Boyfriend’s Parental Rights Maintained

June 14, 2014 By

father's rights lawyerIn a case of first impression, Matter of A.S. v. B.H., a mother brought an application seeking to set aside an acknowledgment of paternity which had been signed by her boyfriend. The mother claimed after the acknowledgment of paternity was executed, she performed a home DNA test and found out the boyfriend was not the child’s biological father. The mother claimed the child, who was three years old, had special needs and was incapable of bonding with the father. She therefore claimed the father should have no parental rights with regard to the child.

Child’s Bonding with Father

Family Court Judge Michael Hanuszczak found the mother’s argument concerning the child’s bonding ability, “exaggerated and self serving.” He also found her assertions concerning the issue of bonding to be speculative. He went on in his decision to state “under [the mother’s] line of reasoning, a special needs child…would be denied a father if the mother did not lend her approval to the relationship.” He further stated “in cases involving the best interests of a child the court looks beyond any limitations of the child to determine whether a parental relationship exists.”

Family History

The mother and boyfriend had a relationship from time to time. The boyfriend had signed an acknowledgment of paternity when the child was born in December 2011. The mother was unsure of whether the boyfriend was actually the biological father of the child. There was testimony that showed the boyfriend was involved in the raising of the child during the period of time the parties lived together. The boyfriend and the child developed a relationship with each other until such time as the boyfriend’s relationship with the mother soured. She then cut off his relationship with the child.

The Judge’s Decision

Judge Hanuszczak in his decision, ruled it was not in the child’s best interest to vacate the acknowledgment of paternity. He also saw no reason to order the child, who had bonded with the boyfriend, not be allowed to have a relationship with the boyfriend because a situation had been created where it was in the child’s best interest to maintain that relationship. The boyfriend was the only father figure this child knew. The attorney for the boyfriend stated “my client was able to show that he was the sole father figure in this child’s life and to remove him would destroy the parent child relationship.”

Conclusion

This decision is a victory for father’s rights.parental rights advocate

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , , ,

New York Family Court Keeps Jurisdiction Over A Child in Virginia

June 10, 2014 By

father's rights attorneysAn appeals court (Third Department in upstate New York) has recently held pursuant to New York Domestic Relations Law section 76-a, a Family Court located in New York State had continuing jurisdiction over a child until neither the child nor the parent of the child had a significant connection to the State of New York and there was no longer substantial evidence in New York State concerning the child’s protection.

History of the Case

Angela Lawrence and Guy Belcher had two children, a son born in 1999 and a daughter born in 2001.  They were divorced in the State of New Hampshire in the year 2005.  After the divorce, Guy Belcher moved to the State of New York.  He brought a custody case in the year 2007.  Pursuant to the decision in the custody proceeding, he received custody of his son and visitation with his daughter.  The daughter thereafter moved to Virginia to live with her mother.

Belcher eventually sought sole residential custody of his daughter in 2011.  In his petition for custody, Belcher claimed his daughter was being physically abused by her stepfather.  He also claimed the stepfather had physically abused his son while his son was visiting with his mother in Virginia.  Family Court Judge Courtenay Hall initially awarded the father temporary custody of the daughter but thereafter overruled herself.  She found the court in New York lacked jurisdiction to make any determination with regard to the case.  Guy Belcher appealed to the Appellate Division of the Third Department.

Appeals Court Decision

The appeals court held “initially, that the Family Court erroneously found, because its prior order addressed custody only with respect to the son, that the court did not have continuing exclusive jurisdiction as to the issue of custody of the daughter. ‘Child custody determination’ is defined, however, as ‘a judgment, decree, or other order of a court providing for the legal custody, physical custody, or visitation with respect to a child’.”  This is pursuant to Domestic Relations Law section 75-a.

The appeals court took the position since a New York Family Court had entered a ruling with regard to visitation in the year 2007, it continued to have exclusive jurisdiction with regard to this matter.  The court cited in its opinion, the daughter had continued to visit with her father in New York during vacations and holidays.  The court’s decision stated “the son allegedly witnessed the abuse committed upon the daughter and was himself the victim of abuse and neglect.”  “Furthermore, the father witnessed the bruising and other injuries suffered by the daughter, and possesses evidence regarding a conversation he had with the mother following the incident in which she purportedly stated that the physical abuse was ‘no big deal and well deserved’.”

