UCCJEA+TANF+UIFSA+Choice Law= Abductions and Chaos

[Proserpina]

Sorry. You need to read up on California law. Yes, they were abducted. Wed or not. I have as much right as she does to establish a relationship in the state in which they were born if paternity was established accorrding to State and Federal Law. It's parental kidnapping when a mother or a father takes a child pre-decree and invokes jurisdiction of another State.
Advocate for forum shopping all you want. It's illegal and unlawful.

Thanks for your time.

Please consult with an attorney.

 

[BL]

Sorry. You need to read up on California law. Yes, they were abducted. Wed or not. I have as much right as she does to establish a relationship in the state in which they were born if paternity was established accorrding to State and Federal Law. It's parental kidnapping when a mother or a father takes a child pre-decree and invokes jurisdiction of another State. Advocate for forum shopping all you want. It's illegal and unlawful.

Thanks for your time.

From a prior post :

I immediately file in California which automatically retains home state jurisdiction.

If the PKPA was true it would be criminal parental Abduction.

Did you fail to file an appropriate criminal report ?

I find it ironic you claim to know so much about Law ,but do not cite the statutes , or failed to " immediately " file kidnapping charges .

There are SOL on filing such reports .

There were appeals processes you could have utilized .

So what do you expect from this forum ?

 

[Proserpina]

From a prior post :



If the PKPA was true it would be criminal parental Abduction.

Did you fail to file an appropriate criminal report ?

I find it ironic you claim to know so much about Law ,but do not cite the statutes , or failed to " immediately " file kidnapping charges .

There are SOL on filing such reports .

There were appeals processes you could have utilized .

So what do you expect from this forum ?

I don't think anyone has been able to figure that out yet, BL

 

[LdiJ]

Sorry. You need to read up on California law. Yes, they were abducted. Wed or not. I have as much right as she does to establish a relationship in the state in which they were born if paternity was established accorrding to State and Federal Law. It's parental kidnapping when a mother or a father takes a child pre-decree and invokes jurisdiction of another State.
Advocate for forum shopping all you want. It's illegal and unlawful.

Thanks for your time.

No, they were not abducted. A parent with custody (which mom had and you didn't) cannot committ the crime of abduction. You can stamp around all you want on that issue, but that is the bottom line, legally.

You went to court in CA, and CA declined jurisdiction and did not order that the children be returned to CA. You could have appealed that decision.

Also, there is a big difference between wed and unwed. In a wedded case both parents legally have custody of their children. In an unwed case only the mother has legal custody until a court orders otherwise.

 

[CdwJava]

Sorry. You need to read up on California law. Yes, they were abducted.

Okay. And what charges were offered by the law enforcement agency to the District Attorney? What charges are listed on the warrant for her arrest?

Has a warrant for her arrest been issued?

If no warrant has issued, and you not only know where the children are but you have also been getting visitation, then I suspect that even the courts agree that no child abduction has occurred (as defined in Penal Code sections 277 - 280). This is certainly NOT kidnapping (as per PC 207).

If you have gone to the police and the courts and they have not issued a warrant for a criminal act, and the courts have not granted you some kind of emergency custody, they are effectively acknowledging this as a civil matter and not criminal.

- Carl

 

[LocalRocket]

OP, I realize that you've been through a lot, but take a step back and B-R-E-A-T-H-E. Nobody on this forum IS the system OR the mother you are fighting against. We are here to provide help, and it's harder to offer that help when you respond with snide remarks and say we "have no clue". This isn't a site where people just make up fake legal advice to upset parents in crisis.

I did some investigating about some of the things you've mentioned, and talked to my sister in law, who is an attorney in CA. (I can never ask her my own question's as she is ex-hubby's sis.) It appears as if there is quite a bit of backlash in CA over the voluntary acknowledgement form. Nurses and midwives are even bound by law in some counties to offer it to unwed fathers at the birth. The CA.gov website touts it by claiming that it will offer children and fathers of unwed mothers "financial support from both parents, access to important family medical records, access to the non-custodial parent's medical benefits, and the emotional benefit of knowing who both parents are". Unfortunately, that paternity acknowledgment DOES NOT establish legal or court recognized paternity, and may in fact establish the MOTHER’S custody without due process (administratively designated custody). This effectively signs dad up for child support without establishing visitation or custody. Even the website for the DA in Riverside County states (while trying to be positive) that "In most cases, signing Voluntary Acknowledgement of Paternity form will make it easier to establish paternity in a court."

The other problem with this form is that mom can have you removed. Also at CA.gov, "Either parent wishing to cancel or rescind a filed Declaration of Paternity can use a Declaration of Paternity Rescission and need only notify the other party by mail". Now OP, these may already be things you know, but I think it will benefit others to have this info up.

