Florida Divorce * Child Custody * Domestic Violence Law Lawyer | Boca Raton

California lesbian couple have Twins.

Both partners are listed on Twins’ birth certificates and Twins’ have both partners’ names in their hyphenated surnames.

Shortly after Twins’ births, couple breaks up.

Biological Mother (Bio Mom) then takes up with sperm donor-Biogical Father (Bio Dad).

Lesbian couple had made no formal legal arrangements between themselves or, for that matter, with Bio Dad regarding Twins.

Bio Mom’s former lesbian partner (Other Mom) files paternity suit to get visitation with Twins.

California trial court orders shared legal custody of Twins between Bio Mom and Other Mom on a temporary basis.

Bio Mom, Other Mom and Bio Dad settle case, continuing same terms on permanent basis. Bio Dad’s rights, if any, are not known.

Bio Mom reportedly settled the case to avoid costly and drawn out litigation.

Read more in this Santa Cruz [CA] Sentinel article: Former Santa Cruz lesbian partners settle paternity suit.

Nurse and Husband have a Baby.

Only Nurse alleges that she was raped … by Doctor … and his Son … and that Husband is not Baby’s father.

Nurse presses charges against Doctor and Son.

Doctor defends that he donated sperm so that Man could have a child via artificial insemination and a surrogate mother … Nurse.

Doctor is acquitted of rape charges, but there remains the question of: who is Baby’s legal father?

Is it:

1. Husband
2. Doctor
3. Son or
4. Man?

Indian Court orders DNA paternity test for Father and Son.

Meanwhile, Man presses charges against Nurse for keeping Baby and cheating him out of money.

Doctor seeks a stay of the paternity test, maintaining that the test could prove the child illegitimate and subject him to stigma.

Appellate court agrees and stays paternity testing.

Read more in this [India] Daily News and Analysis article: Can a baby have four fathers? SC stays paternity test.

Florida Mother and Father have eight year old Son.

Mother and Father break up.

Mother moves to Seattle.

Father and Son remain in Orlando.

Mother supposedly hears that Father and Son are homeless.

Mother allegedly asks friends in Orlando to “get” Son.

The two men reportedly “get” Son from a motel.

And are arrested for kidnapping Son, a felony.

Mother allegedly tells authorities how to find the kidnappers.

Son is found in good condition.

There reportedly is no evidence of Son’s malnourishment or deprivation.

Mother may also face criminal charges in this matter.

Read more in this Palm Beach Post news article: Police: Men arrested after they kidnapped Orlando child.

In Kansas, severe child abuse is on the decline, reportedly largely because of years of “evidence-based prevention strategies” supported by years of generous government funding.

Evidence-based prevention measures include:

1. home-visitation by social workers to families at high risk of abandonment, abuse or neglect of children
2. parent support and
3. education and information on early childhood development

Although these strategies are expensive, they are reportedly seven times less expensive than addressing the abandonment, abuse and neglect of children that would result from not funding these initiatives.

The federal government expends over $100 billion each year due to mistreatment of children.

Home visitation professionals work closely with families in distress to educate parents, assist parents in arranging medical care and direct them to community resources that can help them.

In some ways, these professionals are modern surrogates for longstanding family and friends from whom families may be distanced in our mobile society.

Read more in this Wichita [KS] Eagle article: Prevention effort saves kids, money.

Mother and Father divorce.

Father is awarded custody of Daughter.

Ninety percent of children abducted in California are the subject of a child custody dispute.

And so it was with eight year old Daughter, who went missing fourteen years ago.

Now twenty-two years old, Daughter has recently been found alive and well.

Mother has been arrested for kidnapping though.

This case stands out for its resolution so long after the abduction.

Only six percent of child abduction cases open more than six months are ever solved.

Mother and Daughter moved frequently throughout Daughter’s childhood after the abduction.

Daughter no longer lives with Mother.

Because Daughter is a legal adult, authorities will not provide Father with the name she goes by or her contact information.

Read more in this San Jose Mercury News article: Resurfacing of Walnut Creek girl highlights strains of parental abductions and this CBS Early Show news article: Girl Gone 14 Years Found Safe; Mom Charged.

Seemingly ordinary California family, if a bit large.

Six biological children.

Three children adopted from Africa.

Homeschooled.

Fundamentalist Christians.

The folks next door.

