What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? PA
Since my noob approach yesterday got me nowhere, I am starting a new thread on a seperate topic.
My brother in law and his ex have a 3 year old child together. (hope I am not breaking any of OhioGal's sticky note rules already simply by being this child's aunt. But I am hoping OhioGal can throw in her two cents here. she can't hurt my feelings, I will probably agree with her.)
They broke up and Mom who was living with my brother-in-law and my in-laws left. Leaving her son behind. She is living with her mom, commuting back and forth to school, drops by any old time she feels like it to visit, and as much as I can see how it negatively affects my nephew's behavior, she comes to visit so a judge would think that's a good thing? right? (GRRR)
Here's where my question comes in. Surprise! It's a tad complicated. There are no legal custody descisions in place it just is what it is. She has my nephew on medicaid and receives subsidized daycare for him meaning, welfare thinks he lives with her.
I hear my brother in law say "I will never let her take him." But I do not see him taking the financial responsibility to make that happen. She could just walk right in, take him out for McDonald's and not bring him back couldn't she?
If I had the damn money for a lawyer I would take him myself! He is suffering from a mom who drops by or doesn't whenever she feels like it unannounced to wisk him away, a dad who is never home for important things like band practice and hockey practices and games, and two grandparents who let him run wild. But obviously a judge would never let me take him anyway. And if a judge did, I am not willing to tear my husband's family apart.
Shouldn't my brother-in-law in fact take the financial responsibilty of healthcare and daycare (he may even qualify for welfare for them, who knows?) if he in fact has ANY rights? Or is the fact that my nephew physically lives there enough? I do not want to see his mom just come grab him, I do not want to see my brother-in-law wait for that to happen to do anything about it. The poor little guy does not need one more shake up, the kid is SCREAMING for some stability.
Would taking financial responsibilty for those things be enough? Would it at least hold sway? Or does he need to go through a whole custody thing? We do have a free custody clinic nearby in exchange for parenting classes (which THEY BOTH NEED!) and I keep telling him, but he just doesn't seem up for something so complicated, or maybe he is not up for losing his son's free healthcare and daycare.
But my husband and I are not very interested in losing our nephew, nor my kids their cousin. And I don't see the in-laws willing to take any action here either, which they should.
Thanks for any advice anyone could give me to convince my brother-in-law that he can not wait to do something about this.
Since my noob approach yesterday got me nowhere, I am starting a new thread on a seperate topic.
My brother in law and his ex have a 3 year old child together. (hope I am not breaking any of OhioGal's sticky note rules already simply by being this child's aunt. But I am hoping OhioGal can throw in her two cents here. she can't hurt my feelings, I will probably agree with her.)
They broke up and Mom who was living with my brother-in-law and my in-laws left. Leaving her son behind. She is living with her mom, commuting back and forth to school, drops by any old time she feels like it to visit, and as much as I can see how it negatively affects my nephew's behavior, she comes to visit so a judge would think that's a good thing? right? (GRRR)
Here's where my question comes in. Surprise! It's a tad complicated. There are no legal custody descisions in place it just is what it is. She has my nephew on medicaid and receives subsidized daycare for him meaning, welfare thinks he lives with her.
I hear my brother in law say "I will never let her take him." But I do not see him taking the financial responsibility to make that happen. She could just walk right in, take him out for McDonald's and not bring him back couldn't she?
If I had the damn money for a lawyer I would take him myself! He is suffering from a mom who drops by or doesn't whenever she feels like it unannounced to wisk him away, a dad who is never home for important things like band practice and hockey practices and games, and two grandparents who let him run wild. But obviously a judge would never let me take him anyway. And if a judge did, I am not willing to tear my husband's family apart.
Shouldn't my brother-in-law in fact take the financial responsibilty of healthcare and daycare (he may even qualify for welfare for them, who knows?) if he in fact has ANY rights? Or is the fact that my nephew physically lives there enough? I do not want to see his mom just come grab him, I do not want to see my brother-in-law wait for that to happen to do anything about it. The poor little guy does not need one more shake up, the kid is SCREAMING for some stability.
Would taking financial responsibilty for those things be enough? Would it at least hold sway? Or does he need to go through a whole custody thing? We do have a free custody clinic nearby in exchange for parenting classes (which THEY BOTH NEED!) and I keep telling him, but he just doesn't seem up for something so complicated, or maybe he is not up for losing his son's free healthcare and daycare.
But my husband and I are not very interested in losing our nephew, nor my kids their cousin. And I don't see the in-laws willing to take any action here either, which they should.
Thanks for any advice anyone could give me to convince my brother-in-law that he can not wait to do something about this.