Grandparent visitation awarded - father wants nothing to do with the child

[kmkohio]

What is the name of your state? OHIO

Yesterday, my sister had to go in front of the magistrate to determine visitation rights for her 4 yr old son's father/grandparents to get visitation rights. The father has not been in my nephew's life for the past 3 years and fails to maintain contact with the child stating he can't stand to look at him b/c he looks too much like my sister. He hasn't called in 3 years or so much as sent a birthday card to his son. The magistrate awarded visitation to the grandparents every sunday for an 8 hr time period. The magistrate would not let my sister express her concerns of safety for the child b/c she looked upset and told her it doesn't matter what she thinks that "they were walking out of court today with visitation rights".
My sister never denied the grandparents visitation, she had to restrict visitation to my parents house b/c the grandfather would take the child with a mutual understanding of a drop off time, yet he would keep him hours longer and wouldn't call. The grandfather would talk him to AA meetings where adult conversations are held that my nephew doesn't need to be influenced by. The grandfather also neglected him by returning him soaking wet (diaper at that time) and extremely dirty. Then, the grandfather began stalking my sister (police reports on file) and even attempted to take my nephew out of daycare claiming that my sister and him had previous arragements, which they did not. The only way my sister knew he was there to pick up my nephew was b/c the daycare called her b/c he wasn't on the approved pick up list. The grandmother, who has now been determined as the "transport provider" is on disability and takes high doses of pain medication that cause her to sleep all the time. She even fell asleep in the waiting room of the court area the day of the hearing. She was determined to be the "transportation provider" b/c neither the grandfather, nor the father wanted that responsiblity.
Despite outbursts in the hearing room by the father and the grandparents showing their hostilities over the situation, the magistrate still awarded visitation to them. The father won't even give out his phone number to my sister to get ahold of him when her son is there for fear of "harrassment", she hasn't contacted him in years. The grandparents won't keep their cell phones on to contact them when they have my nephew.
I could provide a lot more details, if someone can help in the situation. My nephew's father's family has been neglectful in caring for my nephew. Furthermore, the father wants nothing to do with his son. He fails to pay child support on a regular basis. As far as I have read, he qualifies for termination of parental rights for five different reasons. The father only filed for visitation to benefit his parents who couldn't follow my sister's wishes previously. The father didn't even show up for the first visitation hearing years ago.
Does this seem normal that the grandparents would be awarded visitation against the mother's best interests of her child? Does this seem normal that the magistrate wouldn't hear my sister's side? What puzzles me is that the hearing was supposed to start at 3:30. The father's family attorney didn't show until 3:45 and milled around in the "back" until the hearing started at 4:15. The magistrate allowed the grandparents, the father, their attorney, and just my sister into the hearing room. To me, it seems as if things were already decided before they entered the hearing room. I know I have babbled on, but our family needs help. Thank you for any advice that you can provide. I read a lot on family law and visitation prior to the hearing and this decision comes as a total shock.

[Silverplum]

Originally Posted by kmkohio

Does this seem normal that the grandparents would be awarded visitation against the mother's best interests of her child? Does this seem normal that the magistrate wouldn't hear my sister's side? .

It's not the mother's view of what's in the child's best interests; and it's not the mother's best interests the judge was deciding.

If Mom didn't have an attorney, and didn't properly present her info/evidence, then it is not at all surprising that she was not given a chance to present her "side."

[kmkohio]

When she attempted to, the magistrate wouldn't hear it, but the magistrate would hear everything from the father's side.

[Silverplum]

Originally Posted by kmkohio

When she attempted to, the magistrate wouldn't hear it, but the magistrate would hear everything from the father's side.

The father had an attorney. She did not. She probably did not follow the rules of procedure. Not having an attorney does not exempt one from following the rules.

[kmkohio]

Since when can't a person represent themselves? We didn't even think that the father would show up since he didn't the last time. What rules of procedure are you speaking of?

[Silverplum]

Originally Posted by kmkohio

Since when can't a person represent themselves?

They can. Of course they can. But they have to do it right. Like plumbing or electrical work -- feel free, but if you don't do it right, you'll probably be sorry.

Originally Posted by kmkohio

We didn't even think that the father would show up since he didn't the last time.

He did. With an attorney.

Originally Posted by kmkohio

What rules of procedure are you speaking of?

Every court has those rules. Any attorney knows their local rules. If Mom planned to rep herself, she needed to rep herself properly.

