Kentucky mom wanting to move to MO

[NSA4answers]

For crying out loud, lady, how dense can you possibly be? We're talking about the law. What it is, and why it is what it is. THE LAW regarding a parent's decision to move is about the non-custodial parent's right to have input regarding where his child lives. It's simple. That is in the best interest of the child, whether you want to admit it or not.

Ok first of all I'm not dense. Thank you though. Maybe next time you want to insult people you should instead close your browser. No one has yet given me a reason why it's legal that a NCP move AWAY from the child. I never said it wasn't in the best interest of the child for CP to stay living in the same state as the NCP. Maybe read instead of skim next time.

You're either too stupid to grasp the concept or you just refuse to admit your point is invalid. If the former, I give up. If the latter, I'm not wasting any more time on you.

Still not stupid and my point is not invalid. Please, don't bother wasting any time on my posts because I am pretty sure I have yet to get a response to anything legal out of you. You incessantly insult me and other people and I really think you need to take a step back. But hey, my thoughts and feelings don't matter right....?

And incidentally, what's "unfortunate" is that so many women think they get to make all the decisions regarding a child that has another parent, and if that other parent doesn't like it that's just too bad. Fortunately, this particular law works to restrain control freaks.

Incidentally, you still haven't gotten the question I was asking or even bothered to answer it. I wasn't asking WHY mom can't take the child and move away from dad. I already KNOW why. But you seem to be so high strung and not paying attention to what I am saying that it doesn't really matter anymore. I wasn't even talking about a woman or a man. I specifically left my labels as CP and NCP and s/he. Enjoy your bliss.

 

[stealth2]

Ok first of all I'm not dense. Thank you though. Maybe next time you want to insult people you should instead close your browser. No one has yet given me a reason why it's legal that a NCP move AWAY from the child. I never said it wasn't in the best interest of the child for CP to stay living in the same state as the NCP. Maybe read instead of skim next time.



Still not stupid and my point is not invalid. Please, don't bother wasting any time on my posts because I am pretty sure I have yet to get a response to anything legal out of you. You incessantly insult me and other people and I really think you need to take a step back. But hey, my thoughts and feelings don't matter right....?



Incidentally, you still haven't gotten the question I was asking or even bothered to answer it. I wasn't asking WHY mom can't take the child and move away from dad. I already KNOW why. But you seem to be so high strung and not paying attention to what I am saying that it doesn't really matter anymore. I wasn't even talking about a woman or a man. I specifically left my labels as CP and NCP and s/he. Enjoy your bliss.

Quit hijacking the thread already.

 

[JimS123]

Incidentally, you still haven't gotten the question I was asking or even bothered to answer it.

He did answer it. Your question was if its not ok for the CP to move why is it ok for the NCP to move and he did answer that. He said

Because in that case the mother isn't removing the child from the father against the father's wishes. The father is, himself, creating the distance. Not Mom's fault, not Mom's problem.

You should take your own advise and read instead of skim

 

[NSA4answers]

Quit hijacking the thread already.

The thread was about moving out of state. The OP never came back. Nothing was hijacked.

 

[stealth2]

The thread was about moving out of state. The OP never came back. Nothing was hijacked.

You're wrong. You took the thread in a direction away from what OP asked (that OP did or did not ocme back is moot). That's hijacking. If you want to have a general discussion about moveaways, start a new thread for it.

You yourself posted that you were hijacking th thread, dumbbum.

 

[NSA4answers]

He did answer it. Your question was if its not ok for the CP to move why is it ok for the NCP to move and he did answer that. He said

Because in that case the mother isn't removing the child from the father against the father's wishes. The father is, himself, creating the distance. Not Mom's fault, not Mom's problem.

You should take your own advise and read instead of skim

I understand that... but isn't the law created to serve the best interest of the child? Is it in the best interest of the child that a NCP moves out of stay basically hindering the relationship between NCP and child. Just in the same manner as if the CP were to move out of state with the child that would hinder the relationship between NCP and child.

Is the law created to protect the child, or the other NCP parent? If it's to protect the parent, why do we talk so much about the best interest of the child when really what it come down to is whatever rights the parent has.

I think my stance on the issue has been misconstrued. I don't feel that either parent should move away from the child and I don't feel that a CP should be allowed to take the child and move out of the state. But then again, my bottom line is the best interest of the child, not the best interest of the parent. Sometimes us adults just don't always get what we want. *Shrug*

 

[NSA4answers]

You're wrong. You took the thread in a direction away from what OP asked (that OP did or did not ocme back is moot). That's hijacking. If you want to have a general discussion about moveaways, start a new thread for it.

You yourself posted that you were hijacking th thread, dumbbum.

The original poster asked about the legality of moving out of state.... that is ALL I have posted about. The legality of either parent moving out of the state, with or with out the child. There was a separate issue regarding journaling that I started a new thread on. Name calling... that's awesome. Does that come as bonus with the "free legal advice?" I can't believe the name calling and bashing that goes on in this forum...

 

[JimS123]

I understand that... but isn't the law created to serve the best interest of the child? Is it in the best interest of the child that a NCP moves out of stay basically hindering the relationship between NCP and child. Just in the same manner as if the CP were to move out of state with the child that would hinder the relationship between NCP and child.

And he answered that too that the law is created to serve the rights of the parents not the best interest of the child. He answerd that several times but you keep asking the same question.

 

[stealth2]

I'm sorry I'm sort of hijacking this thread... it doesn't look like the OP came back, but if you'd like me to start a new thread I will.

And you were told to do that - which you did. So keep the convo there.It's not rocket science.

 

[stealth2]

The original poster asked about the legality of moving out of state.... that is ALL I have posted about. The legality of either parent moving out of the state, with or with out the child. There was a separate issue regarding journaling that I started a new thread on. Name calling... that's awesome. Does that come as bonus with the "free legal advice?" I can't believe the name calling and bashing that goes on in this forum...

The OP asked about her specific situation. Not for a general discussion on moving. THAT belongs in a different thread. So quit hijacking this one for your agenda.

And when you act like an a$$, expect to be called one.

 

[NSA4answers]

The OP asked about her specific situation. Not for a general discussion on moving. THAT belongs in a different thread. So quit hijacking this one for your agenda.

And when you act like an a$$, expect to be called one.

 

[LdiJ]

Ok...now you made me mad enough to respond to this thread, which I have been attempting to ignore.

These forums are designed for legal questions and answers. It is considered to be EXTREMELY rude and unfair to the original poster of a thread to hijack their thread. Why?, because they stop getting the information and advice that THEY need to deal with THEIR situation, while instead the posters have to deal with the poster who insists on continuing to hijack.

You are being incredibly rude here by insisting on debating an issue based not on law, but based on your own personal opinion of how things should be. The original poster is no longer getting any advice at all thanks to you.

If you want to debate this particular issue then you are free to start a new thread. However, continuing to hijack the original poster's thread is the height of rudeness and lack of consideration.

This poster came to this forum for help. This poster is no longer receiving any help thanks to you. Can I be any more clear here?

 

[JimS123]

Your right and I apologize for my part of the hijack