Dads rights...Child visitation

[briman2000]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state?Florida......I have a dAughter who I have been paying child support for several years,her mother and I were never married...But after we broke it off, I was brought in for child enforcement payments, My question is are there any rights i am entitled to? I seem to have no rights without a court order,she has also blocked the schools from giving me any information on her for attendance medical or other info...I have always tried to be on scheduled visits with her mother but she always ends up modifying it...Seems the state only wants to get involved on the child support enforcement,and not the rights of both parents.Sure they enforce the payments for free but they do not help on the visitation rights of the other parent nor will they even talk about it @ the aformentioned hearing....What can i do without hiring a lawer?

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state?Florida......I have a dAughter who I have been paying child support for several years,her mother and I were never married...But after we broke it off, I was brought in for child enforcement payments, My question is are there any rights i am entitled to? I seem to have no rights without a court order,she has also blocked the schools from giving me any information on her for attendance medical or other info...I have always tried to be on scheduled visits with her mother but she always ends up modifying it...Seems the state only wants to get involved on the child support enforcement,and not the rights of both parents.Sure they enforce the payments for free but they do not help on the visitation rights of the other parent nor will they even talk about it @ the aformentioned hearing....What can i do without hiring a lawer?

You have no enforceable rights without a court order. Therefore you have to petiition for visitation/custody. Its certainly better/easier/quicker to do it with an attorney but if you can't, then you can do it yourself. The forms are available at your local courthouse.

 

[whitedoveh]

I am not in Florida....am in Ohio...and I have the same problem. My ex (never married) is on welfare....and I have a good paying job and have paid my child support from day one. The past 3 months though, she has decided to keep my son from me (he's 2 1/2 yrs old) and the only way I can see him is to hire a lawyer (at $175.00 hr) pay court costs etc...and she gets everything paid for her, including legal counsel. The laws need to be changed.

 

[dallas702]

LdiJ is correct. Get this into court asap. You can file pro per and get help from one of the agencies. Support and custody are viewed as two separate issues by the state thanks to the women's "rights" movement and the groups like NOW who would like to drive fathers away from the kids....except for the CS. The children got left out of those maneuverings.

Even if you need a lawyer, and even if it gets drawn out a bit, the $500-1500 should be worth it. I always preferred to keep my money in my own pocket for the kid's needs, but there are some judges who don't like pro per filings and work better with an attorney handling the case.

Check to see if your state has an ERDF chapter (Equal Rights for Divorced Fathers). There is another national group who gives assistance in these cases, but offhand I can't remember the name. Do search under "fathers rights" or "fathers rights custody". Let the mother know you are serious about your rights as a parent and that you WILL have the defined by the court. Chances are, she's not gpoing to want to spend money on attorneys either and she may work with you. Family Support (or whatever it's called there) will give her free services to get court ordered support from you, but they won't be her "attorney" for custody. If they step into that arena you can demand representation by the same state system. It actually is unconstitutional for them to provide legal representation to one party and not to you. No one ever challenges their system, but I have done it, and they paid for a private attorney to enter on my behalf. I made the demand pro per and two judges agreed. You just have to get in there and ask for your rights to be protected.

Whose name is on the BC?

 

[brisgirl825]

LdiJ is correct. Get this into court asap. You can file pro per and get help from one of the agencies. Support and custody are viewed as two separate issues by the state thanks to the women's "rights" movement and the groups like NOW who would like to drive fathers away from the kids....except for the CS. The children got left out of those maneuverings.

Even if you need a lawyer, and even if it gets drawn out a bit, the $500-1500 should be worth it. I always preferred to keep my money in my own pocket for the kid's needs, but there are some judges who don't like pro per filings and work better with an attorney handling the case.