Until one of their children, 7 years old, dies of cardiac arrest.

And, it turns out, two of their other children have serious injuries and conditions, including kidney failure.

The dead girl mispronounced a word while reading her lesson aloud.

Parents are arrested on charges of murder, felony torture and misdemeanor cruelty to a child. In other words, child abuse.

Children are taken into protective custody by child welfare agency.

Parents have no prior arrests or child protective services investigations records.

Parents allegedly use a punishment device advocated by a well-known Christian fundamentalist couple holding themselves out as child-rearing experts.

Parents have retained separate counsel.

Read more in this Chico [CA] News Review article: Child-abuse case shines light on Paradise couple.

Parental alienation.

Much has been written and said of it.

Yet neither the American Medical Association nor the American Psychological Association have recognized it.

Many courts have acknowledged it, however.

And confused it, at least in some cases, with trying to protect a child from a physically and/or psychologically abusive parent.

Resulting in some children being ordered into unsupervised timesharing and, in some cases, majority timesharing, with an abusing parent … to punish the so-called alienating (that is, protecting) parent.

In California, a legislator has sponsored a bill that, if passed, would deny the use of parental alienation in California’s family courts.

Is it better to err in favor of protecting an allegedly alienated parent’s “rights” or in favor of protecting a child from abuse?

Ultimately, that may be the real question on which use of parental alienation in court should turn.

Read more in this Capitol Weekly article: Parental Alienation must be excluded from all custody hearings.

Ohio Father and Mother are divorced.

Mother has primary custody or timesharing with their three children.

Father sees the children every other weekend and once during most weeks, plus vacations and holidays. He talks and text messages with the kids daily.

Mother has remarried.

Mother’s new husband is being transferred roughly eighteen hundred miles away.

Mother intends to relocate the children with herself and her new husband.

Father objects.

Ohio attorneys suggest filing a motion to modify timesharing so that the children live primarily with Father, in Ohio.

It sounds as though Ohio courts are relatively liberal in permitting relocation, but the other parent can object under the right facts and circumstances.

The law governing relocation is an evolving area of the law in our mobile society and a volatile one.

Florida introduced its first statute governing relocation in 2006 and has already amended it significantly.

Read more in this Columbus [OH] Dispatch article: Court has final say in relocation of children.

Catholic Husband and Jewish Wife have three year old Daughter.

Husband and Wife are in the midst of a divorce.

Husband is currently a law student.

Court has awarded Wife temporary custody of Daughter.

Husband and Wife reportedly agree that Daughter will be raised in the Jewish faith.

Nonetheless, Husband has Daughter baptized … and doesn’t tell Wife about it until afterwards.

Upon Wife’s motion, Court then enters a temporary order enjoining or prohibiting Husband from schooling Daughter in any religion besides Judaism.

Then Husband takes Daughter to a Catholic mass … with TV reporters in tow.

Wife seeks to have Husband held in criminal contempt by the Court.

A new judge is assigned to the matter at the instance of Husband’s attorney.

The contempt hearing has yet to be set.

Read more in this UPI news article: Couple fight over 3-year-old’s religion.

French Husband and American Wife divorce in France, where Husband, Wife and Son have been living.

Husband and Wife enter agreement that Son will live with Husband in France.

Wife has timesharing with Son in US for last year’s Christmas holiday. Wife is expected to send Son back to France on January 3rd of this year.

But Wife keeps Son with her.

Husband files for Son’s return to France under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

In a Colorado trial court, Wife alleges that Husband perpetrated domestic violence against her in Son’s presence and that Son appears to be the victim of emotional abuse by Husband.

Wife also contends that Husband had her institutionalized in France to coerce her into divorce and into agreeing to give Husband custody of Son.

Husband does not deny these allegations. Husband’s position appears to be that they are irrelevant.

The trial court disagrees … and appoints a therapist to evaluate Son’s maturity and wishes.

Read more in this Pueblo [CO] Chieftain article: Pueblo woman embroiled in international custody case and this Pueblo [CO] Chieftain article: Mother: Coerced to give up son.

Mother and Father have three year old Daughter. Mother and Father divorce.

Mother is from Ecuador. Divorce judgment permits Mother to take Daughter to visit Ecuador, but only upon prior notice to Father.

Father goes to Mother’s house in Michigan to pick Daughter up. And finds house empty.

