Newborn under 3 months. Mother leaves state without warning

Facts: Parental acknowledgement has been signed by both the mother and father. Parents are unmarried. Pregnancy was planned (evidence easily provided). Both parents resided in State of Oregon for at least 5 years and same residence for past 2 years. Our child was 3 weeks old when Mother decided she wanted to move back to CA for support. I have filed and obtained court order from Oregon judge requesting her to come back and provide 2 hours per day minimum. My lawyer says not to worry. Father Advocacy group is telling me she can still file a petition in CA due to the fact that residency wasn't established (baby was only 3 weeks old). I have read everything I can about UCCJA and I don't understand how a judge in CA could possibly sign off on another concurrent petition without calling the Oregon court or the mother lying about not knowing there is a pending court order (she was served). I don't have the resources to fight 2 concurrent cases in 2 separate states. I put out all the resources I could to file first. The order approved is a TPOR and request for custody.

[tbyte]

Both parents resided in Oregon for five years.
Child was born in Oregon.
Had mother resided in California for one year prior to your filing for paternal rights?
If not, the I'd think Oregon should have jurisdiction. You can file a motion in the California court asking that the case be dismissed because the Oregon court has prior standing. They may be happy to clear it off their docket.

Thank you. Mother has resided only in Oregon for past 10 years. Since my earlier post, the mother has agreed to work with an Oregon lawyer and not have a filing in California.

We have now reached a point where a custody study will be completed over the next 2 months where she will indicate that she wants sole custody and ability to live in California with mother and grandmother in same household. I have read the factors used to assess who should obtain custody since we will unlikely reach joint custody between us.

My question is, though Oregon does not differentiate between mothers and fathers what is the best guess/reality that the father could obtain sole custody when a child is being breast fed? Is it truly 50/50 or more like 90/10 in these circumstances? I realize the factors greatly affect each individual case however I am wondering what history has shown for states that do not differentiate and where the circumstances might be similar. We are also assuming that both parents would be considered "fit" to parent.

[tbyte]

Originally Posted by Unregistered My question is, though Oregon does not differentiate between mothers and fathers what is the best guess/reality that the father could obtain sole custody when a child is being breast fed?

The law does not discriminate, the courts very much do discriminate against fathers. I'd have said you had a shot at 50/50, were it not for the fact that you were never married. That will make it more difficult.
50/50 custody is less likely between parents that are geographically separated. It is really rough on the children.
But unfortunately, I think it is a rare court that would grant custody to an unmarried father.
I guess my suggestion would be, ask for 50/50 custody but be prepared to settle for a shared parenting plan that gives you good rights and visitation, and guarantees that she won't move even farther away.



Is it truly 50/50 or more like 90/10 in these circumstances? I realize the factors greatly affect each individual case however I am wondering what history has shown for states that do not differentiate and where the circumstances might be similar. We are also assuming that both parents would be considered "fit" to parent.[/QUOTE]

Thank you and last question.

Oregon Legislature's stated policy is that "good parents should have frequent and continuing contact with their children". The law also says "Parenting plans should allow frequent contact between the children and both parents work well if people live close".

Based on this notion, could the study not realistically grant custody to the unmarried mother but require her to live in Oregon since this is where the pregnancy was planned, the birth conceived, and where she lived for 10 years prior to birth of child?

[tbyte]

Courts may prevent a parent from moving, or alter the shared parenting plan as a result of the move, but I have never heard of a court requiring someone to move BACK if the complaint is filed a year after they have already left.

I wish I had better news for you. I advice you to get the best arrangement you can, and then wait patiently for an opportunity to expand your rights and access to your children at some point in the future.

In my experience, irresponsible selfish people tend to remain irresponsible and selfish. You give them time, let the pressure off of them, and their true nature bubbles up.

Technically there is a court order requesting her return so you could argue that enforcing the TPOR forces her to come back to her original home state. If we win the hearing (we have a very good shot at that) on the TPOR then we can move on to the custody study which then makes its assessment based on both parents living in OR. Problem is of course that if mother gets sole custody then she can just apply to the court for a move based on family etc.

[tbyte]

There is a court order for her return? Requested, or demanded? For her, or for the children?
If she is failing to follow the letter and spirit of an existing court order, that it the sort of thing that annoys judges and magistrates very quickly.