Motion to Intervene question

[kylecov04]

Oregon

Will the Court accept persons with a psychological parent relationship (mothers fiance) and maternal grandparent (mothers mom) to join in a Motion to Intervene a Petition for (sole) Custody as a kindred group? Mother sentenced to less than 3 years in prison. Father immediately went and picked up kids from the care of a family member (not a visitation day for him). Mother and father never married. Verbal parenting agreement only. Mother and fiance were primary care-givers for over one year prior to sentencing. Children resided here well over 80% of the time. Fiance given legally signed Power of Attorney at sentencing as the mothers wishes were for the care of the children to remain with him. Child-support order in effect but father voluntarily raised his other child-support through employer to avoid paying any for the two children of this relationship. Father will not answer calls or letters requesting contact with the children from the mother, grandmother or any other family member including a half-sibling. Father has made no effort to let children talk to or write to their mother. Father now moves for sole custody and support based on her being in prison. No family contact either - states that someone in her family will take the children. Can we reasonably step in, as a group, and ask that 50-50 custody be granted in order to preserve the mother-child relationship that father refuses to maintain? We will honor her federally protected rights as a parent. We will resume our previous relationships with the children who are 3 and 5 and make sure they get to see their half-sibling, and their mother.

 

[Antigone*]

kylecov Oregon

Will the Court accept persons with a psychological parent relationship and maternal grandparent to join in a Motion to Intervene a Petition for (sole) Custody as a kindred group? Mother sentenced to less than 3 years in prison. Father immediately went and picked up kids from a daycare. Mother and father never married. Verbal parenting plan only. Mother and fiance were primary care-givers for over one year prior to sentencing. Fiance given legally signed Power of Attorney at sentencing as the mothers wishes were for the care of the children to remain with him. Child-support order in effect but father voluntarily raised his other child-support through employer to avoid paying any for the two children of this relationship. Father will not answer calls or letters requesting contact with the children from the mother, grandmother or any other family member including a half-sibling. Father has made no effort to let children talk or write to mother. Father now moves for sole custody and support based on her being in prison. Can we reasonably step in, as a group, and ask that 50-50 custody be granted in order to preserve the mother-child relationship that father refuses to maintain?

The children's father has a right to full custody of his children. I don't see any type of custody being awared to another family member. You might ask for some type of visitation but I believe that is a stretch.

My suggestion to you is to play nice with dad.

 

[mistoffolees]

Groups can not parent. The child has 2 parents - a father and a mother. THOSE two have legal responsibility for the child. If Mom is unavailable, Dad is most likely to get custody.

The fact that Mom was pretending that some other guy was the child's father is irrelevant - other than making her even less fit as a mother.

Mom's bed warmer needs to stay the heck out of it - he has no place in the matter and if he tries to get involved, it could prevent Mom from her custodial rights after she gets out of prison. Mom can not sign over custody to him - only a court can do so.

Grandma also has no legal custody rights.

The only one here with any rights to complain is Mom. However, she's in prison and the court is not likely to require visitation in prison, so all she can do is ask for an order allowing her to communicate with the child by phone or mail.

Now, from a child development standpoint, Dad might let the child see the half-sibling and grandma under some circumstances, but that's his call, not mine or yours.

 

[Just Blue]

Oregon

Will the Court accept persons with a psychological parent relationship (mothers fiance) and maternal grandparent (mothers mom) to join in a Motion to Intervene a Petition for (sole) Custody as a kindred group? Mother sentenced to less than 3 years in prison. Father immediately went and picked up kids from the care of a family member (not a visitation day for him). Mother and father never married. Verbal parenting agreement only. Mother and fiance were primary care-givers for over one year prior to sentencing. Children resided here well over 80% of the time. Fiance given legally signed Power of Attorney at sentencing as the mothers wishes were for the care of the children to remain with him. Child-support order in effect but father voluntarily raised his other child-support through employer to avoid paying any for the two children of this relationship. Father will not answer calls or letters requesting contact with the children from the mother, grandmother or any other family member including a half-sibling. Father has made no effort to let children talk to or write to their mother. Father now moves for sole custody and support based on her being in prison. No family contact either - states that someone in her family will take the children. Can we reasonably step in, as a group, and ask that 50-50 custody be granted in order to preserve the mother-child relationship that father refuses to maintain? We will honor her federally protected rights as a parent. We will resume our previous relationships with the children who are 3 and 5 and make sure they get to see their half-sibling, and their mother.

