Update and Questions

[Ohiogal]

She NEEDS to prove that he still has the cats because that is what puts dad in violation. Having dander is not a violation but the cats are. There is a major difference. If she cannot prove he still has cats she wastes the court's time.

 

[moburkes]

Critter, no offense but have you seen a child in distress due to allergy related asthma? It is horrible and your child can die. I, as a parent, would not take the risk of trying to make my son overcome his allergy. It seems so dangerous.

JMO, again, but take it to court. You have your existing order. You may not be able to prove that dad still has the cats but Christ Almighty, there is some common sense issue here. If child is sick when he returns from dads, bingo--it is probably the cats causing it.

Legally, Im sure this is not the best advice but as a mom, I completely understand what your child is going thru. I myself, have only taken my child to the pediatrician for this, NOT 7 doctors. It seems like a legitmate and documented problem. Dad needs to take his head out of his A**.

Huh? The whole point of allergy meds is to treat or "overcome" the problem. I have allergies, asthma, and allergy-induced asthma. I could die. However, the point of the meds is to reduce your body's reaction to the problem.

 

[jbowman]

Huh? The whole point of allergy meds is to treat or "overcome" the problem. I have allergies, asthma, and allergy-induced asthma. I could die. However, the point of the meds is to reduce your body's reaction to the problem.

Mo, I was referring to Critters advice to get a cat to try to become immune. That is a risk I would not take. I understand the medications is to treat the problem.

 

[critterperson]

Critter, no offense but have you seen a child in distress due to allergy related asthma? It is horrible and your child can die. I, as a parent, would not take the risk of trying to make my son overcome his allergy. It seems so dangerous.

JMO, again, but take it to court. You have your existing order. You may not be able to prove that dad still has the cats but Christ Almighty, there is some common sense issue here. If child is sick when he returns from dads, bingo--it is probably the cats causing it.

Legally, Im sure this is not the best advice but as a mom, I completely understand what your child is going thru. I myself, have only taken my child to the pediatrician for this, NOT 7 doctors. It seems like a legitmate and documented problem. Dad needs to take his head out of his A**.

I know it is scary...I am an asthmatic (mostly outgrown…I haven’t had a true attack in 10 years…I’m 31) so I know first hand and my 2 1/2 year old is also an asthmatic (allergy induced)...But if dad is going to be a pain in the butt about the cats and mom won’t be able to prove whether he still has the cats, or if it is leftover dander from when he had the cats, or if it is any of his other allergies… I was just giving her an idea…My son is allergic to hay and straw but my sister has chickens(their bedding is straw) and his father lives in the country on a farm, and he likes his fathers house and my sisters chickens…Last year he was pretty bad (needing his inhaler every time he was over at his fathers house or at my sisters house playing with the chickens) this year he is doing better when he goes over there and he doesn’t need his inhaler every visit…My pediatrician is aware and he thinks my son is slowly getting over his allergies to straw/hay We still have his inhaler on the ready for him, but so far so good…

 

[moburkes]

CAn't tell that from your post, but, thanks for clearing that up.

 

[critterperson]

Mo, I was referring to Critters advice to get a cat to try to become immune. That is a risk I would not take. I understand the medications is to treat the problem.

I totally understand your point...However, when you think about it we do it all the time with babies...When ever your child gets a shot at the doctor's office for chicken pox, the flu, hepatitis B they are being injected with "pure" virus but as a result of the exposure they become immune to it...In my opinion it is the same principal different way of "injection"

 

[NYR]

My son is severely allergic to cats and of course his dad decides to have two. :-/ I recently got an order from the courts [May 18th] in PA that my son's father is to not have cats in his home and he testified under oath that he cleaned his home for cats and that he no longer has cats in his home. Problem solved? Nope.

She NEEDS to prove that he still has the cats because that is what puts dad in violation. Having dander is not a violation but the cats are. There is a major difference. If she cannot prove he still has cats she wastes the court's time.

He stated that he had cleaned his home for cats, hence getting rid of the dander. I think she would have a case to file for contempt if he truly refuses to clean his house - assuming the cats are gone

 

[Silverplum]

He stated that he had cleaned his home for cats, hence getting rid of the dander. I think she would have a case to file for contempt if he truly refuses to clean his house - assuming the cats are gone

Define "clean" to the court's satisfaction.

 

[NYR]

Define "clean" to the court's satisfaction.

To the point where the child doesn't come home sick. If the reactions are documented by a doctor then I would think it would stand up in court?

 

[Ohiogal]

He stated that he had cleaned his home for cats, hence getting rid of the dander. I think she would have a case to file for contempt if he truly refuses to clean his house - assuming the cats are gone

Wrong. Because he can clean the house (dust and vacuum) and still not get all the dander. There could be dander on clothing, toys, carpeting, drapes, furniture and what not. If the court order states he must remove the cats then he has done so. Unless the court order requires him to scrub every surface and ensure that there is NO DANDER REMAINING ANYWHERE IN THE HOUSE then dad is not in contempt and mom would be wasting her time. Especially since it is TWO WEEKS later.

 

[Ohiogal]

To the point where the child doesn't come home sick. If the reactions are documented by a doctor then I would think it would stand up in court?

Nope. Because mom has already litigated the allergies and the case here is contempt. The order says dad removes the cats -- so unless she can prove dad still has the cats she goes no where. The doctor would have to prove that they are due to cats and that the cats are at dad's house with the child (and that it is NOT just cat dander left over from before the cats were removed). You are barking up the wrong tree.

 

[moburkes]

Wrong. Because he can clean the house (dust and vacuum) and still not get all the dander. There could be dander on clothing, toys, carpeting, drapes, furniture and what not. If the court order states he must remove the cats then he has done so. Unless the court order requires him to scrub every surface and ensure that there is NO DANDER REMAINING ANYWHERE IN THE HOUSE then dad is not in contempt and mom would be wasting her time. Especially since it is TWO WEEKS later.

You beat me to it.

 

[Ohiogal]

Define "clean" to the court's satisfaction.

The courts have defined "clean" -- basically it means habitable. They do not judge housekeeping unless it goes to the realm of uninhabitable.

 

[Silverplum]

The courts have defined "clean" -- basically it means habitable. They do not judge housekeeping unless it goes to the realm of uninhabitable.

Your answer was longer, and better. I just wasn't in the mood to explain!

 

[jbowman]

Innocent question here.

What if Mom has no interest in finding him guility of contempt?? What if she just wants to modify to the existing court order again???

That is what I would do. I mean, granted, I'd be pissed that dad is not ensuring child is in a clean environment--and I would want him to pay BUT the bottom line is if my child had to go there for the summer and there was still dander etc and child is still sick, cant breathe, wheezing, sneezing, swollen eyes, (my kid even gets hives) then I would try to at least modify or something. A judge has a little common sense, I would think. I would hate to think that a judge is going to say "Tough, have the little kid wheeze all summer and have asthma attacks because I dont think you can PROVE that the cats are there or that the house has not been cleaned. I dont give a crap if he may die."

Law is law, I understand. And I dont want to get yelled at but there has got to be some common sense.