Parental alienation?

[redleg17]

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

Facts:

1. I am the live-in bedwarmer/legal stranger

2. Post is for information to set one of the parent's at-ease.

3. The mother (CP) has received a phone message from the father (NCP) stating that he is filing for modification of the custody order due to "parental alienation" and that she should be receiving paperwork "soon".

4. As far as I could interpret from his rambling on the phone, he has an issue with:

a. We take his children to visit his parents and grandparents against his wishes.

b. The visits are always at the request of the parents/grandparents.

c. He has particular issue with the fact that his ex-wife and I have any sort of contact
with his family.

d. The father does not take the kids to visit his own family during his visitation, nor
does he visit them himself.

Can the mother be alienating the children from their father for allowing them to continue their relationship with the father's family at their request?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[Humusluvr]

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

Facts:

1. I am the live-in bedwarmer/legal stranger

2. Post is for information to set one of the parent's at-ease.

3. The mother (CP) has received a phone message from the father (NCP) stating that he is filing for modification of the custody order due to "parental alienation" and that she should be receiving paperwork "soon".

4. As far as I could interpret from his rambling on the phone, he has an issue with:

a. We take his children to visit his parents and grandparents against his wishes.

b. The visits are always at the request of the parents/grandparents.

c. He has particular issue with the fact that his ex-wife and I have any sort of contact
with his family.

d. The father does not take the kids to visit his own family during his visitation, nor
does he visit them himself.

Can the mother be alienating the children from their father for allowing them to continue their relationship with the father's family at their request?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

Is the ex wife somehow creating a situation where the child believes that the father is the root of all her problems? Do the parents or grandparents bad mouth the dad? Are they creating hostility in the child?

I believe the ex wife can take the child to visit whoever she wants (not like murderers or pedophiles - but you get my drift). Why does the dad not want the child visiting the relatives?

PS - #1 made me LOL

 

[redleg17]

The short of it, he's welcome at their home (family IS family), but won't go because he owes them money and they've called him out on some shady stuff he's been doing.

His parents and grandparents don't bad-mouth him in front of the kids.

For that matter, I don't allow them to bad-mouth their father in our house. Whatever I may think of him personally, he's their father and an adult, and will always be referred to with respect or it will have repercussions.

We have a great relationship with his family, and the children want to see their grandparents and greatgrandparents as much as they want to see the kids.

 

[Humusluvr]

The short of it, he's welcome at their home (family IS family), but won't go because he owes them money and they've called him out on some shady stuff he's been doing.

His parents and grandparents don't bad-mouth him in front of the kids.

For that matter, I don't allow them to bad-mouth their father in our house. Whatever I may think of him personally, he's their father and an adult, and will always be referred to with respect or it will have repercussions.

We have a great relationship with his family, and the children want to see their grandparents and greatgrandparents as much as they want to see the kids.

Well then wait for the papers (if they really do get filed) and call his bluff.

Where do you think his accusation comes from? Any merit?

 

[redleg17]

He's the type of person that gets a little information from somewhere and then makes flagrant threats of legal action to intimidate his ex. The accusation is probably a prep. move on his part, he stated that he intends to file for the oldest to live with him when the child is 13 (in a few months). The kid of course wants to go, he's a HUGE discipline problem, and the father has been actively encouraging him to continue misbehaving by promising to buy him all kinds of things if he tells a judge he'd "rather live with Dad". He also makes a joke about all the "antics" the oldest child pulls in our house. Note: he knows better than to do those things in his Father's house, Dad would knock him into next week, probably twice.

There is no merit. If anything, it's the other way around. One of the issues his family called him on was the kids complaining that their weekends with dad were a 48-hour bitch session where they had to sit there and listen to dad and his GF badmouth US.

 

[TheGeekess]

He's the type of person that gets a little information from somewhere and then makes flagrant threats of legal action to intimidate his ex. The accusation is probably a prep. move on his part, he stated that he intends to file for the oldest to live with him when the child is 13 (in a few months). The kid of course wants to go, he's a HUGE discipline problem, and the father has been actively encouraging him to continue misbehaving by promising to buy him all kinds of things if he tells a judge he'd "rather live with Dad".

Without a change in the child's cirmcumstances, that is not going to happen. Children are not allowed to choose where they want to live until they are adults. Georgia children used to have the ability to state where they wanted to live at 14, but Georgia's legislature changed that as of January 1, 2008.

 

[redleg17]

Ah, looked it up. The change isn't that far sweeping as to get rid of selection of custody at 14, but allows the judge greater discretion to overrule his decision in the interest of what is "best for the child". The language has been changed to the childs selection being "presumptive" from "controlling"

 

[TheGeekess]

Ah, looked it up. The change isn't that far sweeping as to get rid of selection of custody at 14, but allows the judge greater discretion to overrule his decision in the interest of what is "best for the child". The language has been changed to the childs selection being "presumptive" from "controlling"

Yes, but it's to help in cases like a NCP promising the sun, stars and moon to a child to get them to move in with the NCP. Judges see through that and now have the ability to help modulate some of it.