Conclusion

In the end, the appeals court simply felt New York was the “more appropriate and convenient forum” to make necessary decisions with regard to this case.advocate for father's rights and custody

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Using Forensic Psychologists As Experts In Custody Cases

May 30, 2014 By

father's rights lawyerIn a custody case, each parent seeks to prove to the court that it is in the child’s best interest that they receive residential custody of the children. To accomplish this goal, evidence must be submitted establishing that the parent advocating for custody is actually the parent that would provide a better, nurturing life situation for the children.

How is this done? One of the ways of establishing one parent being a better parent or having better skills to raise the children is to cause both parents to be evaluated by a forensic expert with the hope each parent’s expert comes down on their side for custody. It is important to utilize a forensic expert to avoid each of the parents telling the judge why he or she is the better parent. Although this can provide the judge with some material that would enable him or her to make a decision, it is generally not sufficient. A forensic expert’s testimony can back up a litigant’s arguments and statements, they would be the parent to enhance the children’s lives and therefore they should be awarded residential custody of the children by the court.

How Do Forensic Experts Operate?

The forensic psychologist will usually have a series of interviews with each of the parents. In addition, the forensic psychologist will interview the children separately and usually in the custody of each of the parents. The forensic psychologist will also have the parents take a variety of psychological tests. In addition, the expert will look into issues as to whether the parents have drug or alcohol problems, have a history of abuse or neglect, and investigate other issues with regard to the parent’s abilities to raise the children. In addition, the forensic experts will usually interview any third parties who reside with each of the parents. The forensic expert seeks to observe each parent’s interaction with the children during their interviews while the child is present. Forensic experts will also review court records and other information related to the case. In some situations, a forensic expert will review school records and speak to the children’s teachers.

Custody Decisions

The forensic expert makes recommendations to the judge handling the custody case. The judge, based on evidence submitted in court, the testimony of the parties and third parties, and the report submitted by the forensic expert renders a decision as to who should be the residential custodial parent of the children. The basis of the court’s decision is what would be in the best interests of the children. Courts look into the quality of the home environment and the level of parental guidance each parent can provide for the children. Courts also look into each parent’s ability to provide for the children’s emotional, intellectual, financial and developmental needs. Courts also take into consideration which parent would do a better job promoting the other parent’s relationship with the children. It is the duty of a residential custodial parent to promote the relationship of the children with the other parent.

Unfortunately, judges are trained in the law and not trained to evaluate parenting skills. Some judges rely very heavily on the reports of forensic evaluators, while others take them into consideration but don’t give them as much weight. Deciding who should become the custodial parent is a difficult task. Judges usually pressure the parents to try to resolve the issue on their own. They may suggest a joint custody arrangement to be negotiated out of court. However, if the parents can’t agree, they are entitled to a trial and the judge will determine who should receive residential custody of the children.custody advocate for fathers

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Appellate Court Overrules Trial Court’s Decision Giving Mother Sole Custody

May 28, 2014 By

father's rights lawyerThere was a marriage between Melissa C.D. and Rene I.D. in 1990. Three children were born from the marriage. A fourteen year old daughter, a five year old daughter, and a seventeen year old son. The parties lived together until October 2010.

In a proceeding in November 2010, acting Supreme Court Justice Ann O’Shea awarded Melissa sole residential custody of the parties’ daughters. She made this ruling in spite of the fact the fourteen year old child wanted to continue to live with her father. Judge O’Shea’s decision was based upon her finding the daughter’s best interests were to have no contact with her father or brother for six weeks after moving. Although Justice O’Shea awarded physical custody to Rene, she gave the parties joint decision making authority with regard to all issues concerning healthcare and education. However, in the event of a dispute between the parties Melissa was to have the tie breaking authority to make the final decision.

