Father's Rights - Unborn Child

[rmet4nzkx]

Congratulations on the safe delivery of your grandchild.

Did your son file a paternity suit in WA state?

Did he sign an acknowledgement of paternity at the hospital or is there a court ordered DNA test, if so were the samples taken at the hospital? Results should be ready by court date.

Is the court date in WA?

If they file for a restraining order in Montana, they will have to acknowledge the existance of the paternity case on the petition and also must have evidence, they can't simply ask for one and have it issued, hopefully, being a Christian will prevent mom from lying to the court. If he is served, possibly while at court, your son should respond to the order and plan on appearing in court.

While what your son is asking is reasonable, mom may also have reasonable requests so asking for a GAL is an excellent idea. The court may not be pleased with her family for interfering with his visitation which could have been made in the presense of the nursing staff supervising and instructing him in the care of the newborn infant without the dog and poney show. He did come with his court orders?

If he still has an attorney he should continue to use that address rather than give his address unless the judge orders him to when they go to court, since his plans are for visitation in Montana at this point anyway. If he still has an attorney, the atorney can receive any court related service with your son's permission, that may help restrain them some and protect him from harassment. If he has bought a house recently he should not list his address with his phone number, have an unpublished number or even have cel phone for contact purposes. This information is accessable on the internet eventually.

Insofar as breastfeeding, mom may think this will be her trump card and while it is best for the child, mom can provide either expressed breast milk or formula for dad during his visitations.

Depending on jurisdiction and the courts it is possible that mom will have to pay for his transportation or that his child support will be modified. It is something that can become a part of the order. Being in two states will make enforcement difficult. Your son may have to consider moving in order to eventualy making this work. The best interest of the child is the key factor.

 

[LdiJ]

STATE: WA

A baby girl was born on September 2.

Here is where the situation sits thus far:

The father waited until June (per her request to be patient for info) to contact the mother. When contacted she seemed pleased to see him and called to have dinner the very next day. They spent a couple of hours together at a restaurant and she filled him on basics regarding the child (girl, due sometime in August, possible names) The father asked if they could begin talking about a parenting plan. She said she'd be in touch. The father thought it was a good start.

24 HOURS LATER:
The very next day she called to say that she was moving to Montana and that he could do nothing about it since she was the primary caregiver. The father silently agrees that this is a good idea (best interests of the child) since her family is there and could provide support. She also stated that this baby was not going to stop her from having her OWN life and that they (my son and her) would never get married so he should stop considering it. Let me explain that one. While, in the beginning, he suggested that he could take care of her and the baby, he gave the thought up months ago when she made it clear to stay away. At this point, all he wanted was a basic parenting plan.

JULY:

The father obtained an attorney and she was served before moving to Montana. Basically, the father was asking for permission to see the baby within 24 hours of birth and to begin a parenting plan.

Her Wa state attorney served papers requesting change of venue.

AUGUST:

Her reponse (along with her sister and brother) was that she had to keep all info from the father because he had a history of DV. This is laughable and he has many ways to back up his character, but no one really knows what goes on behind closed doors. This is the part that scares us, but more on that later.

They went ot court at the end of the month. The judge first ruled that Wa state was the proper venue. He then allowed the father to have 1 hour with the child after birth. (The father was very grateful for the hour)

SEPTEMBER:

The baby was born September 2. The father was notified within an hour of the birth. The father called the hospital to see if there were any rules he must follow for visitation (none) He then made the ten hour drive to the hospital in Montana. The nurse notified him that she was instructed by the mother to only allow supervised visitation and only by the family. Within a few minutes of his arrival at 5AM, the mother's step-father, three male friends and the mother's sister and mother's mother arrived at the hospital. The step-father yelled to the nurses that this guy (my son) was fu(%ing nuts and that they need to call the law. He went on like this for about a minute before the nurse told him that she was not calling the police and that he needed to calm down. He and his friends insisted on waiting outside the door of the room. My son visited with his baby for an hour in front of the mother and her family. All the while, they played Christian music and spoke of whatever they felt like speaking about. After the hour, my son was asked by the nurse if he felt safe and if she should call the police to help him out. He did not think he was in danger, so he declined the offer and left. Nothing eventful after that.

They go to court on Friday (9/16) to ask for temporary visitation. Just yesterday the mother's sister called to ask the father's his address. (The father recently purchased a home and they did not know the new address) Not sure what that was about, just that she said it was important. I personally do not think he's going to receive pictures and a thank-you card. In fact, while trying to have venue changed, they stated that they planned to have a restraining order in the state of Montana ( or something like that, I can't remember the specifics)

The father is asking for a GAL, but in the meantime would like some visitation rights.

