Posted on 06/20/2014 5:46:18 PM PDT by tired&retired
That in itself is kind of interesting. Did he get the other parent’s permission to move the child to Washington?
Here is what the American Bar Association has to say about this situation...it seems this is not uncommon.
Should the court make a decision based on "likely", or should the court determine what the facts are? Seems to me the latter's the better policy.
If I were the father, I would immediately file a motion for the mother to undergo a psychiatric evaluation since she was previously shown by the court to be an unfit mother.
A lot is determined by the wording of the original court order which awarded the father custody. Was it temporary, permanent or other? What were the reasons the child was removed from the mother’s custody? There are many important facts that I am unaware of the details.
Not uncommon at all. Good find!
That could easily be determined with even an out of county deputy doing a simple routine welfare check visit but that's not how the system works. The system is Mommy Victim agenda driven Period.
The CPS system is set up as to where from the very moment a child is taken into custody by children's services for cause no matter how severe to place them back with her and there are lots and lots of judges making it happen.
Mothers can be felon murderers, be keeping molesting boy friends, etc and these agencies & courts will enforce mandatory prison visits. Those who haven't been there and dealt with it personally usually don't have a clue as to the corruption via political agenda.
There’s always a mass of details in these cases, which makes it virtually impossible to just look at a few facts and decide the court’s in the wrong. There’s a bunch of procedural rules, then there’s the actual facts of the case. Take a look at the factors list on page 5 at this pdf.
PsychoBITCH!
How did she get on the bench?
I have found that judges who think they are “King” usually self destruct. I just help them along.
A friend of mine had his fill of a bad judge in his divorce proceedings. It was a rural area and the judge was up for his ten year retention. As part of his campaign the judge rode his horse in the local community halloween parades throwing out candy to the children.
My friend got an old wooden manure spreader, painted it up real nice in red, white and blue and plastered it with signs that read, “Get rid of Judge #$%^$, We have had enough of his manure!” He followed the judge in the parade. Two days later he got a letter that the judge was recusing himself from the case. The guy told me it was the best legal maneuver he ever did to get rid of the judge. Sorry to say the judge won retention by a few votes and then retired.
“The rights of the two parents are set forth in a so-called Permanent Parenting Plan”
Depending upon the circumstances of the CPS removal of the child it could have removed her parental rights.
The lady (?) might have found a loop hole, but who gives a qwerty uiop about the only home the child has consciously known... and I have a hunch that if she DOES get legal-kidnapped this way, the Mommy is going to be telling her bovine manure about the dad. Vindictive vixen syndrome.
I was a kinship foster parent at one point. The parents unfit. I doubt any posters on this thread have gone through the requirements {indoctrination classes} required even if it's your niece, nephew, or grandchild. You loose your rights first of all. You are forced to accept the state agencies morality second of all. Your home will be ruled by the birth mothers demands third point.
You will be legally harassed. No one is looking out for you and you do not receive an attorney no matter if you can not afford one. You get cop visits, threats and I mean threats from parents, followed by them, summons after summons saying be there tomorrow, unannounced visit after visit. Then you watch the kids being returned because the parents played the system with the CPS help and blessings. Most persons don't know Jack about our courts.
Then your sitting in class watching the distraught others dealing with it. Your see stressed foster parents and then you see Butch and Dike chuckling with the contracted from Liberal University class instructor talking about how they have their foster kids keeping their house up for them for a dollar allowance a week.
Some lawyers may have a conscience and some sense of morality. I hope some are still left. The ones I've dealt with outside of simple basic things like Wills or property transfers etc, a Brothel Madam would have more integrity, morality, and honesty. The Founding Father would not recognizer the profession of attorney we see today nor would they tolerate them as a necessary evil.
Thank you Tammy 8 for the excellent narrative on the legal issues involved. Here is one paragraph that is important:
They often falsely believe that the stay of proceeding provisions of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA), 50 U.S.C. §§ 521 and 522, will give them temporary, automatic protection from such legal proceedings while they are on active duty. Many soldiers think that if the other parent files such a petition while they are deployed, courts must put the matter on hold until the soldier returns from duty, thereby preventing custodial changes. Too often they face the consequences of this misconception, after they are already on foreign soil.
This is worth reading for any soldier if they are in a potential custody battle situation:
Because a custody action may be filed at any time, an active duty soldier who has primary physical custody of a child may return home only to find that he or she has lost that custody because the court has determined that since deployment the best interest and welfare of the child has been established with the other parent.
