Passport for Child

[LdiJ]

Thank you. I was hoping it was, but I know I'm possessive, so.....

Its not even really a matter of possessiveness. He is a total stranger to the child. They have never even met. He has had more than 10 years to attempt to pursue a relationship and has chosen not to.

It would be absurd for him to expect the child to come to him unless he has made a real effort to get to know her first.

 

[CJane]

She was lucky - or the passport office messed up - or she didn't simply state that the father had no visitation but also stated that the father was UNAVAILABLE.

The rules are here:
http://www.cpclerk.co.summit.oh.us/Passport/PassportForMinor.pdf

The only way to get sole custody without the other parent's approval or a court order is an affidavit that the other parent IS NOT AVAILABLE. Since OP does know where the father is, that doesn't apply here. If she fills out that form, she's committing perjury.

Sorry, no. I read the passport application and the affidavit. AND I just read the rules that you linked.

Nowhere does it say the other parent must be unavailable. Or that one must not know where that parent is. What it says is one must explain why consent cannot be obtained.

She stated that consent could not be obtained because there is no relationship between her son and his father, and there is no visitation/custody order requiring that relationship.

Apparently, everyone thought that was a good enough reason.

 

[mistoffolees]

Sorry, no. I read the passport application and the affidavit. AND I just read the rules that you linked.

Nowhere does it say the other parent must be unavailable. Or that one must not know where that parent is. What it says is one must explain why consent cannot be obtained.

She stated that consent could not be obtained because there is no relationship between her son and his father, and there is no visitation/custody order requiring that relationship.

Apparently, everyone thought that was a good enough reason.

As I said, either you didn't get the whole story or they made a mistake.

The form says you must explain why the other parent is not available. "I have no idea where he is and have been unable to contact him" is a valid reason. "I know where he is but he refuses to sign" is not.

 

[CJane]

As I said, either you didn't get the whole story or they made a mistake.

The form says you must explain why the other parent is not available. "I have no idea where he is and have been unable to contact him" is a valid reason. "I know where he is but he refuses to sign" is not.

Yeah, I'm sure a mistake was made.

She did NOT state on the affidavit that he refused to sign. She stated that there is no relationship between the child and the father, and therefore consent cannot be obtained.

She knows exactly where he is. In fact, until she moved to Germany a week ago, they lived approximately 5 blocks apart. His brother was is the head of the Park and Recreation Department for the area. The issue is not and has never been not knowing where he is.

But that isn't what's required. What is required is an affidavit stating why that parent's consent cannot be obtained. Not having a relationship with that parent is apparently a good enough reason for two completely separate applications, one for a short term passport and one for a long term passport (remember, they'll be gone 3 years @ minimum).

AND no one asked for a notarized consent from the other parent for international travel at either end of the flight (as we often tell people is required).

But perhaps you're right. Perhaps the whole deal was so riddled with errors as to be simply unbelievable.

 

[CSO286]

Well, thanks for all the advice.
Update: Now that I've opened the windows of communication, he's "maybe" planning to travel to see her, but not until next summer. I told him that I would make small fry available for telephone calls if that is what he wants (this is according to the terms I've proposed in my motion). But I refuse to be the one always calling down there. When before they disconnected, I let him know that he'll need to call her again, before I do it. I need to see proof that he's going to follow through on things, you know?

(I feel kind of bad, telling small fry,to talk to someone she doesn't know about things going on in her life. I know this isn't Dr. Phil, but does anyone have any advice on smoothing thing out for her? Like she says, "Mom, you always tell me not to talk to people I don't know.")

Anyway, I'm dropping off my paperwork at the courthouse tomorrow. Wish me luck.

 

[CSO286]

Update

I filed with courts, and our hearing date is scheduled for this Tuesday (oct 5). He called very upset, and wanted to know "what kind of crap I was trying to pull." I told him that I still need a passport for small fry, and the best way to get it is to ask the court to affirm (through an order) that I have sole legal custody.
Because I didn't want to be dragged back in in a year or two when/if he decides he wants to get involved in her life, I opted to make this the hill to fight on. I've requested a proposed LD parenting plan, allowing liberal phone/email/snail mail/webcam/skype contact and requiring he see her up here at least four times over two years before small fry be required to travel to NCP's state.