The father would like to ask the court for unsupervised visits every other week. He will make the trip to Montana and stay at a lodge nearby the mother's home. He would like 6 hours on Saturday (4 in the AM & 2 in the afternoon) and 4 hours on Sunday (4 in the AM) Because of the recent response from the family, he would like the baby taken to him at the lodge. It doesn't matter "who" drops the baby off and picks her back up as long as they agree not to make a scene. He believes the mother is nursing. Is this a reasonable request?

The father, at this point, is not asking for any reimbursement for the fuel and lodging. Could he? Perhaps having his child support reduced? If not, he's still going to make the visits, but it only seems fair that he should get a reduction. Again, not a deal-breaker, though.

What if they serve a restraining order on him? Could a Montana restraining order be enforced in Montana if he had court orders from the state of Wa to allow him to visit his child?

What are the chances of the mother getting a Montana court to change the venue ruling by the Wa state judge?

Thank you for any help offered.

Ok....I am surprized that the WA judge made any rulings at all before the baby was born....or that the WA judge took jurisdiction. Both of those rulings were technically improper.

Since there was no living child, a judge couldn't make orders regarding that child. There was also no proof that your son is the father of the child either.

The child was born a legal resident of Montana, so it also wasn't proper for WA to take jurisdiction. (Yes, I know that there is a recent "push" to try to get judges to say that the state of conception would have jurisdiction, but I have discussed that with several attorneys, a judge, and a couple of law school professors and all agree that it wouldn't stand up on appeal)

Therefore, its quite possible that Montana could take jurisdiction. Which would make any WA order unenforceable. Of course Montana would enforce a Montana restraining order.

Realistically, it fairly unlikely that a judge would order that your son could have visitation with a newborn, outside of the presence of the mother at first.
Also, if she is breast feeding a 4 hour visit may not be realistic at first either.
Four hours is seriously pushing the envelope for feedings, and it takes a while for a breast feeding mom to build up enough of a supply for pumping (if she is able to pump at all...not all mothers can). Your son really doesn't want the baby to associate him with a lack of food, or with being hungry. That would NOT be good.

Its quite probable that your son is going to have to prove paternity before anything goes any further. I also don't think that WA is going to be able to maintain jurisdiction of this case. I will really be surprized if Montana allows WA to take jurisdiction over one of their legal residents (the child).

 

[UnbornChild]

<<Did your son file a paternity suit in WA state?>>
Not sure if it's considered a paternity suit. He has told the court he believes the child is his and would like father's rights.

<<Did he sign an acknowledgement of paternity at the hospital or is there a court ordered DNA test, if so were the samples taken at the hospital? Results should be ready by court date.>>
No acknowledgement signed. No court ordered DNA yet. I believe the judge was waiting for the baby to be born. Maybe he will order these things this nexty court date?

<<Is the court date in WA?>>
Yes

<<If they file for a restraining order in Montana, they will have to acknowledge the existance of the paternity case on the petition and also must have evidence, they can't simply ask for one and have it issued, hopefully, being a Christian will prevent mom from lying to the court. >>

Evidence of DV? If so, I don't believe there is any. The judge made a comment at last court date that the mother appeared to be pulling at straws since the DV accusation just came out when it appeared she might need to use it. He stated that he felt she had little credibility. Her Christianity hasn't prevented her from lying yet. We continue to pray.

<<If he is served, possibly while at court, your son should respond to the order and plan on appearing in court.>>

Would he appear in court in Montana? Would the Wa state court be able to squash it?

<<While what your son is asking is reasonable, mom may also have reasonable requests so asking for a GAL is an excellent idea. >>

We like the idea of a GAL as well. I am sure Mom has reasonable requests of her own. They both have rights and neither should be denied of those rights. The father is all for the baby having her mommy happy and available.

The best interest of the child: Of course, but when we get into each opinion, emotions, etc. it gets tough to distinguish, doesn't it? Some reactive thoughts of mine were to have the father fight for full custody. He does appear to be the more stable here. (Excellent job, owns his own home, solid family and friend support system) Of course, again, those thoughts are eactive and NOT always in the best interests of the child. A person may have a legal advisor, a pastor (or spiritual advisor), parental advice, etc. But what really guides us to the best interest of the child?

