Question for any attorney's in the house

[Gonzai]

Ok, this is so far out there, and I know I am totally venting
here, and I should probably just keep my mouth shut, but
I am just in one of those moods, and I totally need to get this
out before I start screaming.

I want to know why legal aid, who tells me they only give advice
and don't represent in child custody cases would choose to
represent a 22 year old girl who has 3 childrent under the age
of 4, and another one due in a couple weeks. That's right,
4 kids all under the age of 4.

Not only that, 2 of the kids were born THC positive. She has
smoked through all 4 pregnanies, and still continues to smoke
around her kids (yeah, its no wonder they are always sick).
She also had an abortion in between kid 2 and kid 3. Wow 5
pregnancies - did I mention she was just 22??

She had a domestic assult charge against her for hitting the
children's father with a pipe in front of the 2 oldest children.
Heaven knows why she's like she is. Her mother spent a few
years in prison for child abuse. The girl is absolutely nuts.
Why doesn's she want joint custody?? Well hell, its because
she would lose her welfare checks that she gets I assume.

Ok, to be honest, dad is not that great either. He has his issues
as well, however, the kids are not in any danger, nor is the mom
in danger from him either. He has a domestic assult against her
for pushing her away from him after she hit him. Frankly, they
are both a mess, however, I still want to know why legal aid
would represent her, when they turn down cases for mother's
that are actually decent people.

I just don't get it. Maybe its because her current boyfriend's
mom works for the county attorney's office. hmmmm..... now I
would call that favortism, but that's just me.

Ok, end of rant.....

[jenn-b]

*hugs dearest Nida*
You know how aghast I am at this. I don't get it either. And I don't have any idea how they choose who to represent.

[cutiebunny]

Is there any way that a grandparent or other relative would be able to take the children in lieu of their parents? Even though the children might not be in 'physical' danger, the psychological danger seems pretty severe. Living with a emotionally/psychologically abusive person is very traumatic(I know from personal experience) and it takes a very, very strong person to rise above that situation.

This is the point that I would harp upon in a legal proceeding. Both parents have a criminal history of assault against their domestic partner. It stands to reason that either parent would engage in this type of behavior again(and/or have done so in the past in other instances where no charges have been brought up).

My experience with family law is that, typically, courts(and probono lawyers) tend to side with the mother, even if she is the worse person in the world. Unless the court can be shown proof that the children will be in physical danger should they stay with the mother, the chances are high that she'll win that case. The burden of proof is going to fall on the father of these children to prove that the mother is in no way suitable to raise the children.

I hope I could be of some service to you. It sounds like these children could use a secure, loving 'buffer' relative right now, and I think the best thing you can do is just be there for these kids.

Good luck and I know you'll pull through. You're a strong one

[Drac of the Sharp Smiles]

Is there any way that a grandparent or other relative would be able to take the children in lieu of their parents?
(*snip*)
My experience with family law is that, typically, courts(and probono lawyers) tend to side with the mother, even if she is the worse person in the world.

Isn't it utterly disgusting? I don't think it's so much that people actually want kids to stay with these parents as much as it is people thinking that it's "omg horrible" for the child to be adopted out, even if into a better situation.

It's like the questions my sister's friend, who was adopted, got growing up... "Have you ever wanted to meet your real mother?" (Her answer: "My REAL mother is right here!" Good answer!) Attutudes will NEVER change, as long as people continue to see/treat adopted people like they're damaged in some way. They're constantly told by society that they should have OMGPROBLEMS because they were adopted, and I think a lot of the problems that do exist are BECAUSE of that!

IMHO, the other half of the reason kids in horrible home situations get the shaft is because of the attitude in this country (I speak of the USA) that it's a RIGHT for a person to have kids.... and we can't possibly take away that "right" from someone, even if they're an incompetant parent. We need to drop the notion that having kids is a RIGHT. It should be considered a priviledge. Especially when you consider that money gets taken out of the pockets of people with no children to help pay for everyone ELSE'S children. (Why else would my husband and I pay the same amount for healthcare as a couple with five kids? Heaven forbid people actually PLAN TO PAY for their OWN kids.)

Send the kids to other family members? Sadly, the bottom-bottom line is that mom and dad were raised into what they currently are by grandma and grandpa. First of all, if grandma and grandpa did such a stellar job raising the trainwrecks that are the kids parents... do we REALLY want to give them MORE kids to raise? Secondly, giving the kids to grandma and grandpa will NOT in any way remove them from the parents, because chances are that grandma and grandpa will simply turn around and give them back to the parents while the authorities aren't watching.

The only answer in a situation like this SHOULD be to remove the children to a completely new home.... too bad that can't happen.

[cutiebunny]

Send the kids to other family members? Sadly, the bottom-bottom line is that mom and dad were raised into what they currently are by grandma and grandpa. First of all, if grandma and grandpa did such a stellar job raising the trainwrecks that are the kids parents... do we REALLY want to give them MORE kids to raise?

I really think that this needs to be done on a case by case basis. Yes, there are many horrible parents out there. There's no need to argue that. But there are some good parents out there that, no matter what they do, their children always end up in trouble. Doubly so if the child experiments with drugs. I don't think a 'one size fits all' approach works here. It could be that the grandparents of at least one of the childrens' parents were good parents and simply had a problem child.