Now that you know that you won't be able to force them to move back to CA, and that's even *if* she left illegally, you have a framework to work within. YOU can have the courts make DNA paternity testing happen. You petition for it, don't wait for a judge to think of that idea him/herself. This is an everyday procedure... nothing to say "You've got to be kidding" about. Once paternity is established THAT way, you will be able to establish your custodial standing, whatever it may be, and visitation. But be prepared to know that if you've been spewing accusations of human trafficking, corruption, and abduction, the court is likely to ask that your visitation be supervised for some time. Obviously, supervised visitation would be easier if you moved there again.

Battling with my former spouse over being able to see my kids is what brought me here as well, and I have also had one of my children pass away. It is very sad for a parent to be separated from their children. I realize that it's easy for the claws to come out and to feel defensive when anyone suggests anything other than a situation in which you have ample access to your children. You have a hard road ahead of you, and sometimes we all need a reality check along the way by others who have knowledge of how the system works, even if that knowledge doesn't confirm whatever our desire is.

 

[Proserpina]

The other problem with this form is that mom can have you removed. Also at CA.gov, "Either parent wishing to cancel or rescind a filed Declaration of Paternity can use a Declaration of Paternity Rescission and need only notify the other party by mail". Now OP, these may already be things you know, but I think it will benefit others to have this info up.

Only within 60 days of DOP being signed...no longer than that.

http://www.childsup.ca.gov/Portals/0/cp/docs/cs915_english.pdf

(and doing so does not automagically remove the name from the birth certificate - this needs a court order)

 

[Proserpina]

Unfortunately, that paternity acknowledgment DOES NOT establish legal or court recognized paternity, and may in fact establish the MOTHER’S custody without due process (administratively designated custody). This effectively signs dad up for child support without establishing visitation or custody. Even the website for the DA in Riverside County states (while trying to be positive) that "In most cases, signing Voluntary Acknowledgement of Paternity form will make it easier to establish paternity in a court."

Yes, it does....

California Courts: Self-Help Center: Families & Children: Parentage: How to Establish Parentage: Sign a Voluntary Declaration of Paternity

"When both unmarried parents sign a Declaration of Paternity, it means they are the legal parents of the child. Signing a Declaration of Paternity is voluntary"

 

[Imeanseriously]

OP, I realize that you've been through a lot, but take a step back and B-R-E-A-T-H-E. Nobody on this forum IS the system OR the mother you are fighting against. We are here to provide help, and it's harder to offer that help when you respond with snide remarks and say we "have no clue". This isn't a site where people just make up fake legal advice to upset parents in crisis.

I did some investigating about some of the things you've mentioned, and talked to my sister in law, who is an attorney in CA. (I can never ask her my own question's as she is ex-hubby's sis.) It appears as if there is quite a bit of backlash in CA over the voluntary acknowledgement form. Nurses and midwives are even bound by law in some counties to offer it to unwed fathers at the birth. The CA.gov website touts it by claiming that it will offer children and fathers of unwed mothers "financial support from both parents, access to important family medical records, access to the non-custodial parent's medical benefits, and the emotional benefit of knowing who both parents are". Unfortunately, that paternity acknowledgment DOES NOT establish legal or court recognized paternity, and may in fact establish the MOTHER’S custody without due process (administratively designated custody). This effectively signs dad up for child support without establishing visitation or custody. Even the website for the DA in Riverside County states (while trying to be positive) that "In most cases, signing Voluntary Acknowledgement of Paternity form will make it easier to establish paternity in a court."

The other problem with this form is that mom can have you removed. Also at CA.gov, "Either parent wishing to cancel or rescind a filed Declaration of Paternity can use a Declaration of Paternity Rescission and need only notify the other party by mail". Now OP, these may already be things you know, but I think it will benefit others to have this info up.

Now that you know that you won't be able to force them to move back to CA, and that's even *if* she left illegally, you have a framework to work within. YOU can have the courts make DNA paternity testing happen. You petition for it, don't wait for a judge to think of that idea him/herself. This is an everyday procedure... nothing to say "You've got to be kidding" about. Once paternity is established THAT way, you will be able to establish your custodial standing, whatever it may be, and visitation. But be prepared to know that if you've been spewing accusations of human trafficking, corruption, and abduction, the court is likely to ask that your visitation be supervised for some time. Obviously, supervised visitation would be easier if you moved there again.

Battling with my former spouse over being able to see my kids is what brought me here as well, and I have also had one of my children pass away. It is very sad for a parent to be separated from their children. I realize that it's easy for the claws to come out and to feel defensive when anyone suggests anything other than a situation in which you have ample access to your children. You have a hard road ahead of you, and sometimes we all need a reality check along the way by others who have knowledge of how the system works, even if that knowledge doesn't confirm whatever our desire is.

Thanks for your comments. Here is Ca's Parentage Act

7644. (a) Notwithstanding any other law, an action for child
custody and support and for other relief as provided in Section 7637
may be filed based upon a voluntary declaration of paternity as
provided in Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 7570) of Part 2.
(b) Except as provided in Section 7576, the voluntary declaration
of paternity shall be given the same force and effect as a judgment
of paternity entered by a court of competent jurisdiction. The court
shall make appropriate orders as specified in Section 7637 based
upon the voluntary declaration of paternity unless evidence is
presented that the voluntary declaration of paternity has been
rescinded by the parties or set aside as provided in Section 7575 of
the Family Code.
(c) The Judicial Council shall develop the forms and procedures
necessary to implement this section.


