Time sensitive question...

[Ohiogal]

Sheriff already told her - when she was filing reports after initial denial that he was unable to enforce beyond a phone call to Dad - which he did. That they cannot arrest w/out a court order and they could not force child into car...

She has no reason to expect that anything different would have happened now.

But it makes me wonder why this is in every order in MO:

Pursuant to RSMo. 452.425:
Any court order for the custody of, or visitation with, a child may include a provision that the sheriff or other law enforcement officer shall enforce the rights of any person to custody or visitation unless the court issues a subsequent order pursuant to chapter* 210, 211, 452 or 455, RSMo, to limit or deny the custody of, or visitations with, the child. Such sheriff or law enforcement officer shall not remove a child from a person who has actual physical custody of the child unless such sheriff or officer is shown a court order or judgment which clearly and convincingly verifies that such person is not entitled to the actual physical custody of the child, and there are not other exigent circumstances that would give the sheriff or officer reasonable suspicion to believe that the child would be harmed or that the court order presented to the sheriff or officer may not be valid.

It just states that any court order MAY include. It doesn't state that the court order does include that provision. It is informing people of their rights but not actually giving law enforcement that right. You also need emergency circumstances that the child may be harmed or that the court order MAY not be valid. This is not as clear cut as is being read. I understand the anger however and am uupset about the situation.

 

[majomom1]

I do feel my son is stuck in a no win situation. It is my understanding from other adults in our area that son spends as much time as possible away from my ex as well. He has begged other parents to let him come over just to get away from them. Having access to the car allows him to do this. I have dads here, with scouts and church, that are watching my son. They are the ones that have told me our son has way too long of a leash and they feel our son is being bullied by my ex.

He is also a teen and likes the freedom. I can't say that I blame him. WE have put him in an awful position and my ex won't claim his part in any of this.

Part of my real goal here was to hopefully open a productive line of communication with my ex. I have begged him, in emails too, to call a truce and stop letting the kids know all of our conflict. He is only focused on one of our sons at the moment and wants out of paying child support. Others see the favoritism my ex is giving our oldest, I am sure youngest will see it soon too... and how do I tell him he can't go too. It is not fair that one goes to live with dad but not the other.

There were times when they did not want to go with my ex... I made them go. I told them it was his time and they needed to talk whatever problem they had out with him. I am still glad I did that...

Our oldest son will do fine in the other school. But... our youngest will not be fine in that school. Two entirely different kids and I am trying to find what is best for both of them, not just one of them.

I am worried about his emotions from today. He is torn and I feel him running away from both of us.

I cannot tell you how much it hurt to even see him there... He did give me a great big hug... a long one... before we left. He knows I am hurt... but he knows I love him.

 

[mb94]

Possibly the mediation could give forth to some type of contact with a GAL or therapist who can help the 16 year old discuss why they want to stay with Dad. At least to help break through and get to what he really wants away from Mom and Dad where he may feel like he has to give a certain answer.

I agree this judge made the totally wrong decision. There is no excuse. At the same time, I've seen some family court judges who just seem sick of their job. If it isn't a case of abuse or neglect they will hand it over to the mediators to deal with. I can't say I agree, but maybe they just feel that no matter what rulings they make it won't solve the problems between the parents.

My brother ran away to live with Dad when he was 17. Mom was too controlling and didn't let him do what he wanted. Life with Dad was great for a week. Then he got tired of never having clean clothes to wear, not having anything to eat but junk food, and the parade of girlfriends Dad brought home. This may end up bringing you and your son closer together. Children of divorce often idealize the absent (or less involved) parent. They blame the divorce on one parent, and think the other one was the victim. A few weeks of reality can make the truth come out, and help create a more realistic view of both parents.

 

[CJane]

The problem the attorney has is this may NOT be considered a FINAL appealable order. ONLY final orders are appealable.

I know...

But the statute that actually got this FA motion heard states that 'final disposition' in any family access motion must be w/in 60 days of service to the offending party.

So there has to be a FINAL order before October 29 (I think) yes? That's what I was working from here.

And thank you.

 

[Ozark_Sophist]

Was the hearing in front of a Family Court Commissioner? If so, then under MO statute, you have 15 days to file a motion for a hearing in front of a family court judge.

I ask because I had problems with a FCC but I was fortunate I was able to first refer him to specific state statute demonstrating he was wrong and also to MO SC rules reiterating the statute. I wouldn't be surprised if you were in my county.