Children Alienated

The basis for Judge O’Shea’s decision was her ruling that Rene had alienated the older children. She found the alienation related to Rene making inappropriate comments about Melissa. Judge O’Shea found that as a result of the parental alienation of the two older children, they were “vindictive, cruel, angry and broken children.” Judge O’Shea understood the oldest daughter would not be happy with being forced to live with her mother against her wishes. However, in her decision she stated this was “temporary and far less emotionally destructive than abandoning her to an unfit parent which may leave her with permanent emotional scars.”

Appeals Court Decision

The appeals court found although Rene had made inappropriate comments with regard to Melissa, Judge O’Shea’s ruling was incorrect. They found she was “placing undue emphasis on a single factor, the father’s alleged alienation” of the two children. The appeals court found the decision was not in the oldest daughter’s best interest. The appeals court stated in its decision this would “disrupt her life by removing her against her wishes from her father and brother in Manhattan, where she had always lived, and placing her with her mother and her mother’s lover, a situation that she is not comfortable with, on Long Island, in a community that she does not know.” The appeals court felt Judge O’Shea did not take into consideration Melissa’s inappropriate behavior. The court found Melissa’s inappropriate behavior was a factor in the children’s feeling of abandonment and anger. In addition, the appeals court panel took into consideration a court appointed independent, forensic evaluator at the time of the trial had testified there was no evidence the two older children had been alienated by the father. The appeals court also advised the father to be careful as to what he says to the children in the future. His obligation will be to promote the relationship between the children and the mother.

Conclusion

advocating father's rights on Long IslandThis was a victory for father’s rights.

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , ,

Father’s Rights in 2014

May 22, 2014 By

father's rights attorneysToday more and more fathers are obtaining custody of their children. The bygone days when there was a presumption that the father was the bread winner and the mother took care of the children and should receive custody are long gone. In the State of New York, fathers have equal rights to custody of their children. In most families today, both parents work to help support their family. More and more fathers are involved with the day to day affairs of taking care of and nurturing their children. Family dynamics have changed significantly in the last decade.

Fathers Matter!

Fathers play an important role in their children’s lives. If the father seeks to have custody of his children, he should use due diligence and hire an attorney who is experienced and knowledgeable with regard to advocating on behalf of fathers. Both fathers and mothers bond with their children. Recent studies show that children who do not have a father in their lives are subject to a variety of negative effects. Some of these effects are: (1) Children who do not have guidance from their fathers have a higher school dropout rate. (2) Children raised in families without the benefit of a loving father use illegal drugs on a greater basis than children who are raised in a family that has both a father and a mother in it. (3) There is a greater percentage of children raised in a fatherless family, committing acts of domestic violence.

Fathers help their children develop traits that allow them to be successful during their life. Fathers who are prevented from having quality time for visiting with their children should fight to protect their rights. An experienced father’s rights attorney will be able to analyze a custody or visitation case and provide the father with a road map to protect his rights and achieve a greater possibility of success in the case.

Helping Fathers in Custody and Visitation Problems

Our office works with fathers regularly concerning issues regarding custody and visitation. There are many issues fathers face when litigating custody and visitation matters. There are a variety of situations that can create a negative impression of a father by the courts. Some examples of these situations are the father moving out of the house where his children reside, failing to aggressively pursue employment, failing to fight made up charges of domestic violence alleged by the mother, and failure to maintain a regular form of contact, communication and presence in their children’s lives.

Children’s Best Interests

Decisions concerning custody and visitation by judges take into consideration the children’s best interests. The father’s rights lawyers at the Law Offices of Schlissel DeCorpo are available to speak with fathers who have issues concerning their children seven days a week. Call for a free consultation at 516-561-6645, 718-350-2802 or 1-800-344-6431.experienced father's rights advocate

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , ,

Father Denied Custody – Custody Given to Wife

May 20, 2014 By

father's rights lawyerAn action for divorce was brought in Westchester County. A judge granted the plaintiff, wife, a judgment of divorce. The parties had two children from the marriage. They had settled all issues concerning who was going to pay the marital debt and any equitable distribution of marital assets. The court was faced solely with the issue of who would receive custody of the children of the parties.

Justice Linda Christopher rendered a decision that the mother was more willing to allow and encourage access, and to promote a positive relationship between the children and the father. In addition, there were allegations of domestic violence and issues with regard to the mental stability of the parties.