Check to see if your state has an ERDF chapter (Equal Rights for Divorced Fathers). There is another national group who gives assistance in these cases, but offhand I can't remember the name. Do search under "fathers rights" or "fathers rights custody". Let the mother know you are serious about your rights as a parent and that you WILL have the defined by the court. Chances are, she's not gpoing to want to spend money on attorneys either and she may work with you. Family Support (or whatever it's called there) will give her free services to get court ordered support from you, but they won't be her "attorney" for custody. If they step into that arena you can demand representation by the same state system. It actually is unconstitutional for them to provide legal representation to one party and not to you. No one ever challenges their system, but I have done it, and they paid for a private attorney to enter on my behalf. I made the demand pro per and two judges agreed. You just have to get in there and ask for your rights to be protected.

Whose name is on the BC?

What the he11 are you talking about? That benefits both men and women and even more accurately CPs and NCPs.
When the NCP refuses to pay CS the CP has no right to withhold visitation thanks to that law. And more often than not, it's a male that's the NCP and doesn't pay his CS and still gets parenting time with his kids.
Please don't make this into a male vs female thing b/c it really just makes you sound bitter and ignorant.

OP, go to court and file for visitation rights. Until you have a CO, your ex has does NOT have to let you see the child.

Sarah

 

[dallas702]

Since, over the past 30+ years, the primary custody has been awarded to the mother with only a pittance of "visitation" for fathers at a rate of over 85%..and the fathers are given the "gift" of paying child support at a rate 1000 times what noncustodial mothers are, the bias has created a hostile environment that is never good for the children. It has been slowwwwwwwly turning around during the last 10 years, but the stats are still tilted far, far to the mothers.....even in this day of equal employment oportunities and over 55% female college population.

I have no problem with the state assisting the CP to get the appropriate CS from the NCP. The problem is multiple, though. As I said, the bias is still heavily tilted toward women getting the children and men paying the support. The formulas used by most states for establishing support have nothing to do with the child's needs when they are based on the gross income of the father (who is still assumed to be able to make more money and not be needed by the child). The fact that "visitation" (a term that should be stricken from every family law court) is not enforced EQUALLY with CS, and given the HUGE bias of money over time spent with the children, the present system is so far out of sync with constitutional guarantees of EQUAL PROTECTION a federal law should be passed and enforced that makes the two more dependent on each other.

The fact is, most NCP dads do pay child support. It is also a fact that most NCP mothers do not....even when ordered by a court to pay. That's the chief reason there is so much hostility when children are the pawns of the parents in this custody/visitation war. When CP and NCP are treated equally in all aspects of the system, more money will be obligingly paid, and more children will have access to BOTH of their parents.

Not bitter, and certainly not ignorant. Just being realistic. The point is still: he needs to petition for designated custody rights. Last....don't ask for "visitation". Ask for JOINT/SHARED CUSTODY. Many states now mandate (versions of) it. The court has people to help you work out a schedule. Don't settle for that every other weekend crap. That's NOT parenting!

 

[brisgirl825]

Since, over the past 30+ years, the primary custody has been awarded to the mother with only a pittance of "visitation" for fathers at a rate of over 85%..and the fathers are given the "gift" of paying child support at a rate 1000 times what noncustodial mothers are, the bias has created a hostile environment that is never good for the children. It has been slowwwwwwwly turning around during the last 10 years, but the stats are still tilted far, far to the mothers.....even in this day of equal employment oportunities and over 55% female college population.

I have no problem with the state assisting the CP to get the appropriate CS from the NCP. The problem is multiple, though. As I said, the bias is still heavily tilted toward women getting the children and men paying the support. The formulas used by most states for establishing support have nothing to do with the child's needs when they are based on the gross income of the father (who is still assumed to be able to make more money and not be needed by the child). The fact that "visitation" (a term that should be stricken from every family law court) is not enforced EQUALLY with CS, and given the HUGE bias of money over time spent with the children, the present system is so far out of sync with constitutional guarantees of EQUAL PROTECTION a federal law should be passed and enforced that makes the two more dependent on each other.

The fact is, most NCP dads do pay child support. It is also a fact that most NCP mothers do not....even when ordered by a court to pay. That's the chief reason there is so much hostility when children are the pawns of the parents in this custody/visitation war. When CP and NCP are treated equally in all aspects of the system, more money will be obligingly paid, and more children will have access to BOTH of their parents.

