A non-relative has custody of my niece...

[pleasehelpmeout]

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

As the title says, a non-relative currently has custody of my niece. I'll start from the beginning.

My sister in law has been in to drugs of various kinds. She is currently going through her 2nd rehab. She has two daughters and a son. The niece in question is her eldest, and is 5 years old (I believe). The 5 year old has cerebral palsy, though it only affects her ability to walk at this point (she walks with a bit of a limp).

When my sister in law went into rehab the first time, temporary custody of my niece was given to the father of the child. This father of the child had a different girlfriend, and things were going ok for a couple of years. My sister in law was promised custody of her child if she met certain criteria. She had another child during rehab. She relapsed, and the second child was given to another of my sister in laws, and was obviously not given custody of my niece currently living with her father.

Earlier this year, in April, the niece's father was arrested and convicted with a long sentence (25 years? Life, maybe?) for sexual abuse of the other child living with him and his girlfriend. No charges were brought on behalf of my niece, but several were brought on behalf of the other child. According to several people we have talked to, including a judge, the law states that all children should be removed from the home immediately. This ALMOST happened. The court asked if any of her relatives would take her, and my sister in law (not the one in rehab) offered, since she already had been taking care of the sister of the niece. On the day that the transfer was supposed to be made, the niece was taken by the ex-girlfriend on a trip to the coast. After that, we were never able to take custody of her.

We visited a juvenile court last month where a decision was supposed to be made as to the future of the niece. Only the lawyers and the judge were able to talk. No witnesses or "evidence" was allowed. The judge was in disbelief that the niece hadn't been immediately removed from the household when the father was arrested for abuse. We are too. The judge seemed to be leaning heavily towards making a judgement for us, allowing us to have custody of the niece. She wanted to take a month to review the laws on foster parenting before making a decision, to ensure that she made the right decision.

Within the last couple of weeks, the ex-girlfriend filed a complaint that the judge hadn't allowed them to present their case, since they brought witnesses the previous court appearance that were never heard. The judge decided to hear them out. We were not involved with this hearing, nor were we allowed to bring up any witnesses or evidence.

The judge ended up ruling in their favor, allowing the non-blood relative to keep the child in their care under "foster care", namely because she is "trained" to take care of a child with cerebral palsy. As if our family couldn't be trained! Not to mention, the only deficiency is physical, and it's not a big one at that.

Here's a summary of the current conditions:
- The eldest daughter of the sister in law in rehab is with the ex-girlfriend of the father, technically in "foster care"
- The younger daughter of the sister in law in rehab is with the sister in law not in rehab, in foster care.
- The sister in law is fully certified as a foster care parent.
- According to the laws regarding foster care, foster children should always have priority to be placed with relatives. This isn't happening, as the eldest currently resides with a non-blood relative.

We are in disbelief that she is in foster care with a person whose home has been a place of sexual abuse, who has no blood relation to the child, and is away from her sister when they could be reunited and live together.

No one in the family or relatives has enough money for a good lawyer. We were given a lawyer for free for the previously mentioned cases, but as far as I know, he is done.

What can we do?

 

[LdiJ]

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

As the title says, a non-relative currently has custody of my niece. I'll start from the beginning.

My sister in law has been in to drugs of various kinds. She is currently going through her 2nd rehab. She has two daughters and a son. The niece in question is her eldest, and is 5 years old (I believe). The 5 year old has cerebral palsy, though it only affects her ability to walk at this point (she walks with a bit of a limp).

When my sister in law went into rehab the first time, temporary custody of my niece was given to the father of the child. This father of the child had a different girlfriend, and things were going ok for a couple of years. My sister in law was promised custody of her child if she met certain criteria. She had another child during rehab. She relapsed, and the second child was given to another of my sister in laws, and was obviously not given custody of my niece currently living with her father.

Earlier this year, in April, the niece's father was arrested and convicted with a long sentence (25 years? Life, maybe?) for sexual abuse of the other child living with him and his girlfriend. No charges were brought on behalf of my niece, but several were brought on behalf of the other child. According to several people we have talked to, including a judge, the law states that all children should be removed from the home immediately. This ALMOST happened. The court asked if any of her relatives would take her, and my sister in law (not the one in rehab) offered, since she already had been taking care of the sister of the niece. On the day that the transfer was supposed to be made, the niece was taken by the ex-girlfriend on a trip to the coast. After that, we were never able to take custody of her.

