Florida Divorce * Child Custody * Domestic Violence Law Lawyer | Boynton Beach

Husband and Wife want to have a baby.

They resort to in vitro fertilization and freeze some of the embryos created for possible future use.

Husband’s and Wife’s marriage breaks down.

They are divorcing.

What happens to their frozen embryos?

Or, more precisely, which spouse gets to decide what happens to their frozen embryos?

To some extent, that depends on which state the couple live in. The case law, to the extent that there is state case law, goes every which way.

Prudence may suggest coming to an agreement on this issue before going down that road.

That may be done as part of a broader prenuptial agreement or postnuptial agreement.

Or it may be incorporated into an agreement with the in vitro fertility center.

The perfect solution? In theory, yes, but, in practice, maybe not so much, at least, depending upon where the interested parties live.

Because at least two states, New Jersey and Massachusetts, have reportedly cast such agreements aside in the face of one parent’s subsequent change of heart to no longer wanting to become a parent to a new baby.

Florida, on the other hand, not only recognizes agreements regarding frozen embryos but actually mandates that such agreements be made in advance (although this is not divorce-specific law but more a requirement of reproductive rights law).

It is worth noting, however, that, in the absence of such an agreement, Florida law explicitly recognizes the legal rights of both spouses over the embryos. A very good reason to make an agreement in advance and greatly reduce, if not eliminate, the uncertainty in the event of a later divorce.

But if the couple neglects to enter an agreement (or, presumably, if the agreement is ambiguous), it remains anyone’s guess what a court will decide to do with a couple’s frozen embryos.

Read more in this Wall Street Journal piece: In Divorce, Who Gets the Embryos?

Florida Husband and Wife are divorcing. Not amicably.

They have one Son, who is three years old. They are reportedly battling over custody and timesharing.

Husband arrives at Grandmother’s house to pick up Son for his visitation.

As Husband approaches Grandmother, Grandmother allegedly reveals a handgun and discharges three bullets into Husband.

Husband flees.

Grandmother calls the police … and reports that Husband drew a pistol and threatened her with it.

Grandmother files for a domestic violence restraining order of protection against Husband.

Husband later calls the police as well. But Husband’s account departs from Grandmother’s.

However there are two variations from the all too common “he said, she said” in divorce and domestic violence cases. First, the she is Husband’s mother-in-law, rather than his wife.

Second and more significantly, Husband captures the entire incident on an audio recorded by his cell phone’s video camera.

Grandmother is arrested for attempted murder and detained.

Read more in

1. this Fort Lauderdale Sun Sentinel article: Cheryl Hepner accused of shooting in-law Salvatore Miglino, of Boca Raton, sheriff’s office says

2. this Fort Lauderdale Sun Sentinel article: iPhone captures shooting in Tamarac, authorities say and

3. this Good Morning America ABC TV news article: Woman, 66, Shoots Estranged Son-in-Law Over Custody Dispute, Florida Police Say

New York Husband and Wife have seven Children together.

One of their Children reportedly arrives at school with one eye bloodshot.

This apparently precipitates a report of alleged child abuse to New York’s child welfare agency.

Children are removed from Husband and Wife’s home and taken into child protective custody.

And placed in foster care, reportedly in three separate foster homes. Nearly three years ago.

Along the way, an eighth child of Husband and Wife is born. She joins her siblings in foster care.

Husband and Wife claim to have complied with the Family Court’s juvenile dependency case plan with the expectation of being reunited with Children.

They maintain that they are good parents who provided a loving home. They are critical of the care provided by New York’s child welfare agency, citing the agency’s unnecessary medication of one Child for hyperactivity, inadequate security, Children’s complaints of insufficient food and appearance of bruises and cuts on Children.

But Husband and Wife assert that they got wind that their parental rights were going to be terminated and Children were going to be adopted.

Wife has a supervised visitation with Children at a foster care and supervised visitation facility.

Children walk out of the facility with Wife.

And Husband and Wife allegedly go on the run with Children.

For seven days. Until they are caught by law enforcement.

And Husband collapses and is hospitalized for several days.

Children are in good condition. Husband and Wife are arrested on charges of kidnapping Children.

Husband and Wife later plead guilty to interference with custody.

They serve sixty days of confinement and are also sentenced to three years of probation.

Children remain in foster care. Husband and Wife are barred from any contact with Children.

A hearing on visitation for Husband and Wife is forthcoming.

Read more in

• this NBC TV New York news article: Parents Who Abducted 8 Kids Speak of Life on the Run

• this UK Mail news article: The EIGHT children abducted by their parents from foster care are found safe and ‘in good condition’ by NYPD

• this New York Times article: Recalling Days on the Run With Abducted Children

Mother has eight year old Son, who is an honor student actively engaged in his school community.

Son is overweight. Extremely.

Just under 220 pounds. Sixty of them gained in one year.

At least one doctor has characterized Son’s weight gain as “life threatening”.

