Once a court order is issued by a court of competent jurisdiction concerning the issue of custody, the parties to the proceeding are required to comply with all of the provisions of this order. This is true even if compliance with the court order is inconvenient for one of the parties. Custody orders determine who shall have parenting time with the child during the course of a year. There can be problems with schedules concerning court ordered visitation. If the parties are not able to amicably work out changes in the scheduling of the visitation they have to comply with the court order.

Failing to Comply With Court Ordered Visitation

When a parent fails to comply with a court order concerning visitation and parenting time with the child, the other parent whose rights have been impacted can take legal action to hold the other parent in contempt, have that parent sanctioned, and/or have custody changed. In those situations, the court can ask the parent who violated the prior order to pay the other parent’s legal fees.

Custody orders usually take into consideration the child’s relationship with each of the parents and the non-residential custodial parent’s rights to have parenting time with the child.

Relocation and the Impact on the Non-Residential Custodial Parent

In situations where the residential custodial parent seeks to relocate the court will take into consideration how the relocation of the child will impact on the other parent’s ability to visit with the child and maintain a relationship with the child. There is an appeals case in the State of New York called Stetson v. Feringa which provides an important example of how courts in New York look upon requests for relocation.

In this case, the parents had joint custody of their son. The son resided with the mother and the father had visitation. The father had brain surgery prior to the child’s birth. He suffered from various impairments as a result of the brain surgery. The mother had been facilitating the visits with the father and providing transportation to and from the visits.

Mother Refuses To Provide Transportation For Child’s Visits With Father

The mother met a fellow online and decided to marry him. Unfortunately she lived in New York and he lived in Oklahoma. For purposes of the marriage he temporarily moved to New York. After the marriage, the mother refused to provide transportation for the visits of the boy and his father. Due to the lack of transportation the father had no visitation with his son for about six months. Thereafter the mother brought a proceeding to modify the prior custody order. She also sought to move with the son to Oklahoma. The Family Court found the mother’s request was without merit and dismissed the proceeding. She appealed the ruling.

The Appeals Court

The appeals court rendered a decision that the purpose of the mother moving to Oklahoma was her remarriage. The court found this was not a sufficient reason to uproot the boy. They found it was not in the child’s best interests to move to Oklahoma, but in the mother’s best interests. The mother claimed she would have enhanced financial capabilities in Oklahoma, but the court found these were not significant enough to overcome the fact that it was not in her child’s best interest to move from the locale of the father.

Out of Court Resolution

If you are having difficulty concerning visitation and parenting issues with the other parent of your child, the best way to deal with this is through an out of court negotiated resolution. If you cannot speak to him or her, you can hire an attorney to deal with this issue.

Elliot S. Schlissel is a father’s rights lawyer who represents clients concerning custody, child relocation, divorce, child support and other family related issues. He has been helping his clients for almost 45 years regarding these matters.