[cadillac59]

He does have visitation... thats the problem. We didnt go to trial , I agreed to the standard visitation of every other weekend, in order to get things over with. And even though my younger two cry and refuse to go to his house, I still try to keep things civil with him and tell them they only have to stay one night if they want to come home I will come get them etc. ...I bought them a cell prepaid cell phone just in case they need me to come get them .. I do everything I can to keep it civil and NEVER talk about their father in a bad way around them.

Anyhow... So because of the legal custody , he may be able to stop me from moving? I really dont want to go back to court on this , I am burnt out on lawyer fees.... If we could come to an agreement on visitation , would we still have to go to court?

I'd be curious to know what state you are in because move-aways in California can be difficult--very difficult, and if you are in California he definitely CAN stop you from moving. You better believe it.

[Jacobsmommy123]

Im in Mississippi...

This was the exact conversation with my attorney: Im moving 1200 miles away in June 09, what do I need to do ? Nothing , it won't be a problem, people move away all the time , you could marry someone from Maine, or Paris! And need to move away... as long as he doesn't bring it up to his lawyer that you are moving , and even if he does , I will make the argument that it s a violation of your constitutional rights and we will win anyway... So on the last day of court , I will let his lawyer know , " by the way she is moving and taking the kids" and then there's nothing he can do about it at that point... He said that in Mississippi anything that is NOT in the decree, doesn't exist, and being that there is nothing saying I can't move , and he didn't raise an argument at all ,then I can...

He knew I was moving from the very start, so he had fair opportunity to raise an argument, but soemhow I just don't think its going to be as easy as my attorney said...

The only thing in my decree that says about me moving is that " both parties must comply with chancery court rule that we must , within 5 days , notify the court, and each other, of our new address.

[stevetcg]

Im in Mississippi...

This was the exact conversation with my attorney: Im moving 1200 miles away in June 09, what do I need to do ? Nothing , it wont be a problem, people move away all the time , you could marry someone from Maine, or Paris! and need to move away...as long as he doesnt bring it up to his lawyer that you are moving , and even if he does , I will make the argument that it s a violation of your constituional rights and we will win anyway.... So on the last day of court , I will let his lawyer know , " by the way she is moving and taking the kids" and then theres nothing he can do about it at that point... He said that in Mississippi anything that is NOT in the decree, doesnt exist, and being that there is nothing saying I can't move , and he didnt raise an argument at all ,then I can...

He knew I was moving from the very start, so he had fair opportunity to raise an argument, but soemhow I just dont think its going to be as easy as my attorney said ....

The only thing in my decree that says about me moving is that " both parties must comply with chancery court rule that we must , within 5 days , notify the court, and eachother, of our new address.

I am not up on Miss. Law, but that sounds suspect to me. This basically says that the custodial parent can, at will, leave and there is nothing that the non-custodial parent can do about it.

And its not a violation of your constitutional rights. Saying YOU can't move might be. The father has rights too and your rights are not more important than his.

[Jacobsmommy123]

""And its not a violation of your constitutional rights. Saying YOU can't move might be""

Exactly... But I think what he meant was I have custody , and if I move , the kids go with me , an trust me , there is no chance in a million years that my ex would ever get custody , nor would he ever want it...

[stevetcg]

Yeah - like I said... I'm not sure about Miss. but that's not how it works in most states.

I am sure one of the local family law experts is researching this.

Have you asked the father if he cares if you move? If he doesn't this is all moot anyway.

[cadillac59]

Im in Mississippi...

This was the exact conversation with my attorney: Im moving 1200 miles away in June 09, what do I need to do ? Nothing , it wont be a problem, people move away all the time , you could marry someone from Maine, or Paris! and need to move away...as long as he doesnt bring it up to his lawyer that you are moving , and even if he does , I will make the argument that it s a violation of your constituional rights and we will win anyway.... So on the last day of court , I will let his lawyer know , " by the way she is moving and taking the kids" and then theres nothing he can do about it at that point... He said that in Mississippi anything that is NOT in the decree, doesnt exist, and being that there is nothing saying I can't move , and he didnt raise an argument at all ,then I can...

He knew I was moving from the very start, so he had fair opportunity to raise an argument, but soemhow I just dont think its going to be as easy as my attorney said ....

The only thing in my decree that says about me moving is that " both parties must comply with chancery court rule that we must , within 5 days , notify the court, and eachother, of our new address.

I think you got some pretty bad legal advice and should get a second opinion in Mississippi. The constitutional rights argument is nonsense.

[Jacobsmommy123]

He "thinks" I am moving to be with my ex boyfriend that lives near the area ( The ex has been diagnosed as severely mentally unstable)... And swears that no one will ever have me if he cant... and THAT is the only reason he has a problem with me moving, other than the fact that he wants me back , and is still harassing me to this day about giving him another chance blah blah blah. He would do anything to keep ME here, but it has nothing to do with the children. I am moving to a bigger city because I know that I need to have the equivalent of a two parent income in order to support my kids , and I cannot do that here in Southern Mississippi. I have spent a lot of time near Philly and am happy there and that's why Imade the decision to move to that particular area, plus I have friends and a support system there.

