My husband and I want to take a trip back to his home, which is in Nova Scotia. I have joint custody of my daughter with my ex husband. The trip would only be for about 8 days and we've done this trip before. Now, because my ex is upset with me (I questioned the issue of him parading our daughter in and out of different relationships) he is refusing to sign the consent to travel form. Is there anything I can do? Why would a grown man do this to his daughter out of revenge on me? :confused:

Please... somebody please try to advise me. We are two and a half weeks away from our travel dates... this is not fair to a very upset little 9 year old.

Is this consent to travel mandated by the court as part of your divorce decree? Do you have copies of previous letters he has signed?

No, the consent to travel letter isn't mandated by the court. All my decree says is to provide him with her travel plans and contact information... which I have already done. No, I don't have copies of previous letters... and now I wish I had kept them, I just never thought he would start behaving like this. I never travel without my divorce decree when I have my daughter with me, which states international travel requirements mandated by the court, and I always travel with her birth certificate and she has a passport (which he consented to!) and my passport has my former married name (my daughter's surname) on it as well, which matches the birth cert.

Then go ahead with your vacation without worries. As long as the court doesn't require his consent I don't know why you ever asked for it. In the future I wouldn't bother.

Because the first time I traveled with her to Nova Scotia, the Canadian Customs officer informed me that I had to have this document with me the next time I arrived at the border. THIS is why I have had this done and why I am now panicking... I'm just trying to make sure I follow every letter of the law and why I am trying to find out if there is a way I can travel without this document. If I knew of another place to ask this question, I would.

My husband and I want to take a trip back to his home, which is in Nova Scotia. I have joint custody of my daughter with my ex husband. The trip would only be for about 8 days and we've done this trip before. Now, because my ex is upset with me (I questioned the issue of him parading our daughter in and out of different relationships) he is refusing to sign the consent to travel form. Is there anything I can do? Why would a grown man do this to his daughter out of revenge on me? :confused:
You can try to ask the court for permission, call the Judge's office who presided over your case or ask your divorce atty. If your divorce doesn't state that you need written permission, (as mine did), then don't worry about it. Just make sure you have your divorce papers with you.

Well you could tell him you are sorry for what you said to him ???
He has his life and you have your life, each of you have moved on, while you personally may not like his changing new partners to be honest and sounding really rude, what relationships he is in, is not your business either, and he has the right to his time with the children.
So he is basicly being a pain in the rear to teach you a lesson about keeping your mouth shut about what he does to.

Not saying it is right, but this is what happens in real life.

For your information, I don't need a lesson on keeping my mouth shut! I am not concerned in the least how many women he has... only when it concerns my daughter. He drags her through relationship after relationship. She forms attachments and then he breaks up or whatever the reason may be that the relationship ends. This is very confusing to her. I have moved on... I haven't dragged this child through anything. You are a very rude and hateful person... I needed advice, not a freaking lecture!:mad:

I am sorry you are not happy with some truth, but without his approval most likely you can not go, you do not get people to work with you, if you are attacking them. I have to be honest while it is sad people use their children to fight with each other But what do you expect, so you pick up the phone and discuss with him what he wants in order for you to sign,
You work out a deal.

For your information, I don't need a lesson on keeping my mouth shut! I am not concerned in the least how many women he has...only when it concerns my daughter. He drags her through relationship after relationship. She forms attachments and then he breaks up or whatever the reason may be that the relationship ends. This is very confusing to her. I have moved on...I haven't dragged this child through anything. You are a very rude and hateful person...I needed advice, not a freaking lecture!:mad:



You are WAY of line - if this is how you talk to your ex-husband, no wonder you have problems. If you think that was a lecture, wait until you read this:

Why are you sticking your nose into your ex-husband's relationship with his child? If you feel his behavior with women going in and out of his life is dangerous to her, then go back to Court. If not - what happens when he's with "this child" is none of your business. In my area (NYS) the Court will tell you exactly that - in spades. For someone who has moved on you sure are interested in what your "ex" is doing.

And, yes, you are dragging "this child" through something - you are dragging her through "we would go on vacation but your Dad says no."

Don't bother criticizing my advice - I'll just read what you've already posted and figure you are going to apply it to me.

And if you go ahead with your plans now that he has said a very loud, unquestionable "no," be prepared for additional problems. If you are still intent on going, then see if you can get an emergency hearing to address this issue but you are running out of time. Too late now to just go - you asked, he said no.

You can try to ask the court for permission, call the Judge's office who presided over your case or ask your divorce atty. If your divorce doesn't state that you need written permission, (as mine did), then don't worry about it. Just make sure you have your divorce papers with you.


This is not sound legal advice - you can't telephone a Judge who presided over your divorce and say, "What do you think of this?"

She's already been told (by the Canadian Government) that she needs permission. She asked for permission. The father said no. Now her only choice is to get back into Court to get this problem addressed.

