Emergency Temporary Custody

[Ronin]

Fact: Dad is the father listed on BC.

Yes. But if this was sufficient to establish paternity and custodial rights, there would be no need for a hearing that is still pending to establish paternity.

My point here was not to argue for or against this parents rights, but to indicate that there appears to be no reason whatsoever for the drama of emergency custody hearings and refusing to return the child to the grandmother, and the home environment the child is accustomed to.

It would be much more sensible to address these matters at the hearing already scheduled in December to establish paternity. By then everyone should have a good handle on the mothers situation, and how to best respond to this in a manner consistent with the best interests of the child.

 

[Just Blue]

Yes. But if this was sufficient to establish paternity and custodial rights, there would be no need for a hearing that is still pending to establish paternity.

My point here was not to argue for or against this parents rights, but to indicate that there appears to be no reason whatsoever for the drama of emergency custody hearings and refusing to return the child to the grandmother, and the home environment the child is accustomed to.

It would be much more sensible to address these matters at the hearing already scheduled in December to establish paternity. By then everyone should have a good handle on the mothers situation, and how to best respond to this in a manner consistent with the best interests of the child.

Ronin...Please post a statute that over-rides a AOP fathers rights to that of a grandparent.

 

[LdiJ]

Yes. But if this was sufficient to establish paternity and custodial rights, there would be no need for a hearing that is still pending to establish paternity.

I can explain that as well. Judges in Indiana like to be cautious in unwed cases, therefore they tend to prefer that DNA tests be done to be certain that dad is dad. That does NOT change the legality of dad having signed the AOP at the hospital.

My point here was not to argue for or against this parents rights, but to indicate that there appears to be no reason whatsoever for the drama of emergency custody hearings and refusing to return the child to the grandmother, and the home environment the child is accustomed to.

I am just going to flat out disagree with you on this. Emergency, temporary custody is absolutely appropriate here.

It would be much more sensible to address these matters at the hearing already scheduled in December to establish paternity. By then everyone should have a good handle on the mothers situation, and how to best respond to this in a manner consistent with the best interests of the child.

Again, I disagree. The child's mother is in jail, the child should be with the father.

 

[Isis1]

I can explain that as well. Judges in Indiana like to be cautious in unwed cases, therefore they tend to prefer that DNA tests be done to be certain that dad is dad. That does NOT change the legality of dad having signed the AOP at the hospital.



I am just going to flat out disagree with you on this. Emergency, temporary custody is absolutely appropriate here.



Again, I disagree. The child's mother is in jail, the child should be with the father.

even IF grandma were to call the police, dad shows birth certificate to the police officers. police officers say, "oops, civil matter. not my problem."

 

[CJane]

even IF grandma were to call the police, dad shows birth certificate to the police officers. police officers say, "oops, civil matter. not my problem."

Exactly! The BC is the magic document here. Dad, do you have a copy?

And yes, file for Emergency custody TEMPORARILY pending the upcoming hearing. At THAT hearing, ask that the temp order be extended pending the outcome of Mom's criminal charges.

 

[Proserpina]

My point here was not to argue for or against this parents rights, but to indicate that there appears to be no reason whatsoever for the drama of emergency custody hearings and refusing to return the child to the grandmother, and the home environment the child is accustomed to.

Completely disagree, Ronin - this is exactly the type of situation which justifies an emergency hearing.

(specially when compared to most of the other cases we see here!)

 

[Ronin]

While I respect all of your reasons for disagreeing, I also disagree with these. This is not exactly the type of case that demands an emergency hearing. We do not know how well the father is prepared to accomodate an 18 month old child, or the quaity of the home environment she is being taken from... or taken to.

Compound this with the fact that a hearing on paternity is still pending, and an inexperienced pro se is attempting to wing it and file for an emergency ex parte change in custody, it is far from a done deal a judge will just hand the child over to the father in the next couple of days. At least not without ordering an evidentiary hearing within the next week.

