Posted on 09/19/2016 6:28:51 PM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
A Nassau County judge has fined Fox News host Bill O'Reilly's ex-wife [Maureen McPhilmy] $310,000 for violating the terms of a custody agreement regarding the former couple's two children....
The couple has a daughter identified in court papers as M and a son identified as S, who are 17 and 13 years old, respectively.
According to court papers, M was scheduled to be transitioned to her father's home on Oct. 11, 2015, for his parenting week, under the terms of the couple's custody agreement but McPhilmy notified him that she would not transition the couple's daughter.
O'Reilly moved for a finding of civil contempt, arguing that nothing in the law permits a child of M's age to determine parental access, that McPhilmy impeded O'Reilly from having access to his daughter and that she should be assessed a daily fine of $2,500 for each day of noncompliance since Oct. 11, 2015.
Based on the evidence in the case, [the judge] said, it seems that McPhilmy determined early on that she "was the parent more deserving of the children's loyalty," that she never had a "sincere intention" to follow the couple's original 2010 custody agreement and that her actions since the agreement became effective—including a motion to modify the agreement just one month after the couple's divorce was final—"telegraphed her intent to dismantle it."
(Excerpt) Read more at newyorklawjournal.com ...
Oh wow..... Your situation is very similar to mine.
I’d say sorry, but if you’re like me you have learned to live with a lot of things, and it isn’t important anymore.
The constitution is the document which specifies what the government is and how it is to interact with its citizens.
Cite the declaration all you want it is not the document upon which the government draws its authority.
No I am not a socialist...nor is there anything that I have written that would suggest that.
Our government is described and governed by the constitution. If you want some other form of government then you will either have to move or you will have to amend.
Oh by the way....the Declaration does not address ‘parental rights’ either
We are talking about a court case where a mother is being fined because a fifteen year old refused to see the father because she hates the father
The father is chasing to use family court as a weapon against the mother...the child suffers in many ways.
Your case as special as it is to you is not the case that this thread is about
“The constitution is the document which specifies what the government is and how it is to interact with its citizens.”
Sure. But nowhere in it does it say that our Rights come from a piece of paper, from other men, or from civil government itself. The only people I ever hear making that argument are socialists.
If I am wrong, please quote the portion of the Constitution which explicitly says that our rights come from the Constitution (or man, or the US Supreme Court)
The Declaration of Independence informs our understanding of the Constitution. Our rights are from God. Every Christian knows this. Every conservative knows this.
“We are talking about a court case where a mother is being fined because a fifteen year old refused to see the father because she hates the father”
Supposedly. If she hates the father because of lies told by the mother, or because father enforces rules in his home, that is just too bad. The child is a minor under the authority of two parents in (presumably) joint custody.
“The father is chasing to use family court as a weapon against the mother...the child suffers in many ways.”
Family court judges can usually see through this kind of tactic. Mom presumably has adequate legal resources at hand. If there were a valid reason for Dad to be denied visitation, Mom could make that argument to the Court, file a motion, and the Judge would decide on the merits. Also, we do not know if a forensic psychologist gave an opinion, and if so, whether she found there was a problem with Dad. If she did, that opinion would inform the Judges orders on P&A or modifications of such. Forensic psychologists can ferret out whether Mom (and maybe also her family) are the real ones using the child as a pawn in order to punish Dad. A good independent ad litem attorney, potentially likewise.
If alienation of affection is the reason for the dislike, it is even more important that regular visitation be enforced, in order for Dad to have a chance at a meaningful relationship with the child. It may be too late, but that is still not the final decision of the child.
Ultimately, it is in the best interests of the child to have a relationship with her Dad.
And it is not up to Mom to interpose herself as a substitute Judge over her ex-husband, and deny him visitation which the Court has ordered. That is the job of the Court. Judges don’t like their orders being ignored.
What you seem to be saying is a minor child should be able to disobey her father and overrule the Court order for whatever reason. The child can make her own decisions once she is emancipated. If Dad is abusing his authority then he will regret it in the future.
