Moving/Custody/Visitation

[NvrEndingLife82]

You said paternal grandmother is the babysitter/daycare. Is that not true?

Yes, this is correct.

 

[Ohiogal]

I wasn't going to ask for more in daycare. Only what my 1/2 would have been, basically what he is already paying. I wouldn't mind doing half/half on transport. Part of the reason I moved from where I was, to where I am now, was to make sure his father would be a part of his life. I knew he wouldn't drive to see him if I stayed where I was. Unfortunately, it's looking like I should have just stayed there, to begin with. >.< Then none of this would have been an issue.

You don't get it. Holmes county -- if you are moving -- you are going to be responsible for transportation. And your half? That is not how daycare is calculated on child support. If you move, dad could request new calculations based on your new rate of pay and also ask for deviations downward if you are allowed to take the child and expect him to do ANY of the transportation.

 

[Ohiogal]

Yes, this is correct.

Then paternal grandmother having the child while dad and you are working is not an issue. In fact paternal grandmother is most likely working for less than any other daycare. Paternal grandmother is also part of your child's family.

You just don't understand that YOU are not the one who matters here. The court looks at this from the best interests of the child. NOT the best interests of the parents. 3109.051(D) has all the best interest considerations though the last one is "any other thing the court thinks is necessary." You WANTING to move and take the child with you -- well your wishes are ONE thing but dad's wishes are just as important. Yours do not prevail even if you have the magical "residential for school purposes" designation because that doesn't control.

 

[Ohiogal]

The best interest factors if dad doesn't consent to the move and fights you for custody:

(1) The prior interaction and interrelationships of the child with the child's parents, siblings, and other persons related by consanguinity or affinity, and with the person who requested companionship or visitation if that person is not a parent, sibling, or relative of the child;

The child has had 50/50 time between his parents. In addition, the child has had time consistently with his paternal grandmother. There appear to be no siblings. Friends don't matter in this one.

(2) The geographical location of the residence of each parent and the distance between those residences, and if the person is not a parent, the geographical location of that person's residence and the distance between that person's residence and the child's residence;

You live relatively close. But now you want to change that.

(3) The child's and parents' available time, including, but not limited to, each parent's employment schedule, the child's school schedule, and the child's and the parents' holiday and vacation schedule;

So you want to move the child 2 to three hours away and then you will start working more and going to school plus you will have homework and such for the school work. Dad is salary for 40 hours a week. Though he sometimes makes more.

(4) The age of the child;

Preschool age.

(5) The child's adjustment to home, school, and community;

Child has adjusted well and has family in the area and has lived in this community for most if not all of his short life.

(6) If the court has interviewed the child in chambers, pursuant to division (C) of this section, regarding the wishes and concerns of the child as to parenting time by the parent who is not the residential parent or companionship or visitation by the grandparent, relative, or other person who requested companionship or visitation, as to a specific parenting time or visitation schedule, or as to other parenting time or visitation matters, the wishes and concerns of the child, as expressed to the court;

Not applicable.

(7) The health and safety of the child;

Nothing mentioned impacts this.

(8) The amount of time that will be available for the child to spend with siblings;

Not applicable.

(9) The mental and physical health of all parties;

Okay --- no mention of this one either.

(10) Each parent's willingness to reschedule missed parenting time and to facilitate the other parent's parenting time rights, and with respect to a person who requested companionship or visitation, the willingness of that person to reschedule missed visitation;

Nothing about this.

(11) In relation to parenting time, whether either parent previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to any criminal offense involving any act that resulted in a child being an abused child or a neglected child; whether either parent, in a case in which a child has been adjudicated an abused child or a neglected child, previously has been determined to be the perpetrator of the abusive or neglectful act that is the basis of the adjudication; and whether there is reason to believe that either parent has acted in a manner resulting in a child being an abused child or a neglected child;

(12) In relation to requested companionship or visitation by a person other than a parent, whether the person previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to any criminal offense involving any act that resulted in a child being an abused child or a neglected child; whether the person, in a case in which a child has been adjudicated an abused child or a neglected child, previously has been determined to be the perpetrator of the abusive or neglectful act that is the basis of the adjudication; whether either parent previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to a violation of section 2919.25 of the Revised Code involving a victim who at the time of the commission of the offense was a member of the family or household that is the subject of the current proceeding; whether either parent previously has been convicted of an offense involving a victim who at the time of the commission of the offense was a member of the family or household that is the subject of the current proceeding and caused physical harm to the victim in the commission of the offense; and whether there is reason to believe that the person has acted in a manner resulting in a child being an abused child or a neglected child;

Doesn't appear applicable.

