My parents are supervisors of my supervised visits. I was granted visits by the court that are to take place at my parent's once a week on the weekend. They have no legal rights to my daughter, they are not custodial guardians, her other grandparent's are. Recently they have said my fiancé was not welcome at their home and my fiancé has not seen my daughter in months. There was no reason for this from what I can see. They had a family function the other day and told me that they wanted me to attend and I said my fiancé and I would come. They said they did not want her there and just me. I refused to attend. They then denied me my visitation this weekend. They still picked up my daughter and had her for the weekend, but I was told I could not come there anymore. I want to know if they can do this. I do not see how it is legal for them to use my daughter as a pawn in this fictional argument with my fiancé they are having. Please let me know.

If the purpose of their having your daughter is for your visitation, then they cannot keep you from that visitation. If they try to, then you go back to the court and ask that a different supervisor be appointed.

This may cause them to try and get their own visitation if the custodians don't allow it.

Why do the grandparents have custody and why are your visits supervised?

I very seldom disagree with my colleague, Scottgem, but I am going to disagree here. The Court has granted once a week supervised visits with the child for a reason. If the visits take place at the grandparents' home the grandparents get to pick who visits their home. Whether the "fiance" has anything to do with the custody/visitation is unknown.

If OP is unhappy with the situation he has to go back to Court, request a change in the party/parties that supervise visitation and see what the Court decides is in the best interest of the child.

I note that the grandparents have the child for the weekend. The father has visitation on one of those weekend days in their home, supervised by them.

I'm sure the Court has its reasons.

I further note that the OP skipped visitation this weekend because he couldn't bring his fiancé with him to visit the child. There are a lot of parents who would do whatever it takes to see the child, particularly when it's once a week.

So - the answer is to go back to Court and request a change.

We aren't disagreeing. I didn't address the issue of the fiancée. Yes, the supervising grandparents have the right to not have the fiancée in their home. But they can't refuse to allow the parent to visit if they are being charged with supervising those visits. I believe that would be considered as defying the court order and get them charged with contempt of court.

But the bottom line is that the OP needs to go to the court to enforce the order.

Me and the mother had issues I'd rather not discuss online, all that is needed to be known about that is that I have no issues and I would have custody if I had full time employment and a place of my own. Unfortunately I am on unemployment and I live with my fiancé. I have not wanted to make any issues about the visitation before now, because I didn't feel it mattered where I saw her as long as I saw her and my parents get to see her as well. But lately it seems as if this is going to be an ongoing problem. The last time me and my fiancé went to visit together, my fiancé planned a whole day at the beach and just wanted her to have a good time out of the house, we wanted to leave early go in the morning and have a whole day at the beach. My fiancé bought games and an umbrella so we weren't in the sun all day, and we brought food we wanted to picnic there and it was just going to be a great day. My mother said she had to go. She changed every single thing we wanted to do, from the time we went, to the location, to the time we left and my fiancé was really hurt she was so excited to have a fun great day with my daughter. And it was ruined, we didn't even go to the beach it was some dirty bay we couldn't even go in the water it was so disgusting. Aside from that my daughter doesn't seem to respect me as her father. She goes to my mother for everything, when she's hurt, when she's hungry, and when I tell her if she can or can't do something she goes to my mother to either verify that she is allowed to do whatever it is she asking and I said yes to or to override me if I tell her no for something. This is very upsetting to me I am her father and they are constantly taking over with everything. Now keeping her from seeing my fiancé cause they are mad at her for reasons unknown, my fiancé is adament about me finding out how to go about getting my rights back and I think I'm going to have to. I didn't want to make this a big issue, but they are saying I'm choosing my fiancé over my own daughter and that is simply not true. They are using my daughter as a tool to upset my fiancé and she hasn't kept me from seeing her either. My fiancé tells me to go despite the fact that she can't she hasn't seen her in so long but she doesn't want me not to see her just cause my parents are being ridiculous. They are keeping me from my daughter because I refused to attend a party that my fiancé was specifically told not to come to. I think that is wrong and she was very hurt by that, she never did anything to deserve this treatment and I can't figure out what the problem is, they won't even say what the problem is. They just decided to hate her one day. So I decided not to go to this party and I believe that was the right thing. I don't wish to go hang out with people who are rude to my fiancé and that's my right. So because I wouldn't go to a party they refused to let me see my daughter. I feel like I'm in a tug o war between my fiancé and my family and my family is trying to make a point to my fiancé that they will win and I will chose them over her and when I didn't they got pissed. And I just feel that for them to put me in that situation was wrong and if my fiancé threw a big party she would never say they weren't allowed to go despite the way they are treating her. This has to stop this woman is going to be my wife and they need to respect her as such. So I don't know what makes them think they have the right to visit with my daughter without me being there but I'm going to have to do something. They are probably saying things to her (my daughter)like daddy doesn't want to see you or he wants to be with his fiancé or something crazy like that, this is not fair to my daughter, that's the bottom line. Unfortunately I really don't have anyone who can be a supervisor and it would have to take place at one of those court appointed places and that really sucks, I just wish I could have unsupervised.

