Abusive Grandparents, Non-intact family

[Baz744]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Missouri

Child is three years old, born out of wedlock. Grandparents have never had a relationship with the child. Father pays child support, and has visitation. Mother takes care of child, and lives with him. Paternal grandparents, especially grandmother, emotionally, verbally, and physically abused father throughout childhood.

Father is now permanently and totally disabled with major depressive disorder. Paternal grandfather was less abusive, but failed to protect father from grandmother.

Both mother and father agree that grandparents should have no contact with child.

Grandparents are now filing for visitation under Missouri's grandparent rights statute. What is the likely outcome?

[IsabellaSoriano]

[url]http://forum.freeadvice.com/grandparent-s-rights-100/abusive-grandparents-non-intact-family-473158.html[/url]


is this the same child you have a "no contact" order with?


none of your business.

[Baz744]

Originally Posted by IsabellaSoriano

[url]http://forum.freeadvice.com/grandparent-s-rights-100/abusive-grandparents-non-intact-family-473158.html[/url]


is this the same child you have a "no contact" order with?

No. It is not.

[Baz744]

Originally Posted by IsabellaSoriano

[url]http://forum.freeadvice.com/grandparent-s-rights-100/abusive-grandparents-non-intact-family-473158.html[/url]


is this the same child you have a "no contact" order with?


none of your business.

Also, there is no child from whom I am barred contact.

[Blue Meanie]

Originally Posted by Baz744

Also, there is no child from whom I am barred contact.

there is now an order in my girlfriend's divorce decree barring her from letting me have any contact with her children.

So you are a liar???

[txmom512]

What are y'all talking about? Seriously, is it that difficult to follow??

"girlfriend's children" - subject of his other posts.

His 3 yr old child - subject of this post.

It's not brain surgery people. Pay attention.

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by Baz744

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Missouri

Child is three years old, born out of wedlock. Grandparents have never had a relationship with the child. Father pays child support, and has visitation. Mother takes care of child, and lives with him. Paternal grandparents, especially grandmother, emotionally, verbally, and physically abused father throughout childhood.

Father is now permanently and totally disabled with major depressive disorder. Paternal grandfather was less abusive, but failed to protect father from grandmother.

Both mother and father agree that grandparents should have no contact with child.

Grandparents are now filing for visitation under Missouri's grandparent rights statute. What is the likely outcome?

You are going to have to argue that the grandparents have no pre-existing relationship with the child and therefore should not be granted visitation rights.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by Blue Meanie

So you are a liar???

Just to be a thorn. HE is not the subject of any order barring contact with a child.

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by Zigner

Just to be a thorn. HE is not the subject of any order barring contact with a child.

Correct, his girlfriend is not allowed to have overnight guests of the opposite sex when her children are present. That's a whole lot different than being barred from being around any children.

[Ohiogal]

Originally Posted by LdiJ

Correct, his girlfriend is not allowed to have overnight guests of the opposite sex when her children are present. That's a whole lot different than being barred from being around any children.

Actually per his post HE specifically is not allowed any contact with his girlfriend's children.

txmom512 What are y'all talking about? Seriously, is it that difficult to follow??

"girlfriend's children" - subject of his other posts.

His 3 yr old child - subject of this post.

It's not brain surgery people. Pay attention.

hey Txmom where does it state that this is HIS child? He says dad is permanently disabled with major depressive disorder. He doesn't say this is him.

[CJane]

[url=http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C400-499/4520000402.HTM]Section 452-402 Grandparent's visitation rights granted[/url]
Grandparent's visitation rights granted, when, terminated, when--guardian ad litem appointed, when--attorney fees and costs assessed, when.

452.402. 1. The court may grant reasonable visitation rights to the grandparents of the child and issue any necessary orders to enforce the decree. The court may grant grandparent visitation when:

(1) The parents of the child have filed for a dissolution of their marriage. A grandparent shall have the right to intervene in any dissolution action solely on the issue of visitation rights. Grandparents shall also have the right to file a motion to modify the original decree of dissolution to seek visitation rights when visitation has been denied to them; or

(2) One parent of the child is deceased and the surviving parent denies reasonable visitation to a parent of the deceased parent of the child; or

(3) The child has resided in the grandparent's home for at least six months within the twenty-four month period immediately preceding the filing of the petition; and

(4) A grandparent is unreasonably denied visitation with the child for a period exceeding ninety days. However, if the natural parents are legally married to each other and are living together with the child, a grandparent may not file for visitation pursuant to this subdivision.