(13) Whether the residential parent or one of the parents subject to a shared parenting decree has continuously and willfully denied the other parent's right to parenting time in accordance with an order of the court;

YOu haven't stated he has done this.

(14) Whether either parent has established a residence or is planning to establish a residence outside this state;

2 to 3 hours from Holmes county... so Columbus? Dayton? Youngstown? That is not outside of the state.

(15) In relation to requested companionship or visitation by a person other than a parent, the wishes and concerns of the child's parents, as expressed by them to the court;

Unless he consents, you will each WISH for your child to be with you.

(16) Any other factor in the best interest of the child.

Well there we go... that can BE ANYTHING.


Out of the ones that are applicable, they don't lean towards moving the child away from his father and extended family.

 

[LdiJ]

I would just like to reiterate that this one is different than other moveaways because mom intends to maintain the 50/50 timeshare. I don't think that mom is being realistic about what the cost of transportation, round trip, once a week is really going to be, but if she can pull that off, then her odds of keeping her 50% timeshare would not be bad. She is not attempting to take the child away from dad...she just wants to maintain her 50/50 timeshare.

Think about it mom? How much gas is it going to take you to make that trip once a week? I suspect that its going to be costly enough that it could wipe out the financial benefit of moving. Have you even considered getting a second, part time job, where you are now?

Now, where its really going to be a problem is when its time for the child to start school. She thinks that the magic "residential for school purposes" is going to make her the primary residential parent when the child starts school, but that is not necessarily going to happen. I think that its more likely that dad would end up with that unless mom is prepared to move back once its time for the child to start school.

 

[Ohiogal]

I would just like to reiterate that this one is different than other moveaways because mom intends to maintain the 50/50 timeshare. I don't think that mom is being realistic about what the cost of transportation, round trip, once a week is really going to be, but if she can pull that off, then her odds of keeping her 50% timeshare would not be bad. She is not attempting to take the child away from dad...she just wants to maintain her 50/50 timeshare.

Think about it mom? How much gas is it going to take you to make that trip once a week? I suspect that its going to be costly enough that it could wipe out the financial benefit of moving. Have you even considered getting a second, part time job, where you are now?

Now, where its really going to be a problem is when its time for the child to start school. She thinks that the magic "residential for school purposes" is going to make her the primary residential parent when the child starts school, but that is not necessarily going to happen. I think that its more likely that dad would end up with that unless mom is prepared to move back once its time for the child to start school.

A) At this point in time the trip would NOT be once a week as they have a 2-3-2 plan -- that is two or three times a week she would be making it. She is moving. She could be made SOLELY responsible by the Holmes County court.
B) If she gets a week on week off plan that could be once a week she would be driving the whole distance back and forth.
C) She has to consider the time. Is she going to have 4-6 hours each week (if week on week off) to travel?
D) The residential for school purposes is up for grabs when she moves. And since the child has lived his whole life where they are now, dad may get that. If dad gets that, then the child will be going to school where dad is provided dad doesn't move.
E) You forgot about the cost of child care. Dad pays $487 a month for his portion. That would still be paid to HIS mother who would be watching the child while the child is with dad. Can mom afford the child care wherever she is going to be which might amount to more than that if she is working full time AND going to school?
F) Mom also seems to think that dad would be paying that money to her for daycare if she moves. She can't count on that. Dad may pay only minimally. Especially since in one of mom's threads, dad was on the lease and child support was paid as rent. Now it seems that has changed.*

*Review her posting history.

 

[NvrEndingLife82]

You don't get it. Holmes county -- if you are moving -- you are going to be responsible for transportation. And your half? That is not how daycare is calculated on child support. If you move, dad could request new calculations based on your new rate of pay and also ask for deviations downward if you are allowed to take the child and expect him to do ANY of the transportation.

I am not in Holmes County. I think you may be looking at one of my older threads related to work. That job was in Holmes County. I reside in Wayne County.

If I were able to relocate the little one with me, I really wouldn't care what I got in child support. I was only asking because the child care was part of the current support order, and I was curious about whether or not it could be transferred. And I do understand the whole thing could be recalculated to include pretty much any circumstance surrounding the case.

On a side note, I found the clause in our parenting plan about filing with the court, and also notifying the other parent. It said I had to file with the Domestic Relations Court, so I called them. Apparently the info is incorrect in the parenting plan. Domestic Relations told me I cannot file through them because he and I were never married (so not divorce/separation). They told me I would have to go through Juvenile Court. I stopped in there, and they put a note in the case file about that being incorrect, and they give me the forms I need to file. I did ask them about the 60 day notice thing that was brought up, and they said that is not a requirement. But they did say I would either have to stay in the area until the case is finished, or have to come back for the court dates.