Is there literature to guide us in thinking toward the best interest of the child?

Thanks again for your help.

 

[UnbornChild]

<<<Ok....I am surprized that the WA judge made any rulings at all before the baby was born....or that the WA judge took jurisdiction. Both of those rulings were technically improper.

Since there was no living child, a judge couldn't make orders regarding that child. There was also no proof that your son is the father of the child either.

The child was born a legal resident of Montana, so it also wasn't proper for WA to take jurisdiction. (Yes, I know that there is a recent "push" to try to get judges to say that the state of conception would have jurisdiction, but I have discussed that with several attorneys, a judge, and a couple of law school professors and all agree that it wouldn't stand up on appeal)

Therefore, its quite possible that Montana could take jurisdiction. Which would make any WA order unenforceable. Of course Montana would enforce a Montana restraining order.

Realistically, it fairly unlikely that a judge would order that your son could have visitation with a newborn, outside of the presence of the mother at first.
Also, if she is breast feeding a 4 hour visit may not be realistic at first either.
Four hours is seriously pushing the envelope for feedings, and it takes a while for a breast feeding mom to build up enough of a supply for pumping (if she is able to pump at all...not all mothers can). Your son really doesn't want the baby to associate him with a lack of food, or with being hungry. That would NOT be good.

Its quite probable that your son is going to have to prove paternity before anything goes any further. I also don't think that WA is going to be able to maintain jurisdiction of this case. I will really be surprized if Montana allows WA to take jurisdiction over one of their legal residents (the child).>>>


I am not sure how to wrap your message as previously posted, so I have added <<>> around. Sorry if it is annoying.

I was (and still am) afraid of all that yoiu state above. We were so very surprised at the rulings. Pleasantly surprised of course but still surprised.

The judge stated that the mother, in her response, admits that the child was conceived in Wa with the father. I am not rying to argue anthing here, just telling you what the judge said. This is the reasoning, I believe, behind his justification of saying that this person was most likely the father.

This is a mess. An appeal would take a lot of time, wouldn't it?

If the requests for 4 hours are unreasonable for the child, then by all means, no, they are not the wish of the father. The whole point here, is that the mother wants nothing for the father and the father is stumbling through trying to figure out what really is reasonable, so thank you. Perhaps he shouldn't go in asking for that much time? Do you have a suggestion on what he SHOULD ask for?

Thanks again.

 

[Zephyr]

Realistically, it fairly unlikely that a judge would order that your son could have visitation with a newborn, outside of the presence of the mother at first.

LdiJ- I think this may be one of the few times I disagree with you, why would it be proper for the judge to order the mom who, without proof is claiming domestic violence, to be the supervisor?


and I may be taking the statement totally the wrong way, but dad was there asap after the birth and if allowed to continue visiting frequently until the matter is heard there is no reason he needs to be supervised at all, just because he is the dad does make make him less capable of being a parent to a baby than mom.

again, sorry if I misinterpreted your comments, but this dad seems to be really trying, I think in the end the courts will acknowledge that.

 

[LdiJ]

Realistically, it fairly unlikely that a judge would order that your son could have visitation with a newborn, outside of the presence of the mother at first.

LdiJ- I think this may be one of the few times I disagree with you, why would it be proper for the judge to order the mom who, without proof is claiming domestic violence, to be the supervisor?


and I may be taking the statement totally the wrong way, but dad was there asap after the birth and if allowed to continue visiting frequently until the matter is heard there is no reason he needs to be supervised at all, just because he is the dad does make make him less capable of being a parent to a baby than mom.

again, sorry if I misinterpreted your comments, but this dad seems to be really trying, I think in the end the courts will acknowledge that.

When I said..."at first"...I was talking about the first 4-6 weeks of the child's life, while feeding and routine is getting established. The OP seems to expect that her son is immediately going to get his next visit outside of mom's presence, and I honestly don't think that's very likely.

Supervised is the norm (AT FIRST) where infants are concerned. In a case where DV accusations have been made, supervised is even more likely. While the WA judge is unlikely to take the accusations seriously, a Montana judge might.....and I honestly think that in the end jurisdiction is going to end up in Montana.

Again, I will be very surprized if Montana allows WA to take jurisdiction of a child born and living in Montana.

 

[UnbornChild]

WANNACRY:

We hope the court sees that he is trying to be a father. That's it. In fact, if it means he gets less such as less than four hours due to nursing, so be it. But let's at least TRY to get him SOMETHING.