It appears that the only standing the grandparents have is if they can prove that they've been 'unreasonably' denied visitation. A pretty large burden.

That they have no relationship with the child might not matter if they can prove that the REASON they have no relationship is because the parents are 'unreasonable'.

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by CJane

It appears that the only standing the grandparents have is if they can prove that they've been 'unreasonably' denied visitation. A pretty large burden.

That they have no relationship with the child might not matter if they can prove that the REASON they have no relationship is because the parents are 'unreasonable'.

There is caselaw in Missouri since then that clarifies the 90 day bit...and the unreasonable bit as well.

There is no one definative case in Missouri, but a series of cases, combined with Troxel that pretty much indicates that "no relationship" is not in the grandparent's favor even if its because the parents allowed no relationship, and the 90 day bit applies to grandparents who have an established, long term relationship with the child.

However, the reality of Missouri is that gpv cases get decided based on how well an attorney argues the law, and the predisposition of the judge.

However, its also a well known fact that Missouri judges won't do much to enforce gpv orders either. Which has a lot to do with why there isn't any truly definative case law. A sort of ambivalance seems to reign there regarding gpv, and although it existed pre-Troxel, it seems to be more pronounced since Troxel.

I could give you chapter and verse of at least a half dozen parents in Missouri (all in different parts of the state) who simply refused to obey gpv orders, and never faced any real consequences...and I cannot tell you of any parents who did face any real consequences.

OG doesn't like me telling people these sorts of things, but I do believe that people are entitled to the truth about what is happening in their state.

My opinion of gpv in Missouri is that judges in general had doubts regarding its constitutionality even prior to Troxel, but many had sympathy for grandparents and made orders anyway, but few were willing to take a position that might lead to an appeal in a contempt situation....and that since Troxel, even fewer are willing to take a position that might lead to an appeal in a contempt situation.

[Ohiogal]

Originally Posted by LdiJ

There is caselaw in Missouri since then that clarifies the 90 day bit...and the unreasonable bit as well.

There is no one definative case in Missouri, but a series of cases, combined with Troxel that pretty much indicates that "no relationship" is not in the grandparent's favor even if its because the parents allowed no relationship, and the 90 day bit applies to grandparents who have an established, long term relationship with the child.

However, the reality of Missouri is that gpv cases get decided based on how well an attorney argues the law, and the predisposition of the judge.

However, its also a well known fact that Missouri judges won't do much to enforce gpv orders either. Which has a lot to do with why there isn't any truly definative case law. A sort of ambivalance seems to reign there regarding gpv, and although it existed pre-Troxel, it seems to be more pronounced since Troxel.

I could give you chapter and verse of at least a half dozen parents in Missouri (all in different parts of the state) who simply refused to obey gpv orders, and never faced any real consequences...and I cannot tell you of any parents who did face any real consequences.

OG doesn't like me telling people these sorts of things, but I do believe that people are entitled to the truth about what is happening in their state.

My opinion of gpv in Missouri is that judges in general had doubts regarding its constitutionality even prior to Troxel, but many had sympathy for grandparents and made orders anyway, but few were willing to take a position that might lead to an appeal in a contempt situation....and that since Troxel, even fewer are willing to take a position that might lead to an appeal in a contempt situation.

The bolded is out of line LD. I don't think people should be told to disobey court orders and break the law. I believe they should be educated about their LEGAL options however. I also believe they should be told what will happen to them if they do break a court order.

[LdiJ]

[quote=Ohiogal;2296410]The bolded is out of line LD. I don't think people should be told to disobey court orders and break the law. I believe they should be educated about their LEGAL options however. I also believe they should be told what will happen to them if they do break a court order.[/QUOTE]

Which I did, for a gpv case in Missouri.

OG, it wasn't all that long ago that you told a parent that they could lose custody to a grandparent for disobeying a gpv order and you have since conceeded that point.

GPV is a volital issue that varies dramatically from state to state,