[Blue Meanie]

Originally Posted by kmkohio

Since when can't a person represent themselves? We didn't even think that the father would show up since he didn't the last time. What rules of procedure are you speaking of?

The rules that govern how to behave, present evidence and speak to the Judge. If you represent yourself you are expected to educate yourself.

[kmkohio]

We did educate ourselves, as I stated. The father qualifies for termination, not grandparent visitation. The magistrate wouldn't let her talk with exception of speaking about how the grandfather was attempting to lie about not being a truck driver, which he really does. They were the ones bursting out with hateful words. The father even stated he didn't want a thing to do with my sister and she wasn't allowed to have his phone number. We educated ourselves fully before entering under the impression they had to prove that grandparent visitation was being denied. I thoroughly researched Ohio law on grandparent visitation and there are 3 criteria that have to be met. The only one that was met was that the father was verified through DNA.

[Silverplum]

Originally Posted by kmkohio

So, it's ok for the magistrate to throw a child into a family that hasn't maintained contact with him and the father hates him? Since when do grandparent rights superceed parental rights and parental liabilities? If you aren't of legal knowledge and can't provide any advice outside of my sister should have had an attorney, you're advice isn't really helping.

Okey dokey. Have fun figuring it out from here. And, frankly, this is none of YOUR business. If MOM cared so much, she'd have hired an attorney or educated herself properly. If MOM cared so much, she'd be online instead of you.

[LdiJ]

Ok...what your sister needs to do, and do immediately, is appeal the magistrate's decision. She was not given due process, and the magistrate's award to the Grandparents was an unreasonable one. Your sister would never be able to have a full weekend with her child, nor would she ever be able to attend church with her child.

However, she needs an attorney and she needs one NOW. She may only have 14 days to appeal this decision. If she doesn't have the money for an attorney, then your family needs to help her get one....but it has to be done NOW...like tommorrow at the latest.

[kmkohio]

You're obviously not educated in Ohio Law. If mom was paid her child support maybe should could afford an attorney, but since he uses the child support money to pay for an attorney, I guess my sister is just out of luck. You don't have to be such a smarty pants.

[kmkohio]

Originally Posted by LdiJ

Ok...what your sister needs to do, and do immediately, is appeal the magistrate's decision. She was not given due process, and the magistrate's award to the Grandparents was an unreasonable one. Your sister would never be able to have a full weekend with her child, nor would she ever be able to attend church with her child.

However, she needs an attorney and she needs one NOW. She may only have 14 days to appeal this decision. If she doesn't have the money for an attorney, then your family needs to help her get one....but it has to be done NOW...like tommorrow at the latest.

That's what I thought. Thank you for your advice. She is seeking out an attorney now. The father didn't show up the last time, so we didn't feel it was necessary when we thought they should have established that they were being denied visitation.

[Silverplum]

Originally Posted by kmkohio

We did educate ourselves, as I stated. The father qualifies for termination, not grandparent visitation. The magistrate wouldn't let her talk with exception of speaking about how the grandfather was attempting to lie about not being a truck driver, which he really does. They were the ones bursting out with hateful words. The father even stated he didn't want a thing to do with my sister and she wasn't allowed to have his phone number. We educated ourselves fully before entering under the impression they had to prove that grandparent visitation was being denied. I thoroughly researched Ohio law on grandparent visitation and there are 3 criteria that have to be met. The only one that was met was that the father was verified through DNA.

That's not at all what you wrote before...fortunately for those reading, I have your tiny tantrum quoted in my earlier post.

Clearly, you did not research everything and did not do it so thoroughly as you think. That's on you. No one told your family to go the cheap way.

And I disagree with LdiJ. Respectfully, that is. She IS the local expert on grandparent visitation, and I defer to her in that arena. But I COMPLETELY fail to see her point that Mom was denied her rights. That, imo, is nonsense. Mom failed to present her case. That's not the same thing at all.