Here's a thought, what if he was supervised, but by someone else, such as a mediator. Of course, there is a cost and perhaps the two of them could share the cost?

He has no problem being supervised, he just does not want tension in the air or conversation about how she is going to get her swolen ankles unswollen to be a part of his visit. He is also aware that the baby will probably sleep a lot during his visit. His thought was just to bring a book, lay her in her sleeper and rub her tummy or back (or whatever!!) a couple of short periods of time every other weekend. That's it!!

Thoughts??

 

[casa]

STATE: WA

A baby girl was born on September 2.

Here is where the situation sits thus far:

The father waited until June (per her request to be patient for info) to contact the mother. When contacted she seemed pleased to see him and called to have dinner the very next day. They spent a couple of hours together at a restaurant and she filled him on basics regarding the child (girl, due sometime in August, possible names) The father asked if they could begin talking about a parenting plan. She said she'd be in touch. The father thought it was a good start.

24 HOURS LATER:
The very next day she called to say that she was moving to Montana and that he could do nothing about it since she was the primary caregiver. The father silently agrees that this is a good idea (best interests of the child) since her family is there and could provide support. She also stated that this baby was not going to stop her from having her OWN life and that they (my son and her) would never get married so he should stop considering it. Let me explain that one. While, in the beginning, he suggested that he could take care of her and the baby, he gave the thought up months ago when she made it clear to stay away. At this point, all he wanted was a basic parenting plan.

JULY:

The father obtained an attorney and she was served before moving to Montana. Basically, the father was asking for permission to see the baby within 24 hours of birth and to begin a parenting plan.

Her Wa state attorney served papers requesting change of venue.

AUGUST:

Her reponse (along with her sister and brother) was that she had to keep all info from the father because he had a history of DV. This is laughable and he has many ways to back up his character, but no one really knows what goes on behind closed doors. This is the part that scares us, but more on that later.

They went ot court at the end of the month. The judge first ruled that Wa state was the proper venue. He then allowed the father to have 1 hour with the child after birth. (The father was very grateful for the hour)

SEPTEMBER:

The baby was born September 2. The father was notified within an hour of the birth. The father called the hospital to see if there were any rules he must follow for visitation (none) He then made the ten hour drive to the hospital in Montana. The nurse notified him that she was instructed by the mother to only allow supervised visitation and only by the family. Within a few minutes of his arrival at 5AM, the mother's step-father, three male friends and the mother's sister and mother's mother arrived at the hospital. The step-father yelled to the nurses that this guy (my son) was fu(%ing nuts and that they need to call the law. He went on like this for about a minute before the nurse told him that she was not calling the police and that he needed to calm down. He and his friends insisted on waiting outside the door of the room. My son visited with his baby for an hour in front of the mother and her family. All the while, they played Christian music and spoke of whatever they felt like speaking about. After the hour, my son was asked by the nurse if he felt safe and if she should call the police to help him out. He did not think he was in danger, so he declined the offer and left. Nothing eventful after that.

They go to court on Friday (9/16) to ask for temporary visitation. Just yesterday the mother's sister called to ask the father's his address. (The father recently purchased a home and they did not know the new address) Not sure what that was about, just that she said it was important. I personally do not think he's going to receive pictures and a thank-you card. In fact, while trying to have venue changed, they stated that they planned to have a restraining order in the state of Montana ( or something like that, I can't remember the specifics)

The father is asking for a GAL, but in the meantime would like some visitation rights.

The father would like to ask the court for unsupervised visits every other week. He will make the trip to Montana and stay at a lodge nearby the mother's home. He would like 6 hours on Saturday (4 in the AM & 2 in the afternoon) and 4 hours on Sunday (4 in the AM) Because of the recent response from the family, he would like the baby taken to him at the lodge. It doesn't matter "who" drops the baby off and picks her back up as long as they agree not to make a scene. He believes the mother is nursing. Is this a reasonable request?

The father, at this point, is not asking for any reimbursement for the fuel and lodging. Could he? Perhaps having his child support reduced? If not, he's still going to make the visits, but it only seems fair that he should get a reduction. Again, not a deal-breaker, though.

What if they serve a restraining order on him? Could a Montana restraining order be enforced in Montana if he had court orders from the state of Wa to allow him to visit his child?

What are the chances of the mother getting a Montana court to change the venue ruling by the Wa state judge?

Thank you for any help offered.