 

[NvrEndingLife82]

Then paternal grandmother having the child while dad and you are working is not an issue. In fact paternal grandmother is most likely working for less than any other daycare. Paternal grandmother is also part of your child's family.

You just don't understand that YOU are not the one who matters here. The court looks at this from the best interests of the child. NOT the best interests of the parents. 3109.051(D) has all the best interest considerations though the last one is "any other thing the court thinks is necessary." You WANTING to move and take the child with you -- well your wishes are ONE thing but dad's wishes are just as important. Yours do not prevail even if you have the magical "residential for school purposes" designation because that doesn't control.

I understand that, and I am not arguing with that.

I am not the only one that thinks the child going with me would be in the best interest of the child. Pretty much everyone outside of the father and the paternal grandparents think this (including some of his family members). Granted, I know their opinions do not count either, and only the evidence that can be given to the judge will matter.

I am working on finding a local lawyer. I will probably need one.

 

[Ohiogal]

I am not in Holmes County. I think you may be looking at one of my older threads related to work. That job was in Holmes County. I reside in Wayne County.

If I were able to relocate the little one with me, I really wouldn't care what I got in child support. I was only asking because the child care was part of the current support order, and I was curious about whether or not it could be transferred. And I do understand the whole thing could be recalculated to include pretty much any circumstance surrounding the case.

On a side note, I found the clause in our parenting plan about filing with the court, and also notifying the other parent. It said I had to file with the Domestic Relations Court, so I called them. Apparently the info is incorrect in the parenting plan. Domestic Relations told me I cannot file through them because he and I were never married (so not divorce/separation). They told me I would have to go through Juvenile Court. I stopped in there, and they put a note in the case file about that being incorrect, and they give me the forms I need to file. I did ask them about the 60 day notice thing that was brought up, and they said that is not a requirement. But they did say I would either have to stay in the area until the case is finished, or have to come back for the court dates.

Why did you go Domestic Relations court if another court handled your parenting plan? Through what court was the parenting plan issued? The child cannot be relocated until a decision is made. You can have the child on your time prior to a decision being made but the court order needs followed. Can you afford running to Wayne County from Cincinnati/Dayton or wherever three times a week? Are you willing to pay dad child support if you can't relocate the little one?

 

[Ohiogal]

I understand that, and I am not arguing with that.

I am not the only one that thinks the child going with me would be in the best interest of the child. Pretty much everyone outside of the father and the paternal grandparents think this (including some of his family members). Granted, I know their opinions do not count either, and only the evidence that can be given to the judge will matter.

I am working on finding a local lawyer. I will probably need one.

Their opinions do not matter. And have you looked at what best interest means? It weighs more towards dad based on you have posted.

 

[Ladyback1]

But they did say I would either have to stay in the area until the case is finished, or have to come back for the court dates.

So, if you go ahead and move: What are you going to do if the court awards custody to Dad? And if that happens, it's a good bet that you will end up paying for all travel to exercise your visitation.

 

[Ohiogal]

Have you looked at caselaw? Because you have a shared parenting decree. You file a notice to relocate, dad can file a notice to terminate the shared parenting plan and go for custody. In addition, the best interests standards apply.

 

[Ohiogal]

You also want to look at R.C. 3109.04(F)(1) which lists best interests regarding shared parenting which you actually have. I posted under 3109.051 before. My mistake. They are:

"(a) The wishes of the child's parents regarding his care;

"(b) ***[T]he wishes and concerns of the child, as expressed to the court;

"(c) The child's interaction and interrelationship with his parents, siblings, and any other person who may significantly affect the child's best interest;

"(d) The child's adjustment to his home, school, and community;

"(e) The mental and physical health of all persons involved in the situation.

"(f) The parent more likely to honor and facilitate visitation and companionship rights approved by the court;

"(g) Whether either parent has failed to make all child support payments ***;

"(h) Whether either parent previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to any criminal offense involving any act that resulted in a child being an abused or a neglected child ***;

"(i) Whether the residential parent or one of the parents subject to a shared parenting decree has continuously and willfully denied the other parent his or her right to visitation in accordance with an order of the court;

"(j) Whether either parent has established a residence, or is planning to establish a residence, outside this state."

 

[Proserpina]

I would just like to reiterate that this one is different than other moveaways because mom intends to maintain the 50/50 timeshare. I don't think that mom is being realistic about what the cost of transportation, round trip, once a week is really going to be, but if she can pull that off, then her odds of keeping her 50% timeshare would not be bad. She is not attempting to take the child away from dad...she just wants to maintain her 50/50 timeshare.

Think about it mom? How much gas is it going to take you to make that trip once a week? I suspect that its going to be costly enough that it could wipe out the financial benefit of moving. Have you even considered getting a second, part time job, where you are now?