 

[Just Blue]

While I respect all of your reasons for disagreeing, I also disagree with these. This is not exactly the type of case that demands an emergency hearing. We do not know how well the father is prepared to accomodate an 18 month old child, or the quaity of the home environment she is being taken from... or taken to.

.

Sweetie...The FATHER is much better able to "accommodate" this child than Mom ,that is in flippin' jail, with a $200,000.00 bond that NO ONE is going to pay for her.

 

[LdiJ]

While I respect all of your reasons for disagreeing, I also disagree with these. This is not exactly the type of case that demands an emergency hearing. We do not know how well the father is prepared to accomodate an 18 month old child, or the quaity of the home environment she is being taken from... or taken to.

Compound this with the fact that a hearing on paternity is still pending, and an inexperienced pro se is attempting to wing it and file for an emergency ex parte change in custody, it is far from a done deal a judge will just hand the child over to the father in the next couple of days. At least not without ordering an evidentiary hearing within the next week.

Will you quit harping on the paternity issue...because that has already been explained to you thoroughly.

This father needs to keep his child and file for emergency custody. The child should not be returned to grandma.

 

[Hisbabygirl77]

While I respect all of your reasons for disagreeing, I also disagree with these. This is not exactly the type of case that demands an emergency hearing. We do not know how well the father is prepared to accomodate an 18 month old child, or the quaity of the home environment she is being taken from... or taken to.
Compound this with the fact that a hearing on paternity is still pending, and an inexperienced pro se is attempting to wing it and file for an emergency ex parte change in custody, it is far from a done deal a judge will just hand the child over to the father in the next couple of days. At least not without ordering an evidentiary hearing within the next week.

Ok seriously, that it just a silly comment. Dad can go to goodwill and buy cribs, clothes, blankets whatever. It does not take much to prepare a home for a baby if dad is willing. I dont "know" that your house is prepared to accomodate a child, I don't "know" that anyone who has EVER posted on here has a home ready for a child. Come on now!

This is the childs father. You are wrong just admit it and quit misleading this poster.

 

[sometwo]

and refusing to return the child to the grandmother, and the home environment the child is accustomed to.

Since dad already has the child with him I would think he is prepared for the child. Sounds to me he might have already had visitation to begin with. (although maybe not court ordered)


Who said anyone is prepared to have a baby when the baby comes?

 

[Proserpina]

Since dad already has the child with him I would think he is prepared for the child. Sounds to me he might have already had visitation to begin with. (although maybe not court ordered)


Who said anyone is prepared to have a baby when the baby comes?

The Duggars?

(sorry - the thread is getting a little off-track...)

 

[sometwo]

The Duggars?

(sorry - the thread is getting a little off-track...)

lol well that's a good example.

 

[CJane]

While I respect all of your reasons for disagreeing, I also disagree with these. This is not exactly the type of case that demands an emergency hearing. We do not know how well the father is prepared to accomodate an 18 month old child, or the quaity of the home environment she is being taken from... or taken to.

Compound this with the fact that a hearing on paternity is still pending, and an inexperienced pro se is attempting to wing it and file for an emergency ex parte change in custody, it is far from a done deal a judge will just hand the child over to the father in the next couple of days. At least not without ordering an evidentiary hearing within the next week.

First off, dad is NOT attempting to CHANGE custody, he's attempting to ESTABLISH IT on a TEMPORARY basis PENDING a hearing.

Also, the judge is going to need a DAMNED good reason to NOT award the FATHER of this child custody when the mother CLEARLY cannot exercise custody at this time. A little document called the Constitution would smack him in his head if he tried.

 

[Proserpina]

First off, dad is NOT attempting to CHANGE custody, he's attempting to ESTABLISH IT on a TEMPORARY basis PENDING a hearing.

Also, the judge is going to need a DAMNED good reason to NOT award the FATHER of this child custody when the mother CLEARLY cannot exercise custody at this time. A little document called the Constitution would smack him in his head if he tried.

CJane, you are wonderful.

Jes' sayin' like.