Ex took child out of school against order

I have primary in a joint conservatorship situation.

The orders are very clearly laid out in a calendar outlining visitation in summer (child is in daycare). I went to pick up my child from school today and she was not there. Dad had picked her up, although this is my designated time.

What recourse do I have? I don't want to involve police if that would mean having them go to his house, thus affecting our child. Of course, I want to make sure I get these days back.

He told me he has "banked days" from a year ago (nothing about this in my memory or in order) and that he will keep her until Friday.

Please help, and don't bother telling me to ask my attorney....since I paid my bill (over $70k) I get no response.

Its a felony in TX to interfer with parental custody and its seems to me that EX did so by snatching child from day care --so to me the issue is why didn't you call cops?

At one point when he did this, I called cops and they came over. He then claimed I "entered forcefully". Believe it or not, cops are not on a woman's side here. And he hit me in front of our child on that same occassion, but no one cared.

I just don't want my little one to see that again.

Can I ask them to go to his house when my little one is in school?

Can I simply file a complaint, or does this have to be a drama that our little one will witness again>

Please take time to inhale before reading further. I have seen allot of this with family, relatives and friends and this is why I started posting in this forum. I dont know everything and I have a bunch of questions to last until the good Lord comes to turn out the lights and lock the doors on us. I'm speaking as a friend might but I have to be honest, O.K.?

As a woman, I can understand and I empathize for anyone married to such a bonehead like you are describing. I'm not going to take sides because there isnt a way for me to know if you are a bonehead as well. Taken with a grain of salt and thinking that we all have a littlebit of boneheadedness in us, please look at this from the way that I see it.

How old is your little one? Still in daycare means little one is still very young. What is it that you want Him (her) to see? You got a divorce (I don't know why but anyway) and that was to solves all the problems like I am being told in other posts. But there is still the problems that you had when you were married. Now the baby is learning from what your ex and you are doing. Yes, your ex is doing wrong and yes, you can call the police and yes, you both can continue with this for the next 15 or so years. Your little one will be the next generation to be posting their issues on this forum for the world to discuss.

This is why I am against divorce. It can be necessary sometimes but there are a bunch of times when the parents are better off and the children are better off by keeping it together. I get to wondering if kath21 and SPlum can really believe that the children are going to be happier after reading stories like this one.

My feelings are for your baby. I'll take it that you have a baby boy. If your ex is taking him out of daycare and says that he has days banked, why is this a problem? Screw the law and think of what a blessing it is that he is still interested in being an active parent. How many of us would cheer for a father who wants his child? You should look at the upside and thank the Lord that he is taking responsibility and that the boy is being raised by both parents instead of a single mom and a bunch of strangers who dont know or care about him.

Shouldn't you be concerned that your baby grows up to know his father? You say that you don't want your little one to see this again -

divorcing in texas:

I just don't want my little one to see that again.

 Then don't call the cops the next time. It is not something that you want. Why are you so bent on having the court order enforced to the hilt instead of decompressing the problem. I would suggest - and this is just me - Call him and ask if there is anything that they need. Stop over with a clean set of clothes and ask when he would like to bring "little one" back. You will save on babysitters and have time to pursue the man of your dreams and your ex will start thinking that you are not so bad after all. It really will floor him if you do the opposite if what normally takes place and he might start to wonder which one of you is the bigger bonehead.

Please take the time to read other postings and get an idea of how disfunctional your child might grow up to be if the two of you continue down this road that you are on.

Here's a big hug now that I've gone to saying too much  -XXXX-

Yes Drew, you are correct about this. It is a felony. Would you really want this child to grow up knowing that his father is a felon. How would that help the child establish the parent/child relationship that everyone is clamoring for? Do we really need another deadbeat dad or are we trying to get fathers to take responsibility for the kids that they make?

She's not talking about him running away with the "little one" so where is the interference? Really now, I know that deep down in your heart of hearts that you are not as callous as you are sounding in your reply and I bet that you would like this all to come to a happy ending, wouldn't you? Please take time to read the reply that I posted to her and consider everything. But this time, from "little one's" perspective.