Doctors have ruled out a medical reason for Son’s weight gain, concluding that it is “environmental”.

Ohio child welfare agency (Agency) intervenes due to Son’s sleep apnea.

Son is deemed to be at high risk of developing serious weight-related health conditions.

Son fails to lose weight after a year.

So … Agency removes Son from Mother’s care and places him in foster care.

Ohio juvenile dependency court rules that Mother has neglected Son’s medical care … because Son has not dropped any excess weight to speak of.

Mother and Son are granted one visit per week. For two hours.

An Ohio public defender reports that, by contrast, other Ohio parents have been allowed to keep custody of their children despite having serious drug abuse issues and having beaten their children.

Son has reportedly lost some weight in foster care. But his foster parents are reportedly struggling to keep up with Son’s medical care.

Mother is seeking to regain custody of Son.

Son is representative of the seventeen percent of American children who are obese.

The foster care system is already stretched thin serving children who are abandoned, abused and neglected as those terms are commonly understood.

While some in the medical community advocate placing children in foster care to combat extreme obesity, others reject such extreme measures based only on probability of children developing certain medical conditions, rather than actual diagnoses.

Proposals have been advanced to provide enhanced services to obese children and their families so that such obese children can remain in their homes. Arguably a more practical alternative from a societal perspective and a more palatable alternative from the families’ perspectives.

Read more in this Reuters article: 219-pound boy shows growing problem of extreme obesity and this Cleveland Plain Dealer piece: County places obese Cleveland Heights child in foster care.

Colorado Husband and Wife have been divorced for five years.

They have two Sons together.

Their Younger Son, now ten, has special needs and lives with Wife, a college professor and her second husband.

Their Older Son, now thirteen, lives with Husband.

A relatively unusual, but not unheard of, custody arrangement.

The Colorado family court orders Wife to create a private e-mail account for Younger Son and to get Younger Son a cell phone to use to communicate with Husband.

That was three months ago.

Wife allegedly has yet to comply with the divorce court’s order.

The family court holds Wife in contempt … and sentences Wife to ninety days in jail.

Wife is let out after four days.

Husband challenges Wife’s early release … and Wife is incarcerated for another day and a half.

Wife reportedly fears that her position has been placed in jeopardy by her confinement. She has reportedly mortgaged her home to fund hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees in her divorce court case.

It is unclear why Wife did not comply with the family court order and risked being held in contempt and jailed.

Wife contends that she has encouraged communication between Younger Son and Husband, and that Son calls Husband weekly. She reportedly does not comprehend the divorce court’s harsh treatment of her.

Wife also contends that Husband denies her access to Older Son and will be pursuing that in family court.

Read more in

• this [UK] Daily Mail article: University professor jailed for failing to set up email account for her 10-year-old son

• this Denver ABC KMGH 7 News article: CSU Prof. Jailed 4 Days In Custody Battle

• this Denver ABC KMGH 7 News article: CSU Prof. Jailed Again In Child-Custody Battle.

Every state views it differently. In fact, an argument could be made that every family court judge views it differently.

What?

Drug use. By a parent.

The potential field of drugs that may be used and/or abused is broad: cocaine, methamphetamines, heroin, too many to name really … and marijuana.

The latter of which more and more states are legalizing use of for medical purposes.

Not all the same?

Perhaps, perhaps not.

Family law and juvenile dependency law often draw no hard and fast distinctions based on the particular drug of choice – or the type of use.

In family court or juvenile dependency court, the answer to whether the particular drug of choice – or the nature of the use – matters may well depend on what state you live in … or which family court judge or juvenile dependency court judge a case – your case – happens to be randomly assigned to.

Right now, in New York City, for example, the child welfare agency may be following a policy of filing civil child neglect charges against parents caught with nominal amounts of pot and/or who have admitted to authorities using marijuana in the past. In cases where law enforcement takes no criminal legal action. But makes a notification or report to the child welfare agency hotline.

Although the criminal justice system’s hands are tied from even making an arrest, such parents still face loss of child custody of their children – or restrictions on their contact with their own children – through the family court system or the juvenile dependency court system. Often without any proof of actual demonstrated neglect or harm to their children.

And their children could be forced into foster care, at least temporarily.

Child welfare agencies often maintain that even recreational or medical marijuana users may in fact neglect their children. Fail to send them to school. Leave them unattended. Otherwise suffer impaired judgment while caring for them which exposes them to danger or risk. And, of course, that may be true.

Representatives of parents, on the other hand, counter that, once such parents are on the child welfare agency’s radar due to possession of nominal amounts of marijuana or admission of pot use, the agencies then are in a position to seek other grounds to act against the parents – and, as a result, sometimes they may in fact look for those grounds – and they may in fact find them. And, if they exist, in the context of child protection, does it matter how they were identified?