Then Mother reportedly calls Father to tell him that they are in Ecuador.

In a letter, Mother notes that she feels “alienated” since their divorce. Mother also alleges that Father abuses drugs and that Daughter suffered burns several times while with Father.

Father maintains that child protective services has already investigated and cleared him.

Mother hires Michigan attorney, who contends that Mother is trying to protect Daughter.

Mother faces charges of parental kidnapping.

Father maintains that Mother is unstable and should not have Daughter.

Ecudador is a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Father is seeking Daughter’s return under the Hague Convention.

Read more in this WZZM ABC 13 news article: Greenville dad says his daughter was taken to Ecuador illegally.

Maltese Mother and Scottish Father are divorced.

Mother has custody of their Daughter and they live in Malta.

Father lives in Scotland.

Last November, Mother and Daughter go to Scotland to visit relatives.

While they are there, Father requests a visitation day in Scotland. Mother agrees.

But Father refuses to return Daughter and accuses Mother of keeping Daughter in a dangerous and unsanitary environment.

Because of Father’s allegations, Scottish authorities detain Daughter in Scotland pending a hearing.

Daughter remains in Scotland for almost two months, attending a Scottish school, before any hearing.

In early January, the Scottish court finds that Husband has no rightful claim to custody of Daughter and rules that Daughter should be returned to Malta under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Read more in this Times of Malta article: Girl returned to mother after ‘nightmare’.

Mother and Father divorce. Mother and Father have three Boys together.

Mother and Fiance move in together with the Boys, Fiance’s child and a child of Mother’s from a previous relationship.

Mother and Fiance have two more children together. And become engaged.

This growing blended family reportedly works very well.

Then Father gets a new job out of state.

He informs Mother that he will be taking the Boys with him.

Mother obtains a court order awarding her sole custody of the Boys and providing for them to remain in their home state with Mother.

This Father cannot accept.

Father takes the Boys for visitation at his parents’ house.

Mother calls Father to tell him that she wants the Boys returned.

Father drives over to Mother’s and Fiance’s home.

Father then allegedly reveals a gun and shoots Mother to death … in front of the other children.

Father is arrested for Mother’s murder.

And this blended family is torn apart.

The Boys presently live with Father’s parents. Fiance tries to visit them every other weekend.

Mother’s child from a previous relationship is with some relatives of hers.

Mother’s and Fiance’s children are with Fiance, undoubtedly missing their Mother and siblings.

Read more in this San Jose Mercury News column: Herhold: A lethal child custody battle.

Twelve year old Girl is in child protective custody.

Girl is placed in foster care with Man.

Reportedly, Man is a pimp who has been profiting from Girl’s prostitution at the time the Maryland Child Welfare Agency (Agency) and Girl’s aunt allegedly approve him as Girl’s guardian.

Now Man pleads guilty to this offense with Girl … and three other girls. He could be sentenced to as long as 20 years’ incarceration.

Man has extensive arrest record over twenty year’s long, but no prior convictions.

Agency is supposed to run a background check on any prospective guardian / foster parent, but typical background checks only pick up convictions.

Read more in this Washington DC Examiner article: Court records: P.G. social services approved pimp as foster father.

Mother and Father break up.

Their Son is 5 years old.

Court awards custody of Son to Father.

Mother alleges that Father sexually molested Son.

Child welfare investigators find no evidence to support those allegations and recommend that Father be awarded custody of Son.

Mother abducts Son.

And allegedly hides him in a hole in the wall – quite literally – at the house of her mother (Grandmother).

For two years.

Police say Son reacted to his release as though he had rarely if ever been outside of his hole in the wall, a small hidden crawlspace built into a wall in his grandmother’s house.

Mother is now charged with felony child abduction.

Grandmother is now charged with aiding and abetting.

A man who also lived in the Grandmother’s house is under arrest as well.

Son is now living with relatives pending further investigation of Father and evaluation of Son by child welfare workers.

Father maintains his innocence.

Read more in this ABC News article: Father Rejoices After Police Find Missing Son Alive, Hidden at Grandmother’s Home and this WSIL ABC TV 3 news article: UPDATE: Another Suspect Arrested in Kidnapping Case.

Boyfriend lives in New York.

Girlfriend lives in New Hampshire.

Boyfriend and Girlfriend “meet” on the internet.

Couple has two Daughters.

Relationship sours.

