visitation

[sadgodmother]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California
I want visitation with my godson, he is 13. His mother died 2 years ago, there is no father in the picture, he has a half-sister. The grandparents (his sisters) adopted him and they refuse to let me see him. Previously I was awarded supervised visits through Child Services. I am only seeking visitation rights, not custody.
Please advise me if I have any rights and what I can proactively do to establish visitation. I love my godson with my whole heart and I miss him terribly. Please help me to see him.

 

[Ohiogal]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California
I want visitation with my godson, he is 13. His mother died 2 years ago, there is no father in the picture, he has a half-sister. The grandparents (his sisters) adopted him and they refuse to let me see him. Previously I was awarded supervised visits through Child Services. I am only seeking visitation rights, not custody.
Please advise me if I have any rights and what I can proactively do to establish visitation. I love my godson with my whole heart and I miss him terribly. Please help me to see him.

You have NO right to visitation. The grandparents can determine who sees their child.

 

[mistoffolees]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California
I want visitation with my godson, he is 13. His mother died 2 years ago, there is no father in the picture, he has a half-sister. The grandparents (his sisters) adopted him and they refuse to let me see him. Previously I was awarded supervised visits through Child Services. I am only seeking visitation rights, not custody.
Please advise me if I have any rights and what I can proactively do to establish visitation. I love my godson with my whole heart and I miss him terribly. Please help me to see him.

If the court awarded you supervised visits and the grandparents do not allow it, then you can file for contempt.

OTOH, it's not clear that your visits were court ordered. Was it simply that Child Services allowed you to visit at one time but there's no court order? If that's the case, you'd need to go back to court to request court-ordered visitation. However, it won't be easy and will be even harder without an attorney. I would suggest at least getting an initial consultation with an attorney (many attorneys will do this for free).

And why won't the grandparents let you visit? There's clearly more to the story.

 

[LdiJ]

If the court awarded you supervised visits and the grandparents do not allow it, then you can file for contempt.

OTOH, it's not clear that your visits were court ordered. Was it simply that Child Services allowed you to visit at one time but there's no court order? If that's the case, you'd need to go back to court to request court-ordered visitation. However, it won't be easy and will be even harder without an attorney. I would suggest at least getting an initial consultation with an attorney (many attorneys will do this for free).

And why won't the grandparents let you visit? There's clearly more to the story.

Misto, godparents do not have any standing to sue for visitation in any state in the US. That is a religious designation.

 

[mistoffolees]

Misto, godparents do not have any standing to sue for visitation in any state in the US. That is a religious designation.

As usual, you're wrong.

In some states, anyone with de facto parent status has standing to sue for visitation. De facto status depends on the relationship with the child. If the person has a long-standing, close relationship with a child, they may have standing to ask for visitation - regardless of whether that relationship is religious, familial, or otherwise.

Now, it's hard to establish de facto parent status in CA and OP might well not meet the requirements, but your statement that you must be related to file for visitation in ANY state is absolutely incorrect.

Doesn't it ever get tiring to be wrong all the time?

 

[LdiJ]

As usual, you're wrong.

In some states, anyone with de facto parent status has standing to sue for visitation. De facto status depends on the relationship with the child. If the person has a long-standing, close relationship with a child, they may have standing to ask for visitation - regardless of whether that relationship is religious, familial, or otherwise.

Now, it's hard to establish de facto parent status in CA and OP might well not meet the requirements, but your statement that you must be related to file for visitation in ANY state is absolutely incorrect.

Doesn't it ever get tiring to be wrong all the time?

Once again, what I am getting tired of is you taking the whole concept of "defacto parent" to a level that doesn't exist even in the states that recognize defacto parenting.

A long standing, close relationship with a child does not arise to defacto parenting. A defacto parent is someone who has raised a child in their home and acted as the child's parental figure, without an actual parent also being present in the home.

Do you realize that the statute that was so firmly struck down in Troxel, and in the WA supreme courts before it went to the USSC, is a statute giving standing to absolutely anyone who had a long standing, close relationship with a child? Do you realize that the USSC described that statute as "breathtakingly broad" and unconstitutional?

You are leading people down a garden path because you have become fixated on an idea that you have created in your own mind regarding the meaning of "defacto parent".

 

[mistoffolees]

Once again, what I am getting tired of is you taking the whole concept of "defacto parent" to a level that doesn't exist even in the states that recognize defacto parenting.

A long standing, close relationship with a child does not arise to defacto parenting. A defacto parent is someone who has raised a child in their home and acted as the child's parental figure, without an actual parent also being present in the home.

Do you realize that the statute that was so firmly struck down in Troxel, and in the WA supreme courts before it went to the USSC, is a statute giving standing to absolutely anyone who had a long standing, close relationship with a child? Do you realize that the USSC described that statute as "breathtakingly broad" and unconstitutional?

You are leading people down a garden path because you have become fixated on an idea that you have created in your own mind regarding the meaning of "defacto parent".

And everyone else is getting tired of telling you that you're wrong.


The facts are:
1. I already said that it would be hard to establish defacto parent status in OP's case.
2. SOME states (including CA) do allow for de facto parent status - no matter how much you insist on denying it. Even post-Troxel, some states allow de facto parent visitation.
3. OP already had some kind of visitation. He hasn't stated whether it was court ordered or simply something that CPS dreamed up.
4. OP is not in WA, so the fact that WA's law was soundly trashed by the Supreme Court doesn't mean that EVERY state's law is equally wrong.

OP MAY have standing to file for visitation (at least), no matter how many times you deny it.

Oh, but go ahead and provide case law that he can't......

 

[Proserpina]

A long standing, close relationship with a child does not arise to defacto parenting. A defacto parent is someone who has raised a child in their home and acted as the child's parental figure, without an actual parent also being present in the home.

Underlined is not always a requirement.

 

[stealth2]

And everyone else is getting tired of telling you that you're wrong.

Actuallu, I'm tired of the constant bickering.

 

[Proserpina]

Actuallu, I'm tired of the constant bickering.

You're not the only one.

Le sigh.

It's one thing to point out a mistake, an error, or an inaccuracy. It's another thing entirely to routinely go at someone because they are that someone.

( OT: Your spelling there reminded me - sadly - that the Steelers lost last night. (Actuallu triggered "Polamalu" in my head )

 

[mistoffolees]

Actuallu, I'm tired of the constant bickering.

Then don't read the forum. Problem solved.

Sorry, but when LD is wrong about things, I'm going to point it out. I really don't want people getting inaccurate legal information from her.