We visited a juvenile court last month where a decision was supposed to be made as to the future of the niece. Only the lawyers and the judge were able to talk. No witnesses or "evidence" was allowed. The judge was in disbelief that the niece hadn't been immediately removed from the household when the father was arrested for abuse. We are too. The judge seemed to be leaning heavily towards making a judgement for us, allowing us to have custody of the niece. She wanted to take a month to review the laws on foster parenting before making a decision, to ensure that she made the right decision.

Within the last couple of weeks, the ex-girlfriend filed a complaint that the judge hadn't allowed them to present their case, since they brought witnesses the previous court appearance that were never heard. The judge decided to hear them out. We were not involved with this hearing, nor were we allowed to bring up any witnesses or evidence.

The judge ended up ruling in their favor, allowing the non-blood relative to keep the child in their care under "foster care", namely because she is "trained" to take care of a child with cerebral palsy. As if our family couldn't be trained! Not to mention, the only deficiency is physical, and it's not a big one at that.

Here's a summary of the current conditions:
- The eldest daughter of the sister in law in rehab is with the ex-girlfriend of the father, technically in "foster care"
- The younger daughter of the sister in law in rehab is with the sister in law not in rehab, in foster care.
- The sister in law is fully certified as a foster care parent.
- According to the laws regarding foster care, foster children should always have priority to be placed with relatives. This isn't happening, as the eldest currently resides with a non-blood relative.

We are in disbelief that she is in foster care with a person whose home has been a place of sexual abuse, who has no blood relation to the child, and is away from her sister when they could be reunited and live together.

No one in the family or relatives has enough money for a good lawyer. We were given a lawyer for free for the previously mentioned cases, but as far as I know, he is done.

What can we do?

The only option I can see is getting a good attorney. I really don't see any other way.

Could everyone in the family pool their money to make it possible to hire an attorney?

 

[pleasehelpmeout]

Bummer. I don't think anyone in the family could afford an attorney at this point. I know my wife and I certainly can't contribute - we're having trouble with the bills as it is, and she's taking maternity leave real soon. We really don't have any relatives with a lot of cash, unfortunately.

Are there any not-for-profit lawyers or lawyers that would take on such a case as a volunteer basis? You know, for the "good of the people"? Or what about a school? I know the local university here has an excellent law school, would there be a possibility that they could help out somehow?

 

[Proserpina]

Bummer. I don't think anyone in the family could afford an attorney at this point. I know my wife and I certainly can't contribute - we're having trouble with the bills as it is, and she's taking maternity leave real soon. We really don't have any relatives with a lot of cash, unfortunately.

Are there any not-for-profit lawyers or lawyers that would take on such a case as a volunteer basis? You know, for the "good of the people"? Or what about a school? I know the local university here has an excellent law school, would there be a possibility that they could help out somehow?

You would really have to ask around.

Law schools often do have clinics where students (under the instruction of attorneys) are able to help people.

Start calling around asap!

 

[stealth2]

I'm a bit curious - if no one in the family can even contribute money to help with a lawyer's fees, how are they going to support this child?

Also - I'd venture a guess that most kids in foster care are with non-relatives.

 

[mistoffolees]

You would really have to ask around.

Law schools often do have clinics where students (under the instruction of attorneys) are able to help people.

Start calling around asap!

They may also find an attorney who will give them a payment plan. What people have to realize is that there are huge numbers of people out there who want free legal services because "they can't afford an attorney". Attorneys have the same right to get paid as anyone else. Even those who donate some of their time for pro bono work probably have 100 requests for every hour they can give up.

I'm a bit curious - if no one in the family can even contribute money to help with a lawyer's fees, how are they going to support this child?

That's one of the things that really bugs me - and it happens all the time. People want to fight to get their kids when they obviously don't have any way to take care of them properly. KIDS ARE EXPENSIVE.

I also get frustrated with the unending "I can't afford a lawyer" claims. For many of them, they can afford a couple of packs of cigarettes a day or cable TV or lots of other luxuries, but the attorneys should be flocking to them to offer free services.

Also - I'd venture a guess that most kids in foster care are with non-relatives.

In fairness, most of those cases are probably ones where no fit relative has stepped forward. It IS a little unusual for relatives who want the child to be passed over in lieu of strangers. Makes me wonder what part of the story we're not hearing.

 

[pleasehelpmeout]

I'm a bit curious - if no one in the family can even contribute money to help with a lawyer's fees, how are they going to support this child?

Also - I'd venture a guess that most kids in foster care are with non-relatives.

Good point. Since she is in foster care, and would continue being in foster care after being moved in with my sister in law, the state would be paying expenses. As long as a person is careful with expenses, the state funds are more than enough to take care of a child, especially when you're adding one to a family of four.

I'd venture a guess that you don't know much about foster care law, based on that statement.

