Re: Nada and the lawyer update

[Guest guest]

that is a very tidy response.

>

> Hubby and I visited with a psychologist today who does a lot of

> custody testimony on behalf of kids and grandparents' rights stuff.

> He basically said that in our state grandparents are almost never

> granted rights over the parents' wishes. The one exception he'd

> ever heard of was a situation where the grandparents had been the

> primary caregivers for an extended period of time (i.e. real mom and

> dad in prison for a few years, got out, got custody, and refused the

> grandparents rights to visit the kids). He knows all the details of

> our present situation, and he didn't think we had a thing to worry

> about. So that's a relief. And by the way, a big THANK YOU for

> your support. I don't offer support nearly enough on this board,

> but I'm working on it, and I really appreciate those of you who are

> better at it than I.

>

> But anyway, I got to thinking this weekend...what a sh*tty thing for

> them to do, to have a lawyer contact us. Aren't they basically

> saying " to h@ll with you, we want your kids " ? That my point in all

> of this doesn't matter and they'll try to get to my kids by force if

> they have to?

>

> By the way, my husband's response to their attorney was something

> along the lines of: " I am in receipt of your e-mail. We have been

> advised by Dr. X (psychologist mentioned above) that it is not in

> our children's best interests to be in contact with their

> grandparents. " The beauty of the wording is that the only way

> grandparents' rights are upheld in this state is if the grandparents

> can prove that it is in the children's best interests. Hah!

>

[Guest guest]

I read your original post and was horrified by your nada's actions.

I'm glad you were able to get the answers you were looking for!

>

> Hubby and I visited with a psychologist today who does a lot of

> custody testimony on behalf of kids and grandparents' rights

stuff.

> He basically said that in our state grandparents are almost never

> granted rights over the parents' wishes. The one exception he'd

> ever heard of was a situation where the grandparents had been the

> primary caregivers for an extended period of time (i.e. real mom

and

> dad in prison for a few years, got out, got custody, and refused

the

> grandparents rights to visit the kids). He knows all the details

of

> our present situation, and he didn't think we had a thing to worry

> about. So that's a relief. And by the way, a big THANK YOU for

> your support. I don't offer support nearly enough on this board,

> but I'm working on it, and I really appreciate those of you who are

> better at it than I.

>

> But anyway, I got to thinking this weekend...what a sh*tty thing

for

> them to do, to have a lawyer contact us. Aren't they basically

> saying " to h@ll with you, we want your kids " ? That my point in all

> of this doesn't matter and they'll try to get to my kids by force

if

> they have to?

>

> By the way, my husband's response to their attorney was something

> along the lines of: " I am in receipt of your e-mail. We have been

> advised by Dr. X (psychologist mentioned above) that it is not in

> our children's best interests to be in contact with their

> grandparents. " The beauty of the wording is that the only way

> grandparents' rights are upheld in this state is if the

grandparents

> can prove that it is in the children's best interests. Hah!

>

[Guest guest]

I recently went through a horrible custody " battle " as my fada

referred to it in a domestic violence hearing that he and his wife

attended after pressing charges on me when I flipped out over finding

that they had taken my son from me in an application for emergency

custody.

I felt the pain, and believe me the fear of losing your children that

you bore into this world is inexplicable.

December 9, 2008 my attorney contacted me and told me that the judge

found in my favor and granted NO VISITATION to my fada. I was

relieved and elated. This was after 8 months of juvenile court

apperances in an adjacent county, 2 court apperances for

the " domestic violence " charges which were reduced to disorderly

conduct because of me being livid and flipping out in their front

yard, numerous calls to social services in my county and his, urine

and hair drug screenings (negative of course), 13 witnesses on his

behalf, 5 attorneys on his behalf, and a TPO that prevented me from

seeing my son for 2 months after the alleged " domestic violence "

threats (at which time custody was returned to me). Oh, not to

mention the fact that I am 35 weeks pregant with my 3rd child, my

unborn child's grandnada testified against me and her own son on

fada's behalf, my bruhda? (lol) testified against me on fada's

behalf, my daughter's father testifed against me on my fada's behalf-

who he is now assisting financially for legal representation to gain

shared custody of my daughter who (my) fada never wanted while in his

pursuit of my son.