P.S. I'm not so mean in person.

Sabina,

 Please do not come on this board and start criticizing myself and others.

This is a LEGAL board, not your personal belief board.

If you cannot offer legal guidance, please refrain from criticizing those that do and thinking your personal belief outweighs the legally based guidance here.

The poster has a legal right and expectation that the legally bound agreement her and her ex have should be followed.  She did not ask you your belief about divorce and why she shouldn't attempt to gain assitance in following court orders.

SPlum

Myself and others have been noticing your mean spirited postings. I think that bluetone has made this point rather well. Neither he, Sabina63, ThelmaGlo or I express any malice towards you. I will let them speak for themselves but you have certainly over reacted when you state that Sabina63 is criticizing you.  

SPlum:

Please do not come on this board and start criticizing myself and others.

There is definitely a point to be made in highlighting the difference between your philosophy and hers. When she stated that "This is why I am against divorce. It can be necessary sometimes but there are a bunch of times when the parents are better off and the children are better off by keeping it together. I get to wondering if kath21 and SPlum can really believe that the children are going to be happier after reading stories like this one.", it was to make the point that divorce "is not and should not" be considered mandatory on request of the petitioner but instead, it should be carefully deliberated on. Your postings as well as kath21's are misconstruing what the rest of us understand the topic to be. It is not about ThelmaGlo or anyone else trying to force someone to be with them. Its about what the law provides and how the State of Texas views marriage.

SPlum:

This is a LEGAL board, not your personal belief board.

 I would think that this applies to you as well. Please review your postings and realize that you have not based any of your beliefs on the text of the statues being discussed nor have you taken time to study the leading case law as it applies. I have gone to considerable length to establish the foundation for what I have stated. You have noticeably avoided what has been posted when you replied to ThelmaGlo's thread.

SPlum:

If you cannot offer legal guidance, please refrain from criticizing those that do and thinking your personal belief outweighs the legally based guidance here.

I do not recollect her ever having criticized "those that do" I believe that she was criticizing "those who don't". The reason is plain and obvious, you have done nothing to show a familiarity with the Texas Family Code, Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, The applicable case law or the Standards of Review. I would be surprised if you would speak effectively on the pertinent articles and amendments of the U.S. Constitution. You have not demonstrated this and you have done little to advance the discussion. At trial, your own personal beliefs would fall flat without this necessary background.

I would like to have had a serious (and polite discussion) about what proves or disproves the notion of incontestability but you are much too much combative for a rational discussion.

SPlum:

and thinking your personal belief outweighs the legally based guidance here.

 You would be as incorrect as ever in stating what I quote above. Any lawyer taking this idea into family court would be quickly dismissed as eccentric. The reason being is that what Sabina has shown and what she is attempting to get divorcing in texas to understand is what is called the Best Interest of the Child. There can be no doubt that the court is guided (in principle) by the motivations of each parent who acts in the best interests of his or her child.

§ 153.001. PUBLIC POLICY.  (a) The public policy of this
state is to:   &...
(1)  assure that children will have frequent and
continuing contact with parents who have shown the ability to act in
the best interest of the child;
(2)  provide a safe, stable, and nonviolent environment
for the child;  and
(3)  encourage parents to share in the rights and
duties of raising their child after the parents have separated or
dissolved their marriage.
======================...

§ 153.002. BEST INTEREST OF CHILD.  The best interest of
the child shall always be the primary consideration of the court in
determining the issues of conservatorship and possession of and
access to the child.

I would be willing to discuss your misguided approach in asking;

All due respect, please name landmark cases in which the state of Texas would not give a petitioning party the divorce in which they sought.

I assume that the way you phrase your logic that you have never spent much time in the courtroom. This question sidesteps the issue of whether or not the ground of Insupportability is contestable. I have done well to establish this but you have ignored it. ThelmaGlo's ability to answer such a question would be questionable since it is apparent that she does not have the background or resources to research the issue. You probably already understood that though and were just trying to win an argument.

