Father is in Prison, can I terminate his parental rights?

[Ohiogal]

I don't know if it will make any difference but the agreement is not between the grandparents and myself. It is a modification of Custody between their father and myself. The grandparents have never petitioned the court for a visitation order. We do not share custody or have joint custody. I am the sole custodial parent, I make ALL decisions concerning the children.

And the reasonable visitation with advanced notice, is at my discretion. I am the one who says what is reasonable. Whether it be over night, through the week, or just a couple hours a day.

That's what you think. And that is where you are wrong.

 

[krischris]

That's what you think. And that is where you are wrong.

They shall have reasonable visitation with appropriate ADVANCED notice means IF advanced notice is given and what ever I feel is reasonable. There is NO mandatory time I HAVE TO let the children visit. If there was, it would be stated in the VISITATION! If the court did not state a specific time guideline then it's at my discretion. We're not going by Indiana Parenting Time Guidelines here. These are grandparents and I go by what the COURT papers say.

 

[ceara19]

They shall have reasonable visitation with appropriate ADVANCED notice means IF advanced notice is given and what ever I feel is reasonable. There is NO mandatory time I HAVE TO let the children visit. If there was, it would be stated in the VISITATION! If the court did not state a specific time guideline then it's at my discretion. We're not going by Indiana Parenting Time Guidelines here. These are grandparents and I go by what the COURT papers say.

And if you decide it is no longer reasonable to allow visitation at all, you would NOT be violating the order. However, if the GP's were to initiate legal action against you for stopping the visits, you should fully expect the court to put a strict visitation schedule into place based on what you have considered "reasonable" in the past. Then if you refused visitation you WOULD be violating a court order.

 

[LdiJ]

That's what you think. And that is where you are wrong.

Honestly, its almost guaranteed that she is right. You are falling into the same mindset that BB was....by not acknowledging the different between "reasonable" in light of a parent vs parent case, vs a parent vs third party case.

You have fallen down on that at least once before. You told a parent that they could lose custody by refusing to obey a gpv order, when it patently impossible for a parent to lose custody in that circumstance. There have been instances of a judge attempting to do that in gpv cases, however even prior to Troxel, those instances were overturned by every state's higher courts.

A normal grandparental relationship means that the grandparent spends time with the children along with spending time with the children's parents. The only way that she could violate a "reasonable" order when it comes to grandparents is if she refused any and all contact.

GPV is an issue that is controlled by case law, not by statute. Nearly every state in this country has statutes regarding gpv that have been limited, controlled, or struck down via case law. Many states whose legislatures re-wrote the statutes after being struck down have had them limited, controlled or struck down again.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

GPV is an issue that is controlled by case law, not by statute. .

That statement alone is totally ignorant and shows your continued bias and lack of law.

 

[LdiJ]

That statement alone is totally ignorant and shows your continued bias and lack of law.

And that statement demonstrates your fundamental lack of understanding of the law in this instance and is even a gross contradiction of your many pronouncements on this particular issue in the past.

My mentors on this particular issue are attorneys who are acknowledged to the foremost authorities in this country on the issue, and who have practiced before the USSC.

You are a human being BB and are therefore capable of being wrong.

Kris....turn on your private messages and send me one. I will give you a lead to the foremost Indiana expert of this issue, who has also practiced in front of the USSC, and then you won't need any further advice from this forum.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

As for you Kris, the following is the Indiana staute. I suggest you read it.

IC 31-17-5
Chapter 5. Grandparent's Visitation

IC 31-17-5-1
Right to seek visitation
31-17-5-1 Sec. 1. (a) A child's grandparent may seek visitation rights if:
(1) the child's parent is deceased;
(2) the marriage of the child's parents has been dissolved in Indiana; or
(3) subject to subsection (b), the child was born out of wedlock.
(b) A court may not grant visitation rights to a paternal grandparent of a child who is born out of wedlock under subsection (a)(3) if the child's father has not established paternity in relation to the child.
As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.9.


IC 31-17-5-2
Best interest of the child; in chambers interview of the child
31-17-5-2 Sec. 2. (a) The court may grant visitation rights if the court determines that visitation rights are in the best interests of the child.
(b) In determining the best interests of the child under this section, the court may consider whether a grandparent has had or has attempted to have meaningful contact with the child.
(c) The court may interview the child in chambers to assist the court in determining the child's perception of whether visitation by a grandparent is in the best interests of the child.
(d) The court may permit counsel to be present at the interview. If counsel is present:
(1) a record may be made of the interview; and
(2) the interview may be made part of the record for purposes of appeal.
As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.9. Amended by P.L.15-2004, SEC.3.