Not bitter, and certainly not ignorant. Just being realistic. The point is still: he needs to petition for designated custody rights. Last....don't ask for "visitation". Ask for JOINT/SHARED CUSTODY. Many states now mandate (versions of) it. The court has people to help you work out a schedule. Don't settle for that every other weekend crap. That's NOT parenting!

I understand that things are going slowly to make things equal in the realms of family issues. However, it has to be understood that these laws were biased to begin with b/c women were held to the responsibility of raising the kids. That was women's work. It has been the religious and culturally excepted role for women. Now, men are saying that they want more rights but things take time to change. Women are still fighting for equality after all these years as well. Women don't get paid as much as men for the same job. So you can spout "equal job opprotunities" but the fact is, is that it doesn't always work the way it's supposed to. Men are just now realizing what it's like to want to be equal and it going so slowly. It sucks but that's how it works for everyone. Two steps forward, one step back.
I do hope that one day judges will start putting more weight into what's best for the children instead of being sexist.

Sarah

 

[dallas702]

Sarah;

Just as an "aside", weeve been out of the stoneage for quite some time regarding employment (not that the courts recognize it). The reason SOME women in the same job as SOME men get paid less over time is that statistically they put about 70% of the hours into those same jobs as men do. There are many reasons for it, but that's the facts. Obviously, in our culture...most all civilized cultures of the world...the females (mothers) have far more daily responsibility for caring for the children. That takes away from career time. Actually, it is women who have always had more choices, especially in more modern Christian cultures. Women can choose to be full time mothers (one of the most important and toughest jobs on the planet), or they can choose to enter the career chase. Sometimes they can do both, but usually at the expense of the child to a varying degree. Traditionally, men have had one choice---get a job! If men marry they are expected to work their way up the economic ladder and provide for the family for all the years necessary. The "liberation" of women and the ease of no-fault divorce has thrust millions of mothers into dual roles that are hard enough individually. It has also left millions of fathers as visitors with almost no influence on their children's lives. Perhaps if we (as a culture) had worked more on developing better relationships, building better marriages, being better parents, and having more consideration for each other's responsibilites we would have had far less divorce, abortion, "lost" children, youth crime, disrespect, etc.

Sometimes, thrusting too many choices in front of people keeps them from working to overcome the challenges already in front of them. It may not have always been our idea of "equality" and "fairness", but historically the traditional courting/marriage relationship had the obvious advantage of simplicity. Now, women are blessed with not only more opportunities for self-fulfillment, they are reaping the downside of increased substance abuse, increased mental illness, increased health problems including cancer and heart disease. Yup....pretty soon they will be all caught up with us "lucky" men.

Regardless of how we view the "opportunities", it has been proven time and time again, study after study, decade after decade, that children of both sexes need their fathers fully involved in their lives. The real tragedy of 40 years of easy divorce and overwhelming custody awards to mothers is that most boys from those years have grown up with no idea how to be good fathers. That is one of the most detrimental factors in the failure of men as fathers. Well....that, and the countless thousands of hours of TV sitcoms, movies, books, and other media depicting men and fathers as violent, inept, stupid, uncaring, abusive, lazy, liquored-up, bumbling, smelly, unshaven, unkempt, brain-dead slobs.

Does that about cover it?

No, wait....I forgot the one that really kills them in family court, "deadbeat".

Sit through 10-20 hearings a day for awhile and you'll see that there is a hidden assumption that all NCP fathers are "deadbeats-in-waiting"...that sooner or later these "losers" will stop paying, so we'll be ready for them with a jail cell.

Equality....yeah, right.

 

[gatorguy3]

Sarah,

You mentioned about stupid people and such. The jibberish you are spouting is nothing but hate. It also sounds like a NOW woman's view on the way things should be.

The point you bring up about biblical times and the way things used to be had to do with MARRIAGES. Modern Day divorces and separations shoot those theories out of the water.

