2

0

0

This post hits home. My husbands ex wife left FL to visit her family in NY with their two children (4yrs and 3mths). While in NY she decided she was not returning to FL. Dad immediately sought legal help in FL & was granted an emergency custody order which didn't do a damn thing since NY granted mom the same. It became a jurisdiction battle which FL ultimately won due to the kids residency prior to the abduction. Dad fought like crazy and every time mom came to FL court she did not bring the children to hand over as the court ordered yet there were no repercussions. 7 months later mom finally obeyed court orders and turned the kids over to dad until the court could make a final ruling. In spite of everything that transpired dad still had to plead a case to obtain 50/50 custody and visitation!

Jodi - posted on 12/28/2013

3,558

36

3907

It often happens because the father doesn't fight for it or doesn't have the money to fight for it. Which is wrong, but I'm just saying.

CK - posted on 12/28/2013

20

0

0

I dont know everything, but I do know more than most people regarding this matter of denying a childs relationship with the father.
When a mother is determined to do this, it is much more common that the father is removed completely from the childs life.

Jodi - posted on 12/28/2013

3,558

36

3907

Actually, I have sat through family court, CK. I have also researched cases where mothers have not succeeded in removing their children from their father's life because that's what my husband's ex tried to do to him.....and did not succeed. Could you please not pretend you know it all and accept that others HAVE been through the system?

Michelle - posted on 12/28/2013

3,622

8

3245

CK: It's not advisable to post your email on a public forum. If people want to contact you there is the message button if you go to their profile.

CK - posted on 12/28/2013

20

0

0

Jodi - you have good intentions. However, this case you referenced is so uncommon, unusual, abnormal, and unbelievable that it made ABC Headline news.

I encourage you to sit through a day at your local family court to see what is really going on.

CK - posted on 12/28/2013

20

0

0

Also, a woman does not need EVIDENCE to immediately obtain an ex-parte Court Order that immediately restains the father from seeing the children and court orders that deem the father to be capable of heinous acts of family violence. The woman does not need evidence. She only needs to CONVINCE or persuade a court.

The man however, must provide hard EVIDENCE, WITNESSES, and PROOF that he is not violent and a danger to the children.

This is the law in most democracies. Islamic law is different.

CK - posted on 12/28/2013

20

0

0

I used to think and argue the same points as you. All of us said this.

There are no cases of a woman, determined to sever all ties with the father or destroy the child's relationship with the father...who has not succeeded.

This occurs in civilized democracies with fully developed family legal systems everywhere.

Respectully, you speak with no real experience in these matters. Maybe you can cite a few sensational exeptions... that's about it.

If a mother is determined to remove the father from the child's life, it will be done

Jodi - posted on 12/27/2013

3,558

36

3907

"If the mum says the child is in an immenent threat of danger by the hands of the father - and the children are infants or cannot speak for themselves there is little hope."

She needs evidence.

"For the cases you have seen where a mother has not won, or has been somehow condoned by a court for violating a family court order... please cite your authorities."

There are many cases where the mothers have violated court orders and lost their kids. You only have to look it up. There was one on this site just a few days ago complaining that she had lost her children, and yet it turned out she had been in contempt of the court orders MANY times, which is why she lost them. It happens. I don't need to cite any authorities.

I'm sorry, but I live in a country where fathers have 50/50 rights to their children unless proven or agreed otherwise and unless the courts order otherwise. End of story. If you live somewhere that this is not the case, then more pity to you. But your information is not universal and is not necessarily correct. A mother who withholds rights from the father will often lose the rights to the child on the basis of parental alienation.

I have seen cases here where mothers have had children removed from their primary custody because the mother decided to move interstate without the permission of the father or the courts.

I'm not sure where you get your information from. But it isn't gospel. And in many cases, it is incorrect. It sounds to me, given the comments I have seen, that you are a bitter father or the partner of a bitter father.

CK - posted on 12/27/2013

20

0

0

If the mum says the child is in an immenent threat of danger by the hands of the father - and the children are infants or cannot speak for themselves there is little hope.

For the cases you have seen where a mother has not won, or has been somehow condoned by a court for violating a family court order... please cite your authorities.

The cases where the mother may lose some rights is when the mom has been found by a court and convicted as a criminal and drug addict.

Even if the mother abandons or endangers the child, she will prevail. These are the same personality types who would abduct.

If the mother does not want the dad to see the child, the dad will not see the child.

If the dad does fight in court and finally does get to see the child, by that time there will be no comfort for the child or the father in seeing each other.

If your lawyer tells you something different, he or she is just fleecing you during your time of despair.

