out of country? vivistation...ex says no

[nast]

its ok, i guess, i'm gonna take my chances it court, i just wanted to know what chance in hell i had.

i don't have legal council so i'm kind of out on a limb, as i cannot afford a retainer

so now i have to try and battle her 375.00 /hour lawyer

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Therefore Belize, I would like to see YOU argue in front of any sober judge that dad can take the child to Japan without the express approval of the mother or a judge's order. Heck...a parent can't even take the child out of the country for a vacation without the other parent's approval or judge's in most circumstances.

Sorry to burst your bubble Ldi, but been there, done that, have the freshly starched t-shirt

 

[aparent2]

Hey I am going through something similar. I'm so sorry to hear the mother won't let your child visit you. My daughter's father is being re-stationed in Japan in a couple of months and we are working out her flying there in the summer months to see him.
Here is what I've learned. There is only a couple of airlines which travel to Japan now since 9/11. The age the child must be to fly alone is 11 on both. There are escorts for international flights which cost between $200 adn $400 dollars.
The Mom has to consent to or get the passport for the child. Unless you have sole legal custody which it doesn't sound like you do.
Ask your current wife to contact her base advocate to see if they have any offices which help with legal advice in this matter. Otherwise go to your local court and find out what forms would have to be filed to the court to petition the court for the right to a visitation under your circumstances. You will probably have to pay the cost of travel for the child, and yourself if the child isn't old enough to travel.
I am a mother and I was very worried about my daughter traveling on a 13or 15 hour flight and did a lot of research to set my mind at ease. I believe it would be a terrific cultural experience for my daughter in the long run.
I hope it works out for you and you dont' have to go such a long time without seeing your child.

 

[worriedwith1]

Hey I am going through something similar. I'm so sorry to hear the mother won't let your child visit you. My daughter's father is being re-stationed in Japan in a couple of months and we are working out her flying there in the summer months to see him.
Here is what I've learned. There is only a couple of airlines which travel to Japan now since 9/11. The age the child must be to fly alone is 11 on both. There are escorts for international flights which cost between $200 adn $400 dollars.
The Mom has to consent to or get the passport for the child. Unless you have sole legal custody which it doesn't sound like you do.
Ask your current wife to contact her base advocate to see if they have any offices which help with legal advice in this matter. Otherwise go to your local court and find out what forms would have to be filed to the court to petition the court for the right to a visitation under your circumstances. You will probably have to pay the cost of travel for the child, and yourself if the child isn't old enough to travel.
I am a mother and I was very worried about my daughter traveling on a 13or 15 hour flight and did a lot of research to set my mind at ease. I believe it would be a terrific cultural experience for my daughter in the long run.
I hope it works out for you and you dont' have to go such a long time without seeing your child.

I hope everything works out for you Dad but I have to comment... Why is it so easy for a Dad (who is moving to another state or country) to get to see his child and move with no problem but if the mother was moving, everyone acts like its such a big deal for her to move and create distance between the child and father.

 

[nextwife]

He is not relocating THE CHILD. He is only attempting to exercise a limited amount of visitation to which he is entitled, not to MOVE the child to Japan.

 

[worriedwith1]

He is not relocating THE CHILD. He is only attempting to exercise a limited amount of visitation to which he is entitled, not to MOVE the child to Japan.

I understand that, but whats the difference between him moving or the child moving...Either way, the distance that is created between the two of them is the same.

 

[stealth2]

Because if the NCP moves, s/he is affecting his/her own visitation. If the CP moves, s/he is affecting the NCP's access to the child.

 

[djohnson]

The big difference is, the custodial parent is not moving the child away from other parent and causing that parent to see less of the child. In this case he is moving away from child and not child moving away from him. It's a very large difference.

 

[worriedwith1]

Because if the NCP moves, s/he is affecting his/her own visitation. If the CP moves, s/he is affecting the NCP's access to the child.

WEll theres the law for ya! IT SUCKS...Mom has no choice in life to do what she wants unless dad approves of it but Dad can up and leave and do whatever with his life and Mom has to adjust. WOW

 

[nextwife]

CPs do NOT have an uninhibited right to interfere with visitation by moving the CHILD away from the NCP. Regardless of what gender either happen to be.