Should he chose to fight (and he has now indicated as much), then he can appear by phone at the hearing and make his argument there.
Now I'm not sure what his counter argument to my proposed order will be, but I know this much:
1. he wants her down there every summer for the duration of the break.
2. he wants joint legal/physical custody.
3. he wants the court to order her last name be changed.

Since he received my paperwork three weeks ago, he has called and spoken to small fry 4-5 times. She is kind of uncomfortable (conversation still awkward) with it, though I do encourage her to talk about school, church, friends, etc.
I do listen in on these conversation--we put him on speakerphone, mostly so I can react appropriately afterward and so I can prompt her with something she could share.

I am thankful that my job has brought me into court on several occasions now, and I feel I am pretty prepared to present my case.
My concerns:
1. Likelihood of the court ruling for joint legal when ncp has not been very involved in child's life? In the event the judge does rule for joint legal, I am asking that ncp be ordered to sign for the passport within 30 days of the date of order.

I'm not all that concerned about him ordering that child's last name be changed, She's had it for ten years; I think ncp would need to have a pretty compelling argument for that.

Nor do I think that judge will order her down for the duration of her summer breaks, at least not until ncp has exercised the "visits in child's community" provisions I've asked for.

Any advice for me? Anything I need to be prepared for that I haven't considered?

TIA!!

Drinks on me for all good advice!!

 

[mistoffolees]

My concerns:
1. Likelihood of the court ruling for joint legal when ncp has not been very involved in child's life? In the event the judge does rule for joint legal, I am asking that ncp be ordered to sign for the passport within 30 days of the date of order.

I'm not all that concerned about him ordering that child's last name be changed, She's had it for ten years; I think ncp would need to have a pretty compelling argument for that.

Nor do I think that judge will order her down for the duration of her summer breaks, at least not until ncp has exercised the "visits in child's community" provisions I've asked for.

Joint legal is a real possibility, although you can probably get the court to order him to sign for a passport.

Name change isn't likely unless he can come up with some clear reason why it's in the child's interest.

Judge is not going to order her to go spend the summer who someone who has not had regular visitation. Heck, even if he HAD visited her regularly, most judges would not order the whole summer.

 

[CSO286]

Joint legal is a real possibility, although you can probably get the court to order him to sign for a passport.

Name change isn't likely unless he can come up with some clear reason why it's in the child's interest.

Judge is not going to order her to go spend the summer who someone who has not had regular visitation. Heck, even if he HAD visited her regularly, most judges would not order the whole summer.

My thoughts, too. Except for this: My argument against joint legal is this: He has never initiated contact with small fry--His contact with her has on ever been in response to my actions; i.e. calling him re illness, injury, serving court docs, etc.
To my way of thinking, joint legal implies that all major decisions, school choices, missions trips (out of country), could require that I consult him, and that he could say no to anything I feel could benefit small fry. Am I reading too much into this?

 

[mistoffolees]

My thoughts, too. Except for this: My argument against joint legal is this: He has never initiated contact with small fry--His contact with her has on ever been in response to my actions; i.e. calling him re illness, injury, serving court docs, etc.
To my way of thinking, joint legal implies that all major decisions, school choices, missions trips (out of country), could require that I consult him, and that he could say no to anything I feel could benefit small fry. Am I reading too much into this?

Yes. You're thinking that your wishes supersede the law.

In general, if he asks for joint legal and he's not unfit and makes even a token effort to be part of the child's life, he's probably going to get it.

 

[CSO286]

Yes. You're thinking that your wishes supersede the law.

In general, if he asks for joint legal and he's not unfit and makes even a token effort to be part of the child's life, he's probably going to get it.

Misto--wasn't so much thinking that, more not sure of what the law stated.