What was Mom convicted of? Does she have other convictions...if so WHAT are they? How long have YOU been in the children's lives? Do you have a criminal history? if yes...What?

What was Dad's relationship like with the children before the arrest and conviction of children's Mother? How often did he see the children?

ANSWER ALL OF THESE QUESTIONS.

Thanks.

 

[kylecov04]

Thank you for the responses. We would play nice if the Father would answer us. False address given and a phone he will not answer, a 14-Y.O. girl answers it hostily says don't call again. Number listed with court as Fathers' contact number. Fiance not bed warmer. Fiance person who actually took care of children on a day-to-day basis and provided, house, bed, food, care, toys, clothes, love, etc. Father never had time other than forced 2-weeks in summer and an occasional half-day visit. ORS 109.119, even after Troxil v. Granville, seems to disagree, especially when father will not "play nice". Won't play at all. Still not sure if he has even bothered to be added to birth certificate of one child, the one he refused child-support for. Hmm. It's still worth a try.

 

[mistoffolees]

Thank you for the responses. We would play nice if the Father would answer us. False address given and a phone he will not answer, a 14-Y.O. girl answers it hostily says don't call again. Number listed with court as Fathers' contact number. Fiance not bed warmer. Fiance person who actually took care of children on a day-to-day basis and provided, house, bed, food, care, toys, clothes, love, etc. Father never had time other than forced 2-weeks in summer and an occasional half-day visit. ORS 109.119, even after Troxil v. Granville, seems to disagree, especially when father will not "play nice". Won't play at all. Still not sure if he has even bothered to be added to birth certificate of one child, the one he refused child-support for. Hmm. It's still worth a try.

Sorry, but legally, you ARE simply the bedwarmer.

As for the Oregon law, you are picking and choosing what you want. Read section 2a:
"2(a) In any proceeding under this section, there is a presumption that the legal parent acts in the best interest of the child."

You have a major hurdle to get over. And, unfortunately, your arguments for getting over that barrier are going to simply reinforce Dad's argument that Mom interfered with his rights to parent the child by putting you in his place as the child's parent.

Furthermore, the appeals court has narrowed the interpretation of that law and made it MUCH harder to win:
http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A111369A.htm

Is it possible that you might win? Sure - all sorts of things happen that never should. But the law is very much on Dad's side.

 

[Antigone*]

Thank you for the responses. We would play nice if the Father would answer us. False address given and a phone he will not answer, a 14-Y.O. girl answers it hostily says don't call again. Number listed with court as Fathers' contact number. Fiance not bed warmer. Fiance person who actually took care of children on a day-to-day basis and provided, house, bed, food, care, toys, clothes, love, etc. Father never had time other than forced 2-weeks in summer and an occasional half-day visit. ORS 109.119, even after Troxil v. Granville, seems to disagree, especially when father will not "play nice". Won't play at all. Still not sure if he has even bothered to be added to birth certificate of one child, the one he refused child-support for. Hmm. It's still worth a try.

Fiance may have done things out of the goodness of his heart, but that does not trump the legal rights of this father to raise his children. Obviously mom is unfit and unable to raise her children, so luckily dad is around to step in.

 

[kylecov04]

response to mistoffolees

mistoffolees
Senior Member
I should have made it clearer that I am a woman, not the fiance of Mother. I am family, but not blood, and am assisting fiance and Mothers mom, grandparents to the grandchildren. People break up all the time. Father has a live-in (bed warmer) as well.

Reading all the statutes of law, comments, etc. Not just the ones I want, but there are ones that can be answered YES and I am further researching them.

 

[Antigone*]

mistoffolees
Senior Member
I should have made it clearer that I am a woman, not the fiance of Mother. I am family, but not blood, and am assisting fiance and Mothers mom, grandparents to the grandchildren. People break up all the time. Father has a live-in (bed warmer) as well.