Custody battle in New Hampshire begins.

Girlfriend accuses Boyfriend of sexually abusing Daughters and of “mental delusions”.

Boyfriend accuses Girlfriend of sexually abusing Daughters and of “mental delusions”.

Neither police nor child protection agencies in either of their states have taken any action against Boyfriend (or, apparently, Girlfriend).

Boyfriend [erroneously] contends that this proves that Girfriend abused him with false accusations … alienating their Daughters from him and manipulating the legal system.

Court concludes that couple cannot “co-parent”.

Therefore, court awards Girlfriend primary custody and majority timesharing.

Court also awards Boyfriend “liberal” visitation.

Seeking primary custody himself, Boyfriend files appeal … and learns that New Hampshire law denies unmarried parents in child custody cases, among other folks in family cases, an automatic right of appeal.

So, Boyfriend seeks a discretionary appeal. And loses.

Now, regrouping, Boyfriend asks the trial court to reconsider its ruling, a little late in the game. He is now asserting that different appellate rules based on marital status of parents is discriminatory and, therefore, unconstitutional.

Whatever else, New Hampshire’s unusual appellate rules do at least have the virtue of trimming the appellate dockets considerably.

Read more in this Concord [NH] Monitor article: Unmarried couple’s custody case hits snag – No automatic appeal in fight.

The goal of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is to facilitate return of internationally abducted children to their home states within a brief six weeks.

Unfortunately, this is a far cry from the reality.

According to an article written from the British perspective, one-third of children abducted from the UK to other countries which have signed the Hague Convention are not returned within a year. Several countries typically require well over a year, or even a couple of years, for cases to run the course of their legal system.

Some countries which are parties to the Hague Convention reportedly never return children. Others rarely do so.

According to the article, Hague Convention signatory countries least likely to return children to the UK (and, presumably, anywhere else) are:

• Croatia

• Ecuador

• Honduras

• Mauritius

• Peru

• Serbia

• Sweden

• Zimbabwe

According to the article, even the US refused to return one-third of abducted children.

Of course, some cases of non-return by Hague Convention signatories may be the result of good faith differences in findings of fact or good faith differences in the application of the law of the Convention (particularly the exceptions) to the facts of the cases.

But, if this is the track record of the countries that agreed to the Hague Convention, the even poorer track records of non-party countries shouldn’t be surprising.

Read more in this [UK] Guardian article: Third of abducted children not returned home after a year.

Mother and Father are divorced.

Child welfare agencies in two states are familiar with the family.

Mother is initially awarded custody of their three Children.

Later, Mother loses custody of Children and Father is awarded custody of Children.

Mother is allowed visitation supervised by child welfare personnel at the child welfare agency’s facilities.

Father has other children from other relationships. Father’s visitation with them is reportedly restricted and he was allegedly arrested for injuring one of his other children previously.

While Children are in Father’s care, Father allegedly gets drunk while “playing” with a gun … on Christmas Eve.

All three Children are present at this time, including one-year old Baby.

Father’s gun goes off, shooting one of the Children in the head and killing her.

One of the other Children dials 911, not Father.

Father is arrested for manslaughter, endangering a child and tampering with evidence … and released on bail.

Mother’s counsel seeks to have the surviving Children placed into Mother’s care. Father’s counsel seeks to have the surviving Children placed into Father’s care.

Instead, the Court orders that Father have no contact with the two surviving Children for the time being, that Mother continue to be restricted to supervised visitation, and that neither parent have access to Children’s school.

Children are in foster care.

Read more in this Denton [TX] news article: Father accused in girl’s shooting can’t see children.

Brazil is a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Yet it took nearly six years and massive political and legal effort to secure the return to this country from Brazil of a little American boy abducted by his mother … who died over a year ago.

That boy reportedly was far from the only American (or other non-Brazilian) child abducted to Brazil.

On the other hand, India is not a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Yet, in a recent case there, the Indian Supreme Court ruled that an Indian Wife who had been permanently residing in the UK with her Husband and their child, must return to the UK with their child for custody proceedings there.

Ultimately, the adverse impact of Brazil’s conduct on future trade with the US may have propelled Brazil to finally send the boy home.

Now, a Congressman from that boy’s home state, New Jersey, has introduced legislation intended to promote enforcement of the Hague Convention by appointing an official to monitor compliance and to empower the government to impose sanctions for noncompliance.

