Non-custodial Parent Moves Out of State

Unlike most questions about moving out of state, mine has to do with what happens when the non-custodial parent moves away.

My ex is now wanting an extended visitation with our daughter for summer, and he is claiming that he wants me to cover half the costs of her transportation from Hawaii to Seattle, Washington. He claims this is fair as he is having to fly here to get her and has to pay for his own ticket plus hers.

My feelings on this are:

1. Since he made the decision to move out of state and away from his daughter, any transportation costs are his burden/obligation.

2. Because our daughter is only 4 years old and not old enough to travel on her own, he needs to make the arrangements to have someone I can trust escort her on the plane.

3. In regards to #2, this does not include an Airport-to-Airport transport service (which I'm not even sure would take a 4-year old).

This seems common sense to me, but he claims he has received legal advice that I am 50% responsible for transportation costs in this case. Is common sense too simple? Or was he just giving me a line of B.S.?

What I've seen in the past is this, if the custodial parent is granted a move away order from the court then yes the transportation is tweaked and turned to benefit the non custodial parent. You are in the opposite situation indeed. More than likely he can and will be granted extended visitation providing he is keeping up to his end of the agreement in accordance w/ the divorce settlement. This is an instance where visitation can be modified if one of the parents moves away because of employment or loss of a job. Is he military?

Just my two cents here (not LEGAL by any means).... My situation is a bit different, but my ex and I live 800 miles away from each other - and always have (since I was about 6 months pregant). I have been advised that I would not be responsible for any "travel" costs involved in him visiting our daughter or her going to see him (when she is old enough to go that far). I am with you on this one - he chose to be so far away, it's his responsibility to pay!!

[usmcfamily]

What your ex says/wants and what is legally his right are two different things here. He may "say" he wants an extended visitation, but to get it HE is going to have to petition the courts for a modification of the original order and HE will have to foot the court bill in the court where the order originated (where you and the child live as they hold jurisdiction over the child)....and as to travel costs incurred - he is blowing smoke! There is a CHANCE that IF YOU were the one who had moved and NOT him THEN a family court judge may have made it a condition that you would pay a portion of travel costs incurred in the visitation process ...... BUT he is the one who CHOSE to leave and he knew full well that this would cause a rise in visitation costs so that was his choice and now is his responsibility! Let him try to force his issues --- he will have to do it in court and I really can't see him thinking he would sound intelligent standing in front of a judge asking that YOU pay for your daughter to travel all over the place to see him after he willing moved from living close to you. . . . .it ain't gonna happen!
I would, however, be interested in what the relationship between he and your daughter was before this move.....was the visitation regular? I ask because if there IS a bond between he and your daughter you may want to be cooperative on the duration or frequency of visits (just not on paying for them)so that your daughter does not have a valuable part of her life unfairly removed. I know he is the one who moved, but you are the mom and it is our job to do whatever we can to do what is best for our babies...and if she is closely bonded to her father you need to try to preserve that relationship. At this tender age, I would be more inclined to have him travel to where you live and have his visits there (this is how we had agreed to do it until my daughter had reached a reasonable age)....as you stated NO the airlines will not take a four year old except in rare cases and only then if the flight is a non-stop with no connections and no layovers with someone taking her to the gate and someone meeting the flight attendant at the gate and signing for her! Besides, how horrible for a little girl of this age to be on a jetliner full of strangers......why would he think that would be a good idea? If he wants to pursue this visitation, and for her sake I hope he does, he needs to do the right thing as a FATHER and PAY for it - as parents we are supposed to make whatever sacrifice we have to to take care of our children!
Prayers be with you