Such parents ultimately face high stakes consequences. Not only as to custody and visitation and timesharing. But also restriction of their prospects for employment working with children in a variety of capacities.

In New York, this civil court record raises a cloud over such parents until the parent’s youngest child turns twenty-eight years old.

In contrast to New York, California, which has legal medical marijuana use, now requires a showing of actual harm to children before their child welfare agency may mount a juvenile dependency case for removal of the children.

Needless to say, one may take a different view of these complex cases depending upon whether one’s vantage point is parental rights or children’s rights.

Read more in this New York Times article: No Cause for Marijuana Case, but Enough for Child Neglect.

US Father and Brazilian Mother have Daughter together.

Back in 2008, when Mother did not have legal status in the US and the family lived in Illinois, Father and Mother were battling over custody of Daughter.

So Mother allegedly made off with Daughter to her native Brazil.

Father hasn’t seen or spoken to Daughter since.

Until recently, that is.

But a couple of weeks ago, Father, who now lives in Arizona, went to mediation with Mother regarding Daughter, in Brazil.

The mediation was different from the typical divorce or child custody mediation. Not only did Mother’s mother attend (unusual in itself), but both the US State Department (the US central authority) and the Brazilian Central Authority had representatives attend under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

The marathon mediation session went on for fifteen hours. Kind of long for one session, but not altogether unheard of.

But the mediation was successful, and Mother and Father resolved custody and visitation and timesharing issues regarding Daughter.

And Father got to see Daughter for the first time in over three years.

Astonishingly, Daughter still remembered Father from before her abduction at two and one-half years of age.

And the two got to spend some quality time together in Brazil, having outings and re-establishing their father-daughter bond.

While the agreement cannot be described as overly generous to Father, it does at least provide for unlimited phone and internet-facilitated communication between Father and Daughter and for regular, if infrequent, timesharing and visitation with Daughter in Brazil until she is twelve and, thereafter, lengthier visitation and timesharing here in the US.

Meanwhile, Father continues to work on petitioning for legislation to facilitate blocking unauthorized removal of children from the US.

Mother could face federal criminal charges if she returns to the US.

Daughter is one of approximately twenty American children detained in Brazil despite the requirements of the Hague Convention.

On the other hand, Brazil claims that that about seventy Brazilian children are in the same boat here in the US.

Read more in this [Tempe, AZ] East Valley Tribune article: E.V. man finally sees daughter who was taken to Brazil; custody deal reached and this [Tempe, AZ] East Valley Tribune article: San Tan Valley man hopes international fight for daughter spurs law.

Florida Husband and Wife have Children together.

Husband and Wife divorce.

Florida family court awards Husband primary residential custody of Children.

It appears that Husband may not be entirely cooperative with Wife’s exercise of visitation after their divorce.

Wife seeks and obtains from the Florida family court several different orders for enforcement of her visitation and holding Husband in contempt of court for his failure to comply with the Court’s orders for timesharing with Wife. The Florida family court also awards Wife significant compensatory visitation or makeup timesharing.

Because of Husband’s obstinacy, the Florida family court, without an evidentiary hearing, ultimately modifies custody of the Children to grant Wife primary residential custody of the Children. Without even having been asked to do so.

The court makes no written findings of fact in support of its ruling.

Husband appeals the modification of Children’s custody. On appeal, an intermediate level appellate court reverses for the following reasons.

1. It is well-established here in Florida that children should not be punished due to their parent’s violation of court orders, or other misdeeds.

2. Further, contempt proceedings are to enforce compliance with previous court orders. Not to modify custody. Especially not where the parent seeking enforcement has not put the other parent on formal notice that they are even looking to modify custody.

3. And last, but not least, the Florida family court did not make any express findings that modification of custody would be in the best interests of the Children.

Read more in the Florida court’s appellate opinion reversing the modification of child custody in contempt proceedings.

Florida teen (Mother) becomes pregnant.

Then marries a man (Husband) twenty-four years older than her.

Along the way, Husband reportedly pleads guilty to sexual misconduct with a minor under sixteen years of age and is required to register as a sex offender.

Husband also reportedly has a history of domestic violence and violent assaults.

Mother leaves Husband.

Husband files for divorce while Mother is pregnant. His divorce court papers explicitly deny paternity of Daughter.

Because Husband is not Daughter’s biological father.

But the divorce is never finalized.

Because one month after Daughter’s birth, Mother dies in a car accident.

Under the law, Mother’s and Husband’s divorce stops upon her death.

And, since Daughter’s biological father (Bio Father) does not come forward in any way, Husband is considered to be Daughter’s father under the law.

But Husband has no interest in Daughter at that time.

And Mother’s mother, Grandmother, takes Daughter in and raises her.

Until Daughter is almost four years old.

And Grandmother tries to adopt her.

At which point, Husband decides that he wants Daughter … and seeks primary custody of her.

And the Florida family court does indeed award Husband primary timesharing with Daughter – in Georgia, where Husband now lives.