Now, where its really going to be a problem is when its time for the child to start school. She thinks that the magic "residential for school purposes" is going to make her the primary residential parent when the child starts school, but that is not necessarily going to happen. I think that its more likely that dad would end up with that unless mom is prepared to move back once its time for the child to start school.

It's actually because of the difference that I answered how I did.

With her current time-share, there's a solid chance that it's going to be nothing short of a logistical nightmare for the parents...and that's not even touching on the child's welfare.

What concerns me though, is how there was considerable time spent telling us how Dad isn't suited to be full time parent, but yet he has a 50/50 split. I'll credit the OP for thinking about it further, but it just didn't speak of "best interest" to me - just "Dad isn't suited".

With these things in mind I cannot help but feel that having the child remain where he is - with the same surroundings, the same environment, even down to the same sitter (who just happens to be Dad's parent) - is overall going to be better for him.

 

[Ohiogal]

You might want to read this:
Laurie A. Lockom Kna Laurie A. Smillie v. Steven P. Lockom, 00-LW-3668, WD-99-053
Court of Appeals of Ohio, Sixth District, Wood
August 18, 2000

Because while a notice to relocate is necessary you have other issues as you have a shared parenting plan.

Of course even if you were the only residential parent (you had full custody), you could still be denied to move:
Brown v. Brown, 2013-Ohio-3456, 2012-CA-40
Court of Appeals of Ohio, Second District, Champaign
August 9, 2013


And then there is regarding notice:
In Re Seitz, 2003-Ohio-5218, 2002T0097, 03-LW-4009 (11th)
Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eleventh District
September 26, 2003

which states this:

In her second assignment of error, appellant argues that the magistrate's finding that appellant had moved Alexis to Dublin "without advance notice" is unsupported by the evidence of record and constitutes prejudicial error. Appellant maintains that by filing her notice of relocation in accordance with R.C. 3109.051(G)(1) prior to moving Alexis, she provided advance notice. We disagree.

The standard of review when a party challenges the factual findings of the trier of fact is as follows: "A reviewing court will not disturb the findings of the trier of fact unless they are against the manifest weight of the evidence. State ex rel Shady Acres Nursing Home, Inc. v. Rhodes (1983), 7 Ohio St.3d 7. Where the judgment of the trial court is supported by some competent, credible evidence, it will not be reversed by an appellate court as being against the manifest weight of the evidence. C.E. Morris Co. v. Folley Construction Co. (1978), 54 Ohio St.2d 279." Durso v. Durso (Dec. 4, 1987), 11th App. No. 3832, 1987 Ohio App. LEXIS 9917, at *6-*7.

The purpose of requiring the custodial parent to give notice of the intent to relocate is to provide the court and the non-custodial parent the opportunity to schedule a hearing "to determine whether it is in the best interest of the child to revise the parenting time schedule for the child." R.C. 3109.051(G)(1). "Advance notice" entails more than formally notifying the court of the intent to relocate. The failure to inform the non-custodial parent in advance of the custodial parent's intent to relocate is also a factor that bears on consideration of the child's best interests and on the custodial parent's respect for the rights of the non-custodial parent.

The magistrate's remarks that appellant moved "without advance notice" and that her relocation was "unannounced" do not refer to whether appellant filed a notice of relocation with the court prior to relocating. These comments refer to the fact that appellant's decision to relocate Alexis was unilaterally made without any discussion or consultation with appellee. The court's position on the matter is obvious from the hearing transcript: "It really doesn't matter [when appellee learned of appellant's intent to relocate]. I will tell you the truth. What really matters, if you want to know, is that [appellee] and [appellant] had no discussions about the move to Columbus." On this point, we agree with the magistrate.

Appellant filed her notice of relocation on August 29, 2001, less than five days before actually relocating to Dublin with Alexis on September 2nd or 3rd according to her own testimony. By filing notice only a few days before relocating, appellant frustrated the purposes for giving notice discussed above. As a practical matter, the fact of appellant's relocation with Alexis was a fait accompli to which neither the court nor appellee could have timely responded. Appellant then chides the court and appellee for failing to schedule a hearing on the proposed relocation as allowed by R.C. 3109.051(G)(1). Appellee filed a motion for immediate custody on August 31, 2001, two days after appellant filed notice. The court had already scheduled, and twice rescheduled, a hearing on appellee's prior motion for custody on October 19, 2001. Given these circumstances, neither appellee, nor the trial court can be blamed for not acting on appellant's notice of relocation. Appellant's second assignment of error is without merit.[2]

How quickly can your court schedule a hearing on the relocation PRIOR to your move? Most places need 60 days. Judge Wiles may act more quickly but she may not be able to do so.