If the father wants to be spiteful, sees a vacation out of the country shaping up, he can very well alert the border officials that he suspects a kidnapping (or whatever else he plans to make up) and cause endless problems.

Because the first time I traveled with her to Nova Scotia, the Canadian Customs officer informed me that I had to have this document with me the next time I arrived at the border.

I would check with the Canadian Consulate and ask them why you need such a document when your divorce decree doesn't require it.

I'm not sure what your problem is, but you don't know the whole story behind this man. That's the whole issue... you don't know anything about this. Yet you decide to be the judge and jury of me without any cause. I did not attack him nor do I use our child to fight back at him. All I asked was for advice for the situation, not a judgment statement. You as a moderator should know better.

All I asked was for advice for the situation, not a judgment statement. You as a moderator should know better.

Now you are overstepping the bounds here. When you post a question or comments you open yourself up to comments from others. Your OP did give info that made Chuck's comments reasonable. And your reactions to those comments are shrewish. I suggest you temper your anger a bit and if you don't like any of the advice you are getting, then just ignore it. Don't attack the advisor.

I would check with the Canadian Consulate and ask them why you need such a document when your divorce decree doesn't require it.



Actually I've seen this at the border before - I don't know if it's a random check or rule of thumb. I am aware of a similar situation where mother, stepfather, 2 children attempted to cross and were turned back for parental consent. Obviously picked up on ID check - I would assume if there is no ID check there is no way to know names are different and these are not father's natural children.

Now mother carries notarized letter from father authorizing specific trips.

Hello K:

The very first time when you were told by the Canadian bureaucrat that you needed the fathers permission, were you refused entry?? No, you weren't. Therefore, there ISN'T a REQUIREMENT at all, is there? The Canadian bureaucrat was just feeling his oats, as bureaucrats are won't to do. You're not saying, are you, that he let you in anyway, in spite of the rule?? I don't think the border bureaucrats are that nice - or stupid.

Besides, a Canadian bureaucrat ISN'T the place to get your legal advice.

excon

Here is the form or at least one of them for those that need it.

http://www.globetrektravel.com/minortravelforms.pdf

Child consent to travel ( must be noterized )

Comments on this post
califdadof3 (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/members/califdadof3.html) disagrees: WHOA!. There are new laws in place that come from homeland security. If one parent must travel abroad then they MUST have the consent of the other parent. If they don't they risk breaking federal law as well as kidnapping.

Can you cite the provisions that state that? That really doesn't make sense to me. Why would the US need to prevent people LEAVING the country as part of Homeland Security?

The US shouldn't be restricitng travel by US citizens. Any provisions that involve crossing borders should be imposed by the country crossing INTO.

Comments on this postcalifdadof3 (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/members/califdadof3.html) disagrees: WHOA ! .. There are new laws in place that come from homeland security. If one parent must travel abroad then they MUST have the consent of the other parent. If they dont they risk breaking federal law as well as kidnapping.

Can you cite the provisions that state that? That really doesn't make sense to me. Why would the US need to prevent people LEAVING the country as part of Homeland Security?

The US shouldn't be restricitng travel by US citizens. Any provisions that involve crossing borders should be imposed by the country crossing INTO.


My only thought here is that if the US receives a "tip" that a person might be crossing and there is a potential problem they have the authority to stop that person on this side - I'm addressing Canada here.

Obviously a lot depends on how the border station is set up and you could pass through this side and get stopped on "that" side.

I agree, Canada has a right to stop entry if they suspect something. Canada does have the right to require permission from all custodial parents. But the US doesn't have the right to say to Canada, that they have to require or check certain documents. They may have a mutual treaty agreeing to do so, but no US law is binding on a foreign country. And when entering a foreign country, it's their rules that govern, not the rules of the country being exited from.

I agree, Canada has a right to stop entry if they suspect something. Canada does have the right to require permission from all custodial parents. But the US doesn't have the right to say to Canada, that they have to require or check certain documents. They may have a mutual treaty agreeing to do so, but no US law is binding on a foreign country. And when entering a foreign country, its their rules that govern, not the rules of the country being exited from.



Right. I'm addressing a "tip" - and Homeland Security gets them all the time - that someone is smuggling or kidnapping or has other contraband - and the US passes the info along to the Canadian authorities and they work together.

If Canada doesn't care, well, then the person enters the Country.

Comments on this post
califdadof3 (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/members/califdadof3.html) disagrees: WHOA ! .. There are new laws in place that come from homeland security. If one parent must travel abroad then they MUST have the consent of the other parent. If they dont they risk breaking federal law as well as kidnapping.

Can you cite the provisions that state that? That really doesn't make sense to me. Why would the US need to prevent people LEAVING the country as part of Homeland Security?