Grandmother is appealing the ruling.

And Bio Father is now seeking to establish his paternity and parental rights over Daughter, to retrieve Daughter from Husband’s custody. And Husband is seeking to terminate Bio Father’s parental rights.

And Grandmother, of all people, is in hot water. For speaking out about Daughter’s case.

For which Grandmother may be held in contempt of court. And face incarceration.

Grandmother maintains that she spoke to the media about the case prior to the court’s gag order.

But she would be willing to do it again, now, to save Daughter from Husband.

Husband reportedly also communicates with the media – after the gag order is entered.

Read more in

1. this First Coast NBC TV news 12 article: Baker County Family Court Meets Again in Miranda Wilkerson Case

2. this First Coast NBC TV news 12 article: Grandmother Loses Custody of Girl to Father, Sex Offender

3. this First Coast NBC TV news 12 article: Miranda Wilkerson’s Grandmother before Baker County Judge Today on Contempt Charges

The South Carolina family courts in Charleston may be on to something.

It didn’t come about easily though.

Husband and Wife were going through a divorce.

When they originally filed for divorce, Son was about six years old.

By the time Son had turned twelve, the custody battle over him was still raging on.

Apparently though, Son had had enough. He took his own life.

Out of that tragedy, a local family court judge drew inspiration to try to “fast track” many child custody cases, and spare many children from being the subject of long, bitter legal fights between their parents.

And last month the so-called Fast Track Custody Initiative made its debut.

Participation in the streamlined program is strictly voluntary at this point. And cases involving mental illness, substance abuse or domestic violence are excluded.

The “system within a system” aims to settle temporary residential placement of children within four months of filing of the case … based on a fifteen minute temporary hearing.

Where the judge believes it is appropriate, he or she may appoint a guardian ad litem to fact-find and advocate for the child or children – within a sixty day period.

Once the guardian ad litem has made their recommendation, the parties are ready for mediation and the custody case should be resolved within ninety days of the temporary hearing.

It’s unclear, however, what happens if parents are unable to reach an agreement at mediation in a fast-tracked case.

The fast track reportedly cuts about nine months off the average child custody case timeline.

By implication, the child custody portion of the divorce case is bifurcated (split off) from other aspects of the case, and the remainder (property division, alimony, etc.) would presumably follow a traditional timeline.

An initiative well worth a closer look.

Read more in this [Charleston SC] Post and Courier article: Putting child custody on fast track.

New York Mother and Father have a child together.

Mother and Father, if married, divorce, or, if unmarried, just go their own separate ways.

Then Father relocates to South Florida.

Afterwards, Mother serves Father in a New York action for child support, or enforcement of child support. (Or alimony, or enforcement of alimony, or enforcement of property division agreement or judgment, or enforcement of parenting plan or judgment, etc., etc.)

Living in South Florida now, Father visits a local South Florida divorce lawyer and South Florida family law attorney for help with his defense in this case.

Only, Father is surprised to learn, his local South Florida divorce lawyer and South Florida family law attorney won’t – can’t – help him.

Why not?

Mother’s case is a New York family law case, not a Florida family court case.

And only an attorney licensed to practice law in New York and admitted to practice law in New York may appear and represent a party in a New York family law court case.

That means Father needs a New York divorce lawyer and New York family law attorney (or New York child support lawyer or New York alimony attorney or New York child custody attorney) and so on.

At first blush, it probably sounds like this could get pretty inconvenient and expensive for Father to identify and consult with a New York attorney. And it could.

But it doesn’t have to … Because a New York attorney doesn’t have to be based in New York.

She might have an office right down the street here in South Florida. As I do.

If Father is lucky, his local South Florida divorce lawyer and South Florida family law attorney may refer him to a New York divorce lawyer and New York family law attorney who is located here in South Florida.

But, if not, Father should be able to locate one on his own, now that he knows what he’s looking for.

Needless to say, the above would also apply if Mother was the ex-spouse or parent who had relocated to Florida, instead of Father.

And the same rationale applies for any other state an ex-spouse or parent may have relocated from. New York is just an excellent illustration of the principle, because there are so many transplanted New Yorkers here in South Florida.

Canadian Father and Lebanese Mother are divorced.

Their Daughter is now 8 years old.

Father gives Mother permission to take Daughter to Lebanon for a week to attend an extended family member’s wedding.

That was last February. And they haven’t returned to Canada since.

Father believes Mother has remarried a Lebanese man.

Since the alleged abduction, a Canadian family court has awarded Father sole custody of Daughter. And an arrest warrant has been issued for Mother.

But those measures have not been enough to make any headway.

Lebanon does not recognize the Canadian child custody order, and is doing nothing to help Father secure Daughter’s return to her home country, Canada.

Read more in this CBC News article: Quebec girl abducted by mother.

Husband and Wife have Son while living together in Indiana.

Husband is from Egypt.