[stevetcg]

He "thinks" I am moving to be with my ex boyfriend that lives near the area ( The ex has been diagnosed as severly mentally unstable).... And swears that no one will ever have me if he can't ....and THAT is the only reason he has a problem with me moving, other than the fact that he wants me back , and is still harassing me to this day about giving him another chance blah blah blah. He would do anything to keep ME here, but it has nothing to do with the children. I am moving to a bigger city because I know that I need to have the equivilent of a two parent income in order to support my kids , and I cannot do that here in Southern Mississippi. I have spent alot of time near Philly and am happy there and thats why Imade the decision to move to that particular area, plus I have friends and a support system there.

I think Caddy nailed it. I agree and think you got some bad advice.

And it doesn't matter if he can keep you there or not. He can keep the kids there and I don't imagine that you will go without them. Result remains the same.

They are his kids too and moving THEM against his will violates HIS rights.

[Jacobsmommy123]

Ok... so from the advice I have gotten so far , I realize that the best thing to do is to work things out with the ex before I leave , If he won't agree , I may have to go to court, I have written a visitation plan and would like you opinions on it , I believe it is more than fair. But , will it be enough to convinnce a judge? It is a work in progress and will need to be written over before I take it before a judge, but these are the high points . If anyone has any suggestions of what needs to be added/ deleted , I would appriciate it . Of course , I will take out CP and NCP , and reword it , so please don't critique that.
Thanks!





NCP may visit at anytime, At his expense, providing it has been prearranged at least 5 days in advance and doesn't interfere with already made plans involving the children, in which case CP would be willing to negoitiate and plan for a more suitable visitation time.

** Any extended visitation time will be determined by school schedules , and will begin the day after school dismisses and will end the day before school resumes**

Proposed visitation schedule: (CP is responsible for the cost of transportation for the following schedule)

Summer Holidays - 30 consecutive days during summer months ; Days being either in one visit,( first four weeks ; last four weeks) ; or broken down into two separate visits of fifteen days each, at anytime school is not in session.

Thanksgiving Holidays: From the day following school dismissal to the day before school is set to resume.

Christmas Holidays: From December 25th at 2:00 PM with the kids returning by 6:00 PM on the Friday before school is set to resume.

Spring Break: One Day after school dismisses through day before school is set to resume.

Any other approved extended time is to be determined by school schedules.

NCP will also be informed of phone numbers where he may reach the children at any reasonable time, and will also have access to the children by their cellular phones ,and email accounts, if any. Furthermore, both CP and NCP do agree to abide by Uniform Chancery Court Rule 8.06 of the Mississippi Code , with regard to addresses of both parties.

Beginning October 2008 ,NCP has standard visitation rights of every other weekend and is currently enforcing given rights. Giving NCP a total of 26 weekends, or 52 days per year.

With the new proposed schedule , visitation would be increased to a minimum of 56 days.

NCP currently has no involvement with any extra curricular activities nor anything school related involving the children, no involvement with and decisions including educational or medical , so no routine as far as these matters would be upset.

[JudyKayTee]

It's not what you write out - it's what your husband agrees to or what the Court orders that matters. While this is a starting point unless you enter into a separation agreement the Court is going to make its own determination of what is fair and reasonable.

If you are in one State and your husband in another, who is going to pay the transportation for the children, supervise them on their trips, and how reasonable are your suggested provisions - ?

You are very foolish if you don't consult with an Attorney. You have little understanding how the system works and I think you may very well be wasting your time cutting and pasting agreements.

I don't mean to sound as harsh as this reads but you need someone with legal experience and knowledge to walk you through this.

[stevetcg]

I don't think it's a bad schedule or unreasonable, but if I were the NCP I wouldn't agree to it. Going months without seeing my kids would not mitigate having 4 whole extra days. Plus 30 days consecutive makes for significant scheduling issues for the rest of life.

I am not saying it is a bad plan and he very well may agree to it. But if his goal is as you state to keep you around, why would he agree to it? It is well within his rights to not allow you to move (presumably).

[Jacobsmommy123]

I don't think he will agree to it , but I thought what I had come up with was a good starting point for negotiations if I have to go to court, I will nedd to show the court that Ido actually have the kids best interest at heart and am trying to move away to make a better life for them and that I am not , in anyway trying to take the kids away from their dad by moving.I am trying to come up with a reasonable plan to keep him in their lives.

[JudyKayTee]

I dont think he will agree to it , but I thought what I had come up with was a good starting point for negotiations if I have to go to court, i will nedd to show the court that Ido actually have the kids best interest at heart and am trying to move away to make a better life for them and that I am not , in anyway trying to take the kids away from their dad by moving.I am trying to come up with a reasonable plan to keep him in their lives.