I think it's wonderful the father is willing to travel and maintain consistent contact with the child. The schedule he is asking for seems more than fair~ and can then increase over time to him eventually being able to bring the child to his home state for vacations/holidays/weekends etc.

He should also file for joint legal custody- which he'll likely get.

Father needs to keep at this until he has his custody/visitation established via court order.

 

[UnbornChild]

How do I wrap your reply in the little box like you do?

>>The OP seems to expect that her son is immediately going to get his next visit outside<<

We actually don't "expect" anything. We just know that he will not harm the child so when we are hoping for something, such as visitation, unsupervised, we are backing up our hope with what WE know about him.

Again, I am quite afraid you may be right regarding the jurisdiction, DV accusations, etc. And once again, we WERE quite surprised on the outcome, but are not arguing with it.

We know she is not afraid of him, but very angry that she was stopped from having an abortion. This is now a fight on her and her family's part. Not for the baby's best interests, but for vengeance. How dare we challenge them? This is truly what we believe and it hurts knowing that it could be a little easier. It's very hard not to REACT. But again, we know we must do what is right for the child.

At any rate, I AM afraid you may be correct regarding Montana.

 

[UnbornChild]

>>I think it's wonderful the father is willing to travel and maintain consistent contact with the child. The schedule he is asking for seems more than fair~ and can then increase over time to him eventually being able to bring the child to his home state for vacations/holidays/weekends etc.

He should also file for joint legal custody- which he'll likely get.

Father needs to keep at this until he has his custody/visitation established via court order.<<

Thank you, Casa. We think it's great that he is doing what he is doing as well.

What is your opinion on the jurisdiction situation?

 

[casa]

>>I think it's wonderful the father is willing to travel and maintain consistent contact with the child. The schedule he is asking for seems more than fair~ and can then increase over time to him eventually being able to bring the child to his home state for vacations/holidays/weekends etc.

He should also file for joint legal custody- which he'll likely get.

Father needs to keep at this until he has his custody/visitation established via court order.<<

Thank you, Casa. We think it's great that he is doing what he is doing as well.

What is your opinion on the jurisdiction situation?

Unfortunately Ldij is most likely correct. While most states like to keep jurisdiction in the originating state- the issue here is the baby was born in MT. I think the WA judge was helping your son, and IMO made a smart move. However, it's very plausible that MT will take jurisdiction.

Your son can contact the local La Leche League in the area of MT the mother lives. It's not expensive and they can meet with him about breastfeeding schedules, help Mom figure out pumping (if she's willing- tho many mothers use this as an excuse- fewer and fewer are getting away with it) He will have facts and proof of his willingness to facilitate the child's breastfeeding along with his visits.

I think if the mother has family there- why not ask the maternal grandmother or other relative (ask for the one who's most cooperative- tho it seems slim pickings from what you describe) and that way not only does the Mom not supervise <or sabatoge> the family gets to see the father is a loving and caring parent.
Why not ask. If not, then move to a supervised visitation situation- but I tend to shy away from that since it has the 'appearance' that the father is actually dangerous.

Did your son attempt to get a statement from the nurse at the hospital re; the mother's family members being hostile?

 

[rmet4nzkx]

<<Did your son file a paternity suit in WA state?>>
Not sure if it's considered a paternity suit. He has told the court he believes the child is his and would like father's rights.

<<Did he sign an acknowledgement of paternity at the hospital or is there a court ordered DNA test, if so were the samples taken at the hospital? Results should be ready by court date.>>
No acknowledgement signed. No court ordered DNA yet. I believe the judge was waiting for the baby to be born. Maybe he will order these things this nexty court date?

<<Is the court date in WA?>>
Yes

<<If they file for a restraining order in Montana, they will have to acknowledge the existance of the paternity case on the petition and also must have evidence, they can't simply ask for one and have it issued, hopefully, being a Christian will prevent mom from lying to the court. >>

Evidence of DV? If so, I don't believe there is any. The judge made a comment at last court date that the mother appeared to be pulling at straws since the DV accusation just came out when it appeared she might need to use it. He stated that he felt she had little credibility. Her Christianity hasn't prevented her from lying yet. We continue to pray.

<<If he is served, possibly while at court, your son should respond to the order and plan on appearing in court.>>

Would he appear in court in Montana? Would the Wa state court be able to squash it?

<<While what your son is asking is reasonable, mom may also have reasonable requests so asking for a GAL is an excellent idea. >>

We like the idea of a GAL as well. I am sure Mom has reasonable requests of her own. They both have rights and neither should be denied of those rights. The father is all for the baby having her mommy happy and available.