Husband and Wife’s marriage is rocky.

While Wife is in the hospital, Husband allegedly abducts then three year old Son to his native Egypt.

Indiana family court awards Wife sole custody of Son.

Three years ago.

But Husband has not allowed Wife to see or speak to Son since.

Son has also had no contact with his big sister, from whom he was inseparable until the day he was abducted.

Husband was always insistent that Son be raised in the Muslim faith.

Wife never gave permission for Son to obtain a passport or to travel abroad.

However Husband was able to obtain an emergency passport for Son without Wife’s permission. It is unclear but the passport may have been issued by Egypt rather than the US.

The US government requires both parents’ consent to issue a passport for a minor child under sixteen years of age.

As an extra measure of protection, it is possible for either parent to place an alert so that the US government does not issue a passport for their child.

But parents should know that several foreign countries grant dual citizenship to American children of their nationals and may issue passports by their own country with only the permission of the parent who is a national of that country.

Egypt is not a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Wife’s US child custody order is not recognized in Egypt.

Seventy-four percent of the abducted children returned to the US in 2009 were abducted to Hague Convention countries.

Mother, as an American, non-Muslim woman, reportedly would not prevail in any child custody battle in Egypt’s own family courts.

Read more in this Evansville [IN] Courier Press article: Evansville’s Missing People: Life without Adam.

Mother and Father have Child.

Mother and Father provide food, clothing and shelter to Child.

Child becomes overweight, in fact, clinically obese.

And the problem is growing worse, not better.

Childhood obesity reportedly sets Child up for a host of health problems in both the short term and the long term.

Which is why the medical establishment now advocates that Child be removed from his parents’ home and placed into protective custody to address Child’s obesity, where his parents have failed to get it under control. They argue that this is less extreme than surgical remedies.

And in a small number of extreme cases in a handful of states, such as New York, California and Texas, obese children have been taken into temporary protective custody.

About two million kids in the US are obese.

Read more in this Yahoo Shine Health article: Should parents lose custody of super-obese kids? and Foster Care Proposed as Solution for Extreme Childhood Obesity.

Father and Mother have a Son together while living in Massachusetts.

Father and Mother break up.

Father returns to Costa Rica.

Massachusetts child welfare agency removes Son from Mother’s care after Mother allegedly tests positive for cocaine and marijuana use and suffers a seizure.

Father’s Mother, Grandmother, cares for Son for about a year.

Then Son is returned to Mother.

About a year later, Mother again allegedly tests positive for drug use.

Then Mother turns Son over to Father and gives permission for Father to take Son to Costa Rica.

Mother asserts that Father’s permission was conditioned on returning Son to her in the US in September of 2006.

Father denies the existence of any such condition.

Father, worrying about Mother’s chronic substance abuse, keeps Son with him beyond September of 2006.

Mother files for custody in Massachusetts family court and presses criminal charges against Father in Massachusetts.

Massachusetts family court awards Mother custody of Son.

Father is not served with the court order.

In 2008, Father is arrested for kidnapping Son, and Father is extradited to Massachusetts.

All this time, Son remains in Costa Rica with Father’s brother, Uncle.

Costa Rican court grants Uncle permanent guardianship of Son.

Mother is reportedly arrested for hitting a police officer after fainting while driving. Mother confesses to having used marijuana with prescription medication.

Nonetheless, the Massachusetts family court orders Father to return Son to Mother.

Father does not.

Father pleads guilty to one count of parental kidnapping and is sentenced to time served.

Meanwhile, the Costa Rican family court refuses to recognize US jurisdiction over Son, who has been in Costa Rica for five years.

Costa Rica did not enter the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction until 2008.

And summons Mother to appear in court in Costa Rica regarding her parental fitness.

Father is awaiting disposition on another pending criminal charge against him in Massachusetts.

Son remains in Costa Rica, where he is reportedly thriving and excelling, having reportedly overcome developmental and speech delays.

Read more in this South Coast [MA] Today article: Parent kidnapping case drags on.

Every state makes its own laws regarding child custody and parental responsibility, and child visitation and timesharing. Beyond the precise language set forth in the statute books, every state’s divorce courts and family courts impose their own unique judicial interpretation of those laws and implement enforcement based, to a large extent, on that interpretation. For those reasons, among others, rulings and judgments in each state’s divorce courts and family courts can vary dramatically, perhaps even more than the wording of their respective state laws might suggest.

A Michigan father contends that many Michigan fathers divorced or separated from their children’s mothers are largely excluded from their children’s day to day lives. And he reports that a whopping forty percent of kids across the US do not have their biological father living in their home.

Despite the evolution of the law governing child custody and parental responsibility, this father indicates that Michigan fathers are ten times more likely to “lose custody” of their children in a custody battle with the children’s mothers. In Michigan cases where the family court awards sole custody to one of the children’s parents, it is awarded to the mothers a staggering ninety-two percent of the time.