In my most humble opinion, regardless of the situation of a couple while married, after divorce shared is what is best for children in most cases. In the cases where there is true domestic violence or otherwise, the possibility of shared with supervised visitation should be considered so long as the abuse was not against the children. If the abuse was against the children then there should be something that can be considered for that.

The world is not perfect and the laws most definitely are less perfect than that. Sorry, but I get tired of hearing about all the inequality women are getting. I am glad you and the rest of the male bashers are okay with women getting a job just because they are women. Why not work hard for the job or the pay that men get? There's a concept.

 

[LdiJ]

Sarah,

You mentioned about stupid people and such. The jibberish you are spouting is nothing but hate. It also sounds like a NOW woman's view on the way things should be.

The point you bring up about biblical times and the way things used to be had to do with MARRIAGES. Modern Day divorces and separations shoot those theories out of the water.

In my most humble opinion, regardless of the situation of a couple while married, after divorce shared is what is best for children in most cases. In the cases where there is true domestic violence or otherwise, the possibility of shared with supervised visitation should be considered so long as the abuse was not against the children. If the abuse was against the children then there should be something that can be considered for that.

The world is not perfect and the laws most definitely are less perfect than that. Sorry, but I get tired of hearing about all the inequality women are getting. I am glad you and the rest of the male bashers are okay with women getting a job just because they are women. Why not work hard for the job or the pay that men get? There's a concept.

The reality of things is that women are still not treated with total equality in the workforce. Its almost there...but not quite.

And its absolutely true that the reason why its not 100% there is because women still traditionally get stuck being the ones who have to miss work due to child-related issues....more particularly, pregancy. Pregnancy does tend to put a crimp in a career path....and when families choose to have multiple children its often more cost effective for one parent to stay home to raise them due to the high cost of daycare (at least until they start school)..........and its still generally mom who does that.

Eventually I am sure that it will get to the point where parents share child-rearing responsibilities equally (in some families its already there)...however, until that becomes the "norm"...mom's are still generally going to be the primary caregivers to the children....therefore mom's are still going to be the one's with primary custody when the parents split up.

I agree that custody should be "shared". I am not fond of 50/50 splits because I really do think its hard on the kids. It would be ideal if the kids stayed in one home all the time and the parents moved in and out to give them the 50/50 split....but of course that's totally impossible. However shared doesn't require a 50/50 split.

I personally think that what is best for kids (for consistency's sake) is to have one place where they sleep each night during the school week, yet spend their non-school hours with each parent 50/50......as long as both parents are willing to be responsible for things like homework and activities.

And of course....until we get to the point that both parents are willing to set their own needs aside and stay living within a few miles of each other until their children are grown....or CAN do that economically....then 50/50 of any sort is not going to become the "norm".

 

[dallas702]

LdiJ;

There is a great myth being circulated about the pitfalls of 50/50 custody. Even Dr. Laura has bought into that falsehood that children need the "security" of sleeping in one home most of the time. The facts substantiate that what kids crave most is secure and contented parents. They don't care which home they are in as long as they get max time with each parent. Of course, this works best when the parents are both cooperative, friendly, non-threatening, and uplifting. Even a little grousing doesn't discourage children as long as they aren't put in the middle as sounding boards.

Yes, 50/50 (or anything close to that) is hard work. As I said before, the homes need to be fairly close. Beyond the obvious logistical challenges there must be cooperation regarding extracurricular activities and special occasions (friends, sleepovers, church activities, etc.). Anything can be worked out with a little patience and correct priorities.

The first few years are a learning experience for both parents...and for the children. The court isn't going to figure out everything for the family...nor should it. Both parents must look at the other as just as important and valid as thery think they themselves are. In fact, each should realize that the other must surely love the children just as much or they wouldn't be going through all this. It's easy to give up, go away, and send CS every month.

It's a lot of work to share custody, but the rewards for the kids are multiple. Just them knowing that BOTH parents care enough to want to spend every minute they can with them is a HUGE deal to kids. It completely removes that "....my dad/mom doesn't love me...." factor that damages kids growing psyches so much. For kids, being wanted is faaaaaar more important than switching beds/toys/friends/meals once a week. Obviously, one school has to be maintained. The good part of this is that you can choose the best school because you have two locations to compare.