An international network of judges is also communicating in the hope of facilitating timely returns of abducted children.

Read more in this [India] Daily News and Analysis article: SC asks NRI woman to fight child custody battle in England and this Baltimore Sun article: Justice for stolen kids and this [New Jersey] Hub article: Legislators call for bill on international child abduction.

Husband and Wife are divorcing, and each is vying for custody of their Sons.

Sons go to counseling with Counselor, a therapist.

Counselor and her husband (Corroborator), also a therapist, have offices in the same practice and suite.

Counselor testified in the custody trial that Husband yelled at Counselor in rage.

Corroborator also testified in the custody trial, backing up Counselor’s testimony.

It turns out that Husband secretly recorded his conversation with Counselor.

No yelling on the recording.

As a result, Counselor and Corroborator stand trial for perjury.

The family court judge presiding over the custody trial testified against Counselor and Corroborator at their criminal trial!

Yet Corroborator’s patient, presumably a neutral, disinterested third party witness, also testified that Husband was loud in Counselor’s office.

It is unclear whether the recording could have been incomplete or, as Corroborator contends, not legitimate at all.

Jury is hung and mistrial is declared because jury cannot reach a unanimous verdict.

Technically, the state can try Counselor and Corroborator again, but the likelihood is diminished.

Read more in this Lufkin [Texas] Daily News article: Counselor takes stand to defend self in perjury trial and this Lufkin [Texas] Daily News article: Judge declares mistrial in perjury case.

California Husband and Wife have two year old and four year old Daughters.

Wife, an attorney, accuses Husband of molesting their older Daughter.

Husband denies the allegation.

Wife files for divorce.

California authorities do not pursue a criminal case against Husband.

Wife and Daughters and maternal Grandmother move from Southern California to Texas.

Wife again seeks prosecution of Husband for the alleged molestation of Daughters.

Husband’s attorney indicates that no experts back up Wife’s allegations against Husband. (Which, if true, is not conclusive.)

California trial court orders Mother to bring Daughters back to California – and indicates that the court plans to award temporary custody of Daughters to Husband’s Sister.

Rather than relinquishing Daughters to Husband’s family and placing them at risk of contact with Husband, either Mother or Grandmother shoots Daughters to death and then shoots the other adult before turning the gun on herself. All are killed.

Although both women have gunshot powder residue on their hands, the weapon is registered to Grandmother and investigators conclude that Grandmother was probably the shooter.

Read more in this Los Angeles KABC-TV 7 news article: Custody dispute suspected in Clemente murders and this Wall Street Journal posting: Investigators: Grandmother Pulled Trigger in Howrey Associate Slaying.

Few international parental child abductions have received as much media attention as this Boy’s abduction to Brazil by his Mother, but that didn’t help much.

His Father has been fighting to get him back home since 2004.

Even after Mother died in Brazil last year, the Brazilian courts still dragged their heels in returning Boy to his Father in the US – despite Brazil being a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Numerous politicians and celebrities have spoken out in support of Father and reached out to their counterparts and contacts in Brazil in the hopes of freeing the Boy.

But none of that helped either.

The President of this country finally called the President of Brazil … but it isn’t clear that that helped much either.

No, what reportedly finally did the trick was Congress holding up a trade deal worth almost $3 billion to Brazil.

And thanks to their astuteness, Father and Son are finally reunited and their flight touched down here in Florida a short time ago.

Read more in this Associated Press article: Boy, American dad arrive in US from Brazil.

Mexican Mother is awarded custody of Son by a Mexican court.

Wealthy French Father, accompanied by counsel, takes papers that look like official Mexican court papers before a Texas judge, representing that he has legal custody of Son.

The Mexican court papers were reportedly incomplete and misleading.

Apparently, neither Father’s counsel nor the court verified them.

Texas judge enters pick-up order for Son, with a hearing date scheduled for shortly afterwards.

Law enforcement officers pick up Son, who protests vigorously the entire time, to the effect that Father beats him.

Officers ignore Son’s words.

Mother tries to get Son back at airport.

Son refuses to accompany her – out of fear that Father will kill Mother.

Father absconds with Son.

Not for the first time, according to Mother.

Father and Son miss scheduled court date.

Texas court issues warrant for Father’s arrest on perjury and custodial interference.

That was two months ago.