The best interest of the child: Of course, but when we get into each opinion, emotions, etc. it gets tough to distinguish, doesn't it? Some reactive thoughts of mine were to have the father fight for full custody. He does appear to be the more stable here. (Excellent job, owns his own home, solid family and friend support system) Of course, again, those thoughts are eactive and NOT always in the best interests of the child. A person may have a legal advisor, a pastor (or spiritual advisor), parental advice, etc. But what really guides us to the best interest of the child?

Is there literature to guide us in thinking toward the best interest of the child?

Thanks again for your help.

Let me refer to Lidj's remarks re jurisdiction.
Washington: The killing of an "unborn quick child" is manslaughter. Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 9A.32.060(1)(b) (West Supp. 1999).

Ok....I am surprized that the WA judge made any rulings at all before the baby was born....or that the WA judge took jurisdiction. Both of those rulings were technically improper.

Since there was no living child, a judge couldn't make orders regarding that child. There was also no proof that your son is the father of the child either.

The Judge in Washington properly took Jurisdiction in this case since the State of Washington recognizes some degree of fetal rights as cited above. Thus the unborn child at the end of pregnancy was a legally a person from quickening which occured in Washington State prior to the parnets meeting in June and before the move out of state. Dad also obtained legal counsel and began paternity proceedings prior to birth which is allowed and contributes to establishing jurisdiction. Since we done know the actual pleadings some quesitons cannot be answered yet and will become more clear at the next court date.

Mom did not contest jurisdiction in Washington State since she was allowed to move to Montana.

While dad has not signed and/or filed an acknowledgement of paternity at the hospital, this requires the signature of both parents and several things might evolve out of this situation and may be settled at the next court date. However if mom refuses to sign the AOP and the court orders a DNA test who pays for the test might arise.

If they try to get a DV restraining order in Montana, it may be fought or possible quashed for a number of reasons depending on the facts, hopefully your son's attorney is on top of this possibility. Mom may be estopped if the motion re DV was dismissed with prejudice and there has been no other incidents documented. Has your son obtained the transcripts of he hearing at the end of August, if not, he should, they will be required if there is an appeal etc.

Yes there are many opinions and many gray areas, not everyone here has the same opinion or cites current law, some have their personal agendas.

You may search out the concept of the best interest of the child as it applies in Washington state as well as the site for the GAL.

Your son may ask for many things the judge may grant some and not all of them, same for mom, that is why asking for a GAL up front in anticipation of contest is a good idea, since mom was not open to developong a parenting plan and may be under the influenc eof others. It helps show that your son is thinking of the best interest of the child as the GAL represents the child's rights and he is not trying to take the child away from the mother.

As I said breastfeeding does not preclude your son having visitation and feeding the child with expressed breastmilk and/or formula. If mom wants to be present alone during his visitation, that is an option, but it sounds like she is influenced easily by others. It might be wise to offer some form of supervised visitation unless your son already has competence in child care of infants the first few visits untill all are comfortable, perhaps you could be the supervisor. It would also be a good idea for your son to take parenting and or infant care courses, this would be a good sign to the court of his desire to be a competent and loving parent.

 

[UnbornChild]

<<Did your son attempt to get a statement from the nurse at the hospital re; the mother's family members being hostile?>>

Yes, and while they are sympathetic to the situation, their legal cousel will have to decide if that will be allowed. We are still waiting to here from counsel (it's been 10 days) I am not sure we will have the statements at all let alone in time for this week's hearing.

How important would it be to "fight" to get their statements (their were 5 nurses present) or should we move on to stronger issues?

 

[casa]

<<Did your son attempt to get a statement from the nurse at the hospital re; the mother's family members being hostile?>>

Yes, and while they are sympathetic to the situation, their legal cousel will have to decide if that will be allowed. We are still waiting to here from counsel (it's been 10 days) I am not sure we will have the statements at all let alone in time for this week's hearing.

How important would it be to "fight" to get their statements (their were 5 nurses present) or should we move on to stronger issues?

You can certainly mention it in court or in your affidavits/declarations. The only other option would be to subpoena the nurse(s). This is where an attorney would be helpful to hear all the specifics of your case and determine which things are most important to pursue.

At any rate, I agree father should ask for what he wants...and whatever he gets will be more than he has now.

 

[starting over]

If you want to quote someones reply, just click the "quote" button on the bottom right hand side of their reply. That will put it in the box so you don't have to << >> anymore