We aren't disagreeing. I didn't address the issue of the fiancee. Yes, the supervising grandparents have the right to not have the fiancee in their home. But they can't refuse to allow the parent to visit if they are being charged with supervising those visits. I believe that would be considered as defying the court order and get them charged with contempt of court.

But the bottom line is that the OP needs to go to the court to enforce the order.


We're on the same page. Yes, they cannot refuse to allow the father to visit. Yes, the can refuse to allow the fiancé into their house.

And, yes, I believe that denying visitation to the father ALONE is a violation of the Court Order.

I have a similar situation in my family - the father can visit with no one else, no girlfriend, no family, no one. He's gone back to Court and attempted to challenge the Order, only to be told that the Order is in the best interest of the child. Alone with the child, he's fine. With someone else he's NOT so fine.

all that is needed to be known about that is that I have no issues and I would have custody if I had full time employment and a place of my own. ... Unfortunately I really don't have anyone who can be a supervisor and it would have to take place at one of those court appointed places and that really sucks, I just wish I could have unsupervised.

Sorry, but I find that hard to accept. Supervised visitation is granted when the parent presents a danger to the child in some way. I can understand your not having custody if you can't provide for your child, but that doesn't explain the supervised visits. Something else is going on here.

If there are no issues, then you should be able to just pick up your child from the custodial parent and do whatever you want or go wherever you want without supervision.

If there is no reason for supervised visits then go back to court and petition for a change.

Me and the mother had issues I'd rather not discuss online, all that is needed to be known about that is that I have no issues and I would have custody if I had full time employment and a place of my own. Unfortunately I am on unemployment and I live with my fiance.


I have never seen anyone denied custody AND/OR ORDERED TO HAVE SUPERVISED VISITATION due to unemployment and living with a fiancé. What State is this?

Step one, of course, would be to marry your fiancé. Again, I fail to see the problem if you are married, and your new wife supports you (with your unemployment benefits) until you get a job. In fact, I see that situation all the time.

Did you make the beach arrangements without discussing them with your parents?

I don't know how old the child is but it is normal and natural for the child to go to the people who are with her 24/7 (or as close to that as possible) instead of the person they see once a week. That does not mean you are being criticized by anyone.

I am puzzled why you would skip visitation because you couldn't bring your fiancé. That seems contrary to everything else you've posted. Something is missing from this narrative.

EDIT: Just re-read and the maternal grandparents have custody. The paternal grandparents supervise visitation. Where is the mother in this scenario? You BOTH lost custody?

I see two different explanations in the same original post: One is "They said they did not want her there and just me. I refused to attend."

The second is: "They then denied me my visitation this weekend."

You either refused to visit OR your parents denied you visitation. Are you saying you refused to "attend" without your fiancé and your parents refused to allow her in the house... those denying you visitation? As I said, that's totally within their power.

I appreciate your opinion Judy but you are incorrect in saying that I didn't go to visit this weekend due to my fiancé not being allowed there. My fiancé hasn't been allowed there for months and I have gone. The whole reason for me asking this question was due the fact that THEY DID NOT LET ME COME TO VISIT and I am willing to do anything to see my daughter which is why I'm on this website trying to find out what my rights are. You obviously misunderstood my question, I did not ask if my parents had a right to deny my fiancé coming to their house, obviously they do, it's there home and it's ridiculous that you would think that I even asked that. I asked if they had a right to deny ME MY visits because I didn't go to a party they had because my fiancé could not go. I feel one thing has nothing to do with the other. I don't think that somebody should use my child as a manipulation tool to get me to do things I don't want to do. Threatening to deny me my visits for not attending a party I'm pretty sure is not in the court order. My parents do not have ANY rights to my daughter, they do not even have visitation rights therefore if I didn't have supervised visitation they would not see her either. And I do not have set days and times for my visits, the only stipulation is that there is a supervisor for the visits, it is not stipulated that she goes there on the weekends and that I can only have one day that I can see her. It was agreed upon by me and the custodial guardians that I get her for the weekends, not my parents. I'm not quite sure where you are getting your facts from but they are incorrect. All I wanted to know is if they, the appointed supervisor had a right to deny ME visitation from my daughter if I have done nothing to violate any court ordered stipulations. The fact that they will not allow me to bring my fiancé is another issue in and of itself and that will definitely be addressed, if I have to I will see if I can change the location of the visits through the courts, that way the supervisors being my parents will have no right whatsoever to say weather or not my fiancé is present. If the location is not there home they couldn't say anything. There job is to watch my visit not to tell me what I can do and where I can go. If I want to take my daughter to the park then I would think they need to get off there and go to the park. My daughter sits in a house all weekend playing video games and watching TV, I don't think that's healthy for an 8 year old girl.

