Status Hearing/Scheduling Mediation - School Issues

[profmum]

I think it's terribly unlikely, since they're jointly responsible for creating the original distance, that Mom will be penalized for moving another 10 miles... especially if it was done w/in the constraints of the court order.

Their lack of agreement on schools IS a problem, but it's a short-term one. If it's unlikely to be agreed to in mediation, it's unlikely this will get before a judge prior to end of summer. Child is already signed up for school where Mom chose. Unless there's a compelling reason child should NOT attend, it's probably in DAD'S best interests to start wrapping his head around kiddo attending there.

I disagree, Mum enrolling the child in a school without Dad's notification or approval is a problem that will be addressed by the courts. Which is why the judge asked both parents to "present their case" about parenting arrangements and school options. School issues are time sensitive so most likely the courts will accomodate the need to have this settled before school starts.There is no reason for Dad to think that just because the child is already enrolled by Mum in the school she picked (without notifying him) that the child will go to school there. No way of knowing with any certainty now.

Now OP if Mum's school looks better on paper as you say with higher testing scores etc, Mum has a good chance of letting the child stay in her home school.Intangibles are intangibles for a reason.. they are hard to explain in court.

 

[SimplyMom]

Child is already signed up for school where Mom chose. Unless there's a compelling reason child should NOT attend, it's probably in DAD'S best interests to start wrapping his head around kiddo attending there.

And if Dad went behind Mom's back and signed their son up for a different school with an alternative program, requested mediation "in good faith" two days later (still without having told Mom about the alternative school choice), and refused to tell Mom what school their son was put on the list for after the lottery closed out, would Dad's school be the one chosen by the court?

Looking from a legal standpoint, what preference does Mom's "chosen" school get? Simply because their son's name is on a list there? His name is also on the list at Dad's local school. What tips the scale?

 

[SimplyMom]

I disagree, Mum enrolling the child in a school without Dad's notification or approval is a problem that will be addressed by the courts. Which is why the judge asked both parents to "present their case" about parenting arrangements and school options. School issues are time sensitive so most likely the courts will accomodate the need to have this settled before school starts.There is no reason for Dad to think that just because the child is already enrolled by Mum in the school she picked (without notifying him) that the child will go to school there. No way of knowing with any certainty now.

Now OP if Mum's school looks better on paper as you say with higher testing scores etc, Mum has a good chance of letting the child stay in her home school.Intangibles are intangibles for a reason.. they are hard to explain in court.

A settlement conference is going to be scheduled for the next 30-60 days, and a hearing will take place shortly after that. So you're right, this should be resolved prior to school starting in late August.

Mom's local school does not look better on paper than Dad's local school, and neither does the one with the alternative program. Although her moving does put her in a better school area compared to her old one, Dad's school is still "better" on paper. It's one of the reasons we chose to move here.

 

[profmum]

Looking from a legal standpoint, what preference does Mom's "chosen" school get? Simply because their son's name is on a list there? His name is also on the list at Dad's local school. What tips the scale?

The courts already have told Dad what needs to be done if they cannot reach an agreement:

"In the meantime they are both to provide the court with a summary detailing the changes they want to make with the existing custody agreement and their options for school".

Dad should put together the best possible case for the school he wants the child to attend. If I were Dad I would NOT request a change in custody, Mum has done that and let her motives become clear to the court.

 

[SimplyMom]

Dad should put together the best possible case for the school he wants the child to attend. If I were Dad I would NOT request a change in custody, Mum has done that and let her motives become clear to the court.

I agree, and Dad is not going to go for a change in custody. It simply does not make sense considering both parents are in the same city, there's no reason for their son not to spend as much time as possible with both families.

Dad has suggested, and will try to accomplish during medation, that they apply for a zone exemption for their son between both houses. So far Mom is not going for it, but perhaps a judge will be able to help them both come to an agreement during the settlement conference.

 

[Drake01]

Why do you think his STEP SISTER matters at all? Because she doesn't. She means NOTHING to the situation. She is YOUR child. NOT his sibling that is taken into consideration. Why should she matter?

For the same reason that courts will take into consideration friends, teachers, school staff, and a whole host of other people children have become familiar with that have no legal relationship to the child in school switches. I find it odd you don't understand this.

 

[proud_parent]

For the same reason that courts will take into consideration friends, teachers, school staff, and a whole host of other people children have become familiar with that have no legal relationship to the child in school switches. I find it odd you don't understand this.

Courts have great latitude to consider any number of relevant factors in determining the best interests of the child.

Please cite any statute or case law in OP's state establishing that the Court shall (read: must) consider those things that you mention.

 

[LdiJ]

For the same reason that courts will take into consideration friends, teachers, school staff, and a whole host of other people children have become familiar with that have no legal relationship to the child in school switches. I find it odd you don't understand this.

A judge might take into consideration a child's familiarity with a school, however the judge would NOT take any of those other things that you mention into consideration...and a judge certain would NEVER take a stepsibling into consideration.

 

[SimplyMom]

A judge might take into consideration a child's familiarity with a school, however the judge would NOT take any of those other things that you mention into consideration...and a judge certain would NEVER take a stepsibling into consideration.

Actually, there is case law in the Alaska Supreme Court where siblings (whether full siblings or not) have been taken into consideration when deciding custody:

Supreme Court of Alaska.
Barry K. McQUADE, Appellant,
v.
Patricia A. McQUADE, Appellee.
No. S-6608.
Aug. 18, 1995.