Unfortunately, the system is overwhelmed and no one is going to send out a counselor to talk to the grandparents(or any other caring relative) to see if they're "good" people. If there's the possibility that someone other than the childrens' parents will be considered as a custodian, then, things like criminal history, finances, mental history, etc. will be more of a deciding factor. Not that these aren't good souces of information in cases like this, but one can be considered mentally 'sane' but, in reality, be incredibly twisted.

Has the issue of counseling, especially in the case of the older children who witnessed the pipe incident, been considered? If not, those children should be taken to a therapist. I know that it can be pricey, especially if it's not covered by their medical plan, but the investment in these kids now can possibly save them from a destructive path.

As an aside, it has always seemed unfair to me that there are so many wonderful, caring people in this world that physically unable to have children, but yet, then you see children who are in abusive situations because their parents can't parent.

Meh

[Gonzai]

Thanks for the responses, and thanks CB for your case by
case response.

My oldest son is who is in question here. I think I did a
pretty good job raising him, given the cicumstances. My
husband died when my boys were 3 and 6 years old. I
have never re-married, and raised them completely by
myself. I tried really hard to keep my oldest son out of
trouble growing up, but once he starting running with kids
that drank and did drugs, it was over. I tried everything,
including putting him in boot camp and having him civilly
committed. Didn't stop him, and by the time he was 17
he was arrested for 3rd degree burglery and spent close
to a year in prison.

He is lazy, loud mouthed, and thinks alot of himself. He
doesn't give a hoot what other's think of him, and is very
quick to lose his temper with other adults. But when he is
with his kids, its like he is a different person. He takes them
to the park, he cooks for them, makes them sit down at the
table to eat, disciplines them, yet at the same time, loves
them the best way he knows how.

He is not trying to get custody of these kids. He knows
better than anyone else, that he could not handle full
custody. What he wants, though, is joint custody. He wants
to have the kids 3 days a week, and let her have the kids 3
days a week, and split every other Saturday. I agreed to
help him with this, since I already have one of the girls
with me 4 to 5 nights a week, and the other 2 I have 3 nights
a week (that is when I am in town).

Her mother has the two oldest one to two nights a week, which
leaves mom with one night a week for the oldest, two nights a
week for the middle, and 3 to 4 nights a week for the youngest.
Yes, the youngest is her favorite, and the one she is most
bitchy about. The reason she does not want to split custody,
is because she would lose her welfare benefits and food stamps.
She doesn't even like her oldest child, and her oldest literally
cries when she has to stay with her mother. The middle one
is starting to do that as well. What does that say about the mom?
These kids are 3 and 2. The baby is a year old, and she is due
to have another in a week or so.

I agree with you CB that the courts tend to favor the mom's, and
it will definately be on Jon to prove he deserves to have joint
custody. What I don't get, however, is how she was able to
retain a legal aid attorney. When I talked to legal aid, they told
me they don't represent in custody battles, they only recommend
what the person should do. The only time they get involved, is
in an emergency situation, where the kids or the parent is in
danger by the other parent. That is not even close to the case
here.

So, what I want to know is why my tax dollars go to legal aid to
help someone like this when other parents, who really are good
people and can't afford legal representation get turned down. I
just don't understand how she was able to do it.

EDIT: By the way, my youngest son, who was raised in the exact
same environment is graduating from college this year, and he
works a full time job. He had his issues too, but has grown out
of them. He and his ex have a little girl, and they actually work
very well together to make sure she has the best life possible.

[klet]

So, what I want to know is why my tax dollars go to legal aid to
help someone like this when other parents, who really are good
people and can't afford legal representation get turned down. I
just don't understand how she was able to do it.

You might want to check your state's legal aid page to see what it has to say about custody cases. It might vary by county, and the person who told you that they don't do legal aid cases might be full of it. If it turns out that they really don't do custody cases, and only give advice in these cases, and this woman is actually getting representation rather than just advice, ask them for advice on what to do about that. It can't be legal for them to give representation to one client and tell the other that they "don't do custody cases."


You say you have the girls for so many days per week--does your son live with you? That might actually be in his favor, as the courts are more likely to give joint custody since that's basically what you've got going now. In my experience, the courts will do whatever possible not to disrupt the child's living pattern. That's the reason my parents only got visitation rights to my then 3 yr old (now 5) cousin. He hadn't been living with us, so despite the rather dismal conditions his half-brothers were living in, and the fact that my aunt had despised them, and they were hardly squeaky-clean like my parents, the oldest brother got custody because he'd been living with the boy before my aunt died.


Do you have the kids so often because she cannot take care of them on those nights due to work, etc? That's another thing that could work in your favor. My lead at work went through a divorce two years ago, and her ex got join custody because she worked starting at 3:30 am four days a week, and so he was often the one who got the kids ready for school. This was after he told her to her face (not in front of a judge or lawyer, though) that there was no way he was going to pay her child support. Half the time, he's out of town and dumping the kids on her, anyway.

If the girls hate being with their mother, make sure they get interviewed! The court needs to take that into consideration, and I think it's grounds for joint custody at the very least.

Good luck, hon! I hope it works out in your favor.