• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Question Regarding Temp Parenting Plan & Final Parenting Plan

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

daddy1980

Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Wa State

Ok so i proposed a temporary parenting plan and filed it with court and got the mother served and all that and we had court yesterday and i had asked for a preogressive schedule to give me 4 hrs per visit twice weekly *unsupervised* and then 8 hrs twice weekly the next month and then 1 8hr visit and 1 overnight visit the following month well she asked in her responce for the visits to be twice weekly 4 hrs each *supervised still* and the judge granted her request and didnt give me *unsupervised visits* :-(


He did grant me fathers day :) and my birthday :) but still only 4 hours supervised (i asked for those 2 days be overnight visits but mom didnt agree. so i didnt get it


So i have a few questions regarding my court hearing.

#1 Why would a judge not do a progressive plan and just order the 4 hour visits and not mention them going longer after a period of time? he just mentioned that he was granting her request for the times and supervised untill there is a change in circumstances or we come up with a FINAL parenting plan?


#2 She served me her responce 10 minutes before court hearing (shouldnt i have been serverd erlier so i could have time to look over her responce? or should i have asked for continuance so i could have time to look over them?
I thought since i was the petitioner i had the right to respond to her responce? Am i wrong here?


#3 Even though she agreed to mutual desicion making as i asked for the judge stated since baby lives with her she gets to make all the desicions?


#4 The judge stated he didnt know what did or didnt happen with the DV accusations but stated since we have a DV TPO and mom has concerns about baby's safety this is the way the visits are going to be?


#5 We didnt have our original judge we had a visiting judge cause our judge was in a differant county doing a trial. Maybe i should have asked for continuance untill our judge came back?



#6 So now that we have this temporary order and mother asked for visits to be the 4 hours twice a week untill final parenting plan is in place and the visits be supervised at least untill the TPO is over. Would it be best to wait untill TPO is over to file the FINAL parenting plan so i can assure i get the best results?

My concern is that she isnt gonna budge on parenting time and when we go to court for final parenting plan im gonna ask for shared and she is gonna ask for LIMITED time again.


I put in my decleration that i had completed parenting classes and filed the certificate for the judge to see and all that but he didnt seem to care about what i have done so far it all seemed to boil down to what mom wanted and the TPO

Any advice?

As usuall thanks for any/all input
 


CJane

Senior Member
With the restraining order in effect, the judge ruled exactly according to statute...

RCW 26.09.191
Restrictions in temporary or permanent parenting plans.


(1) The permanent parenting plan shall not require mutual decision-making or designation of a dispute resolution process other than court action if it is found that a parent has engaged in any of the following conduct: (a) Willful abandonment that continues for an extended period of time or substantial refusal to perform parenting functions; (b) physical, sexual, or a pattern of emotional abuse of a child; or (c) a history of acts of domestic violence as defined in RCW 26.50.010(1) or an assault or sexual assault which causes grievous bodily harm or the fear of such harm.
And...

(2)(a) The parent's residential time with the child shall be limited if it is found that the parent has engaged in any of the following conduct: (i) Willful abandonment that continues for an extended period of time or substantial refusal to perform parenting functions; (ii) physical, sexual, or a pattern of emotional abuse of a child; (iii) a history of acts of domestic violence as defined in RCW 26.50.010(1) or an assault or sexual assault which causes grievous bodily harm or the fear of such harm; or (iv) the parent has been convicted as an adult of a sex offense under:
The bad news for you is that this WILL follow you. It's not JUST while the restraining order is in effect. You now have a "history of acts of domestic violence". The statute REQUIRES that your decision making AND parenting time be limited.

Domestic violence as referenced in the above statute:

(1) "Domestic violence" means: (a) Physical harm, bodily injury, assault, or the infliction of fear of imminent physical harm, bodily injury or assault, between family or household members; (b) sexual assault of one family or household member by another; or (c) stalking as defined in RCW 9A.46.110 of one family or household member by another family or household member.
You need an attorney. Yesterday.

WA statutes regarding child custody can be found here:

Chapter 26.09 RCW: Dissolution proceedings ? legal separation
 

daddy1980

Member
.

CJane,

For some reason the website you gave me says the citation you requested cannot be found?


Also do you think i would have got better results yesterday with a Lawyer?

And will hiring a lawyer get me closer to what i want in final parenting plan? or is judge just gonna look at that DV PO and give her what she wants?
 

CJane

Senior Member
CJane,

For some reason the website you gave me says the citation you requested cannot be found?
Google RCW 26.09

Also do you think i would have got better results yesterday with a Lawyer?
Maybe. You would have at least understood what the judge was ordering and why.

And will hiring a lawyer get me closer to what i want in final parenting plan?
You are not going to get 50/50. It's unlikely you'll get anything approaching 50/50 (like not even 60/40) without Mom's agreement. And, with the "history of domestic violence"... statute REQUIRES that your "residential time" be limited.

or is judge just gonna look at that DV PO and give her what she wants?
It really has nothing to do with what Mom wants, and everything to do with what statute requires. Statute requires that you parenting time be limited.
 

daddy1980

Member
Amazing

I find it quite amazing that all a women has to do is claim DV against the father and automatically he wont get anywhere near a shared plan and she will get what she wants
 

CJane

Senior Member
I find it quite amazing that all a women has to do is claim DV against the father and automatically he wont get anywhere near a shared plan and she will get what she wants
Yeah, you're not even TRYING to get it.