Perhaps even more shocking in this day and age, Michigan fathers are reportedly awarded joint custody of their children in only thirteen percent of custody disputes.

And, it is said that the typical Michigan visitation and timesharing schedule grants the noncustodial parents a meager four overnight visits per month.

All combining to effectively isolate many Michigan fathers from their children’s everyday lives of school, extracurricular activities and friendships.

This Michigan father advocates for equal timesharing for fit fathers in Michigan. Both for the fathers’ sakes and for the children’s sakes.

All of the above may seem to be a sad commentary on the state of divorce and child custody laws and visitation and timesharing law as applied in Michigan and, likely, other states as well.

Florida’s child custody and parental responsibility laws and timesharing and visitation laws are drafted so as to be more sensitive to the best interests of children whose parents are no longer together. And the policy of Florida divorce courts and family courts is to be more sensitive to the best interests of children whose families are no longer intact.

Of course, each Florida county and each Florida family court room within each county is somewhat unique.

Any father who identifies with what this Michigan father has to say and who has a child subject to the jurisdiction of the Florida family courts should consult with an experienced Florida child custody attorney. Whatever the law and practice in Michigan, a fit father should be able to look forward to a much better outcome in a child custody dispute in a Florida family court.

Read more in this Muskegon [MI] Chronicle letter to the editor: Legal system forces divorced dads out of kids’ lives

Times have changed.

A Canadian survey approximately ten years ago concluded that working moms and dads devoted roughly equal time to parenting.

And parents reaching amicable settlements of their divorces these days tend to end up with equal parenting time.

But, as of 1995, only about 49,000 fathers were designated as primary residential parents.

As of 2010, however, about 154,000 fathers were designated as primary residential parents.

Children generally do better when both of their parents are actively involved in their lives.

And fathers generally do much better when they are actively involved in their children’s lives.

Read more in this [Canadian] National Post editorial: Denying fathers their rights.

Mother and Father live in British Columbia, Canada.

Mother and Father have three year old Son together.

Mother and Father break up.

Mother allegedly abducts Son to the US.

Canadian family court awards Father sole custody of Son.

Mother manages to remain at large with Son for seven years, despite Father’s efforts to locate Son.

Mother reportedly flies into a rage while in a laundromat in Arizona, allegedly because Son bought some candy.

Police are summoned.

And discover that Mother is wanted in Canada for parental child abduction.

Police arrest Mother for disorderly conduct.

Son is taken into child protective custody.

Son is then returned to Father, who comes to Arizona. Father plans to bring Son back to Canada (and his two older siblings, Sisters).

Due to the age at which Son was taken, he barely recollects Father or Sisters.

Unrepentant, Mother defends her actions and insists that Father is not Son’s father … despite a DNA test reportedly proving that he is.

Son can undoubtedly look forward to a big adjustment.

Arizona authorities are working with the Canadian courts to find a way to extradite Mother to Canada.

Read more in

• this Vancouver Sun article: Boy’s return to Canada means new set of challenges for family

• this CTV News article: ‘Valor’s had a good life,’ mom says from jail and

• this Calgary Sun article: Missing boy’s father a stranger

Today was Father’s Day.

While many fathers celebrate their day with their children, some fathers don’t get to see their children at all on Father’s Day.

In Canada, it appears that parental alienation syndrome drives a wedge between many fathers and their children … with family court approval.

One Canadian father reports that a family court judge asked him:

“Why should I let you see your daughter?”

The situation is reportedly so severe in Canada that male suicides far outpace female suicides.

Father’s rights groups offer support – and lobbying for joint and equal parenting.

Read more in this Winnipeg [Canada] Sun news article: No happy Father’s Day for many dads.

About a year ago, I posted about a Central Florida Attorney in the Thick of International Child Abduction Case Regarding His Stepson.

And now, a year later, an eleven year old boy who has spent most of his life in the Ocala, Florida area, must return to Costa Rica to live with his biological father.

The “psychological father” who raised him, a Florida attorney, exhausted all available legal options in an effort to allow the boy to remain in his Florida home.

The attorney was married for several years to the boy’s mother, who has a drug problem, but never legally adopted the boy.

During mother and son’s annual visit to Costa Rica, the boy’s biological father sought custody and was able to hold the boy there.

The Florida attorney hired a contractor to recover the boy, but the boy’s biological father pursued the boy’s return in American courts.

Read more in this Ocala Star-Banner news article: Boy, 11, headed back to Costa Rica..

Texas Husband and Wife have two Sons, ages five and eight.

Wife and one Son are members of the Cherokee Indian Nation.

Husband and Wife allegedly chain their five year old Son to his crib-bed overnight, every night.

Husband and Wife are arrested for false imprisonment, child endangerment, child neglect, malicious punishment.

Sons are placed in foster care.

Sons are reportedly frightened of Husband and Wife.

The child welfare agency asks the Texas family court to terminate Husband’s and Wife’s parental rights to Sons.

