Update and Question re: supervised visitation

[InfantCustody]

And then:


Was the above done?

I am guessing that since she is just typing up the case plan, and was reviewing it with me so I know what is going on, that these steps had not been done as of when I spoke with her. She did say she would be arranging for the case to be transferred to Dad's county, and for them to then take the lead role in his on-going case plan. Additionally, since dad has failed to start the barrage of text messages about the case being substantiated, I am guessing he does not know as of yet.

 

[Ohiogal]

And they acknowledge that they have no right to change his visitation, minus the child being in their custody. His "compliance" with the safety plan has been voluntary. Had he failed to voluntarily comply with the safety assessment, I would have had to go to court for a hearing much earlier. She said they make a safety plan, and it is up to the non-offending parent to either have the other parent comply or present the safety assessment and evidence in court, and ask a judge to follow their safety recommendations.

In this particular case, 4 MD's have said the baby was burned by heat, so I am not sure what evidence Dad will present, but I am certain he will try and I know he has the right to be heard. The same right I would want if I were in his shoes.

I will say I am amazed at how quickly CPS inserts themselves into every aspect of your life. My older son, while he was uninvolved and nothing happened in my home, was listed on the case and they interviewed him, examined his schooling, medical care, etc before clearing his portion of the case. It was really shocking when Dad was reported for abuse and they started looking into my parenting of my older son. I knew it was all ok, but still shocking.

It couldn't have been that shocking since you were basically chomping at the bit to have dad reported for something. You knew he had been reported and you blame him for this regardless of anything. I have had MDs (several) state that a baby was shaken and they turned out to be wrong. The baby was actually born with a hemotoma that did not affect the child until several months after birth. Shocking? What is shocking is how badly you want dad out of the picture.

 

[Ohiogal]

I am guessing that since she is just typing up the case plan, and was reviewing it with me so I know what is going on, that these steps had not been done as of when I spoke with her. She did say she would be arranging for the case to be transferred to Dad's county, and for them to then take the lead role in his on-going case plan. Additionally, since dad has failed to start the barrage of text messages about the case being substantiated, I am guessing he does not know as of yet.

Then they have not abided by the law. It has been more than five days. Oh we don't care that we are stomping on dad's rights because he doesn't get to his child now because YOU get to control it. Which was what you wanted in your first post. Hmmmm....

 

[Ohiogal]

I hope dad fights every step of the way.

 

[InfantCustody]

Also dad has a right to have counsel appointed for him:


Please note:


No where in here does it say CPS has the right to order the parent to do ANYTHING.

Ok. Well, you lost me several long law chapters ago. To me, not an attorney, it looks like those are in cases where CPS has taken custody of the child. Is that correct or no? It looked, to me, as if that is when CPS is taking a case before the court but I fully admit I am no attorney. I am going based on what she said. She said the case plan will provide dad with on-going services including the ones I listed such as parenting classes, coping, discipline, safety, etc. She didn't say Dad can't refuse ongoing services, so based on what you said, I guess he can refuse to do any of it unless the judge orders it when we go to court.

 

[InfantCustody]

It couldn't have been that shocking since you were basically chomping at the bit to have dad reported for something. You knew he had been reported and you blame him for this regardless of anything. I have had MDs (several) state that a baby was shaken and they turned out to be wrong. The baby was actually born with a hemotoma that did not affect the child until several months after birth. Shocking? What is shocking is how badly you want dad out of the picture.

Chomping at the bit to have Dad out of the picture? I didn't call CPS. I didn't ask the MD to call CPS. I took him in for a diaper rash, as his medical records prove, and they said he had been scalded in hot water or set on a hot surface. Based on "grossly geometric and demarcated borders." He brought in a second opinion. I took the baby to the hospital, and they examined him - with two MD's.

Dad and I were doing fine until the baby came home with second degree burns to 2/3 of his bottom. Literally, skin sloughing off and peeling. The rest? Too burned to have any "external" skin left. Just raw, weeping, bloody skin that the only thing that would stick being burn cream.

I blame him regardless? No, I have asked every SINGLE MD what else could have caused this. If it could be a diaper rash, or an allergic reaction. I have called formula and diaper cream and wipe companies. And each and every one has said "NO" and explained why that is. I told Dad I would LOVE to have a MD tell me it could be something else. I continue to communicate with Dad on a daily basis and have been supervising contact for him so he is still spending time with the baby.

