• 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.

Just curious

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

What is the name of your state?

Why is it okay for the CP to deny the NCP visitation, but it's not okay for the NCP to deny the CP child support? Isn't the denial of both of those things damaging to the children? Just curious.....
 


StepmomsAreBest said:
What is the name of your state?

Why is it okay for the CP to deny the NCP visitation, but it's not okay for the NCP to deny the CP child support? Isn't the denial of both of those things damaging to the children? Just curious.....
As far as I know it's not OKAY to do either one. But most of the time they go hand in hand. I think it's a spite thing, brought on by one or both parties not willing to take responsibility for their own actions.
 

BelizeBreeze

Senior Member
StepmomsAreBest said:
What is the name of your state?

Why is it okay for the CP to deny the NCP visitation, but it's not okay for the NCP to deny the CP child support? Isn't the denial of both of those things damaging to the children? Just curious.....
Both are civil violations of contempt of a standing court order. And in each case, it is up to the aggreived party to bring it to the court's attention by filing a show cause for contempt action.
 

tigger22472

Senior Member
StepmomsAreBest said:
What is the name of your state?

Why is it okay for the CP to deny the NCP visitation, but it's not okay for the NCP to deny the CP child support? Isn't the denial of both of those things damaging to the children? Just curious.....
As stated both are considered contempt. I think what you might be referring to is the fact that there are different concequences (if any at all) for these actions. As sad as it is part of it has to do with this: If a CP denies a NCP visitation most of the time they get a 'slap on the wrist' and told not to do it again. Is that right? NO. However? What really is a judge to do? He could fine the CP which I'm all for. But let's say that doesn't work. They can remove the child. Ok... so then the child would more then likely be put in the care of the NCP. Judges look at the fact that more then likely there's a reason why the CP has custody so they have to question if that is in the best intrest of the child. That doesn't even consider if the parents don't live in the same school district so you are uprooting a child from home, school and friends. When CS is denied there are easier ways to take care of that. OF course also judges work for the government and when a NCP doesn't pay court ordered support there is the chance the CP would end up on gov't assistance and judges try to prevent that.

Now, this might not be a popular opinion, but it's still mine. I believe when a NCP willingly refuses to pay support by quitting jobs and working under the table to do whatever it takes not to pay support that a CP should be able to deny visitation. Now, I don't believe this is true when the reasons for not having support is due to economical reasons beyond the control of the NCP. In the same respect, I think that support should be able to be withheld, even if it's simply put in an account and held for later, if a CP denies a NCP visitation. In the end however, support and visitation issues are always separate. Some will argue it's not fair to punish the child by not allowing a relationship when support isn't paid while others will say it isn't fair to pay for a child they never get to see. That's what the courts are for and it's really hard to be fair in situation at hand.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

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