Father Acts Inappropriately

Justice Christopher noted in her decision the father did not allow the children to go to the mother’s place of residence until the mother obtained a court order regarding this matter. In addition, she found the father was a controlling individual. He had demeaned the mother in front of the children. In addition he had, without cause or justification, called the police on the mother and advised her she was nothing more than a nanny to his children.

Sole Custody Awarded to Mother

The court awarded the mother sole custody. However, pursuant to the custody order, the mother was obligated to enroll in and remain in a psychotherapy program to help her with her physical displays of anger which had been directed to the father.

Conclusion

Courts take seriously the issue of the residential custodial parent providing a nurturing and positive relationship between the children and the other parent. In this case, the court found the mother was more likely to take this action even though she had anger management issues.

best interest of the childrenElliot Schlissel is a father’s rights attorney. His office helps fathers obtain extensive parenting time (visitation), and custody of their children.

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , ,

Father Given Sole Legal and Physical Custody of Children: He is Allowed to Relocate Back to Texas With the Children From New York

April 28, 2014 By

helping father's win custody There was recently an interesting case before Justice Lori Sattler who sits in the Supreme Court Part in New York County. A father and a mother had each brought petitions in a post judgment custody proceeding. Each of them sought sole legal and physical custody of the parties’ two children. The father presented in his moving papers there had been problems regarding his visitation with the children, especially during weekends and holidays. He claimed these problems arose right after the wife moved from Texas to New York. The wife, who had received custody of the children from a court in Texas, moved to New York several days after entry of the judgment of divorce giving her custody by the court in Texas.

Mother Alienates the Children Against Father

The father, in his moving papers, asserted the mother had been involved in a program of parental alienation of the children against him. He also argued in his papers the mother was an unfit parent. He claimed she was incapable of taking care of the children because she was continually abusing drugs.

Mother’s Arguments

The mother alleged in her papers the father had sexually abused his daughter. However, the court after reviewing the allegations and the evidence submitted regarding these allegations determined that this was not true. Justice Sattler found the mother to be less than honest in her testimony. She found there were inconsistencies in the mother’s testimony. Justice Sattler held the mother’s testimony created questions with regard to her ability to help develop a loving relationship between the children and the father. She concluded there was a change of circumstances since the entry of the judgment of divorce in 2011 by the court in Texas. She found this change of circumstance required she reevaluate what was in the children’s best interest.

Custody Modified

Justice Sattler determined a modification of the Texas custody order was warranted. She ruled the father was to receive sole legal and physical custody. In addition, she authorized him to relocate back to Texas because this was in the children’s best interests. Justice Sattler went on, in her decision, to state the father was more capable of providing the children with a stable and appropriate living environment. He was better suited to foster a relationship between the children and their mother.

Conclusion

custody for husbandsIn this case, the court found the father was the more stable parent and it was in the children’s best interests to live with the father in another state. The writer assumes the mother’s parental alienation of the children contributed to this judge’s decision to award the father sole legal and physical custody. The author of this article has been involved in dozens of cases where mothers have failed to promote the loving relationship between the father and the children. Alienating children against one parent damages the children. It is in children’s best interest to have two loving parents and not to be participants in a war of roses between the parents.

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Father Named Son’s Guardian

April 15, 2014 By

father's rights attorneySurrogate John Czygier Jr. sitting in Suffolk County recently had a case before him involving a developmentally disabled child. A father had brought a proceeding to be appointed the guardian of his son, Nicholas. The child’s mother took the position Nicholas didn’t need a guardian because he wasn’t developmentally disabled.

A Hearing Was Held

Surrogate Czygier held a hearing to determine whether Nicholas was a developmentally disabled individual who required a guardian be appointed. When it was established that Nicholas needed a guardian, the mother then took the position she should be named her son’s guardian. The mother made it clear, to the court, she intended to move to Florida whether or not she was appointed as Nicholas’s guardian. She also made it clear she was moving to Florida with or without her son.