Further, due partly to the protections afforded to natural parents under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, many courts are entering temporary custody orders, finding that since the order is of a temporary nature, the service member’s presence is not necessary—and hence that no fundamental right of that parent has been materially affected by entering it. The length of the soldier’s deployment very often is a critical factor as to whether he or she will retain the primary physical custody of the child after the expiration of the assignment.
If the child is thriving in his or her new environment, the court will be very reluctant to remove the child from the present living arrangement. Thus, it is not a good practice for a service member to request a stay instantaneously merely because it is available or specifically to delay dealing with the other parent and the court system because they represent inconveniences that the soldier would just like to put off as long as possible.
If the soldier can return, it would be in his or her best interest to do so. Also, as pointed out by Mark Sullivan, an experienced family law practitioner who often works with military personnel and their spouses, counsel for the soldier should assume that opposing counsel has a working knowledge of the SCRA and may make several strong arguments against a stay being entered, such as (1) the elements of a valid ninety-day stay have not been met, (2) the service member’s leave and earning statement indicates that he or she has accrued sufficient time to be present, (3) the service member’s absence is one of convenience rather than military necessity (i.e., deployment to a foreign country versus mobilization out of state), or (4) the alleged unavailability may be cured by electronic means (i.e., via telephone, video teleconferencing, or the Internet).
See Mark E. Sullivan , Family Law and the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act: An Outline 6, at www.abanet.org/legalservices/downloads/lamp/scrafamlaw.pdf; see generally MARK E. SULLIVAN, THE MILITARY DIVORCE HANDBOOK: A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO REPRESENTING MILITARY PERSONNEL AND THEIR FAMILIES (ABA Section of Family Law 2006).
Thank you again Tammy for the excellent reference....
I’d love to know the specifics of how a kid subject to a Michigan custody plan ended up in Washington.
Too bad the guy wasn’t stationed in Germany and took the child with him!
If I were in his situation, a private investigator would already be compiling a file on her current activities.
Here is the Michigan child custody Law provisions:
Section 722.23
CHILD CUSTODY ACT OF 1970 (EXCERPT)
Act 91 of 1970
722.23 “Best interests of the child” defined.
Sec. 3.
As used in this act, “best interests of the child” means the sum total of the following factors to be considered, evaluated, and determined by the court:
(a) The love, affection, and other emotional ties existing between the parties involved and the child.
(b) The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to give the child love, affection, and guidance and to continue the education and raising of the child in his or her religion or creed, if any.
(c) The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to provide the child with food, clothing, medical care or other remedial care recognized and permitted under the laws of this state in place of medical care, and other material needs.
(d) The length of time the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment, and the desirability of maintaining continuity.
(e) The permanence, as a family unit, of the existing or proposed custodial home or homes.
(f) The moral fitness of the parties involved.
(g) The mental and physical health of the parties involved.
(h) The home, school, and community record of the child.
(i) The reasonable preference of the child, if the court considers the child to be of sufficient age to express preference.
(j) The willingness and ability of each of the parties to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing parent-child relationship between the child and the other parent or the child and the parents.
(k) Domestic violence, regardless of whether the violence was directed against or witnessed by the child.
(l) Any other factor considered by the court to be relevant to a particular child custody dispute.
History: 1970, Act 91, Eff. Apr. 1, 1971 ;— Am. 1980, Act 434, Imd. Eff. Jan. 14, 1981 ;— Am. 1993, Act 259, Imd. Eff. Nov. 29, 1993
© 2009 Legislative Council, State of Michigan
On a submarine he isn’t privy as to what is going on ashore. I’d bet someone knew ship movement schedule and planned legal maneuvers accordingly. On the carrier by the time we’d cross the Atlantic and get to ROTA, Spain for start of our six month deployment the line to the JAG’s office was as long as the check cashing line.
Really the best move he could make right now is apply for an emergency hardship discharge. If he is a Snipe on the sub the Navy likely won’t approve it due to the high training cost & time to become Nuke qualified and low manpower issues now facing the services.
What the hell is wrong with you?
The SAILOR Dad is stationed on a submarine home ported in Washington state.
Were you aware no submarines are home ported in Michigan?
Is the Navy supposed to kick out any single parent who has a custody plan in a given state when they need the service member in a different state?
“Sorry Sailor, you’re going to have to give up custody, because we need you in San Diego!”
You seem to really be trying to twist this against the father and for the mother. Are you actually the mother or the judge?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.