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 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 Granted Physical and Legal Custody of Daughter

February 21, 2014 By

father's rights attorneyJudge Michelle Schauer sitting in the Family Court in Westchester County recently dealt with a difficult custody case. The father and mother of the child, Madison, were not married. Both of them had submitted applications to the court for sole legal and physical custody of their daughter. A custody agreement was worked out. The agreement had a parenting plan in it. Shortly after the agreement was executed, the father brought a proceeding in the Family Court of Westchester County before Judge Schauer claiming the mother had violated the terms of the parenting plan contained in the custody settlement agreement.

Mother’s Behavior Concerning Child Questioned by Court

Father alleged that the child’s day care provider had raised serious concerns about the mother’s behavior at the time her diaper was being changed. An investigation was undertaken by the Administration for Children’s Services. The investigation determined that the allegations regarding sexual abuse of the child were unfounded. In spite of this determination, Judge Michelle Schauer granted the father temporary custody. The mother had argued that there was no change in circumstances involving the child, Madison, that would suggest that a temporary change in custody was needed. However, during the course of the proceedings, the mother’s older daughter revealed to a teacher that she had been molested. An issue was presented to the court that because of her being molested she might become a perpetrator who would sexually molest Madison. The court felt the mother had exhibited a complete inability to recognize and deal with her older daughter’s serious emotional problems. The judge stated in her decision this was a significant factor in making a determination it was in Madison’s best interests to give custody to the father. The court specifically found the father was the more fit parent. He was granted sole legal and physical custody of Madison. The mother was granted visitation with the child.

custody help for fathers

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

Mother Loses Custody: She Interfered with Father’s Visitation

December 4, 2013 By

father's rights lawyersIn a recent decision, the Appellate Division of the Third Department (an upstate Appeals Court) found a mother who “clearly attempted to thwart and frustrate the father’s visitation” lost custody of her child. This case involves a mother who is a graduate of Cornell Law School, and a father who is an assistant professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at Cornell University.

The mother and father were married for a brief period of time and had a child. A decision was initially made by the trial court judge giving the father custody because the mother had violated a joint custody separation agreement that had been incorporated into a Judgment of Divorce. This agreement had given the mother physical custody of the child and the father parenting time (visitation with the child). The agreement specifically prohibited either the mother or the father from relocating without the consent of the other party or the court.

Mother Relocates

Shortly after entering into the joint custody separation agreement, the mother accepted a job in New Jersey. She relocated with her son over the father’s objections. After a court hearing, the Supreme Court Judge awarded sole custody of the parties’ son, Ethan, to the father.

The court in its decision stressed a party seeking to relocate has the burden of showing the relocation is in the child’s best interest. The mother claimed she took the only job she had been offered. This had forced her to relocate. The Court in its decision stated, “the record amply supports the conclusion that the mother was not entirely willing to include the father in decisions regarding the child.” The mother had acted hostile to the father when the parties exchanged the child.

Conclusion

Relocating a child is not as simple as most parents believe it is. The court will take into consideration the impact the relocation of a child will have on the parenting time (visitation with the child) of the other parent. When moving, the residential custodial parent should obtain consent of the other parent or bring an application to the Family Court or the Supreme Court and obtain a Court Order authorizing the relocation.

helping fathers with custody issuesElliot S. Schlissel is a father’s rights attorney representing fathers in child custody cases, regarding visitation problems and parenting time issues throughout the metropolitan New York area.

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

Joint Custody Does Not Relieve Both Parents From Paying Child Support

November 15, 2013 By

father's rights lawyerWhere the parents have joint or shared custody, involving each of the parents having equal time with the children, both parents are not relieved of their obligation to pay child support. Most parenting plans designate one parent as the primary residential custodial parent. This is necessary especially in Nassau and Suffolk Counties on Long Island. School districts will look to parenting plans and divorce settlement agreements to establish the primary residential location of the child. The reason for this is that school district want to know who will be responsible for providing schooling for the child or children.