Aside from the statute, you have already stated that the court has awarded the grandparents visitation rights. Regardless of the exact nature of those rights, without a significant change in circumstances as to provide the court STATUTORY basis to rescind the current order, you stand very little chance of having the order vacated.

In fact, the grandfather being ill and possibly dying in the near future tips the scales towards the grandparents in light of the limited time they may have. And the fact that you veil all of this in the cloak of TPR so that your current husband may adopt is not so well hidden that a judge will not see through it.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

And furthermore, while Lidj like to talk AROUND the issue, the Indiana has already bee found constitutional in 2001.

In Crafton v. Gibson, 752 N.E.2d 78 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) the Indiana Court of Appeals held that its grandparent visitation statute, which allows the court to grant grandparents visitation rights only if such visitation is in the child’s best interests and (1) the child’s parent is deceased; (2) the marriage of the child’s parents has been dissolved in Indiana; or (3) the child was born out of wedlock and there has been a declaration of paternity. The court held that because the statute was not as broad as the statute at issue in Troxel, even under a strict scrutiny analysis, the statute passed muster.

 

[LdiJ]

And furthermore, while Lidj like to talk AROUND the issue, the Indiana has already bee found constitutional in 2001.

In Crafton v. Gibson, 752 N.E.2d 78 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) the Indiana Court of Appeals held that its grandparent visitation statute, which allows the court to grant grandparents visitation rights only if such visitation is in the child’s best interests and (1) the child’s parent is deceased; (2) the marriage of the child’s parents has been dissolved in Indiana; or (3) the child was born out of wedlock and there has been a declaration of paternity. The court held that because the statute was not as broad as the statute at issue in Troxel, even under a strict scrutiny analysis, the statute passed muster.

Crafton v Gibson is one of many Indiana cases on the subject, but glad you took the time to look.

However, that is still not germaine to the issue at hand. The discussion is whether or not a "reasonable" visitation order for grandparents requires mom to give the grandparents overnight and/or "alone time" visitation.....and whether or not mom can be found in contempt for not doing so.

I assert that she cannot be found in contempt for not doing so. This is not my opinion but the opinion of strong and knowledgeable legal minds, who are experts on this particular legal issue.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Crafton v Gibson is one of many Indiana cases on the subject, but glad you took the time to look.

However, that is still not germaine to the issue at hand. The discussion is whether or not a "reasonable" visitation order for grandparents requires mom to give the grandparents overnight and/or "alone time" visitation.....and whether or not mom can be found in contempt for not doing so.

I assert that she cannot be found in contempt for not doing so. This is not my opinion but the opinion of strong and knowledgeable legal minds, who are experts on this particular legal issue.

When you get your law degree you come back and assert anything you want. Until then quit misleading this poster that you actually have experience in the legal field OR know what you're talking about.

OR would you like to tell this poster where you are licensed to practice law?

It also might be prudent to stop smoking that crack. Where in the hell did I mention contempt? the POINT , miss fake attorney, is that this has everything to do with the current status and court order. PERIOD.

But I guess all that law school I had was a waste of time. After all, you said case law, NOT the state statute, controls so why bothre following the law? HOW FRIKKIN' IGNORANT

 

[krischris]

Who would have ever thought that such a little question would turn into such a heated debate?

I was seeking advice on a particular question and it turns into an all out brawl on who knows what and who knows it better.

I'm just assuming, and I could be wrong, but unless any of you are in the state of Indiana and practice law in the state of Indiana, particularly "BB", than you really don't have any idea what the courts on a county level will do concerning GPV. Each state's Code's are different. And for your information BB, I have read the Statute concerning GPV. Over and Over again! I've also done research on different legal websites that the State of Indiana has, consulted an attorney a few years ago, and I spoke with a judge concerning the issue. The very first stipulation is if the parent is deceased. Neither parent is this situation is dead. The second is if the marriage was dissolved in Indiana. Which it was. The third has absolutely no bearing on this case. Now for the Best Interest of the Child, Interview in Chambers, a judge is not going to question a 8 and 5 yr old on what they think. IF he does, he will take into consideration the age of the child, and more important, WHAT THE CUSTODIAL PARENT WISHES! Who gives a rats behind what the father thinks, he's sitting in prison doing 30 yrs! Now they have had meaningful contact with the GP, only because I allow it. I've had meaningful contact with you too, but that doesn't mean that I want to come live with you or even see for you that matter. You sound just like my ex-husband. Arrogant, conceited, over-bearing, controlling and you ALWAYS have to get the last word in. A little bit of advice, your NOT perfect, no one is, and you certainly don't know EVERYTHING there is to know, if you did, well, you wouldn't be on here arguing like a little child! My 5 year old doesn't try to argue her point as much as you do. Instead of trying to make everyone else SEEM WRONG, why don't in take it into consideration that maybe YOUR wrong. Are you to full of pride to just admit it? Or are you really just that ignorant to think that your always right?