The US shouldn't be restricitng travel by US citizens. Any provisions that involve crossing borders should be imposed by the country crossing INTO.

I know things are changing soooo fast that most of us can barely keep up. Here is a link that might help to understand why I had said what I did.

Special Requirements for Children Under Age 16 (http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/minors/minors_834.html)

Special requirements of U.S. State Department.

Another thing coming down the pike is that everyone.. children and adults will soon need passports to travel to mexico and possibly beyond our boarders to any country.

As far as the homeland security part goes it has its roots here.

http://travel.state.gov/pdf/2004_Hague_Law_Library.pdf


Our government does restrict its citizens from travel. If a NCP owes arrears they can't leave the country. They can't get a passport. A drivers license etc. Our government wants to create a whole new breed of criminals.. the NCP.. mainly dads by making arrears a felony on the federal level. Talk about abuse.. sheesh.

I hope that helps.

Our government does restrict its citizens from travel. If a NCP owes arrears they can't leave the country. They can't get a passport. A drivers liscence etc. Our government wants to create a whole new breed of criminals .. the NCP .. mainly dads by making arrears a felony on the federal level. Talk about abuse .. sheesh.

I hope that helps.

Ok, I checked both the links and I don't agree they support what you said. The first link is a list of the rules governing issuing a passport to a US citizen under 16. Presumably, since this isn't the first time they have traveled, the child already has a passport. But I can understand needing both parent's signature or copies of the custody agreement to get the passport.

The second link refers to a treaty VOLUNTARILY entered into by member countries. It doesn't deal with enforcing US laws.

Finally, I didn't say that the US doesn't restrict travel. Clearly, a citizen needs to be approved for a passprt, its not automatic. And, yes, there are reasons a US citizen would be restricted from leaving the country. But US law cannot and does not impose any restrictions on where a US citizen can go as long as long as they are approved for travel. The restrictions on having a passport when traveling to Cananda and Mexico is the RE-ENTER the US, not to leave it.

Our government does restrict its citizens from travel. If a NCP owes arrears they can't leave the country. They can't get a passport. A drivers liscence etc. Our government wants to create a whole new breed of criminals .. the NCP .. mainly dads by making arrears a felony on the federal level. Talk about abuse .. sheesh.



I really have to disagree with this. A NCP can not get a passport if arrears is in excess of $2,500 and they are not on a payment plan with their state

(Section 51.70 (a) (8) of Title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations states, in part, that if you are certified to Passport Services by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to be in arrears of child support payments in excess of $2,500, you are ineligible to receive a U.S. passport . If this applies to you, Passport Services strongly recommends that you contact the appropriate State child support enforcement agency to make payment arrangements before applying for a passport. This is because:

* The State agency must certify to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that acceptable payment arrangements have been made.
* Then, HHS must notify Passport Services by the removal of your name from the electronic list HHS gives to Passport Services. (Passport Services cannot issue a passport until your name has been deleted by HHS.)


I do not in ANY WAY think that this is abuse. I'm absolutely horrified by some of the dead beat dads and moms out there. I'm not talking about honest good working people who fall behind in support. I'm talking about the kind of people who choose not to pay child support when they could. The state and gov can not make exceptions for certain individuals, therefore everyone who meets the criteria can not get a passport.

I really have to disagree with this. A NCP can not get a passport if arrears is in excess of $2,500 and they are not on a payment plan with their state

(Section 51.70 (a) (8) of Title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations states, in part, that if you are certified to Passport Services by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to be in arrears of child support payments in excess of $2,500, you are ineligible to receive a U.S. passport . If this applies to you, Passport Services strongly recommends that you contact the appropriate State child support enforcement agency to make payment arrangements before applying for a passport. This is because:

* The State agency must certify to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that acceptable payment arrangements have been made.
* Then, HHS must notify Passport Services by the removal of your name from the electronic list HHS gives to Passport Services. (Passport Services cannot issue a passport until your name has been deleted by HHS.)


I do not in ANY WAY think that this is abuse. I'm absolutely horrified by some of the dead beat dads and moms out there. I'm not talking about honest good working people who fall behind in support. I'm talking about the kind of people who choose not to pay child support when they could. The state and gov can not make exceptions for certain individuals, therefore everyone who meets the criteria can not get a passport.


I don't want to veture too far from the OP's question. But I myself have had to deal with agencies over issues that arose from lies. Judge didn't care and agencies were extremely slow to move forward. In Cali if your drivers licence is suspended because some DA says so and after a hearing its proven to be incorrect.. or if your paying and they mess up and don't credit you right. Then the number for the state agency is an answering machine that ends with.. It may take 15 working days and up to 90 days to clear this mater.

If the system worked correctly then it wouldn't take forever to make corrections and be so quick to take your rights away. Im not for the NCP that refuses to pay but statistically most of us the owe pay our due.