The court awards Husband and Wife no visitation or timesharing with Sons.

Husband and Wife then request visitation with their younger Son.

A guardian ad litem for Sons recommends against visitation with Husband and Wife’s older Son based on the Son’s expressed preferences, and recommends only therapeutically supervised timesharing with younger Son.

Sons’ maternal grandmother is willing to have Sons placed with her if Husband and Wife’s parental rights are terminated.

Read more in this Austin Daily Herald article: Visitation denied for parents who chained son and this Austin Daily Herald article: Child-chaining parents plead guilty.

Indian Mother and Father of Hindu faith have Child together.

Mother dies.

Father takes up with another Woman, and converts to Islam.

Mother’s brother, Uncle, files for guardianship of Child based on Father’s abandonment of Hinduism and Uncle’s fear that Child will be kidnapped.

An Indian statute provides that no Hindu may continue as natural guardian (parent) of a child if that Hindu renounces Hinduism.

India’s highest appellate court is expected to interpret this statute and rule on it soon.

On a temporary basis, the Indian court has entered an order

1. restraining Father from transferring certain specified assets jointly owned by Mother and Father due to Child’s rights of inheritance and

2. awarding temporary custody of Child to … Uncle.

Read more in this Hindustan Times article: HC to decide if renouncing Hinduism means losing child’s custody.

Michigan family court awards primary custody of Children to Mother.

Father reportedly keeps Children beyond his allowed visitation and timesharing … and makes off with Children to Canada.

When captured by law enforcement authorities, Father contends that Mother is abusive toward Children and he is only trying to protect Children from Mother.

Father is charged with unlawful retention of the Children by a parent.

And the Children are returned to Mother’s care as originally court-ordered.

At trial, the Children’s testimony does not sound as though it corroborates Father’s version of events.

The jury cannot reach a unanimous verdict and a second trial is scheduled.

Read more in

• this Livingston [MI] Daily news article: Court Docket: Hung jury declared in parental kidnap case

• this Livingston [MI] Daily news article: No verdict yet in kidnap case

• this Livingston [MI] Daily news article: Trial begins Monday for father accused of parental kidnapping

Kentucky Wife cheats on her husband. Wife gets pregnant and has Baby.

Wife’s Boyfriend seeks parental rights and responsibilities, including timesharing and visitation with Baby.

Under long-settled legal precedents, where a mother’s marriage is intact, in the eyes of the law, the mother’s husband is (conclusively) presumed to be the father of the mother’s child.

The Kentucky Supreme Court overturns that precedent in favor of a more scientific and pragmatic approach looking to DNA testing rather than blind rules of law.

Read more in this Wall Street Journal piece: Kentucky Supreme Court Wades into Extramarital Affairs and this Courier-Journal article: Kentucky court says fathers of children conceived during affairs have parental rights.

Mother and Father, a member of the Seneca Indian Nation tribe, have Daughter together. Father works for the Seneca Indian Nation, in security for one of its casinos.

During the first year after Daughter’s birth, Mother and Father amicably address Father’s timesharing and child support privately.

In time, Mother and Father’s relationship becomes more strained and Mother files for child support through the state family court of Pennsylvania. No challenge is made to the jurisdiction of the state family court of Pennsylvania.

Later, Father files for custody of Daughter through the Seneca Nation Peacemakers Court, the Indian tribal courts.

Father makes various unsubstantiated allegations of child neglect, which are refuted by a written statement filed with the Seneca Indian nation court by Daughter’s pediatrician. Father also accuses Mother of kidnapping Daughter in the past.

The Seneca Nation Peacemakers Court then gives Father custody of Daughter … and awards Mother, Daughter’s primary caregiver until then, absolutely no visitation or timesharing. Since 2008.

Indian nation courts may exercise child custody jurisdiction over Indian nation member children.

But, under the laws of the Seneca nation, Daughter is not a member of the Seneca Indian nation, because only her father and not her mother is of Indian heritage.

And so a Seneca nation appellate court reverses a lower Seneca nation court ruling that Daughter is a “Seneca minor”.

That reversal should strip the Seneca Nation Peacemakers Court of child custody jurisdiction over Daughter.

Yet the state family court still has not exercised child custody jurisdiction over Daughter, and Mother still has no access to or contact with Daughter. Even her letters are returned to sender.

And the Seneca Nation Peacemakers Court also allows Daughter no contact with her half-sister or her maternal grandparents.

Mother’s lay advocate, a member of the Seneca Indian nation and a highly experienced lay advocate in the Seneca nation courts, contends that the Seneca nation courts have favored Father out of bias.

The case continues in the appellate courts of the Seneca Indian nation. Mother refuses to give up on having contact with Daughter.

Read more in this Buffalo News article: A mother’s emotional fight – A Seneca Nation court has stonewalled Amanda Prechtel in efforts to reunite her with her younger daughter, Marissa.