Now back to the reasonable visitation part. If the GP wants to drag this out in court, and spend money she doesn't have, let her. If she wants to file contempt charges on me for violating an order, than let her. It's just going to cost her more and more money. When the judge finds in my favor and she wants to appeal it, than let her take it to the Appellant Court in Indianapolis and spend thousands and thousands of dollars. If the judge is not going to put the burden on me to take the children to a prison to see their dad, than he isn't going to make me take the kids to go see the woman that raised him! But when my kids come back cussing at each other and being defiant because the grandmother tells them they don't have to listen to me or my husband, than reasonable visitation to me is just about nothing. When it starts affecting my children's attitudes and they start to become rebellious at 5 and 8 yrs old, than thats when I start saying enough is enough. I am a Christian, and I run a Christian home, and I will not tolerate my children acting that way. When the grandmother won't respect my wishes on how I want my children raised and what I want them exposed to, than that's it. My 8 yr old told me she was going to take them to the prison to see their dad. After the order was issued for phone contact only. I told them the next time they went over there to tell their grandmother if she takes them there it will be the last time they come to visit. If the grandmother is the reason behind it, than all ties will be cut. Period! I will allow her to have some contact with them until I have court papers saying that visitation is terminated. I'm not there when my kids go to visit and I'm not there when they talk to their dad on the phone. I have no idea what they are telling my kids. All I know is they come back completely different than when I left them there.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Your ignorance is showing.

I suggest you read the part of the statute which allows a judge to question in chambers.

now I'm done with you. you're a fool led by fools.

 

[Mediate]

Now they have had meaningful contact with the GP, only because I allow it. I've had meaningful contact with you too, but that doesn't mean that I want to come live with you or even see for you that matter.

And THAT RIGHT THERE indicates how truly clueless you are.

You sound just like my ex-husband. Arrogant, conceited, over-bearing, controlling and you ALWAYS have to get the last word in.

And you sound like many mothers who come to this board thinking because you have a uterus and have the title as "mother", that you have the ultimate right to dictate everything (regardless of the situation regarding your ex).

Bring a big bag to court. You'll need it to put your ass in it when it's handed to you.

Now back to the reasonable visitation part. If the GP wants to drag this out in court, and spend money she doesn't have, let her. If she wants to file contempt charges on me for violating an order, than let her. It's just going to cost her more and more money. When the judge finds in my favor and she wants to appeal it, than let her take it to the Appellant Court in Indianapolis and spend thousands and thousands of dollars. If the judge is not going to put the burden on me to take the children to a prison to see their dad, than he isn't going to make me take the kids to go see the woman that raised him! But when my kids come back cussing at each other and being defiant because the grandmother tells them they don't have to listen to me or my husband, than reasonable visitation to me is just about nothing. When it starts affecting my children's attitudes and they start to become rebellious at 5 and 8 yrs old, than thats when I start saying enough is enough. I am a Christian, and I run a Christian home, and I will not tolerate my children acting that way. When the grandmother won't respect my wishes on how I want my children raised and what I want them exposed to, than that's it. My 8 yr old told me she was going to take them to the prison to see their dad. After the order was issued for phone contact only. I told them the next time they went over there to tell their grandmother if she takes them there it will be the last time they come to visit. If the grandmother is the reason behind it, than all ties will be cut. Period! I will allow her to have some contact with them until I have court papers saying that visitation is terminated. I'm not there when my kids go to visit and I'm not there when they talk to their dad on the phone. I have no idea what they are telling my kids. All I know is they come back completely different than when I left them there.

I rescind my advice to bring a big bag. You'll need a U-Haul instead. And make sure your savings and/or checking accounts are well-stocked with funds.