My question to you would be to name any leading case law that refutes the appellate court's opinion in In re Richards when it states that there are material issues of fact for the fact finder to determine. Also, please explain how the trial court has the ability to ignore what the appellate court has already determined to be the intent of a particular statute such as insupportability.

Yes, without a doubt -

SPlum:

The poster has a legal right and expectation that the legally bound agreement her and her ex have should be followed.

and Sabina had acknowledged that much in her response but there is a difference between a legal right owed to the mother and a moral responsibility of doing what is in the child's best interest. It would be a blessing to us all if you could find it in your heart to understand this.

Please take this for what it is worth. I have no malice towards you and would sincerely like to continue hearing what you have to say but civility means everything, inside and outside of the courtroom.

Vadgue.1026 - If you take a moment to try and understand what I want to say, I'll try to be brief. These postings get a bit too long but the subject needs the attention and It's an important topic that needs public debate.

The point that you see;  "The EX hit the mother in front of the children." is a minor issue for the sake of Sabina63's reply. This is an incident that there is no possible way of getting to the bottom of. There are a number of details that are not included in the original post that need to be discussed to determine the bottom line. I will post a separate reply if you would like to discuss it further. Its an interesting and important topic and would do well to everyone who reads this.

Sabina63's comments come from the an ongoing discussion being argued (in the legal sense I hope) about whether sec.6.001 should be understood as "divorce on demand". Whether there is a particular justification in this particular case or not is not central to the argument. What Sabina, myself and others are trying to impress is that divorce needs to be deliberated on in each separate case and the consequences should be taken into consideration.

I am sorry for anyone that has to go through childhood with unhappy parents but your comment that you parents never divorced and that you have never even thought about hitting your spouse gives good reason for the continuation of an intact marriage when ever possible. Please consider the alternative If your parents did divorce. This thread gives good reason to state that divorce doesn't necessarily mean that the child is any better off. The parents share custody and the confrontation still continues. The difference is that the parent/child relationship between the mother and child and the father and child has been diminished to the extent that the to parents no longer have a shared 100% custody.

I do not know you well enough but for the sake of the discussion, let's say that you are a father w/children and you have entered the marriage in good faith. Let's say that you are one of those responsible fathers who is really into teaching your children values (such as not hitting women). You depend on your wife as she depends on you in everything that comes with being married. Shared responsibilities for the house, transportation, and other provisional needs of the children. Say that you have both done well for the past few years and established a good environment for the children even though that initial feeling of honeymoon excitement has passed.

What harm can you expect if your wife has a midlife crises and wants to rediscover herself? You stand to loose much if not everything. The most important is your ability to instill your own personal values on your children. Having read Child custody  I would be concerned about the child's situation going from bad to worse after the separation. Does expblast have a legitimate interest in removing his daughter from such an environment?

With "divorce on demand", there is no chance for a father (or mother) to argue the point if the facts in the particular case show that the divorce is not in the Child's best interest. This has been misconstrued by sooo many who think that such a respondent is trying to force their spouse to stay with them against their will. Nobody ever spends the time thinking of the Best Interests of the Child argument. Some times divorce might be necessary but "divorce on demand" forecloses on any chance even when it truly would be in the child's best interest.

Most everything I have read concerning the opposing view that divorce should be mandatory has been from the filter of one's own bias. This is to say that the argument comes only from the proponent's own particular circumstances and viewpoint and does not consider both, the pros and the cons of all possible scenarios. There is much to argue against this if you are willing to consider the balancing of interests.

The discussion that started all of this was whether sec.6.001 is or should be interpreted as being incontestable. But opposing viewpoints have morphed the discussion into something much different. At times, the discussions have more of an appearance of a therapy session than a legal discussion but it all falls back on "the Best Interests of the Child". Incontestability forecloses on any ability of the children's best interests being discussed at trial and those who believe in sec.6.001 being incontestable do not think that it is necessary to concern the child's interests in the decision of divorce. You may know of instances where divorce is the better option and I can think of a few in which that is not the case. What is being suggested is that it should be judged on a case by case basis.