Where can I read it without signing whatever at the site?
You are off on such an incredible rant...just have at it.
None of what you have said has anything to do with anything. There is NO RIGHT to be a parent. Get over yourself
Since neither you nor I know exactly what has happened between this teen ager and her father ( or mother) it is unreasonable for you to postulate that which cannot be proven
Your bitterness over your own circumstance is dripping in every single post.
DOn’t bother to respond because I will not answer
“Since neither you nor I know exactly what has happened between this teen ager and her father ( or mother) it is unreasonable for you to postulate that which cannot be proven”
Correct. But that did not stop you from making the anti-family argument that a minor child should have the right to dictate custodial arrangements, and ditch her father for reasons of her own choosing. And it didn’t stop you from slamming any parent who, for the right reasons, declines to give up on their God-given responsibilities to their child(ren).
Considering that I was victorious in my Custody case in just about every way, and that I have a great relationship with a pre-teen son, despite Mom’s repeated attempts to destroy the relationship and remove the child from the State where he lives, bitterness would be the last word that could be used to describe my attitude. I won’t have to wait until my child is 30 to have a relationship with him! Praise God!
As if I care if you read my response!
“None of what you have said has anything to do with anything. There is NO RIGHT to be a parent. Get over yourself”
If you bring a child into the world, and you are not judged unsuitable by a Court of law, you have a right and a duty to be the parent to that child.
“And your bitterness seeps through every post”
I guess it isn’t just me who is “bitter”. LOL!
I understand what you say that the ex wife doesn’t get to win and that the father should wrest the power of his visitation rights from her when she flippantly denies them. I know that women in divorce situations can be unreasonable. However, I must requote myself...”I understand well the price the children pay because of the adults’ power games.” I lived it.
Don’t let the needs of the emotionally wounded child get lost in the red haze of anger directed toward the ex. The children are the most innocent victims in a train wreck that is usually the parents making. My dad was mature and wise and realized this. Had he marched in and demanded his rights, he would have destroyed our fragile relationship. He still got his way, but he was respectful of my pain and for that I am grateful.
I can’t stand BOR either. He is an arrogant bully on camera. I can’t imagine any woman wanting to be married to him and being divorced from him must be ten times worse. I often don’t take the woman’s side in a divorce because I have several in my family who are sadistically cruel to their ex husbands, but in this case, who knows?
I keep repeating this, but it is critically important: it is in the best interest of children to have a meaningful relationship with both parents (assuming one or both is not adjudicated by the Court to be unfit). It is in the best interests of children NOT to have the parent not in possession, get bashed by the parent in possession. If Mom is bashing Dad and denying visitation in violation of a Court order, she is harming the child in two ways. Dad not asserting his visitation is harming the child in two more ways (ie. indicating to the child that the child is not important enough to fight for; showing the child that Mom’s idea that a Dad is unnecessary or that Dad can be replaced by another man of Mom’s choosing is perfectly OK).
We see the fruit of fathers who don’t want to be fathers, and/or mothers who don’t care to have Dad in the home, in Charlotte, NC these past few days.
We can all bring up anecdotal examples of how our own experience was an exception to the rule. All the studies I’ve seen or read underline the importance of a father (and mother, but especially a father) being active in life of his children. That is why the family Courts, at least in my jurisdiction, have erected a legal mountain for the primary custodian to relocate with the child(ren) to another jurisdiction. That is why visitation is enforced, even if child support is unpaid.
Yes children suffer in divorce, to varying degrees, regardless of the circumstances. The suffering should not be multiplied by denial of visitation with either parent.
A friend of mine recently attended a divorce recovery class at a local Baptist church. She was quite surprised by the number of Moms (especially ones who claimed to be Christians) who were not hiding that they wanted to “stick it” to the father of their children, financially or otherwise. Divorce is awful, but this is not something that either parent should be doing.
BOR is a jerk on air and perhaps also in his family life. I would not be surprised if he were a terrible father. If he is only now asserting parental rights and duties, shame on him.
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.