The whole thing boils down to everyone arranging their lives a little differently. If a child cannot adapt to this, he/she will never be able to adapt to anything. If the parents can't adapt, then someone should kick them in the a** and make them understand why they must!

BTW; I have not only helped P1 & P2s set up these arrangements, I did it for almost 10 years myself. Sometimes it was very challenging, but it was ALWAYS worth it. ALWAYS!

All family courts should start at 50/50 (many are moving in that direction) and then move away from that based on the parents willingness to make it work. If from day 1 the judge can see that the parents aren't going to cooperate, then he/she should ask the parents which one is willing to give up their children for all but a few weekends a year. That usually wakes them up.

 

[stepmom&mom]

I believe it was little more than 100 years ago that custody tended to default to the father. That ideology has only changed in the past century and has now become the other extreme. Someday, I hope we will get it right and realize that kids need BOTH parents.

 

[briman2000]

Brimans' response

Thank you for the quick response...My name is on the birth certificate..After going down to the court house today,I have once again hit a wall,......I tried to get the social for my daughter, turns out she doesnt have one yet..I heard that this can be applied for...The reason I wanted the social was when my taxes were filed, I didnt know i could claim her as a depend..When i talked to H&R Block they said if I paid over 51% of that childs well being I would be able to...Fact is I pay 53% she pays 47%..Is this a debateable deduction? Also i also asked Child support enforment if they could give me anything proving to the schools that i was her father, so i review her records...NO Deal...My child has a SLD. as such I am concerned as to her attendance,progress, problems...All they could do refer me to Free Legal Aid which i called, and they told me I my income was too high to use the service...I was then referred to another # for prefered legal services..Which they wanted $30. for 1/2 hour just to talk about it and not even a real lawer..Seems its all about money....Also I did Check my Court ordered papers for social and visitation....Nothing on both subjects...Thanks...Briman

 

[dallas702]

Something is amiss here.

First, children have been assigned social security numbers at birth for 10-15 years. How has the mother been claiming the tax deduction? How did she get her into school? Was she born in another country and brought here illegaly?

Second, if you are on the BC, and that is required to enroll a child in public school, why aren't you on the contact list or parent form? Did you NEVER get anything from the school with your name on it when you were together?

If your "ex" has been claiming her as a deduction you're going to have to show that you've been not only the primary monetary contributor to your child, but that "lives in the home more than half of the year" part is going to be sticky. If you had a divorce decree or CO this would be spelled out. Today, switching every year is common.

You really need to get into court. Paying $30 for a 1/2 hour consultation may be well worth it if you have all your info well documented and organized. I'd go in and extend another 1/2 hour if you are getting good responses. Yeah, it's a bit os a come-on for getting business, but good attorneys will be straight with you. It only gets expensive when they have to do all the research and paperwork.

 

[briman2000]

Reply

After talking to her mother a few min ago,she confirmed she Does Have a social...Now I'm thinking "Why didn't the lady @ Child enforcement have it...or did they" She was in front of a computer(clicked a few keys) said she didn't.. Also her mother and I split up before she entered school.So because my name is on the B.C. and uncontested does that give me a lil more leeway?Everything is legal,we are both american and grew up in same area..My problem with her stems from the lack of information I have been exposed to,why block records from me,unless there is something to hide??Her mother and I had a 3 year relationship but we were both really young (late teens early 20's) By Filing for and Accepting child support,uncontesting me being her father doesn't this entitle me to some kind of rights as her dad...I am only following up on this to do what is right for the child,there have been a few instances of neglet in my opinion..Child not taking showers,smell of house(Has eight cats 2 dogs) and few instances of lice extending for 2 months@ a time..I have called Childs protective service after the lice escapades..But i was never gotten back to, nor could I inquire as to the result of their visit to house..Lots of bad blood between her mom and I but we all know we still have to contend with each other for a long time yet to come..I want to know what she is hiding in school or in the household....NOt bitter just concerned..Bri