They may also find an attorney who will give them a payment plan. What people have to realize is that there are huge numbers of people out there who want free legal services because "they can't afford an attorney". Attorneys have the same right to get paid as anyone else. Even those who donate some of their time for pro bono work probably have 100 requests for every hour they can give up.

That's one of the things that really bugs me - and it happens all the time. People want to fight to get their kids when they obviously don't have any way to take care of them properly. KIDS ARE EXPENSIVE.

I also get frustrated with the unending "I can't afford a lawyer" claims. For many of them, they can afford a couple of packs of cigarettes a day or cable TV or lots of other luxuries, but the attorneys should be flocking to them to offer free services.

In fairness, most of those cases are probably ones where no fit relative has stepped forward. It IS a little unusual for relatives who want the child to be passed over in lieu of strangers. Makes me wonder what part of the story we're not hearing.

What kind of payment plans? I don't know the exact financial situation of the rest of the members of the family, but there might be a way we could find to pay if there was a payment plan of some sort. My mother in law is jobless, my brother in law is on disability. I have three sisters in law, one in rehab, and two in stable family relationships. It is possible that those two could pool together to pay for an attorney. I am dead serious when I say that my wife and I couldn't contribute though - we have bills from last month sitting on the counter, waiting to be paid. Unless we want to ruin our credit rating, we wouldn't be able to help. And we don't have cable. We do have internet, but that's a necessity, since I do a lot of eBay selling and web programming. Neither of us smoke or drink. The biggest vice we have at this point is heading to the local ice cream shop on a weekly basis for $0.99 waffle cones.

I can see why you get frustrated with people who cannot take care of the children that they are fighting for. I can assure you, that is not the case here. She would be very well taken care of in my sister in law's family. Likewise, I can see where you get frustrated with people who expect free legal services. However, I'm not expecting anything here. I'm just asking what my options are. I don't see why you should be frustrated with me for that.

There isn't any part of the story I haven't told. That IS the whole story. I am being truthful here - I want some real answers, not fake answers based on some fantasy of reality I have. And now you can see why we want to fight this - it is as absurd as it sounds that it is. I don't know what the girlfriend told the judge, but I'm sure there were some lies in there to make herself sound better. She's told plenty of lies to officials before, I'm sure she'd tell some more. Like I said, for whatever reason, we weren't allowed to bring our witnesses or evidence forth during the latest hearing.

Is there a way I can get a transcript of the case? I'd like to see more of the details of exactly why the judge ruled the way she did, what evidence and witnesses were brought forth, etc.

Does anyone here think such a case is winnable? Would we be wasting our time and money paying an attorney to go after it?

 

[stealth2]

Good point. Since she is in foster care, and would continue being in foster care after being moved in with my sister in law, the state would be paying expenses. As long as a person is careful with expenses, the state funds are more than enough to take care of a child, especially when you're adding one to a family of four.

I'd venture a guess that you don't know much about foster care law, based on that statement.

Yep, I actually did know that. And I suspected that y'all figured the state would pay the family member to take the kid. Would y'all be in such a rush to get custody if the kid didn't come with money attached?

 

[pleasehelpmeout]

Yep, I actually did know that. And I suspected that y'all figured the state would pay the family member to take the kid. Would y'all be in such a rush to get custody if the kid didn't come with money attached?

Yes, absolutely, 100%. We all love her, want her in our family, and no questions asked would take her even if she wasn't in foster care.

If it was about the money, there's plenty of other foster children out there that would suffice. You asked how the child would be paid for, that's why I answered with "by the state".

Regarding your knowledge of foster care laws, I was replying to the statement below.

Also - I'd venture a guess that most kids in foster care are with non-relatives.

Yes, I'd venture a guess that that is true. So? How does that change the law that gives first priority to relatives? Why does that even matter to us?

 

[pleasehelpmeout]

I wish you all would be more helpful than just throwing personal judgments at me and my family, and our motives. I'm beginning to think I wasted my time coming here.

 

[mistoffolees]

Yes, absolutely, 100%. We all love her, want her in our family, and no questions asked would take her even if she wasn't in foster care.

Good. Then someone needs to find a way to make sacrifices to borrow the money, save the money by cutting expenses, or get a second job to earn the money so that you can hire an attorney.

 

[stealth2]

I wish you all would be more helpful than just throwing personal judgments at me and my family, and our motives. I'm beginning to think I wasted my time coming here.

Oh please... "you all"? I'm the only one who went there, so why you feel it necessary to impugn the others who replied to you is beyond me. Fact is - this is a complicated situation and you're going to have trouble prevailing w/o an attorney. Telling you that is hardly throwing personal judgments at you, your family or your collective motives.