Parent With Greater Income Pays Child Support

In the case of Bast v. Rostoff, the New York State Court of Appeals in 1998, dealt with the issue of an equally shared custody arrangement and obligations to pay child support. In this case both parents requested the court to have the other parent pay them child support. The Court of Appeals (the highest Court in New York State) ruled in shared custody situations, the parent with the greater earned income is by the very nature of earning more money than the other parent deemed to be the non-custodial parent for child support purposes. This causes the parent with the greater income to pay child support payments to the parent with the lesser income. This is an example of the expression “no good deed goes unpunished.” Work hard, get educated, get a good job, earn more money than your spouse, and even if you have 50% of the visitation you still have to pay child support!

custody and child support advocates for fathersThe father’s rights lawyers at the Law Office of Elliot S. Schlissel, represent fathers throughout the metropolitan New York area with regard to issues involving child support, custody and divorce.

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

Custody Changed Where Mother Alienated Children Against Father

November 4, 2013 By

father's rights lawyerReferee Dean Richardson-Mendelson, sitting in the Family Court of Rockland County, recently had a very disturbing case presented to him involving parental alienation of three children by a mother against their father. In this case, the father sought to modify a previously entered Judgment of Divorce. The settlement in the divorce case had granted both the mother and the father joint legal custody of the parties’ three children. The father now sought sole legal custody and sole physical custody of all three children due to the mother’s relentless program of parental alienation of the three children against the father.

Father’s Parenting Time in the Judgment of Divorce

In the original Judgment of Divorce the father was granted parenting time on alternating weekends. In addition he had two dinner visits with the children during the week. Pursuant to the Judgment of Divorce the father had parenting time on alternating holidays in addition to the standard weekly visitation.

Court Grants Sole Legal Custody and Physical Custody to Father

Referee Dean Richardson-Mendelson found the mother had systematically over a period of time, engaged in parental alienation of the children. Her actions were of such a nature to prevent the father from having a relationship with his children. Referee Richardson-Mendelson found the mother’s actions were systematic and designed to sabotage the father’s relationship with his children.

The Court noted in its decision the children maintained a negative view of the father that was not related to the actual reality of the parental situation between the father and the children. He further found the distortion in the relationship between the children and the father was caused by the mother’s relentless campaign of negatively influencing the children against the father. The court ordered a change in custody of two of the three children. Unfortunately, the court found that the third child was so indoctrinated by the mother to hate her father, he was concerned that she would run away.

parental alienation assistanceElliot S. Schlissel is a father’s rights lawyer representing fathers throughout the metropolitan New York area for more than 45 years with regard to custody, visitation and divorce related issues.

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

Visitation Problems

October 31, 2013 By

father's rights lawyerVisitation problems with children usually involves one parent interfering with the parenting rights of the other. Parenting plans are usually established in divorce judgments, settlements in divorce cases, settlements in Family Court, judicial rulings on custody and visitation issues. Usually one parent is the residential custodial parent, meaning the child lives with this parent and the other parent has visitation (parenting time) with the child or children. So what do you do if one parent does not comply with the terms of the court order or parenting agreement? In the short run it is important to document the interference with visitation rights. A written diary should be maintained documenting each and every instance of one parent interfering with the other parent’s access or parenting time with the children.

Sometimes a mediator can be utilized to try to work out parenting time issues. If the parenting rights issue cannot be amicably resolved, it is strongly suggested you retain an attorney experienced in handling custody, visitation, and parenting rights issues. There are specific standards utilized by the courts in cases involving changing custody. Courts generally look for a change in circumstances before they will issue an order changing the residential custodial parent.

Reason for Change in Visitation Schedules

Life is not stagnant. Parents may seek to relocate. Employment of one or both of the parents may change, and with this change there may be a different work schedule that does not work well with the prior visitation order or visitation agreement. If visitation (parenting time) arrangements need to be changed and the parties cannot amicably work this out between them, a petition must be submitted to the Family Court or if the parties had been divorced, an application can be brought to the Supreme Court to modify the terms of the divorce related to the visitation/parenting time schedules.

Courts will utilize the standard of what is in the children’s best interest when dealing with custody and visitation issues. Protecting the children and allowing the children to reach their maximum potential and live a happy life is more important than the sometimes ping pong ball type of pulling back and forth between parents regarding visitation issues. If one of the parents does not live up to his or her responsibilities under Court Orders or visitation agreements this should be brought up to the judge handling the case and may be a ground for a change in custody.

How Much Visitation is Appropriate

It is in the child’s best interest to have two dedicated loving parents. Courts are moving towards giving the parent the child doesn’t live with as much visitation as is practical. Children that have two parents who want to spend time with them are blessed. The children should be allowed to grow and prosper as individuals within the love and understanding of both parents.help for caring fathers

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