My sister and her husband need legal assistance for a custody case.

[Acevalefor]

I don't like asking for help but this is one of those times that I will ask for anything to help my niece and my sister. The short of it is that my sister's husband's ex-wife is trying to take full custody of their daughter with only limited visitation. Currently, and for the last 2(I think) years the custody has been split 50/50. This will be a drastic change for the child. She will have to change schools and will only see her dad 2 days per month. I don't want to see her go through this. I don't even want to see her have to go through this legal battle. And here is the problem with the battle.

My sister and her husband recently bought a house so they have no money to hire a lawyer. Their income is just high enough that they do not qualify for any legal aid, so they have no representation. Meanwhile, the mother does not even make enough money to support herself. This qualifies her for %100 legal aid. She does not have to pay a dime to enter this custody battle. She also filed, on the advice of her free legal aid, in a court that notoriously sides with the mother. Make of that what you will.

Now that you know a little bit of the story, the point of this post is to ask for donations or to simply pass it along. They need $4000 to even retain an attorney. Estimated total cost is $8-15k. Needless to say, they cannot come up with that kind of money and cannot represent themselves.

Here is the Gofundme. Please share it or like it or whatever you need to do on your preferred social network. Thank you for whatever you can do.

[Tyche]

There's critical aspects missing. What claim does your the ex have to change prearranged custody? Courts aren't prone to dramatically adjust a child's life simply because a parent wants to screw over another parent. There has to be a reason the court would deem reasonable. Make sure there's meticulous documentation of when and how long your sister and her husband have the child. Hit up /r/legaladvice.

[Acevalefor]

There's critical aspects missing. What claim does your the ex have to change prearranged custody? Courts aren't prone to dramatically adjust a child's life simply because a parent wants to screw over another parent. There has to be a reason the court would deem reasonable. Make sure there's meticulous documentation of when and how long your sister and her husband have the child. Hit up /r/legaladvice.

We do not know her claim yet. The first hearing ended in about 3 minutes with the judge telling them that he did not have enough information. They were then sent to some sort of mediation fact-finding hearing with a family attorney who is supposed to represent both of them for the court. I am not sure what that is about but it seems shady to me unless I am misunderstanding what the session was and who this attorney is. Right now we are looking for an attorney to represent him simply to even the playing field. They found out earlier today that they qualify for some of the grant programs and an advocacy group will help with some of the legal expenses. It still does not cover everything though.

Before all this happened, the custody arrangement was verbal and in good faith. There is no binding written agreement on any of it. The father is also paying child support as if she were the custodial parent because of the lack of written documentation and the mother's claim that she supports the child financially for more than 6 months of the year. She may be just over the 6-month threshold because she gets the girl for holidays and some extra weekends since the father works weekends. As far as I know, the child-support thing is nothing more than her establishing a paper trail to support her case. i.e. "I financially support her and have her for more than half the year anyway and here is my child support order to prove it."

[mallister]

that was just asking for trouble. do not *ever* take things on faith or verbal agreements in a custody case. it makes for a very painful lesson, and you'll pay for it for a long time. voice of very painful experience here.

the mediator is there to try to sort shit out between the parties before it goes back to court; they might claim to represent both parties but again, voice of experience here, it doesn't really work out that way.

have your sister get a lawyer, or prepare for this to go downhill fast.

[Tyche]

The mediator is the legally binding way to make good faith arrangements.

[mallister]

it's legally binding alright. good faith is another matter.

get a lawyer.

[Tyche]

This is what I'll say. And if Kaslo rears his head in here, he may or may not choose to further comment...don't trust anecdotal internet experiences in these matters. People will have much different experiences with the court and mediators depending on what side of the aisle they're on. There is nothing super shady about the way it's currently being handled as you describe. The mediator is doing his or her job. That's nothing out of the ordinary. You do not have to agree to arrangements presented in the presence of the mediator. If you can come to an amicable arrangement with the mediator, even better, but you shouldn't feel pressured into anything. If people don't like the mediator, then they're misunderstanding their position. If you can't agree as a couple with a mediator, you are well within your rights to escalate to court with an attorney. You shouldn't look at them as someone against you or your cause, as they can do little harm to your case.
On another note, your inlaws needs to remember and write down everything possible and in the future, document every minute, hour, day, and cent spent with the child.

[mallister]

Did you read thier account of the meeting with their mediator? If its to be believed (I dont know these people, wasnt there, etc) it wasn't far from mine, and no. The mediator isn't on your side.

[Tyche]

He didn't post an account of the first meeting, so what do you want me to read? I think your bias is showing. The mediator doesn't have a side. Or they're not supposed to. Regardless, it doesn't matter. They do not finalizing anything you are not agreeable to. They're there to mediate.

[Tyche]

Just seen the long form on the gofundme. If the mediator isn't mediating, then it's obvious the need to escalate. Just from a cursory read of this, it seems to me that something is missing. Like, is mom applying for some kind of government assistance?

[Acevalefor]

Just seen the long form on the gofundme. If the mediator isn't mediating, then it's obvious the need to escalate. Just from a cursory read of this, it seems to me that something is missing. Like, is mom applying for some kind of government assistance?

That is exactly what she is doing. She lost her job a couple of months ago and applied for every form of assistance she could. She also filed for child support. This whole thing has something to do with the state getting involved. Mallister is right if I am to trust everything my sister says (and she has never given me reason not to believe her) about the fact-finding session. It was not a mediation in any way and was skewed in the mother's favor. It's all in the gofundme summary. They were not even in the same room at the same time. They were interviewed separately. The way my brother-in-law described it to me was that he was being treated as a hostile witness. Also, this particular court and judge were chosen by the mother because of their record of siding with mothers. Next court date is in the middle of March. Can they request a change of venue?

For the record, I know well enough not to ever trust an ex. My brother-in-law is learning the hard way. He doesn't need to be reminded how stupid he was to trust her.

[Tyche]

If that's the case, the mom is required by law to do what she's doing. You can't apply for any type of government assistance for the child with an absent parent and getting money from the other parent first. I hope this sheds a little light on the situation. Yes, in this scenario, your in law will need an attorney. But you should probably be a little less critical of the individuals involved; being the ex, the mediator, and the judge, and be a little more upset with the system. The ex has to do what she's doing in order to file for things like Medicaid, food stamps, etc. and I'm sure the mediator probably told your in-law the same, which is why he may have felt it was one sided or dismissive, however, the mom is, in fact, in the right here. Unfortunately, for many of the programs, if there's an absent parent (and being that there was previously no legal arrangement, I would think that your in-law would qualify by law as an absent parent) then you must apply for child support. That requires going to court. Which puts you in the place your in now. If you really want to get pissed, just take solace in the fact that your in law and sisters money won't even be going to the child, it'll likely go to the state and a very small percentage will end up in the hands of the mother. Child support reimbursement for mothers applying for things like TANF fucks everyone. It sucks. But nothing I read seems out of the ordinary. I think the only option you have here is to get custody. Which it seems they're doing.

[Acevalefor]

If that's the case, the mom is required by law to do what she's doing. You can't apply for any type of government assistance for the child with an absent parent and getting money from the other parent first. I hope this sheds a little light on the situation. Yes, in this scenario, your in law will need an attorney. But you should probably be a little less critical of the individuals involved; being the ex, the mediator, and the judge, and be a little more upset with the system. The ex has to do what she's doing in order to file for things like Medicaid, food stamps, etc. and I'm sure the mediator probably told your in-law the same, which is why he may have felt it was one sided or dismissive, however, the mom is, in fact, in the right here. Unfortunately, for many of the programs, if there's an absent parent (and being that there was previously no legal arrangement, I would think that your in-law would qualify by law as an absent parent) then you must apply for child support. That requires going to court. Which puts you in the place your in now. If you really want to get pissed, just take solace in the fact that your in law and sisters money won't even be going to the child, it'll likely go to the state and a very small percentage will end up in the hands of the mother. Child support reimbursement for mothers applying for things like TANF fucks everyone. It sucks. But nothing I read seems out of the ordinary. I think the only option you have here is to get custody. Which it seems they're doing.

Thanks for that explanation. Understanding the system better really does make me upset more at the system than anything. It seems that everything they are doing is exactly what you have suggested. They just need to raise the funds now.

[mallister]

He didn't post an account of the first meeting, so what do you want me to read? I think your bias is showing. The mediator doesn't have a side. Or they're not supposed to. Regardless, it doesn't matter. They do not finalizing anything you are not agreeable to. They're there to mediate.

i understand why you would think this, for sure. but i have experienced hostile mediators before (and a biased court venue to boot), and been in no position financially to contest much of anything. it's a terrible place to find yourself.