As it would sound, to you, no child is ever abused and it is always the fault of the "custodial parent" if CPS is called. I DIDN'T CALL THEM, and I thought he had a bad diaper rash until all the MD's started lining up to say otherwise. You know NOTHING about this case, and yet you are advocating as if you know Dad is some saint who has been wrongly accused. I guess I should just give Dad his regular time back and assume CPS (being the most horrible agency that ever existed) made the wrong conclusion and hope that they weren't right. You know, if they were right and someone in Dad's house DID burn the baby, what is the worst that happens?

Because please correct me if I am wrong, but that is how it comes across?

If it were YOUR child who came home with a medical condition that the MD's were saying were burns, what would you do?

 

[InfantCustody]

Then they have not abided by the law. It has been more than five days. Oh we don't care that we are stomping on dad's rights because he doesn't get to his child now because YOU get to control it. Which was what you wanted in your first post. Hmmmm....

I believe that is 5 days from when the case decision is made...not 5 days from when the case is opened. In my understanding, they have 30 days to complete the investigation. It has not been 5 days since the case decision was made.

And per the advice of Dad's attorney (he has talked to her, and even with my being such an evil b*tch, he still talks to me - must be because I am such a horrible person) he should cooperate with the investigation and follow the recommendations of the safety assessment.

If Dad were so concerned about his "rights" he could have filed something in court himself, or demanded he continue to utilize his regular time. But of course, it's still my fault.

 

[LdiJ]

I believe that is 5 days from when the case decision is made...not 5 days from when the case is opened. In my understanding, they have 30 days to complete the investigation. It has not been 5 days since the case decision was made.

And per the advice of Dad's attorney (he has talked to her, and even with my being such an evil b*tch, he still talks to me - must be because I am such a horrible person) he should cooperate with the investigation and follow the recommendations of the safety assessment.

If Dad were so concerned about his "rights" he could have filed something in court himself, or demanded he continue to utilize his regular time. But of course, it's still my fault.

I am pretty sure that OG did not review your last few threads before responding to you. If she had, I think that she would have responded very differently. I suspect that she got you confused with someone else.

 

[Silverplum]

I am pretty sure that OG did not review your last few threads before responding to you. If she had, I think that she would have responded very differently. I suspect that she got you confused with someone else.

ASK OG. Don't speak FOR her. Ask her what SHE is thinking her ownself.

I *suspect* that OG is speaking to the very person to whom she believes she is speaking.

 

[LdiJ]

ASK OG. Don't speak FOR her. Ask her what SHE is thinking her ownself.

I *suspect* that OG is speaking to the very person to whom she believes she is speaking.

If so, then I am really confused, because that's not the way she normally responds when CPS has substantiated that a child was abused. Anyone familiar with Instant's case would have known that she didn't call CPS.

 

[Ohiogal]

If so, then I am really confused, because that's not the way she normally responds when CPS has substantiated that a child was abused. Anyone familiar with Instant's case would have known that she didn't call CPS.

I stand by what I said. The fact that CPS substantiated this last week and hasn't informed dad of such means they are not playing by the law. MDs are known to be wrong -- I had experts at a hospital proven wrong regarding shaken baby syndrome. Something stinks to high heaven about this case. Dad did not necessarily abuse this child. CPS is denying him his constitutional rights by changing the parenting plan without going to court. And I hope dad fights to the bitter end.

 

[CJane]

Wow. Just wow.

IC -- if Dad is AGREEING to the supervision, that's all that matters. He's agreed to comply with the CPS recommendations and that's a good thing.

Absolutely have your attorney file an ex parte, based on the substantiated case, once it's in your hands. And yes, ask for supervision at a center so that there is an uninvolved party supervising the visits.

Keep moving forward and make sure baby is taken care of. Yes, occasionally doctors are wrong about abuse. But there seems to be quite a lot of consensus on this one, and the "demarcation" is a huge marker for intentional burning.

 

[InfantCustody]

Wow. Just wow.

IC -- if Dad is AGREEING to the supervision, that's all that matters. He's agreed to comply with the CPS recommendations and that's a good thing.

Absolutely have your attorney file an ex parte, based on the substantiated case, once it's in your hands. And yes, ask for supervision at a center so that there is an uninvolved party supervising the visits.

Keep moving forward and make sure baby is taken care of. Yes, occasionally doctors are wrong about abuse. But there seems to be quite a lot of consensus on this one, and the "demarcation" is a huge marker for intentional burning.