Vadgue.1026:

And please don't single people out when making your comments to other posters. While you may have good intentions that's not what this board is about.

In polite disagreement, I have to say that sabina63 did nothing more that establish a point of difference in opposing philosophy. There could be no possibility of taking her comments as derogatory or demeaning as might be suggested. Doing so would be taking this out of context. On the other hand, replies that have continued to be made to her and others with the same beliefs towards marriage show a lack of courtesy or respect for other's viewpoints and this has gone unchecked until recently.

I hope that you will agree that what this board is about is sharing information with each other in a respectful fashion without trying to diminish another member's viewpoint. If you notice, there are a few members from Texas who have something to offer in the way of legal understanding of Texas Law. Those of us who are familiar with the statutory language of the Family Code and the applicable case law draw on this when expressing ourselves. This has been met with hostility by more than a few people who are not from Texas and do not even pretend to know what the laws in Texas provide.

Why would anyone from California take such a large amount of time trying to discredit another member from Texas by demanding that he does not understand the law? Unbelievable.

I would suggest, and I ask if you can agree on this point, that Sabina63 has taken the high ground when she suggests that the mother should take steps to de-escalate the underlying issues. This is what any court should look at as being in the best interest of the child. The layman's way of expressing it would be to "chill out", regroup and reassess the big picture. There are those who disagree with this though and would continue the drama by drawing the courts back into it.

I say that we should all take a deep breath and relax. Life is way too short.

Wow. Thank you to the folks who actually took the time to read my original and later post....and shame on those who used this forum as a means of attack and pontification on the morality of divorce.

To Sabina or whoever prompted me to take a deep breath, my main question was indeed one of the enforcabiltiy of a legal decree.

I was abused; should I have stayed for the sake of our little one?

Should his father, albeit not a "dead beat dad" be allowed to continue to control in the only way he can now: via our child by picking him up whenever he wants to? Should I have written a requiem like you did so you could have the full background: once again, it was a legal issue.

I did not call the police on that occassion until after I left his home. He, however, contacted the police and claimed that he was defending himself...later my son came home and told me daddy had said I had tripped.

No, I am not a bonehead...and I certainly have my child's best interests in mind. It is very important that he have his father in his life. But I need to protect and know my rights so I can better help our son deal with the anger his father shows towards me, even though I no longer live with the man.

I asked the question because I wanted to make sure our son did not see the cops coming to the house: I wanted to know if there was another way....and as far as making my husband a felon...well, domestic abuse is a felony, too.

I appreciate all the support that has come from the professionals on this site who give their time and advice to those who are in need of legal advice. This site has given me some very important info while my very long and litigious divorce was in process.

But I am truly disgusted and offended by several of these posts.., and once again, shame on all of you for not understanding that I just needed legal advice, not a speech or philosophical debate.

All the best,

Divorced in Texas

You are a truly perfect example of conservative Christianity.....thank you for your sage words. and I too shall pray for you. That you one day understand that women should not be beaten, and those women who escape do deserve rights to protect their children from witnessing further abuse.

You need to read more often. About domestic violence.

Or at the very least, read my post and read between the lines.

Godess bless.

Document everything.  Date it.  Time it.  Get a tape recorder and record your conversations with him (EX).  It is legal in Texas as long as one party is privy to the recording.

Contact your attorney and request a Writ Habeus Corpus.  This may or may not be effective, considering the amount of time the EX keeps your son during YOUR periods of possession.  However, your attorney can guide you to what is lawful and within your right to react to a man who is obviously trying to get at you - not the child.  If you document everything and keep good records, you can go back to court and request that the orders be further enforced, and possibly hold your EX in contempt of the original orders and fine him or jail him for "x" number of days or "x" numbers of dollars for taking the child during times that were not his to begin with.  Also, depending on what kind of child care your son is in, you can provide a copy of your divorce decree to the child care facilitator and notify them of the days your EX is to pick up the child.  All other days are out of the question.  Unless you specifically tell the school he can pick up that day, the child is not to leave.  If it is a school regulated by the state, they can only relinquish the child to the appropriate parent on each day.

Hope this helps.