Jodi - posted on 12/27/2013

3,558

36

3907

Actually, no, mum doesn't always win. In the absence of a court order, if dad takes the child, the police won't do anything. If mum takes the child, the police won't do anything. If mum denies visitation to dad with no court order, and dad has evidence of this, she may lose the argument in court due to parental alienation. Mothers do not always win. I've seen women here who have had their children removed for refusing visitation or for moving interstate without approval by the court.

And it is hypothetical, because the OP hasn't actually said this is an actual situation. He has merely posed it as a hypothetical.

CK - posted on 12/27/2013

20

0

0

In the absence of a court order, moms always win. Even with a court order, if your dealing with someone who is in a capacity to abduct the child (especially the mother), there is no hope. If the mom doesnt like the court order, go to another city and get one you like. Have multiple lawyers. Avoid legal service.

If that doesnt work, go to another state. If that doesnt work, go to another country. Just keep on doing this until the other party gives up.

It is that simple. It is not hypothetical. It is real.

Jodi - posted on 12/27/2013

3,558

36

3907

It's actually not that simple CK. It is only abduction if there are court orders for custody in place. 911 will do nothing if there are no court orders. However, the OP seems to be talking in a lot of hypotheticals, so I'd rather hear back and see if this is a real situation.

CK - posted on 12/27/2013

20

0

0

If you are the mother and the father has abducted the child, this is easy. Dial 911. If you are a father, give up now. If you pursue your child.. even think about seeing or communicating with your child again...your life will be hell. You will wind up broke and very sick. Just stay alive and take care of yourself for your child in the future.

LalaBoom - posted on 12/27/2013

248

0

41

Speaking in the third person is so confusing.

If your child has been abducted you need courts to remedy the situation. You don't give many details to work with or give you adequate advice, AND you have made it clear this is now under international jurisdiction (which only complicates matters 10-fold).

Jodi - posted on 12/26/2013

3,558

36

3907

Do you mean that one parent has kidnapped the child AND alienating the other parent? Go to court.

Brent - posted on 12/26/2013

13

0

0

What if all of the above are being a performed by the same parent? What should be the consequences?

Jodi - posted on 12/26/2013

3,558

36

3907

Both parents in this scenario are denying the child its rights, and they are both using a form of parental alienation.

Choosing to kidnap a child is a really poor decision. If the other parent is denying the right to a relationship with the child, then that is what the court system is for. If there is already a court order in place for visitation/custody, and the other parent is STILL denying rights, then file for contempt. Continued parental alienation will generally result in loss of custody. Yes, it is a slower process that just kidnapping the child, but it is one that will result in an outcome that is legal and sustainable. Kidnapping a child is not sustainable, and is likely to result in a confirmation of the reasons why the other parent denied access in the first place. It provides them with ammunition in a custody hearing.....

Ariana - posted on 12/25/2013

1,309

0

624

I agree for most of that, but in terms of residency is the other person also trying to move out of the country where the abducting parent wouldn't be able to get access to the child? That might be a little extreme.

Brent - posted on 12/24/2013

13

0

0

I agree with you. However that parent in my opinion should not lose contact with the child, but the abducting parent should not be allowed primary custody nor determine residency for the child moving forward. Do you agree?

Ariana - posted on 12/24/2013

1,309

0

624

I really don't know that much about the issue. They would probably end up in jail in that case wouldn't they?

I still think they should have some sort of contact with the child, possibly supervised visits, but if they've done things against the law in regards to the child that should be reason to limit their rights. They stole the child therefore they have to live with the consequences.

The children do deserve to see their parent though and it may be harmful to discontinue contact altogether.

Brent - posted on 12/24/2013

13

0

0

What if the abducting parent is found guilty of international child abduction under the Hague convention? Should that parent still be allowed to be a joint managing conservator of the child?

Ariana - posted on 12/24/2013

1,309

0

624

No they shouldn't be abducting the child.

I don't know if the abducting parent should lose total rights to the child either, I guess it would depend on how far the went with the situation. It wouldn't be healthy for the child to never see that person again, but the risk of the parent trying to abduct them again would be a fear to consider.

I think a parent can move to a place neither child lived if they have primary custody of the child. The question then becomes how far away is it and would the other parent be able to see the child still? Moving to another city and moving to another country are totally different situations.

If it's very far away maybe the parent who moved should be responsible for the expenses incurred for the other parent to visit their child?

You should not abduct a child. If the other parent was abusive that parent may feel it was in their child's best interest, if not then they are probably thinking more of themselves.

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms