Personal Narrative: Child Custody Detection

Child relocation laws and best practices in the United States vary from state to state. Child custody in Arizona is defined as “legal decision-making” for the child and visitation is known as “parenting time”. The term “child custody” is no longer used, effective January 1, 2013. The court can order one or both parties to have legal decision-making authority for the child(ren) and consider many factors, falling under A.R.S. 25-403. In the case of joint legal decision-making authority, both parents must work together to make decisions regarding the child. If one parent is granted sole legal decision-making authority, they make decisions about the child without consenting the other parent as long as it

     According to many the custody of a child should be determined with the best interest of the child in mind. However, it is not easy for a

Child custody have been an issue for many years but no clear rules have been established until approximately in the 1970’s. In the early colonial years, the arrangement was unappealing to children and their mothers and possibly doing psychologically damage. Luckily, history has evolved and children’s well-being has become a priority in divorce cases.

This case was last before the court on 1/4/2017 for a report to the court. The hearing was rescheduled until 2/6/2017, as all the attorneys were not present. At that time, temporary custody of Issac Johnson remained with the Department. The case was continued until 2/6/2017 for a status report.

11. The Division is permitted access to Ms. Gueits’ home and shall make a child welfare referral to Florida regarding housing assistance and services being implemented for the children once physical custody is transferred to Ms.

During the period of TMC, DFPS is required to make reasonable efforts to reunify children with their families if safe and appropriate, or to make timely efforts to legally free them for adoption or find another permanent placement for them. While the child is in the state’s TMC, Texas law requires the appointment of an attorney to represent the child’s expressed interests and a guardian ad litem to protect the child’s best interests in the state court proceeding affecting the parent-child relationship.

Ms. Gomez informed HS that last permanent address was located on 615 East 179 St. Bronx, NY and client specified that family resided there for 3 years. Family was evicted from the apartment due to no-payment. Family is currently residing at 1195 Sherman Ave. Bronx, NY Unit 2B, admission date 04/17/2015. Family composition consists of Yannette Gomez (34y, self); Xavier Baez Gomez (15y, son); Joselyn Velazquez (daughter, 6y); Naidelynn Velazquez (daughter, 5y); Juan Velazquez (son, 3y). However, Ms. Gomez informed HS that Jorge Baez (son, 16y) and Deliala Baez (14y, daughter) are residing in the facility with the family. HS reminded client that she must at both children to the case. Furthermore, this is an ongoing issue CMS Pimentel and CM Pagan had advised client several times to Ms. Gomez that she must add both children to the case. Ms. Gomez informed HS that no one else is going to move in with the family. Also, no one in the family composition is going to move with them if permanent housing is obtained.

Irina Lakotiy reported her son, Oleg Lakotiy, was violating a protection order by being at her residence. Irina stated she picked up Oleg at Valley Medical Center in Renton, gave him a ride to her residence, and was concerned Oleg was possibly high on drugs. Oleg was listed as the respondent and Irina was listed as the petitioner of a DV Protection Order out of King Co Superior Court # 16-2-05363. The order stated Oleg was restrained from coming near and having any contact whatsoever in person, or through others, except by phone, and was prohibited from knowingly coming within, or knowingly remaining with 500 feet of Irina's residence. I contacted Oleg inside of a children’s play house, which is in the back yard of Irina's residence. Because

29) Plaintiff was order to be ready to come to work with 24 hour notice. This gave the Defendant no opportunity to see the Plaintiffs minor child. Children need fathers.

I basely terminated my Pensacola Housing Voucher Program. The reason why, I left Pensacola, FL was to come back to my mother's house of resident in Tallahassee, FL to help her and myself for health issues. In addition, I did the terminated in Pensacola, FL before I came to Tallahassee. At my mother we did not see eye to eye, so I decide to move out. Therefore, I call Pensacola Housing, and they wise me that 10 days have passed by so that terminates me out of the Housing Voucher Program. However, I was wise; I have the rights to appropriate judicial proceedings. Furthermore an attorney is the only thing can get me back on the Housing Voucher Program if not I will have to get back on the two year waiting list again. By having an attorney sending

CM contact ACS worker in regards to the child removal and the outcome of the family court dated for 4/24/17. As per ACS worker Ms. Harris child will no be returned to the father , the court decided to granted the custody to one of Mr. Simmons family member who resides in Connericut and the process will take appoximatley 2 more months to be

I am requesting for an emergency order to be put in place for summer. When myself and Michael 's father settled on the last petition we had agreed we would split summer 50/50. He 's been putting me off for the past month telling me wait a couple days he will call me to talk about what days we would have Michael during summer. Knowing I have to give my job notice on what days I will work, being I don 't work when I have Michael. Finally 3 weeks before summer Michael 's father tells me he 's not giving me additional days because I don 't deserve them, that he spent 30,000$ on a lawyer and he doesn 't have to split summer with me. That is totally not fair. I deserve to spend time with Michael being I miss out on so much during school months. I am also filing for other reasons in this letter, but I n the meantime I would like a emergency order put in place so I can spend time with my son during summer and not miss out on another summer because Michael 's father did the same thing to me last summer.

I would like to give you some insight regarding my custody case Elaine Sinclair Perry vs Officer Peter Perry (estranged husband). This case has been ongoing for over four (4) years and I am eager for this case to come to an amicable solution. My daughter is six (6) years old and her father Officer Peter Perry continues to fight for weekend visitation. Officer Perry is inconsistent with visitation and child support payment. Whenever he comes to pick up our daughter, Officer Perry doesn 't give any advance notice. He texts the night before and then show up the next morning to pick up our daughter. He doesn 't give detailed information as to where our daughter is being dropped off or the address and telephone number of where she is dropped off. Officer Perry also wants our daughter to stay over the weekend through Monday. The environment where Officer Perry resides is not livable for anyone because it lacks basic survival needs such as water. The home environment is unhygienic and unsafe for our daughter to spend weekends. I lived at the house and there was no running water. Also, no light is in the home. A home visit needs to be conducted in order to investigate if there is food, light and water. It is unrealistic for our daughter to stay overnight Saturday through Monday. Officer Perry resides in Stony Hill, Kingston and our daughter resides in Spanish Town, St. Catherine. Our daughter education will be negatively affected by being dropped off on a Monday.

Elmore County DHR’s testimony revealed that the parties were divorced on April 25, 2008 in Montgomery County Circuit Court. At that time, the non-custodial parent (NCP) was ordered to pay $534.00 a month beginning May 1, 2008. After reviewing ALACOURT, there are no additional orders regarding this case. The custodial parent (CP) applied for child support services on January 11, 2011. Elmore County DHR’s representative referenced Chapter 9.1.2.a.C of the Child Support Policy and Procedures Manual, which is paraphrased, once the client comes in and there is an order established prior to the application, the client is to fill out the Affidavit of Past Due Support, and collect all available payment records; this is what the agency has done. On that same day that the CP applied for services, the court’s payment record was pulled. The CP’s Affidavit of Past Due Support was also received at that time. The balances were loaded on DHR’s Alabama Location Enforcement Child Support System based on all the collected information. In the meantime the hearing was requested, DHR pulled the court’s payment record again to ensure there were no additional payments that DHR was unaware of and recalculated the arrears on a spreadsheet. The Agency obtained the same arrears balance, but the interest balance showed a one-cent difference. After reviewing the arrears, DHR finds no error based on the CP’s Affidavit, the court’s payment record and DHR’s payment record. The final calculation showed the arrears total of $11,456.58 and the interest total of $6,986.27 due in child support.

California Family Code also allows the mediator’s recommendation to the court regarding custody and/or visitation to be adopted by the court. (California