7601. "Parent and child relationship" as used in this part means
the legal relationship existing between a child and the child's
natural or adoptive parents incident to which the law confers or
imposes rights, privileges, duties, and obligations. The term
includes the mother and child relationship and the father and child
relationship.



7602. The parent and child relationship extends equally to every
child and to every parent, regardless of the marital status of the
parents.

 

[BL]

Thanks for your comments. Here is Ca's Parentage Act

7644. (a) Notwithstanding any other law, an action for child
custody and support and for other relief as provided in Section 7637
may be filed based upon a voluntary declaration of paternity as
provided in Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 7570) of Part 2.
(b) Except as provided in Section 7576, the voluntary declaration
of paternity shall be given the same force and effect as a judgment
of paternity entered by a court of competent jurisdiction. The court
shall make appropriate orders as specified in Section 7637 based
upon the voluntary declaration of paternity unless evidence is
presented that the voluntary declaration of paternity has been
rescinded by the parties or set aside as provided in Section 7575 of
the Family Code.
(c) The Judicial Council shall develop the forms and procedures
necessary to implement this section.


7601. "Parent and child relationship" as used in this part means
the legal relationship existing between a child and the child's
natural or adoptive parents incident to which the law confers or
imposes rights, privileges, duties, and obligations. The term
includes the mother and child relationship and the father and child
relationship.



7602. The parent and child relationship extends equally to every
child and to every parent, regardless of the marital status of the
parents.

You have visitations .

Ca. declined Jurisdiction .

You did not utilize your legal options .

There was no parental kidnapping .

You know where your child is .

If you want more File for it .

 

[Proserpina]

You have visitations .

Ca. declined Jurisdiction .

You did not utilize your legal options .

There was no parental kidnapping .

You know where your child is .

If you want more File for it .

In a nutshell!

 

[Imeanseriously]

I don't have visitations anymore because the order was issued by county court who did not have jurisdiction in custody matters.

But, paternity and support was retained by the chancery court. Problem is, county court did not have jurisdiction to establish nor enforce support orders according to UIFSA.

Mississippi's paternity code is completely different that Cali's. It's title is "*******y" and the father assumes all financial costs.

Cali is 50/50.

Now, Chancery court wants to modify the county court order.

Birth Certs are from Cali and have my name.

Miss claimed personal jurisdiction over me when I was trying to visit my kids there.

When I commenced in Cali for custody, parentage, and support, Cali was the home state and the only state that could claim jurisdiction over all parties.

The first judge only stated that Miss had jurisdiction over the kids for custody matters.

Parentage and Support couldn't just get thrown out. And I'm assuming Miss will attempt to register their support order here.

But...

4956. (a) A party contesting the validity or enforcement of a
registered order or seeking to vacate the registration has the burden
of proving one or more of the following defenses:
(1) The issuing tribunal lacked personal jurisdiction over the
contesting party.
(2) The order was obtained by fraud.
(3) The order has been vacated, suspended, or modified by a later
order.
(4) The issuing tribunal has stayed the order pending appeal.
(5) There is a defense under the law of this state to the remedy
sought.
(6) Full or partial payment has been made.
(7) The statute of limitation under Section 4953 precludes
enforcement of some or all of the arrearages.
(b) If a party presents evidence establishing a full or partial
defense under subdivision (a), a tribunal may stay enforcement of the
registered order, continue the proceeding to permit production of
additional relevant evidence, and issue other appropriate orders. An
uncontested portion of the registered order may be enforced by all
remedies available under the law of this state.
(c) If the contesting party does not establish a defense under
subdivision (a) to the validity or enforcement of the order, the
registering tribunal shall issue an order confirming the order.

 

[Proserpina]

OP, I'm still not entirely sure what you're trying to accomplish.

 

[Imeanseriously]

In a nutshell!

I agree is legally wasn't parental kidnapping, but her actions clearly

3428. (a) Except as otherwise provided in Section 3424 or by any
other law of this state, if a court of this state has jurisdiction
under this part because a person seeking to invoke its jurisdiction
has engaged in unjustifiable conduct, the court shall decline to
exercise its jurisdiction unless one of the following are true:


I'm not here complaining. It's just unfortunate for all involved. Interstate cases are difficult especially when one state doesn't have a family court nor adopted the Unified Parentage Act.

 

[Proserpina]

I agree is legally wasn't parental kidnapping, but her actions clearly

3428. (a) Except as otherwise provided in Section 3424 or by any
other law of this state, if a court of this state has jurisdiction
under this part because a person seeking to invoke its jurisdiction
has engaged in unjustifiable conduct, the court shall decline to
exercise its jurisdiction unless one of the following are true:


I'm not here complaining. It's just unfortunate for all involved. Interstate cases are difficult especially when one state doesn't have a family court nor adopted the Unified Parentage Act.

Well, at least we got that bit cleared up.