 

[CJane]

Was the hearing in front of a Family Court Commissioner? If so, then under MO statute, you have 15 days to file a motion for a hearing in front of a family court judge.

I ask because I had problems with a FCC but I was fortunate I was able to first refer him to specific state statute demonstrating he was wrong and also to MO SC rules reiterating the statute. I wouldn't be surprised if you were in my county.

You're not in the metro area, are you?

 

[CJane]

It just states that any court order MAY include. It doesn't state that the court order does include that provision. It is informing people of their rights but not actually giving law enforcement that right. You also need emergency circumstances that the child may be harmed or that the court order MAY not be valid. This is not as clear cut as is being read. I understand the anger however and am uupset about the situation.

My order DOES include that, and it's my understanding that majo's does too.

Which is why I'm confused.... I was reading it to say that they HAVE to enforce it unless they believe that returning the child to the parent who's supposed to have custody would harm the child or that they believe the order is not valid.

 

[Ohiogal]

I know...

But the statute that actually got this FA motion heard states that 'final disposition' in any family access motion must be w/in 60 days of service to the offending party.

So there has to be a FINAL order before October 29 (I think) yes? That's what I was working from here.

And thank you.

Maybe? I dont know when everything was timestamped and I am not licensed in MO hon. It is possible. However it may be deemed to have been waived however that is something that can be tried. However the final disposition for the family access motion -- the final hearing has been held -- however they may be rolling it into the modification as they have stated that the son stays until the modification hearing.

 

[Ozark_Sophist]

You're not in the metro area, are you?

No, but this thread is indiciates the lack of family law knowledge that family court commissioners have.

 

[Ohiogal]

My order DOES include that, and it's my understanding that majo's does too.

Which is why I'm confused.... I was reading it to say that they HAVE to enforce it unless they believe that returning the child to the parent who's supposed to have custody would harm the child or that they believe the order is not valid.

Nope. It is saying that an order MAY include a clause requiring law enforcement to step in under those circumstances. HOWEVER unless the order actually contains that clause requiring it, then it doesn't.

 

[Silverplum]

No, but this thread is indiciates the lack of family law knowledge that family court commissioners have.

And not just in MO...

 

[Silverplum]

Nope. It is saying that an order MAY include a clause requiring law enforcement to step in under those circumstances. HOWEVER unless the order actually contains that clause requiring it, then it doesn't.

But majo's DOES include it...

I want to go KICK that noncompliant, lazyassed, stupid sheriff in the BUTT!!!!!

 

[peppier]

a very. very. ugly place to be. my heart goes out to her. taking the high road here would be more then i could do i think.

You could because you would understand that the kid is a victim of his father's scheming and teenagers are more susceptible than anyone.

 

[majomom1]

CJane Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogal
It just states that any court order MAY include. It doesn't state that the court order does include that provision. It is informing people of their rights but not actually giving law enforcement that right. You also need emergency circumstances that the child may be harmed or that the court order MAY not be valid. This is not as clear cut as is being read. I understand the anger however and am uupset about the situation.

My order DOES include that, and it's my understanding that majo's does too.

Which is why I'm confused.

No cjane... my order does not have that provision. And I know that law enforcement is in a tough spot on that anyway, especially with the age.

I am stuck on the Family Access Motion and there being no good cause. i really, really don't think the judge got that I have custody and our son is supposed to be in school in MO. The words that were used were "parenting time"... not custody.

I believe he used those words too... he did not find that Mr. May interefered or withheld parenting time... I honestly think the man went into dreamland.

We did cover the car issue and that my son had too many kids in the car, warning tickets and speeding tickets.. all on my ex's weekends AND that my son was not allowed to drive his car to my house.

 

[CJane]

No cjane... my order does not have that provision. And I know that law enforcement is in a tough spot on that anyway, especially with the age.

I am stuck on the Family Access Motion and there being no good cause. i really, really don't think the judge got that I have custody and our son is supposed to be in school in MO. The words that were used were "parenting time"... not custody.

I believe he used those words too... he did not find that Mr. May interefered or withheld parenting time... I honestly think the man went into dreamland.

We did cover the car issue and that my son had too many kids in the car, warning tickets and speeding tickets.. all on my ex's weekends AND that my son was not allowed to drive his car to my house.

I've gotta get some crap done so I can leave work. I'm gonna mull... I'll call you soon...

Don't get too hung up on the parenting time/custody issue... they're used interchangeably more often than not.