Father allegedly abducted Son to France for two years, reportedly beating him and leaving him unsupervised and denying any contact at all with Mother.

Read more in this Fox News article: Worldwide Manhunt Under Way for Fugitive Father, Missing Son and this San Antonio Express News article: Dad accused of perjury, kidnapping.

Years after the capability came into being, having a child through a surrogate mother who carries the baby to term is still fraught with legal perils.

And the circumstances surrounding each baby are different.

Sometimes the surrogate mother is “merely” the carrier or vessel for a couple’s own biological child. (Mother can’t physically carry the child.)

Sometimes the surrogate mother is the carrier for the biological child of one member of the couple and a third party. (One of the couple is infertile.)

Sometimes the surrogate mother is the carrier for the biological child of neither member of the couple. (Both of the couple are infertile or gay parents.)

And the applicable law of a particular state may view each of these scenarios differently.

A surrogacy arrangement may involve the following players:

1. intended legal parent
2. intended legal co-parent
3. egg donor
4. sperm donor
5. fertility clinic
6. surrogate mother

That’s a lot of folks to coordinate and work with.

The most common legal breakdown in the process is that the surrogate mother decides she wants to keep “her” child, for any reason or for no reason.

All told, there are about seven hundred fifty babies born this way each year. That’s about half the number that couples try to arrange.

This “cottage industry” is something of a free-for-all, at least unless and until a court becomes involved.

For the most part, fertility doctors call all the shots.

Some states require the intended parents to go through a home study and legal adoption of the baby. Some also require some type of psychological screening of the intended legal parents.

Some other states are satisfied by the surrogacy contracts alone.

Still other states don’t recognize or enforce surrogacy contracts at all.

Some only recognize surrogacy where at least one intended legal parent is biologically related to the baby.

The incredible upshot is that, at times, babies who have two sets of “parents” who want them end up in foster care while the courts try to sort things out.

A model act has been proposed by the American Bar Association to address the issues in a consistent way.

Read more in this New York Times article: 21st-Century Babies – Building a Baby, With Few Ground Rules.

Florida reportedly has the distinction of having enacted this country’s strictest state prohibition on adoption by gay prospective parents.

But gay people are permitted to serve as foster parents (and collect state funds for same).

Even for years.

One gay foster father (Foster Dad) took in a baby boy and his four year old brother (Boys) five years ago.

It is undisputed that both Boys have thrived in Foster Dad’s care. Even the Department of Children and Families concedes that Foster Dad is a great parent.

Foster Dad wants to adopt the Boys.

But he was blocked by Florida’s ban on gay adoption.

So Foster Dad challenged the ban in court – and won at trial. Because there is no evidence of inferior parenting by gay parents and because the statute denies children in foster care permanency.

Now, the case is crawling its way up the state’s appeals ladder.

And all the while the Boys are denied permanency…

Read more in this Palm Beach Post blog editorial: Lose his case, lose his kids? and this National Public Radio article: Florida Judge Rules Against Gay Adoption Ban.

Many states offer or even require divorcing or separating parents to take a parenting class. Florida is one of those states, mandating a four hour class on co-parenting after separation.

Now, researchers at the University of Missouri’s Human Development and Family Studies program have developed an online program, called Focus on Kids Online, to comply with Missouri’s legal requirement. (Florida’s four hour class is also available online.)

Parents who have completed the Missouri program actually self-report better relationships and heightened awareness of problems – and solutions for those problems.

That is what may truly distinguish the University of Missouri program from its counterparts in Florida and other states.

Enthusiastic about the response, the University plans to offer the online program to other states in the future.

One suggestion in the program is that parents provide consistent routines and chores in each parent’s home. A great concept, but difficult to implement in practice.

Read more in this Science Daily article: Digital Solutions Developed to Support Divorced Families.

So many separating fathers have the preconceived notion that it is impossible for them to have majority timesharing with (or physical custody of) their children.

But they couldn’t be more wrong.

More and more separated and divorced dads want, and can and do get to have their children with them most of the time.

According to a recent article, fully fifty (50%) percent of fathers who seek equal or majority timesharing with (physical custody of) their children receive it.

Due to a combination of the recession and social change, the American family has changed … and family courts have adapted to it.

More and more mothers are the primary breadwinners in their families and more and more fathers are the primary caregivers for their children prior to separation.