Reading all the statutes of law, comments, etc. Not just the ones I want, but there are ones that can be answered YES and I am further researching them.

...And father's live-in bed warmer has no legal rights to the children either. That bed warmer isn't here asking to take custody from the natural parent, right

 

[kylecov04]

Blue Meane,
Wll answer all your questions after a while, taking my son to kindergarten.

 

[mistoffolees]

mistoffolees
Senior Member
I should have made it clearer that I am a woman, not the fiance of Mother. I am family, but not blood, and am assisting fiance and Mothers mom, grandparents to the grandchildren. People break up all the time. Father has a live-in (bed warmer) as well.

It doesn't matter who you are - the father is the one who has the legal right to custody.

Oregon's law about 'family ties' is weak and specifically states that the legal parents' rights are presumed to take precedence. AND it has been further weakened on appeals.

Father's bedwarmer is irrelevant unless she is a proven danger to the child. But, then, she's not the one trying to take custody away from a legal parent, is she?

You already got advice from several people. You are unlikely to prevail in a custody battle, but even attempting it is likely to end ANY relationship you have with the child and might ruin Mom's chances when she gets out of jail.

At best, you MIGHT get visitation - and that's probably what you should be talking about.

 

[Proserpina]

Oregon

Will the Court accept persons with a psychological parent relationship (mothers fiance) and maternal grandparent (mothers mom) to join in a Motion to Intervene a Petition for (sole) Custody as a kindred group? Mother sentenced to less than 3 years in prison. Father immediately went and picked up kids from the care of a family member (not a visitation day for him). Mother and father never married. Verbal parenting agreement only. Mother and fiance were primary care-givers for over one year prior to sentencing. Children resided here well over 80% of the time. Fiance given legally signed Power of Attorney at sentencing as the mothers wishes were for the care of the children to remain with him. Child-support order in effect but father voluntarily raised his other child-support through employer to avoid paying any for the two children of this relationship. Father will not answer calls or letters requesting contact with the children from the mother, grandmother or any other family member including a half-sibling. Father has made no effort to let children talk to or write to their mother. Father now moves for sole custody and support based on her being in prison. No family contact either - states that someone in her family will take the children. Can we reasonably step in, as a group, and ask that 50-50 custody be granted in order to preserve the mother-child relationship that father refuses to maintain? We will honor her federally protected rights as a parent. We will resume our previous relationships with the children who are 3 and 5 and make sure they get to see their half-sibling, and their mother.

Who was the primary caregiver prior to the last year?

 

[kylecov04]

Proserpina
"Who was the primary caregiver prior to the last year?"

Both Mother and Father. Mother stayed at home with the children while also attending school. Father worked.

 

[kylecov04]

Antigone*of*Greece
...And father's live-in bed warmer has no legal rights to the children either. That bed warmer isn't here asking to take custody from the natural parent, right?

We are not trying to take the kids away from the father. Not asking to take over full custody, only share it the same as if Mother was here... until such time as she can return and then will assist her in asking the court for a change in custody solely for her and the father. Wouldn't be doing anything if the Father would call us and let us know the kids are okay. If he would let the Mother talk to the kids, at all. Instead, he has severed ALL ties and communication.

 

[kylecov04]

mistoffolees
"2(a) In any proceeding under this section, there is a presumption that the legal parent acts in the best interest of the child."

I would argue that the Mother, a legal parent, also is acting in the best interest of the child by desiring the continuance of well-established relationships with her children. That the child has a legal right to visit with their half-siblings and their mother. That the mother be able to find out how the children are doing, how is school going, are they brushing their teeth, to tell them that she loves them and misses them. Be that achieved through just visitation or a continuance of the shared verbal custody that mother-father had held prior to her being taken into custody.

" Oregon's law about 'family ties' is weak and specifically states that the legal parents' rights are presumed to take precedence "

I agree, legal parents' rights are presumed to, and should always, take precedence. The mother can be shown to be a parent by preponderance of evidence. No doubt about that. I can also prove that she is the mother of the children in question so therefore has the presumed rights and also has the best interest of the children in mind.