 

[Ohiogal]

Good point. Since she is in foster care, and would continue being in foster care after being moved in with my sister in law, the state would be paying expenses.

Not true. If the child is in KINSHIP care, the state might not pay expenses.

As long as a person is careful with expenses, the state funds are more than enough to take care of a child, especially when you're adding one to a family of four.

You are assuming that those funds are available for FAMILY care or KINSHIP care.

I'd venture a guess that you don't know much about foster care law, based on that statement.

I'd venture a guess that you DO NOT KNOW MUCH about foster care law based on your statements. I do. Work with it daily.

What kind of payment plans? I don't know the exact financial situation of the rest of the members of the family, but there might be a way we could find to pay if there was a payment plan of some sort. My mother in law is jobless, my brother in law is on disability. I have three sisters in law, one in rehab, and two in stable family relationships. It is possible that those two could pool together to pay for an attorney. I am dead serious when I say that my wife and I couldn't contribute though - we have bills from last month sitting on the counter, waiting to be paid. Unless we want to ruin our credit rating, we wouldn't be able to help. And we don't have cable. We do have internet, but that's a necessity, since I do a lot of eBay selling and web programming. Neither of us smoke or drink. The biggest vice we have at this point is heading to the local ice cream shop on a weekly basis for $0.99 waffle cones.

Look for a retainer of at least $1500 to start with. Then at monthly payments after that.

I can see why you get frustrated with people who cannot take care of the children that they are fighting for. I can assure you, that is not the case here. She would be very well taken care of in my sister in law's family. Likewise, I can see where you get frustrated with people who expect free legal services. However, I'm not expecting anything here. I'm just asking what my options are. I don't see why you should be frustrated with me for that.

I would not count on state aid to help raise a family member's child.

There isn't any part of the story I haven't told. That IS the whole story. I am being truthful here - I want some real answers, not fake answers based on some fantasy of reality I have. And now you can see why we want to fight this - it is as absurd as it sounds that it is. I don't know what the girlfriend told the judge, but I'm sure there were some lies in there to make herself sound better. She's told plenty of lies to officials before, I'm sure she'd tell some more. Like I said, for whatever reason, we weren't allowed to bring our witnesses or evidence forth during the latest hearing.

You are NOT a party to the case. If you are not a party then you have no standing to present evidence or witnesses.

Is there a way I can get a transcript of the case? I'd like to see more of the details of exactly why the judge ruled the way she did, what evidence and witnesses were brought forth, etc.

Nope. Such cases are normally private.

Does anyone here think such a case is winnable? Would we be wasting our time and money paying an attorney to go after it?

Don't know.

ETA: And the child is NOT in foster care if the girlfriend has custody. If the child was in foster care, the county/state would have custody. NOT the girlfriend.

 

[cjones]

If the child has been living with the girlfriend and the father for the last few years, its possible one of the main reasons the judge ruled to keep the child with the girlfriend dispite the fact that she's not a blood relative is simply because of stability. If this woman is the only mother figure the child's ever known and knows how to care for a child with cerebral palsey then from the child's needs standpoint, this sounds as if its the best option for the child.
One of the things you can do is get visitation on a regular basis. Does anyone from the family have a strong relationship with the child other that the girlfriend?
Get educated! Take classes to prepare yourselves or whoever to care for the child. Just because its a limp now doesn't mean something might come up that the care giver would need to be able to recognize and treat immediately. Granted I know nothing about this disease either but, I can see where someone with experience in dealing with it could be more capable to care for a child than someone with out.
Does anyone in the family know about any other medical issues etc of the child? Are you or anyone playing an active role in her life?
To uproot a 5 year old from the life and people she's known all of her life can be traumatic especially if she doesn't know the "blood relative" who will be caring for her.
If nothing else, you should think about how you can prove another house is better capable of taking care of the child and would be in the best interests of the child. In this case, a blood relative doesn't necessarily mean that person is more suitable for caring for the child.

 

[Ohiogal]

Yes, absolutely, 100%. We all love her, want her in our family, and no questions asked would take her even if she wasn't in foster care.

If it was about the money, there's plenty of other foster children out there that would suffice. You asked how the child would be paid for, that's why I answered with "by the state".

Regarding your knowledge of foster care laws, I was replying to the statement below.

Yes, I'd venture a guess that that is true. So? How does that change the law that gives first priority to relatives? Why does that even matter to us?

If girlfriend has CUSTODY then the child is NOT in foster care. The child is in the CUSTODY of the girlfriend. If the child were in foster care the county/state would have custody of the child. You are NOT first priority in taking custody from a person who was apparently granted it by a court.