Foreign parents of children abducted to Japan by their Japanese parent haven’t ever had much to look forward to in terms of getting to see their children again.

That may be about to change though. Japan has announced that it is preparing to enter the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, and it is targeting acting by year’s end.

If so, it will be no minor accomplishment, because the stricken nation will, presumably, first have to overhaul its own domestic child custody laws to make them compatible with the Hague Convention.

Currently, Japanese laws recognize only sole custody awarded to one parent, and make no provision for visitation or timesharing by the parent who is not awarded sole custody.

And the Japanese courts are, by all accounts, biased against foreigners and fathers.

The US and European countries have been exerting increasing pressure on Japan to adopt the Hague Convention and modernize its domestic child custody laws.

Read more in this Australian news article: Japan to sign child abduction convention and this Houston Chronicle news article: Japan moves to join global child custody pact.

North Carolina Husband and Wife have two Children, ages 5 and 11.

Wife is diagnosed with breast cancer.

Husband files for divorce, relocates far away from Children and then files for primary custody of Children.

Now Mother’s cancer has metastacized and she is at Stage 4.

The North Carolina family court modifies child custody of Children, awards primary custody ro Husband and orders that Children relocate to Illinois in mid-June.

Wife asserts that her disease is well-managed and does not interfere with her ability to parent Children. Wife also describes Husband as abusive.

However, based on the testimony of a forensic psychologist, the divorce court concludes that “children who have a parent with cancer need more contact with the non-ill parent”.

There is nothing to suggest that this statement is anything but the personal opinion of that forensic psychologist, unsupported by any scientific studies.

There is no indication that any other factors are considered in modifying custody.

This case has sparked hot debate, petitions and calls for the presiding judge’s dismissal from the bench.

Wife is considering appealing the ruling.

Read more in this Time magazine article: Should a Mother Lose Custody of Her Kids Because She Has Cancer?.

Bermuda Husband and Wife have a five year old Son together.

Husband and Wife divorce.

Bermuda family court awards custody of Son to Husband.

Wife abducts Son and deprives Husband of any contact with Son for nine years. It appears that Wife and Son have been living in various locations in Florida since 2003, along with Son’s younger half-sister.

Mother reportedly has been arrested on more than one occasion for theft.

Son is located in a homeless shelter in western Florida, and authorities arrange for Son to be reunited with Husband.

Husband travels to the US for his first contact with Son in years. They enjoy spending several precious hours together.

But immediately prior to a scheduled mandatory US court appearance, Wife and Son disappear again.

This despite Husband’s application for Son’s return to Bermuda under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Read more in this [Bermuda] BerNews news article: Father’s Heartbreak: Jasai Swan-Burrows and this [Bermuda] Royal Gazette article: Heartbreak as father’s reunion with son ends abruptly.

Mother and Father both enter the US illegally and remain in Arkansas.

Mother remains undocumented for years. Father secures legal status on a temporary but renewing basis.

The government pursues increased child support from Father for their Daughter.

And then Father looks to get custody of Daughter.

To modify custody, Arkansas requires a material change of circumstances since entry of the previous child custody order.

At trial, the family court modifies child custody and awards custody of Daughter to Father. It appears that the trial judge bases his ruling upon his personal political and policy views, rather than Arkansas child custody law.

On appeal, Arkansas’ highest court reverses and restores custody of Daughter to Mother.

It turns out that the circumstances Father complains of, Mother’s undocumented status and lack of a valid driver’s license, are exactly the same as they were at the time of Mother’s and Father’s divorce. They were apparently acceptable to Father then, and the marital settlement agreement was approved by the family court and adopted in its final judgment.

Further, the evidence at trial showed that Father had had little or no contact with Daughter for about two years.

Read more in this Arkansas Times piece: Illegal Immigrant.

Florida Mother has four Children, ages 10, 11, 14 and 16.

Children’s Aunt has custody of Children and has been raising them for several years.

Aunt, who lives in Alabama, brings Children to Florida to visit with Mother.

Aunt reportedly allows Children to go on a drive with Mother.

Mother allegedly crashes the car.

The 14 year old Child is killed in the accident.

It is reported that Mother is legally intoxicated at the time. In fact, her blood alcohol level is said to be 4 times the legal limit.

The Florida court finds that Mother was not allowed unsupervised visitation and timesharing with the Children and again orders that Mother not have unsupervised contact with the Children.

The court modifies custody of Children, stripping it from Aunt, who reportedly allowed Mother to have the Children unsupervised, and awarding it to Childen’s great aunt and uncle.

The court also enters a restraining order of protection against Mother’s Boyfriend, who reportedly beats the Children. Boyfriend is also arrested on charges of domestic violence.

Both Mother and Aunt may face criminal charges.

Read more in this [Orlando] WFTV 9 news article: Alleged Drunk Mom’s Kids To Stay With Aunt, Uncle.