Then, my next question would be: what my responsibility to him is should he get joint legal?
What decisions would I need to contact him on? I am trying to find out out what implications joint legal custody has given that we're 1500 miles apart.
Do I have to contact him for any non-emergent elective medical procedure? Brace? Laser treatment for scar removal?
Am I required to get his his signature on school field trip permission slips for their overnight trips to the state capital? For local ones?
Can he prevent me from enrolling her in a parochial school?
This is not something I'm hugely familiar with. I've been making all the decisions for the last ten years. If he is awarded joint legal, then I also don't want to end up in hot water for making a decision on my own that I used to make all the time without thinking, "Should I have asked her father?" Or worse, having it come back to bite me in the backside.

 

[mistoffolees]

Misto--wasn't so much thinking that, more not sure of what the law stated.

Then, my next question would be: what my responsibility to him is should he get joint legal?
What decisions would I need to contact him on? I am trying to find out out what implications joint legal custody has given that we're 1500 miles apart.
Do I have to contact him for any non-emergent elective medical procedure? Brace? Laser treatment for scar removal?
Am I required to get his his signature on school field trip permission slips for their overnight trips to the state capital? For local ones?
Can he prevent me from enrolling her in a parochial school?
This is not something I'm hugely familiar with. I've been making all the decisions for the last ten years. If he is awarded joint legal, then I also don't want to end up in hot water for making a decision on my own that I used to make all the time without thinking, "Should I have asked her father?" Or worse, having it come back to bite me in the backside.

In practice, it's rarely an issue. You are legally required to consult with him on MAJOR decisions.

For example, you wouldn't need his permission to send the kid on a school field trip or most elective medical procedures. If there is a significant risk of permanent harm or death, then you obviously should consult with him.

Attending a parochial school is a major decision (even assuming that he's not going to pay for it). He should be consulted. If you can't agree, then you may end up back in court.

There really are very few major decisions affecting a child. Things like where the child lives, where they go to school, and life-altering medical treatment.

Oh, and if there's a disagreement and both sides are reasonable, the court has to choose something and the person who has raised the child its whole life probably has an edge, anyway.

 

[CSO286]

In practice, it's rarely an issue. You are legally required to consult with him on MAJOR decisions.

For example, you wouldn't need his permission to send the kid on a school field trip or most elective medical procedures. If there is a significant risk of permanent harm or death, then you obviously should consult with him.

Attending a parochial school is a major decision (even assuming that he's not going to pay for it). He should be consulted. If you can't agree, then you may end up back in court.

There really are very few major decisions affecting a child. Things like where the child lives, where they go to school, and life-altering medical treatment.

Oh, and if there's a disagreement and both sides are reasonable, the court has to choose something and the person who has raised the child its whole life probably has an edge, anyway.

Thanks, Misto. I do appreciate the clarification. The main motive behind asking is that based on his history, as soon as this is resolved, I do think he's just going to drop right back out of small fry's life. And if that is the case, then I don't feel it ought to be necessary to have consult him for anything.
Yes, i know that the rebuttal here is " That's not the law."

In the meantime, wish in one hand....and so on, right?

 

[TheGeekess]

Yes. You're thinking that your wishes supersede the law.

In general, if he asks for joint legal and he's not unfit and makes even a token effort to be part of the child's life, he's probably going to get it.

Maybe, maybe not. The judge in my case decided to give me sole legal and physical custody because The Teen's father had been absent for all her life (until I filed for CS).

 

[CSO286]

Maybe, maybe not. The judge in my case decided to give me sole legal and physical custody because The Teen's father had been absent for all her life (until I filed for CS).

Well, that's comforting.

but in all seriousness, I do appreciate your advice, Misto, so I can be as prepared as possible for any outcome.

 

[WittyUserName]

Sorry to be a buttinsky:

I had a similar situation; dad was gone for years with no contact but then wanted to be involved. Judge ordered joint legal. Ex was interested for a while but eventually went back to not communicating. Lawyer advised that I send him email updates with "if there's anything you'd like to talk about, please let me know. Otherwise I'll assume you are in agreement."

Dad may drop right back out (mine sorta did) - but in that case you make the attempt at contact and if he chooses not to respond, c'est la vie.