Thank you, really.

I talked to Dad tonight (with him ranting, for an hour and a half) and he has been notified (by the police detective, not in writing) that the case has been substantiated "officially" as of today. The detective said he understands they have been processing the case, but the official determination came down today. The detective did tell him the police department will likely NOT be pressing criminal charges as they cannot place the child "in his hands" when the "incident" occurred. He made it sound as if he and the detective are best buddies, which with Dad being a police officer, maybe they are. Who knows...

He told him he will be recommended to have "parenting, discipline, etc, etc." classes and Dad told me "they can all go F*CK themselves if they think I am taking a G*D D*MN THING!" So, I guess there is no more mystery in that aspect.

Dad did say that as soon as the case decision is in his hands, in writing, that we can then go back to whatever visitation is court ordered. Since that is true, I believe I will have my attorney go ahead and file the ex-parte pending Dad's appeal of the CPS decision. He said "he will appeal and shred the CPS case to bits, as he isn't some moron who will take this laying down."

I DO know that medical evidence can be wrong, and the reason I talk to Dad at such lengths and try to work with him is because I keep an open mind that perhaps this isn't what it seems on the surface. Does it make sense that Dad would intentionally burn the baby? HELL NO! That being said, I am not going to possibly FURTHER neglect our child by sending him back to dad's house when there is a SUBSTANTIATED CPS case against him. As a Mom, I feel that is the only responsible thing to do!

I'll keep you posted...

 

[CJane]

Thank you, really.

Did Dad end up attending that doctor's appointment?

And remember, until CPS got involved in your case, OG was congratulating you on your efforts to co parent, and how far you've come since your first post, when you wanted to move across the country and decided that it wasn't in your child's best interests to do so.

Your efforts haven't changed. It's clear that you don't quite trust Dad, and frankly, he's been a bit cuckoo since the beginning. I remember his threads here. But you HAVE made a VERY strong effort to make sure that Dad's rights aren't "trampled on".

Keep on keepin on. Do as your attorney recommends, and keep the baby safe. That's all you can do.

 

[InfantCustody]

Did Dad end up attending that doctor's appointment?

And remember, until CPS got involved in your case, OG was congratulating you on your efforts to co parent, and how far you've come since your first post, when you wanted to move across the country and decided that it wasn't in your child's best interests to do so.

Your efforts haven't changed. It's clear that you don't quite trust Dad, and frankly, he's been a bit cuckoo since the beginning. I remember his threads here. But you HAVE made a VERY strong effort to make sure that Dad's rights aren't "trampled on".

Keep on keepin on. Do as your attorney recommends, and keep the baby safe. That's all you can do.

Dad did attend the MD appointment. He stood there with his sunglasses on and his arms crossed while the MD said "In my opinion, this is not a diaper rash due to the severe demarcation and geometric lines. An allergic reaction, rash, etc produce a "splotchy" appearance and this is very even and fluid. This looks like he was set on something hot. It covers only his seat." Dad said nothing, and walked out.

Dad is doing the happy dance tonight, because the police are likely not pressing charges. He said he can call the detective into court for any hearing I want to attempt, and he can testify that there is not sufficient evidence to say that something occurred. He said the detective not pressing charges, and testifying in court, will counteract the validity of a substantiated CPS case. Dad said all the MD's and the CPS in my County are all wrong, don't know what child abuse looks like, had a burn "stuck in their heads" and will all be called out for what they are on appeal. He is planning his large law suit for when he has the case unsubstantiated.

No, I don't fully trust Dad, but I don't think anyone would under these conditions. I have always had "mom anxiety" that I think all moms have when separated from their infants, but I have tried my best to keep it in check and have NEVER had it get in the way of Dad/baby time.

I do remember that OG was praising my efforts and progress until CPS got involved. She even said I should stick around and learn, that she liked me! So much for that...

Anyway, I am going to follow what my attorney recommends and do what is necessary to make sure the baby is safe, within what the family court system allows. I have peace with filing the motions necessary, and from there it is out of my hands. It's all I can do. If Dad wins his appeal, so be it. As you said, I will keep on keeping on! Dad will go ballistic when I file the ex-parte and it is hard to say what will come from him, but it is inevitable unless I am just going to give him his 48 hrs/wk back with the substantiated CPS case, so why delay.

Thank you...truly. I'll keep you posted with any new updates.