Guardian Ad Litem for Child Favors Father

A guardian ad litem was appointed to represent Nicholas (a guardian ad litem is an attorney who is appointed to protect a child or incompetent). The guardian ad litem made a recommendation that the father was the more appropriate parent to be appointed by the court as the guardian for Nicholas.

The Judge’s Decision

Judge Czygier, in his decision, took into consideration the father had worked to enhance Nicholas’ life. The father also understood and maintained realistic concepts concerning his son’s disability. The court also took into consideration the fact that if Nicholas was relocated to Florida with the mother it would interfere with the father’s current relationship with his son. Judge Czygier stated in his decision although the mother had been the primary caretaker of Nicholas up until that point in time, he doubted her fitness to be Nicholas’ guardian. The court therefore determined the father was the more fit parent to be the child’s guardian. The judge’s decision stated the father was more likely to see to it that Nicholas was able to maintain a relationship with his mother. The father’s petition for guardianship was therefore granted by the court.

helping fathersElliot Schlissel has been protecting father’s rights concerning guardianship, custody, and child support issues for fathers throughout the Metropolitan New York area for more than 45 years.

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , ,

Father Receives Custody of Biological Child and Non-Biological Child

March 25, 2014 By

fathers rights lawyerThe Appellate Division of the Third Department, an appeals court, recently upheld a decision of a Family Court Judge granting a father custody of his biological child and a child he was not biologically related to.

The father and the mother were married. They lived together with two children. The father was the biological father of the younger child and not biologically related to the older child. The parties entered into a separation agreement. Pursuant to the agreement, the parties agreed to have joint legal custody of the children with physical custody of the children to the mother. The father had parenting time with the children.

The mother thereafter consented to a finding of neglect regarding both children. The court at that point ordered joint physical custody of the older, non-biological child be maintained between the parties. Each party was to have custody on alternate weekends. The mother still kept the physical custody of the younger child. The father only had visitation with the younger child.

Father Seeks to Modify Court Orders

The father brought proceedings seeking to modify the visitation arrangements with regard to both of the children. In these modification petitions to the Family Court, he asked for sole custody of both of the children. The Family Court initially entered an order granting him physical custody of both children and granting parenting time to the mother. Thereafter a petition was filed by the father alleging the mother had violated the temporary visitation order of the Family Court. Thereafter the Family Court granted residential custody of both children to the father and gave the mother liberal parenting time.

The mother had appealed the last order. The appeals court held there was a sound and substantial basis for the Family Court awarding custody of the children to the father. They took this position because the father was providing a more stable home and he had shown that he was capable of taking care of both of the children’s needs.

Conclusion

help fathers fight for custody It is possible for fathers to gain custody of both children they are biologically related to and children they are not biologically related to!

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Father’s Consent Needed For His Children To Be Adopted

March 7, 2014 By

Keith Jay was the biological father of twin boys. The Department of Social Services brought a proceeding against the boys’ mother. This proceeding sought to terminate the mother’s parental rights and allow the twin boys to be adopted.

Keith Jay intervened in the proceeding. He requested a court order stating that since he was the father his consent was required before his children could be adopted. The Department of Social Services took the position they were only required to provide notice to Keith concerning the adoption of his children because Keith had fallen behind in his child support payments to his children. Keith was able to show the court he had maintained regular contact with his sons. In response to the Department of Social Services contention that he had not paid his child support payments, he provided documentation to the court his tax refund was seized to pay for his child support obligations.

Seized Tax Refunds Satisfy Child Support Obligations

Judge Ellen Greenberg, sitting in a Family Court Part in Nassau County, held the tax refunds that were seized, which belonged to Keith, did satisfy his financial obligations to make child support payments for his children. Judge Greenberg took the position that she saw no distinction between involuntary payments of child support through a wage garnishment order or the seizing of tax refund checks and the voluntary payments of child support by a father. She therefore concluded even though Keith had never shown any interest in becoming the custodial parent of his children he is deemed to be the father of the children and his consent would be required before the children could be adopted.

custody assistance for fathersElliot Schlissel is a father’s rights lawyer representing fathers throughout the Metropolitan New York area with regard to child custody and child visitation proceedings.

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , ,
« Previous Page
Next Page »