OK judy once AGIAIN I've never skipped my visitation because my fiancé didn't go. What I did not go to was my sisters 30th birthday party be cause my fiancé wasn't invited. That has nothing to do with my daughter. Then since my family was upset that I didn't go they retaliated by telling me I couldn't come to there house this weekend to see my daughter.Why do you keep saying that I didn't visit my daughter because my fiancé couldn't go. That is not the issue. The issue is that they refused to let me see my daughter because I wouldn't go to my sisters Birthday party. One has nothing to do with the other. My Point is do my parents have the right to keep me from seeing my daughter because they are angry with me. They totally used my daughter as a weapon against me. I at least got to talk to her twice on the phone. This isn't the first time they have done this to me. All I want to know is it legal for them to do this?

First, where we are getting our facts from is from what you have posted. And what you have posted has been a little vague. Remember Judy is trying to help you, if she has misunderstood anything it is from what you posted. I think your criticism is a little too much.

But that being said, Your question has been answered. The supervisor has no right to deny you visitation. If they do so, you can go to court to have them removed as supervisors.

But this still doesn't answer the question of why there is supervision in the first place. If the facts are as you state, then you should have no problem getting unsupervised visits. But I have to believe there is something you aren't telling us because I don't believe supervised visits would have been ordered under the circumstances you describe.

Yes as I have stated there was an issue, in the past and no I've never harmed my child. The courts just felt that I was not competent to care for my child and at that time that was probably the case. However that is not the case now. And as I've said before it's personal and I'd rather not put all that on the world wide web, I asked for an opinion on weather or not my parents can deny me my visits due to them being upset with me. There have also been times that they got mad at me while I was there over something trivial and decided to get crazy and start yelling and kicked me out telling me to leave in front of my daughter that's happened a few times and I'm just sick of them interfering with my visits with my daughter cause they are mad or upset about something. This is the craziest form of control issues I have ever seen. I'm 32 years old and I want to be a father to my child. And I know that there are court orders that keep people from visiting their child with other people and I kind of figured you had some personal feelings on that issue... I actually said to my fiancé you must have some kind of thing like that going on because you refused to hear what I was saying. It's like you were one tracked minded on the fiancé issue when that was not the issue at all, it only played a part as being the reason why they were denying me my visit. But I would never stop seeing my kid because my fiancé couldn't go and she would never ask that of me. We BOTH love my daughter very much and want what's best for her. I also don't believe that keeping my daughter from seeing my fiancé is beneficial for MY CHILD, I don't know what you're situation is but it's not mine. There is no stipulation in my order that I cannot have my fiancé around my daughter. My fiancé is great with her, and my daughter loves her. My fiancé has had a similar childhood to my daughter and she says her stepmother was one of the closest people to her in her life and was a very positive influence. My fiancé is also good for me. She has motivated me and inspired me and she has been a great help to me. We will be doing renovations to our home shortly to provide a room for my daughter. I'm pretty sure the only thing the court wants to see is that I am stable, can provide for my daughter, and have a suitable home environment for her to visit me in. That is what both my fiancé and I are trying to achieve. My fiancé is also on a very friendly basis with the mother so no issues will ever be brought up by THE CUSTODIAL GUARDIANS to say that my fiancé can not visit with my daughter. Everyone's situation is different and mine is not like yours. It's sad when people take personal feelings and emotions out on the children. A lot of times when mother's make stipulations like that it's due to some hurt or resentment they have towards the father and really has nothing to do with weather or not that person would be detrimental to the child's well being. That is the point I'm trying to make with my parents, they started disliking my fiancé over a car that she purchased from them. They decided a year later after selling her the car that they did not ask for enough money and that they wanted the car back. My fiancé had that car in our driveway for a year before she was able to put the car on the road. At the time I had a vehicle and it was to expensive to insure both. I then crashed my car and they wanted to take the car back from her and give it to me and insure it in my name. My fiancé had offered them the car back after the accident and they told her no. Then a week after insuring it they wanted it back. My fiancé said no cause she had just spent the money to put it on the road. Due to this they got mad and told her she wasn't allowed at the house. My parents are not right in their thinking and actions sometimes. This hurt my fiancé very much cause she always felt very close to my parents, but they are not always who they seem to be and I tried to tell her its them not her and not to feel bad. But this is going on months now and she has missed my daughter terribly, even still she did not tell me not to go without her she would never do that and she did not even tell me to press the supervisor issue with the courts. But now that they are taking it out on me and telling me THAT I can't see her this is what the problem is. My daughter wants to see me, she doesn't know why I'm not there, and I just fear that THIS IS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF MY CHILD.

