Part 1
[QUOTE=Tayken;112223]How did you "know". You are presenting a statement of "fact" then identifying it as a "subjective belief" in the next sentence. You countered your own evidence. I truly hope your affidavit material, testamony and statements to the OCL reporter were not delivered in this pattern.
You may want to look up 'emotional reasoning' on Google. This is a common pattern to "emotional reasoning". You may have some "emotional reason" to support your "belief" but, it may very well not be grounded in a cogent and relevant fact.
Then you produce the phone records, and send a with prejudice letter attaching the cogent and relevant evidence to the fact you made the phone call. You do this identifying in your own incoming call record that the mother called you and outline the facts of the conversation in detail and ask that the other parent not conduct themselves in this manner in the future.
Through the application of cogent and relevant evidence you:
(a) establish the call happened using third party documentation from the service provider that actually serviced the call.
(b) establish that the other parent called x days after the incident and raised it as an issue and inject the question why it took so long if it is so important.
(c) that the child is safe, happy and shoing no signs of distress.
(d) the other parent called on on date and time for a duration of X minutes to dispute the fact as established in (a).
(e) you request that this conduct no longer happen and for all communications to happen through the immutable and third party managed parenting system known as Our Family Wizard.
You DEMONSTRATE with COGENT AND RELEVANT EVIDENCE that the incident did happen and that the other parent called you weeks afterwards and is trying to create conflict where no conflict should exist.
No police, no CAS, and you are exhausted? For some reason the Respondent in the case law already posted had over 10 police incidents called on him and well, he got through trial (17 days of it!)...
Or your lawyer failed to advise you of what should and could be done. As the moving party in the matter you have to meet and exceed the requirements set forth for a mobility case. Those are determined on the child's best interests... Not the parent's best interests. You can find a lot on mobility on this site and all the case law that is leveraged to make a determiniation of where a child should primarily reside.
The fact that your husband is the leaving parent makes it an uphill battle to establish it is in the child's best interests. And for good reason... A child's habitiual residential location should only be moved ON CONSENT or in their BEST INTERESTS.
Not because your husband got a new job, makes more money, married a new person, etc... IT IS ALL ABOUT THE CHILD'S BEST INTERESTS and the determination of the CHILD'S BEST INTERESTS.
But, did you explain why it would be in the child's best interests? That is the only element of a mobility matter a judge can make a decision on.
A child may say they want to be a astronaut at that age and then a doctor. Children do have a voice, your husband's child expressed it to the OCL and although the move may be in you and your husband's best interests ... It may very well not have been in the best interest of the child.
If the child's best interests were *THIS* important to you and your husband... You simple would not have moved. Simple fact. You would have made due with your situation (as adults) for the sake of the child in questions "best interests".
[QUOTE=Tayken;112223]How did you "know". You are presenting a statement of "fact" then identifying it as a "subjective belief" in the next sentence. You countered your own evidence. I truly hope your affidavit material, testamony and statements to the OCL reporter were not delivered in this pattern.
You may want to look up 'emotional reasoning' on Google. This is a common pattern to "emotional reasoning". You may have some "emotional reason" to support your "belief" but, it may very well not be grounded in a cogent and relevant fact.
Then you produce the phone records, and send a with prejudice letter attaching the cogent and relevant evidence to the fact you made the phone call. You do this identifying in your own incoming call record that the mother called you and outline the facts of the conversation in detail and ask that the other parent not conduct themselves in this manner in the future.
Through the application of cogent and relevant evidence you:
(a) establish the call happened using third party documentation from the service provider that actually serviced the call.
(b) establish that the other parent called x days after the incident and raised it as an issue and inject the question why it took so long if it is so important.
(c) that the child is safe, happy and shoing no signs of distress.
(d) the other parent called on on date and time for a duration of X minutes to dispute the fact as established in (a).
(e) you request that this conduct no longer happen and for all communications to happen through the immutable and third party managed parenting system known as Our Family Wizard.
You DEMONSTRATE with COGENT AND RELEVANT EVIDENCE that the incident did happen and that the other parent called you weeks afterwards and is trying to create conflict where no conflict should exist.
No police, no CAS, and you are exhausted? For some reason the Respondent in the case law already posted had over 10 police incidents called on him and well, he got through trial (17 days of it!)...
Or your lawyer failed to advise you of what should and could be done. As the moving party in the matter you have to meet and exceed the requirements set forth for a mobility case. Those are determined on the child's best interests... Not the parent's best interests. You can find a lot on mobility on this site and all the case law that is leveraged to make a determiniation of where a child should primarily reside.
The fact that your husband is the leaving parent makes it an uphill battle to establish it is in the child's best interests. And for good reason... A child's habitiual residential location should only be moved ON CONSENT or in their BEST INTERESTS.
Not because your husband got a new job, makes more money, married a new person, etc... IT IS ALL ABOUT THE CHILD'S BEST INTERESTS and the determination of the CHILD'S BEST INTERESTS.
But, did you explain why it would be in the child's best interests? That is the only element of a mobility matter a judge can make a decision on.
A child may say they want to be a astronaut at that age and then a doctor. Children do have a voice, your husband's child expressed it to the OCL and although the move may be in you and your husband's best interests ... It may very well not have been in the best interest of the child.
If the child's best interests were *THIS* important to you and your husband... You simple would not have moved. Simple fact. You would have made due with your situation (as adults) for the sake of the child in questions "best interests".
Comment