A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.support » Child Support
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

fathers rights law



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 17th 08, 09:00 AM posted to alt.child-support
fathersrights
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 109
Default fathers rights law

THE FOLLOWING IS AN EXCERPT FROM A BRIEF THAT WAS ACTUALLY FILED AND USED
SUCCESSFULLY IN SEVERAL EQUAL FATHERS RIGHTS CASES. IT IS FOR USE AS AN
EXAMPLE ONLY AND WOULD HAVE TO BE EDITED BY YOUR LAWYER TO REFLECT RECENT
CASES IN YOUR STATE. US SUPREME COURT CASES CITED IN THE COMPLETE BRIEF ARE
CONTROLLING IN ALL STATES.

THIS BRIEF EXCERPT IS AUTHORIZED FOR PERSONAL USE BY FATHERS IN THEIR
PERSONAL LEGAL CASE ONLY AND MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, E MAILED, OR PUBLISHED
IN ANY MEDIUM WITHOUT THE EXPRESS PERMISSION OF THE FATHERS RIGHTS
FOUNDATION. A LINK TO A COMPLETE AND UPDATED BRIEF IS AVAILABLE BELOW. USE
OF THIS BRIEF EXCERPT DOES NOT ESTABLISH AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP
WITH ANY PARTY.

INSERT CASE HEADING HERE

BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MAXIMUM POSSIBLE INVOLVEMENT/VISITATION



The Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act sets parental
involvement standards as to the award or modification of custody and
visitation.

The 1985 amendments to the IMDMA and the Illinois Supreme Court's Eckert
decision, In re Marriage of Eckert (1988), 119 ILL. 2d 316 at 327,
represented a changed approach to custody and visitation determination in
Illinois. Prior practices of awarding custody, visitation, supervised
visitation and removal of children from the state or area should be
re-evaluated in light of these amendments and subsequent case law.

The amendments included among the purposes of the IMDMA securing the maximum
involvement and cooperation of both parents in the child's welfare. See: 750
ILCS 5/102 (7):

Purpose:

(7) secure the maximum involvement and cooperation of both parents regarding
the physical, mental, moral and emotional well-being during and after
litigation.

The amendments further re-defined best interests of the child to include a
presumption for the maximum involvement and cooperation of both parents in
the child's ongoing welfare.

Best Interest Defined:

(c) The Court shall presume that the maximum involvement and cooperation of
both parents regarding the physical, mental, moral, and emotional well-being
of their child is in the best interest of the child. 750 ILCS 5/602(8)(c).

The Statute was later amended to add a new test for custody, the ability of
the custodial parent to foster a relationship between the child and the non
custodial parent. See: 750 ILCS 5/602(a)(8).

The willingness and ability of each parent to facilitate and encourage a
close and continuing relationship between the other parent and the child.
750 ILCS 5/602(a)(8)

Eventually in January 1994 denial of Court Ordered visitation was deemed a
criminal offense. See: 720 ILCS 5/10-5.5(b).

Every person who, in violation of the visitation provisions of a court order
relating to child custody, detains or conceals a child with the intent to
deprive another person of his or her rights to visitation shall be guilty of
unlawful visitation interference. 720 ILCS 5/10-5.5(b).

The above changes were precipitated by studies showing the child's need for
significant and continuing contact with both parents after divorce. See,
e.g.,



Wallerstein & Kelly, Surviving the Breakup, (1980) (study points to the
undesirability of routinely designating one parent as "psychological parent"
and of lodging sole legal and physical custody in that one parent).

There were also doubts raised about the constitutionality of presumptively
denying custody to one of two admittedly fit parents: See, King vs. Vancil,
34 Ill. App. 3d 831, 341, N.E. 2d 65 (5th Dist. 1975).

Recent case law declares a duty of the custodial parent to foster the
relationship between the non-custodial parent or face a change of custody.

The trial court should enforce this obligation by explicitly telling the
custodial parent about it and further informing the custodial parent that if
he or she is unwilling or unable to meet it, then the court stands fully
prepared to change the custody order and grant custody of the children to
the non-custodial parent to see if that parent could do a better job of
meeting this obligation. In re Dobey 629 N E 2d 812 (Feb. 1994)

In this case the mother seeks to lower the amount of visitation she already
agreed to in negotiations and which was entered as a court order. This alone
evidences her unwillingness to foster the relationship between the father
and his children, and puts into question her ability to serve as a custodial
parent under the above Dobey standard.........

THE COMPLETE ,RECENTLY UPDATED, REMAINDER OF THIS BRIEF (SEVERAL
PAGES) PLUS THE TACTICS AND DOCUMENTS TO USE WITH THE COMPLETE BRIEF FOR
MAXIMUM EFFECTIVENESS, IS IN THE MULTI STATE & COMPREHENSIVE GUIDES TO
FATHERS RIGHTS AVAILABLE AT http://www.fathersrights.org:




 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
fathers rights help fathersrights Child Support 0 April 1st 07 02:13 AM
Welcome Fathers Rights and Family Rights people! Greegor Spanking 13 December 26th 06 04:40 PM
Fathers Rights Andre Lieven Child Support 0 March 27th 06 12:29 AM
Fathers Rights mrbrklyn Child Support 0 March 24th 06 05:16 AM
Fathers Rights Forum Gypsy0005 Child Support 0 January 16th 05 02:48 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.