Applying the same logic that traditionally resulted in awards of custody (primary timesharing) to stay-at-home mothers now results in awards of equal or majority timesharing (physical custody) to fathers … even when the mothers work only because the fathers don’t.

As a result, more than two million mothers do not have majority timesharing with (physical custody of) their children.

Read more in this New York Times piece: More Fathers Are Getting Custody in Divorce and this Working Mother article: Family Focus – Custody Lost.

According to a recent study apparently conducted in the UK, one third of children whose parents divorce become estranged from the parent that they do not live with primarily.

The study attributes this to very bitter, hostile divorces taking place under a statutory framework apparently emphasizing blame and competition.

The study reports that the goal of twenty percent of divorcing parents is to make their spouse as miserable as possible – without regard to the impact of their behavior on their children.

Fully half of the studied parents opted to litigate timesharing arrangements “despite knowing it made matters worse for their children”.

As a result of such attitudes and conduct, according to twenty-five percent of the parents participating in the study, their children were so disturbed by their parents’ divorces that the children became self-destructive or even suicidal.

A leading UK law firm thinks the current statutory scheme in the UK needs to change and proposes out-of-court “conflict clinics” for resolving parenting disputes, rather than litigation.

The study was conducted on behalf of that UK law firm.

The study was based on interviews of only two thousand divorced parents and two thousand children of divorce.

The intent behind the study was to “review” the impact of a twenty year old UK statute applicable to child-related issues in divorce.

The study’s conclusions are quite disturbing, but it is not entirely clear whether the study conformed to scientifically sound methodology, including using a statistically significant and random sampling of subjects and ensuring freedom from bias.

It is also unclear whether the study holds any relevance for US statutory schemes regarding parental responsibility and timesharing, and the application of those statutes by judges to families appearing before them.

Read more in this UK Times article: Third of children lose touch with parents after divorce and this UK Daily Mirror article: Divorce kids lose fathers.

Allegedly abusive American Husband goes to China in 2007 to teach English, leaving behind in New York his undocumented Mexican immigrant Wife and their Baby.

Later, Husband contacts Wife and invites her and two year old Baby to China to reconcile.

Within a day of Wife’s and Baby’s arrival, Husband reportedly disappears with Baby. Husband takes up with Chinese Girlfriend.

Husband leaves Baby with a babysitter and fails to pick her up. Baby ends up in a Chinese orphanage. After Husband allegedly abducts her.

Wife and Mexican Embassy official show up where Husband is staying. Husband goes after them both with knives, but is not prosecuted in China.

Wife obtains a New York State court order, awarding her sole custody of Baby.

China is not a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and does not recognize foreign child custody orders.

Wife obtains a US visa by virtue of being a victim of domestic violence. Husband is deported from China.

Warrant is issued in US and Husband is arrested by US federal authorities for international parental kidnapping.

A combination of US nonprofit agency attorneys, private attorneys, Chinese private investigators, the Mexican consulate in China, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the US State Department, and Wife’s resourcefulness, initiative and determination culminated in Wife finding Baby, abandoned in the Chinese orphanage.

Read more in this New York Times article: Family Fights Odds, Retrieving Kidnapped Girl.

Mother gives Daughter up for adoption upon Daughter’s birth.

Daughter has been in the custody of state child welfare agency for all of her two years.

Father seeks custody of Daughter. Father is an American Indian.

Father seeks to invoke the Federal Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), which applies to children of American Indian heritage.

In the first trial over custody of Daughter, Father’s tribe sends a representative to testify in state family court that Daughter is not formally enrolled as a member of their American Indian tribe – and is no longer eligible for membership. The tribal representative represents that ICWA is not applicable to Daughter.

Father disagrees. Court orders a new child custody trial so that Father may have an expert testify otherwise.

For the new trial, Father subpoenas the chief and other leaders (the real decision-makers) of his tribe, to testify that Daughter is eligible for enrollment in the tribe.

The tribal leadership then asserts sovereign immunity in federal court to challenge Father’s subpoenas, arguing that enrollment decisions are internal matters of Indian affairs about which tribe officials should not be compelled to testify.

Father responds that the tribe waived that argument by previously furnishing a representative to testify on the very same subject in the state’s family court at the first trial.

Read more in this UPI article: Tribal sovereignty issue in custody case and this Providence [RI] Journal article: Narragansett Indian Tribe tries to block subpoena of tribal leader.