With all that said, do not get lost in your thoughts of thinking this

is going downhill from the attorney contact. You and your husband do

have rights and even if you don't have as much " pull " or aren't

as " financially sound " as your parents, such as myself, the courts

are not oblivious to people using them to serve their own selfish

needs and agendas. I am actually in the process of filing a

harassment, defamation and interfering with the custody of a minor

suit against fada and his wife, also copyright violation.

Stand strong, at least your hubby has access to the laws and KEEP

your children away from the madness. NO ONE can force you to do

anything you don't want and they are absolute nuts for thinking that

they have the courts on their side.

Many blessings and stay strong!

>

> Hubby and I visited with a psychologist today who does a lot of

> custody testimony on behalf of kids and grandparents' rights

stuff.

> He basically said that in our state grandparents are almost never

> granted rights over the parents' wishes. The one exception he'd

> ever heard of was a situation where the grandparents had been the

> primary caregivers for an extended period of time (i.e. real mom

and

> dad in prison for a few years, got out, got custody, and refused

the

> grandparents rights to visit the kids). He knows all the details

of

> our present situation, and he didn't think we had a thing to worry

> about. So that's a relief. And by the way, a big THANK YOU for

> your support. I don't offer support nearly enough on this board,

> but I'm working on it, and I really appreciate those of you who are

> better at it than I.

>

> But anyway, I got to thinking this weekend...what a sh*tty thing

for

> them to do, to have a lawyer contact us. Aren't they basically

> saying " to h@ll with you, we want your kids " ? That my point in all

> of this doesn't matter and they'll try to get to my kids by force

if

> they have to?

>

> By the way, my husband's response to their attorney was something

> along the lines of: " I am in receipt of your e-mail. We have been

> advised by Dr. X (psychologist mentioned above) that it is not in

> our children's best interests to be in contact with their

> grandparents. " The beauty of the wording is that the only way

> grandparents' rights are upheld in this state is if the

grandparents

> can prove that it is in the children's best interests. Hah!

>

[Guest guest]

That's good to hear, congratulations to both you, Alana, and you,

Writermanque for retaining the right to parent and protect your

kids!

-Annie

> >

> > Hubby and I visited with a psychologist today who does a lot of

> > custody testimony on behalf of kids and grandparents' rights

> stuff.

> > He basically said that in our state grandparents are almost never

> > granted rights over the parents' wishes. The one exception he'd

> > ever heard of was a situation where the grandparents had been the

> > primary caregivers for an extended period of time (i.e. real mom

> and

> > dad in prison for a few years, got out, got custody, and refused

> the

> > grandparents rights to visit the kids). He knows all the details

> of

> > our present situation, and he didn't think we had a thing to worry

> > about. So that's a relief. And by the way, a big THANK YOU for

> > your support. I don't offer support nearly enough on this board,

> > but I'm working on it, and I really appreciate those of you who are

> > better at it than I.

> >

> > But anyway, I got to thinking this weekend...what a sh*tty thing

> for

> > them to do, to have a lawyer contact us. Aren't they basically

> > saying " to h@ll with you, we want your kids " ? That my point in all

> > of this doesn't matter and they'll try to get to my kids by force

> if

> > they have to?

> >

> > By the way, my husband's response to their attorney was something

> > along the lines of: " I am in receipt of your e-mail. We have been

> > advised by Dr. X (psychologist mentioned above) that it is not in

> > our children's best interests to be in contact with their

> > grandparents. " The beauty of the wording is that the only way

> > grandparents' rights are upheld in this state is if the

> grandparents

> > can prove that it is in the children's best interests. Hah!

> >

>