Again - if you were saying wife instead of fiancé this would not be an issue.

I've simply never seen custody denied and/or supervised visitation ordered due to someone living with someone else and collecting unemployment. If I had to go to a party with people I HATED, without my fiancé, in order to see my daughter I would do it.

My confusion arises out of statements like this: "Now keeping her from seeing my fiancé cause they are mad at her for reasons unknown, followed by sentence after sentence about what caused the rift. You either know or you don't.

How long has someone else had guardianship/custody of your daughter? And, yes, when you get to Court if there have been problems in the past and your fiancé is terribly attached to your daughter and they miss each other I can see the Court saying that is detrimental to the child. You and your fiancé are not legally committed to each other and it sounds like your child has already been through a lot of changes I can see the Court siding with your parents.

If your parents are such crazy control freaks why do you allow them to visit with your child? How did they get appointed to supervise the visits? Was that without your consent, out of your control?

K I'm not going to go into personal issues with unknown folk on the internet. I don't even know if you're a lawyer so I don't feel inclined to tell you the personal reasons as to why I have supervised visits. I mean really if you can't figure it out from what I wrote (personal, stable, etc) there really is only one reason for things like that, if you can't figure it out then maybe you aren't a lawyer and I don't need to tell you all of my business... I didn't ask you to comment on weather or not my visits should be supervised or weather or not I can get unsupervised visits that was irrelevant to my question, which was can my supervisors deny me my visits. If I had asked you if I could get unsupervised then I could understand your reason for asking me why my visits are supervised, but since I haven't I don't understand why you are so desperate to know the details as to why I have supervised. I appreciate your opinions, I really do cause this is a problem that I have to resolve, {personal attacks removed-<>} But thank you Scott and I will look into this with the courts... and yes there is stuff I'm not telling you but all that needs to be known is I have never harmed my daughter in anyway and never will so supervised visits are not in place for any reason like that... so rest assured on that, I had some personal problems of my own that the court required I have some assistance with, that's all, I'm not a bad person.

Yes as I have stated there was an issue, in the past and no I've never harmed my child. The courts just felt that I was not competent to care for my child and at that time that was probably the case.

Actually, you did not state that. What you said was; "all that is needed to be known about that is that I have no issues and I would have custody if I had full time employment and a place of my own." This is why I have questioned the supervised visits. Now you have explained it so it makes sense.

But my answer still stands. Additionally, I'm going to suggest that you ask the court to appoint a guardian ad liteum (GAL). This person can evaluate the situation and, if its as you relate, recommend supervised visits as no longer necessary.

I'm going to add a couple of points here. First, on this site we prefer to help with the situation, not just answer the question. You wanted to know if your parents, as the court appointed supervisors, could deny you visitation. But that makes the question of why visits were supervised in the first place, pertinent. We aren't asking you to reveal any info you don't want to, however, many people do use the anonymity of the WEB to ask questions of faceless strangers. In addition, we have seen, many times, where people posts questions and leave out pertinent facts. When its clear that information has been left out, it raises questions. Since all we have to go on is what you tell us, when info is incomplete or unclear we have to interpret the situation based on what you do post.

The other point is that you don't get to dictate who can or cannot respond to your posts. If you don't like how someone responds, then ignore them. If you think they violate our rules, then report it.

My point here is that you have stepped over the line in your responses. I've had to remove some of your posts because of that.

Someone in court objected to you having non supervised visits, a judge does not rule on this without some other party, be it the other grandparents, the other parent or child protectivie services.

I would have to assume many things because you are expecting us to read between lines. So I agree I have never seen supervised visits ordered unless either CPS was involved and the children were taken out of the home by them, or one of the other parties made a motion that you were not able or did not fight to require this.

If they refuse your visits, you will need to go to court to force the visits. Also you may look at a different type of supervised. I will say this, here in Atlanta we have professional centers for visits, and there , your girlfriend or even wife would not be allowed unless she was related and named on an approved list to visit.

Closed, OP created a second user name to attack those trying to help them.