[casa]

Originally Posted by kmkohio

What is the name of your state? OHIO

Yesterday, my sister had to go in front of the magistrate to determine visitation rights for her 4 yr old son's father/grandparents to get visitation rights. The father has not been in my nephew's life for the past 3 years and fails to maintain contact with the child stating he can't stand to look at him b/c he looks too much like my sister. He hasn't called in 3 years or so much as sent a birthday card to his son. The magistrate awarded visitation to the grandparents every sunday for an 8 hr time period. The magistrate would not let my sister express her concerns of safety for the child b/c she looked upset and told her it doesn't matter what she thinks that "they were walking out of court today with visitation rights".
My sister never denied the grandparents visitation, she had to restrict visitation to my parents house b/c the grandfather would take the child with a mutual understanding of a drop off time, yet he would keep him hours longer and wouldn't call. The grandfather would talk him to AA meetings where adult conversations are held that my nephew doesn't need to be influenced by. The grandfather also neglected him by returning him soaking wet (diaper at that time) and extremely dirty. Then, the grandfather began stalking my sister (police reports on file) and even attempted to take my nephew out of daycare claiming that my sister and him had previous arragements, which they did not. The only way my sister knew he was there to pick up my nephew was b/c the daycare called her b/c he wasn't on the approved pick up list. The grandmother, who has now been determined as the "transport provider" is on disability and takes high doses of pain medication that cause her to sleep all the time. She even fell asleep in the waiting room of the court area the day of the hearing. She was determined to be the "transportation provider" b/c neither the grandfather, nor the father wanted that responsiblity.
Despite outbursts in the hearing room by the father and the grandparents showing their hostilities over the situation, the magistrate still awarded visitation to them. The father won't even give out his phone number to my sister to get ahold of him when her son is there for fear of "harrassment", she hasn't contacted him in years. The grandparents won't keep their cell phones on to contact them when they have my nephew.
I could provide a lot more details, if someone can help in the situation. My nephew's father's family has been neglectful in caring for my nephew. Furthermore, the father wants nothing to do with his son. He fails to pay child support on a regular basis. As far as I have read, he qualifies for termination of parental rights for five different reasons. The father only filed for visitation to benefit his parents who couldn't follow my sister's wishes previously. The father didn't even show up for the first visitation hearing years ago.
Does this seem normal that the grandparents would be awarded visitation against the mother's best interests of her child? Does this seem normal that the magistrate wouldn't hear my sister's side? What puzzles me is that the hearing was supposed to start at 3:30. The father's family attorney didn't show until 3:45 and milled around in the "back" until the hearing started at 4:15. The magistrate allowed the grandparents, the father, their attorney, and just my sister into the hearing room. To me, it seems as if things were already decided before they entered the hearing room. I know I have babbled on, but our family needs help. Thank you for any advice that you can provide. I read a lot on family law and visitation prior to the hearing and this decision comes as a total shock.

Your sister COULD HAVE filed to Terminate Parental Rights...due to no contact/no support...but she would have had to do it BEFORE Dad filed any action in court. Now that Dad has filed action, it's definately considered 'contact'. So, now a TPR is difficult at best...and definately not without an attorney.

What people are trying to explain to you, is that if you go to court Pro Se (Representing yourself) You are expected to know the Law just like an attorney is. Many of us have gone Pro Se & won...but we had to educate ourselves & follow Court Rules & Procedure properly.

I suspect Mom's emotional outbursts didnt' help her any. The court won't view that as stability- and in fact may view it as she is not in control of her emotions, therefore any acussations she has/had against the grandparents are 'suspect'. If THEY are the nutty ones, then she needed to be calm & rational & let THEM show it.

If Mom didnt' provide evidence (police reports/affidavits/testimony from daycare) then everything she said is "hearsay". Meaning: Just because she said it, doesn't make it true. She needs to prove it.

Now, to the Grandparent visitation issue. Considering you admit the grandparents have remain involved in the child's life...they have no need to be denied contact w/the child. Since Mom didn't prove the child's safety & welfare at risk...the court ordered that the grandparents CONTINUE contact~ legally.

Now to the good part: The Court Order will actually protect Mom. No more trying to pick up child at daycare, No more showing up at their whim. They are now restricted to one day a weekend & there is a Court Order outlining when to pick up and return and where to visit the child. NOW if they fail to return the child, Mom can pursue Contempt of Court. Repeated instances will result in consequences from the court.

[casa]

Originally Posted by Silverplum

That's not at all what you wrote before...fortunately for those reading, I have your tiny tantrum quoted in my earlier post.

Clearly, you did not research everything and did not do it so thoroughly as you think. That's on you. No one told your family to go the cheap way.

And I disagree with LdiJ. Respectfully, that is. She IS the local expert on grandparent visitation, and I defer to her in that arena. But I COMPLETELY fail to see her point that Mom was denied her rights. That, imo, is nonsense. Mom failed to present her case. That's not the same thing at all.

LdiJ is an expert on Parental Rights via the Constitution ~ but respectfully, I say that every single state has some sort of Grandparent visitation Rights...and the tide is only moving more towards that- not against it. IMO