Hello? Male CPs have the same limits on MOVING THE child imposed as do female CPs.

 

[djohnson]

WEll theres the law for ya! IT SUCKS...Mom has no choice in life to do what she wants unless dad approves of it but Dad can up and leave and do whatever with his life and Mom has to adjust. WOW

It's not about mom's choice vs. dad's choice. It's about using a child as a pawn and making bad choices concerning that child. Let mom (or CP) move, that's fine, no problems. The problem comes in when the CHILD moves.

Do you get it now?

 

[stealth2]

WEll theres the law for ya! IT SUCKS...Mom has no choice in life to do what she wants unless dad approves of it but Dad can up and leave and do whatever with his life and Mom has to adjust. WOW

Oh brother. You're just not getting it.

 

[worriedwith1]

Oh brother. You're just not getting it.

No, I get it Thank you...But what I dont get is if the parents were still together it would be ok to relocate and if NCP decides to leave and relocate its ok for the child but if CP does, that poor child is going to suffer. It should be the same for both parts, NCP shouldn't have the choice to move and create the distance either regardless whether he/she is CP or NCP. Either way the distance is created and the child is involved. Maybe thats why theres so many absent NCP's, they can up and leave anytime.

 

[casa]

to: worriedwith1

I am a custodial parent who had to petition to move and fight a big fight to move and it was only 41 miles away Why? Because the other parent was a jerk and wanted to waste taxpayers money and mine to try to make it seem like I was creating distance.

On the other hand my childs father moved all over the country and when he decided to show up and be a parent, I let him without a fight. Why? Because it's about the child after all. A child has a right to both parents unless they are in danger from one of them.

You are asking why SOME NCPs raise a stink when the CP moves- well, not all of them do. You are also asking why a CP can't move without the NCPs consent. These are obvious answers to me, and I'm not a lawyer! Some parents are jerks! CP or NCP both. Some parents are not jerks and want to do their best to allow access to the other parent. So you making sweeping statements that could go either way and yet demand explanations!

The same father who fought me about moving 41 miles away wouldn't find himself in the same fight if he moved anywhere he wanted to. Is it fair? No. Is it one-sided? Yes. BUT that doesn't mean I have to stoop to his level.

Pretty simple, do what's best for your child and stop trying to control the other parent's life.

Sounds like you had a bad experience with this topic- well, so did I. But that doesn't mean I can now assume that EVERY NCP is an idiot bent on making life difficult for the CP. (just the one I picked, I guess! ) lol

 

[worriedwith1]

I am a custodial parent who had to petition to move and fight a big fight to move and it was only 41 miles away Why? Because the other parent was a jerk and wanted to waste taxpayers money and mine to try to make it seem like I was creating distance.

On the other hand my childs father moved all over the country and when he decided to show up and be a parent, I let him without a fight. Why? Because it's about the child after all. A child has a right to both parents unless they are in danger from one of them.

You are asking why SOME NCPs raise a stink when the CP moves- well, not all of them do. You are also asking why a CP can't move without the NCPs consent. These are obvious answers to me, and I'm not a lawyer! Some parents are jerks! CP or NCP both. Some parents are not jerks and want to do their best to allow access to the other parent. So you making sweeping statements that could go either way and yet demand explanations!

The same father who fought me about moving 41 miles away wouldn't find himself in the same fight if he moved anywhere he wanted to. Is it fair? No. Is it one-sided? Yes. BUT that doesn't mean I have to stoop to his level.

Pretty simple, do what's best for your child and stop trying to control the other parent's life.

Sounds like you had a bad experience with this topic- well, so did I. But that doesn't mean I can now assume that EVERY NCP is an idiot bent on making life difficult for the CP. (just the one I picked, I guess! ) lol

Casa, I agree that not all NCP are like mine...I could agreeon that in more then one way, LOL...I dont want to control his life, he can go where ever he wants as far as I;m concern as long as he doesn't forget about our daughter. But I think its unfair to CP exspecially when dealing with a NCP that just wants to control you even though you left so he couldn't. It sucks...But just like you said, we choose them.