Your writing a proposed visitation/custody plan to which he does not consent does not show the Court much of anything. You haven't addressed transportation costs and chaperone costs - that I can see - and the entire "schedule" won't work if you move away.

It appears to be written very much from your perspective - and that could hurt you.

Honestly, I'm not trying to give you a hard time. You need an Attorney to explain your rights and the options which are available - and perhaps go over the hard, legal truth of things with you, how the Court does and doesn't work. I guarantee your agreement will be useless to an Attorney.

[Jacobsmommy123]

Judy:

I have an attorney.I have been informed of my rights and NCPs rights , according to him. I am trying to get around using an attorney for this particular matter. NCP doesn't have an attorney. You say that it appears to be written just from my perepective... elaborte please.. Im curoius because if that is what you see , then I need to work on that. I am trying to be fair to everyone, and actually by giving him the kids for almost every holiday , I thought that kind of put me on the losing end.Also , it would state in the agreement I present to NCP for his approval that I will be responsible for transporting the kids back home and getting them to his home safely. Iwill not have them flying , so Iwould have to drive them. I own my own business , so that would be possible for me to take the time off.

[stevetcg]

Judy:

I have an attorney.I have been informed of my rights and NCPs rights , according to him. I am trying to get around using an attorney for this particular matter. NCP doesnt have an attorney. You say that it appears to be written just from my perepective... elaborte please.. Im curoius because if that is what you see , then I need to work on that. I am trying to be fair to everyone, and actually by giving him the kids for almost every holiday , I thought that kind of put me on the losing end.Also , it would state in the agreement I present to NCP for his approval that I will be responsible for transporting the kids back home and getting them to his home safely. Iwill not have them flying , so Iwould have to drive them. I own my own business , so that would be possible for me to take the time off.

You have the kids over 300 days a year. No one is going to view you as being on the losing end of anything.

You want to drive from PA to MS for every holiday? Im just guessing but isn't that about 1500 miles... each way? NO way a court is going to view that as being in the best interest of the kids.

[Jacobsmommy123]

Good Point Steve

[Jacobsmommy123]

BUT... I already have the kids over 300 days a year anyhow... He has no Holidays as of now , per our divorce decree.

[JudyKayTee]

Judy:

I have an attorney.I have been informed of my rights and NCPs rights , according to him. I am trying to get around using an attorney for this particular matter. NCP doesnt have an attorney. You say that it appears to be written just from my perepective... elaborte please.. Im curoius because if that is what you see , then I need to work on that. I am trying to be fair to everyone, and actually by giving him the kids for almost every holiday , I thought that kind of put me on the losing end.Also , it would state in the agreement I present to NCP for his approval that I will be responsible for transporting the kids back home and getting them to his home safely. Iwill not have them flying , so Iwould have to drive them. I own my own business , so that would be possible for me to take the time off.

I would never consent to this. In fact, I'd be screaming.

"Summer Holidays - 30 consecutive days during summer months ; Days being either in one visit ( first four weeks ; last four weeks) ; or broken down into two seperate visits of fifteen days each, at anytime school is not in session; Thanksgiving Holidays: From the day following school dismissal to the day before school is set to resume; Christmas Holidays: From December 25th at 2:00 PM with the kids returning by 6:00 PM on the Friday before school is set to resume.; Spring Break: One Day after school dismisses through day before school is set to resume.

He is entitled to see the children during the Summer and then Thanksgiving, Christmas and spring break? Four times a year, no matter HOW many days are involved - ?

And this part: "Any other approved extended time is to be determined by school schedules."

Who is going to "approve" the schedule?

You don't want the children to fly so you intend to drive them back and forth. So will he miss out a day or two in each direction or do you intend to take them out of school early or return them late (on holidays when school is in session)?

[stevetcg]

BUT... I already have the kids over 300 days a year anyhow... He has no Holidays as of now , per our divorce decree.

Sure, but he still gets them every other weekend. And if he were so inclined, I would venture to guess that a court would give him more... and that is something that becomes much more difficult if you move.

If you don't believe he will agree to any of this, what is the point? The court is unlikely to do anything that will make things harder for him if he isn't willing. And it does not seem as though he is.

[JudyKayTee]

You have the kids over 300 days a year. No one is going to view you as being on the losing end of anything.

You want to drive from PA to MS for every holiday? Im just guessing but isnt that about 1500 miles... each way? NO way a court is going to view that as being in the best interest of the kids.

I also questioned where the travel time is going to fit in, safety issue aside.

I think the agreement as written has the opposite effect for which it is intended - it makes it look like Dad is being cut out of the kids' lives.

It's proposed agreements like this that lead to orders that the mother can't leave the State with the kids - at all.