It's not like Mom just said "He hit me!" and got a restraining order against you that requires you to not even be in the same room with her.

It isn't about what MOM wants. If MOM was the one with the RO against HER for abusing YOU, SHE would be the one with limited visits.

The state of Washington has decided that someone with a history of domestic violence should have a limited role in their children's lives. That's not MOM'S fault.
 

daddy1980

Member
Yeah, you're not even TRYING to get it.

It's not like Mom just said "He hit me!" and got a restraining order against you that requires you to not even be in the same room with her.

It isn't about what MOM wants. If MOM was the one with the RO against HER for abusing YOU, SHE would be the one with limited visits.

The state of Washington has decided that someone with a history of domestic violence should have a limited role in their children's lives. That's not MOM'S fault.
So in a nut shell your saying the judge didnt order the 4 hour supervised visits because thats what MOM asked for but because he had to?


Couldnt he have ordered the visits to be Unsupervised at least?

Im not trying to be rude here im just lost and confused especially since the lawyer i talked to said it shouldnt be a problem for me to get what i was asking for and evern more and she is suppose to be the BEST family law lawyer in town (maybe she knows how to fight to get what she wants?)

This is BY FAR the BIGGEST battle i will ever fight in my life and i wanna make sure im doing whats best for my daughter i dont wanna GIVE UP i want to be as involved in her life as much as possible and when she gets older i want her to be PROUD of her dad for fighting for her and not just GIVING UP
 
Last edited:

ErinGoBragh

Senior Member
How is it not true? please explain im confused
For reasons CJane already pointed out. You make it into this big vendetta of the courts siding with women. It's not about man or women, it's about what the state interprets is what is needed for your CHILDREN- the most important people in this equation- to be safe and well-adjusted, and you make it sound like it's all mom's fault that you can't have your kids as often as you like.

Reality check: Your actions are the only thing that put you in this situation. Not mom. Not the kids. Not the statute, which never would have come into play in this situation, had you not taken it upon yourself to commit whatever act of DV (I only read some of your past threats) that landed you in the situation in the first place.
 
Last edited:

CJane

Senior Member
So in a nut shell your saying the judge didnt order the 4 hour supervised visits because thats what MOM asked for but because he had to?
I'm saying that the judge is required by statute to limit your time. The judge took that into account and determined that it is in the best interests of the CHILD (not YOU, not MOM, the CHILD) that supervised visits continue. There are a whole lot of reasons he could have come to that conclusion.

Couldnt he have ordered the visits to be Unsupervised at least?
Sure, but this temp plan is supposed to go til December 1, when the TPO ends. You jumped the gun.

And NOW, the judge has told you that you either need an agreement with Mom or you need a change in circumstances. Right now? You're stuck with what you have. Probably for quite awhile. Might as well start concentrating on being the best dad you can be in the very limited amount of time you have.

Im not trying to be rude here im just lost and confused especially since the lawyer i talked to said it shouldnt be a problem for me to get what i was asking for and evern more and she is suppose to be the BEST family law lawyer in town (maybe she knows how to fight to get what she wants?)
Maybe she's pretty sure that she could convince a judge to order contrary to statute, and Mom couldn't afford to appeal. That was my ex's attorney's MO.

Maybe she isn't really "the best" family law lawyer in town.

Maybe she was blowing smoke, hoping you'd hire her.

Maybe she knew you couldn't afford to hire her and thought she'd be nice and tell you what you want to hear.
 

ErinGoBragh

Senior Member
I'm saying that the judge is required by statute to limit your time. The judge took that into account and determined that it is in the best interests of the CHILD (not YOU, not MOM, the CHILD) that supervised visits continue. There are a whole lot of reasons he could have come to that conclusion.



Sure, but this temp plan is supposed to go til December 1, when the TPO ends. You jumped the gun.

And NOW, the judge has told you that you either need an agreement with Mom or you need a change in circumstances. Right now? You're stuck with what you have. Probably for quite awhile. Might as well start concentrating on being the best dad you can be in the very limited amount of time you have.



Maybe she's pretty sure that she could convince a judge to order contrary to statute, and Mom couldn't afford to appeal. That was my ex's attorney's MO.

Maybe she isn't really "the best" family law lawyer in town.

Maybe she was blowing smoke, hoping you'd hire her.

Maybe she knew you couldn't afford to hire her and thought she'd be nice and tell you what you want to hear.
Was this the same attorney, I wonder, who told dad to poke his nose into mom's business and pull a background check on mom's BF, even though there was no real reason to do so?
 

daddy1980

Member
CJane

Is it your opinion that i should wait untill Dec 1st hearing for the TPO and hire an attorney at that time and fight for what i want?


OT: Did your lawyer get you what you wanted by using the strategy you explained?
 

ErinGoBragh

Senior Member
Is it your opinion that i should wait untill Dec 1st hearing for the TPO and hire an attorney at that time and fight for what i want?


OT: Did your lawyer get you what you wanted by using the strategy you explained?
You REALLY need to reread CJane's post if you think she was talking about her attorney.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top