Hi,

My Ex-husband and I share Joint Legal Custody of our 10 yr. old daughter, w/ myself having Sole Legal Custody. My new husband has received a job promotion and in time will require us to move out of state. We have been very upfront about this decision w/ my ex-husband and he seems to be understanding of it at this point in time.

I wanted to get some advice on how to go about making a modification through the courts when the time comes. Does anybody know what they look at or take into consideration when making a final ruling? From what I know they will compare the crime rates, school systems & whether the move will compromise the relationship w/ the other parent. Will this modification require input on our daughter's part? I guess I'm wondering if for some reason my ex-husband does decides to fight me on it, will the court rule that our daughter can not leave the state of AZ?

Thanks.

Hello reeves:

If I was the ex, I'd fight you on it. If I was the judge, I'd rule on behalf of the ex.

It's the courts job to decide what's in the best interest of the child - not the parents. It's my view, that it's better for a 10 year old to have close contact with her father, rather than not. Without reasons to rule otherwise, the family courts generally agree with me. A promotion by your present husband isn't grounds, in my view, to rule in your favor.

Your present husband knew that you came with a 10 yr old who has a relationship with her father. I think he should put off the promotion for another 8 years for the sake of your daughter. In fact, I think YOU should ask him to do that very thing.

excon

What you don't say is what visitation the father has and how much a part of your daughter's life he has maintained.

There is really no way for us to predict what a judge will do. But, if the father has maintained an active part of your daughter's life then there is a very good chance he can force you to not take your daughter out of the area.

Yes, it is not the school districts or the crime rate they will be looking at
( OK all of that will be presented I am sure)

But in the end if your ex says it is OK, then it will be OK with the judge and will just go though. So what you need to do NOW is file a motion to allow you to move at some future time. And get the ex to sign off on it if he will.

If your ex is doing proper visitation, and has joint legal custody ( you have physcial custody) and if he is seeing the child on a regular basis your problem will be how he can continue to see the child, he may hold you liable for paying for all transportaton to get the child to him for his visitation. He may demand longer vistits over holidays, and summer.

And in the end if he has regular visits, he can prevent you from moving if it can not be shown he will continue to be able to visit because you are too far away.

Many people have to give up promotions and transfers because the court just will not let them move and take a child.

Hello again, Reeves:

I didn't want to leave on that note. I think my friend, Ruby is right. You didn't get the answer you wanted. But, I DID give you the answer you needed.

Indeed, contrary to being bitter, I'm thrilled to have had an ex-wife, who did the very thing I suggest you do.

I'm an old guy now. My son and I are very tight, and I mean VERY. We're in business together and he's my best friend. We've spoken every day since he could hold the phone – even when I was in the slam.

I thank my lucky stars to have had a wife who understood that her son's relationship with his dad was more important than her new husband's promotion. They stayed, and he got a promotion anyway.

excon

First may I call your attention to the guidelines for using the comments feature posted here;

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/feedba...ure-24951.html

I do think you owe excon an apology, because he did answer your questions. Maybe it wasn't answered they way you would have liked, but it was answered accurately.

Second, I do think you need to make sure the court modifies the custody/visitation BEFORE your husband accepts the promotion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello reeves:


It's the courts job to decide what's in the best interest of the child - not the parents.


excon

---

Why do they always say this. I'm going to be a parent soon. My ex-bf left me for another woman though he knew I was pregnant. Even before we broke up he knew that I was having a hard time with my pregnancy because this is my first one. I couldn't eat and I always threw up. And then he decided to move on though he knew that putting me into an emotional stress can affect the pregnancy itself. It was my dad who helped me through the hard times. The father of my unborn baby hasn't checked on my pregnancy. And from what I've heard he talked to a lawyer and wants a joint custody. He didn't care or still doesn't care about the baby because it's still unborn... the court's job shouldn't be for the child interest only but to the parent who stick out for that baby. They should see who has the real heart to raise that child.:mad:

The court will consider whether the move appears to be in the best interests of the child. All of the factors you've cited and more may come into play. A lot depends on how aggressive your attorney is and how aggressive your ex's attorney is. Ultimately the judge will decide whether to allow the move.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yamotnako

why do they always say this. I'm going to be a parent soon. My ex-bf left me for another woman though he knew i was pregnant. Even before we broke up he knew that i was having a hard time with my pregnancy coz this is my first one. I couldn't eat and i always threw up. and then he decided to move on though he knew that putting me into an emotional stress can affect the pregnancy itself. It was my dad who helped me through the hard times. The father of my unborn baby hasn't checked on my pregnancy. And from what i've heard he talked to a lawyer and wants a joint custody. he didn't care or still doesn't care about the baby coz it's still unborn...the court's job shouldn't be for the child interest only but to the parent who stick out for that baby. they should see who has the real heart to raise that child.:mad:

---

Unfortunately yamotnako, this is an emotional argument and the law isn't based on emotions. Right or wrong, it's not the way it works. I get a real kick out of the American mentality which believes or wishes that the law is going to decide based on emotions. And nothing so clearly makes that point more than family law issues, which is laden with emotion and everybody that is so caught up in the heat of a conflict in this arena is so convinced that they are the ones legally in the right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yamotnako

the court's job shouldn't be for the child interest only but to the parent who stick out for that baby. they should see who has the real heart to raise that child.:mad:

---

What you are missing is that the courts will often decide that giving custody to the parent that has reared and cared for the child is in the best interest of the child.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by s_cianci

Unfortunately yamotnako, this is an emotional argument and the law isn't based on emotions. Right or wrong, it's not the way it works. I get a real kick out of the American mentality which believes or wishes that the law is going to decide based on emotions. And nothing so clearly makes that point more than family law issues, which is laden with emotion and everybody that is so caught up in the heat of a conflict in this arena is so convinced that they are the ones legally in the right.

---

I get it. But how can you give rights to those who doesn't care. Yeah it is based on emotion... the baby was made because of emotion... not the court... can you imagine your baby to be like a pingpong ball. Especially a newborn... just because one parent has the financial stability would that means he has the right though he didn't give any care for that child during pregnancy...

And that's why its left up to the courts to make the decision, so they can base their decision on what's best for the child.

You need to have more confidence inb your abilitiy to raise the child. Financial stability is only one measure the courts use to decide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem

And that's why its left up to the courts to make the decision, so they can base their decision on what's best for the child.

You need to have more confidence inb your abilitiy to raise the child. Financial stability is only one measure the courts use to decide.

---

Yes it did... what about mental health... can I use that to fight him... he has been under medication for depression even before I met him. And he has some anger management issue. Though I never saw him hit a person... but he scared me when he punched a hole through his bathroom door because he was angry with me.

Yes, anything that might challenge his fitness as a parent or might constitute a danger to the child.