"The custody investigator further noted that "[t]he sibling relationship in this family is very strong, especially between Jeffrey and his older sister, Lori. It is of utmost importance that this relationship be maintained."
The custody investigator testified that the ideal situation would be one in which Patricia stayed in Alaska so that the parties could continue the shared custody arrangement. The custody investigator further testified that the deciding factor in her custody recommendation was the bond between Jeffrey and his siblings. [FN2] She testified that in her opinion it was in the best interest of Jeffrey to stay with his older siblings."

"1. The superior court did not impermissibly favor sibling bonds over parental bonds.
[4] As to parental bonds, the superior court "carefully considered the love and affection *425 that both parents have" for Jeffrey. Moreover, the superior court considered the custody investigator's report which stated that "Jeffrey loves and cares equally about both parents and appears to be bonded to both." As to sibling bonds, the superior court "considered as an important factor in this case that Jeffrey is bonded to his half brothers and half sister," and found it "essential for Jeffrey to have contact with his half brothers and half sister for his own best interest." Moreover, the superior court considered the custody investigator's report which stated that the sibling relationships were very strong and should be maintained. The superior court also was able to take into account the custody investigator's testimony that the sibling bonds were the deciding factor in her recommendation.
On appeal, Barry argues that the superior court gave too much weight to sibling bonds and not enough weight to parental bonds. Alaska Statute 25.24.150(c)(4) requires the superior court to consider "the love and affection existing between the child and each parent" in determining the best interests of the child. In addition, "[t]his court has often embraced the proposition that it is desirable to not separate siblings in the course of custody disputes." Craig v. McBride, 639 P.2d 303, 306 & n. 9 (Alaska 1982) (the fact that a case involves half siblings has no bearing on "the desirability of keeping the children of the family together") (citation omitted). However, we have declined to adopt a rigid standard for weighing the importance of maintaining sibling bonds in custody disputes, and have instead articulated a more flexible approach:
[C]onsideration should be given to the desirability of not separating the children unless their welfare clearly requires such a course. "

Whether it also applies to a school situation I don't know.

If I broke any rules with the cutting/pasting I apologize. I just wanted to get this information out there.

 

[proud_parent]

Actually, there is case law in the Alaska Supreme Court where siblings (whether full siblings or not) have been taken into consideration when deciding custody:

{snip}

Whether it also applies to a school situation I don't know.

If I broke any rules with the cutting/pasting I apologize. I just wanted to get this information out there.

While that's all well and good, the case you cited was a custody action, not an action to determine school enrollment (as you've already acknowledged).

Furthermore -- and this goes back to OG's point -- the siblings in that case were half-siblings (and, therefore, legal relatives), NOT step-siblings (and, therefore, NOT legal relatives).


But props to you for posting actual AK law and not mere opinion.

 

[SimplyMom]

While that's all well and good, the case you cited was a custody action, not an action to determine school enrollment (as you've already acknowledged).

Furthermore -- and this goes back to OG's point -- the siblings in that case were half-siblings (and, therefore, legal relatives), NOT step-siblings (and, therefore, NOT legal relatives).


But props to you for posting actual AK law and not mere opinion.

I realize that, although everything should be finalized before school begins and likely before the court ruling (If they can't come to a settlement agreement, of course), making her his half-sibling.

Still, whether that has any bearing on the school decision remains to be seen. I will update on the progress in case it could help someone in the future. My husband's lawyer believes it will be a factor, but all lawyers have their opinions.

I wish I could find something in AK law regarding past school decisions, but I only have access to Supreme Court decisions online and apparently school cases haven't needed to be escalated to that level. Understandably so.

 

[SimplyMom]

No telling how this would have played out in court, but it won't be getting that far (at least not for the school issue).

My husband's enlistment was just extended and we're being moved to a new base. Our lives have definitely just gotten more complicated. He will try to work something out with Mom, but it'll probably end up a full-blown custody battle. Again.

 

[CJane]

No telling how this would have played out in court, but it won't be getting that far (at least not for the school issue).

My husband's enlistment was just extended and we're being moved to a new base. Our lives have definitely just gotten more complicated. He will try to work something out with Mom, but it'll probably end up a full-blown custody battle. Again.

Do you know his next duty station yet?

Your husband needs to understand that he stands virtually NO chance of becoming primary custodian in this case... his best bet really is to file to change the visitation to a long-distance plan. MUCH easier, less expensive, less contentious and something he can actually count on happening.

 

[wileybunch]

Do you know his next duty station yet?

Your husband needs to understand that he stands virtually NO chance of becoming primary custodian in this case... his best bet really is to file to change the visitation to a long-distance plan. MUCH easier, less expensive, less contentious and something he can actually count on happening.

I agree. The military is more than "just a job" and unfortunately if all things are equal between the parents, the one that's causing the child to have to move around isn't going to be able to wrestle a 50/50 physical custody arrangement to them having primary and the parent that stayed put getting visitation.

 

[SimplyMom]

I understand. He was supposed to get out and stay in Alaska. I already ended my military career to stay up here. It's crazy that things happened this way, he was due to separate on June 16th (my birthday, no less)

We're headed to Tinker AFB in Oklahoma City. Luckily the base school is fantastic (we have the rest of our kids to think about, too).

I don't know how they're going to deal with it, or how it should be dealt with. Looking at the best interest factors for Alaska things are pretty much equal, the only thing that could be in Dad's favor is promoting a close and loving relationship with NCP. This is just from experience with past deployments and the way Mom has been, and it's a horribly long story.

Mom hates living here, though, and has only stayed here this long to avoid a custody battle. So who knows how quickly she'd try to move later.

It's a mess.