MsFacetious
What a Kerfuffle...
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 21,624
- Reaction score
- 33,041
Sole physical custody means that a child shall reside with and be under the supervision of one parent, subject to the power of the court to order visitation. If a child lives with only one parent, that parent has sole physical custody and is said to be the custodial parent. The other parent is said to be the non-custodial parent, and may or may not have visitation rights with his/her child. If Jeremy wanted his child to spend any time with his mother, (even supervised visitation) he could ask for changes in visitation.
That isn't up to the parent though, it's up to the court.
If the court gives one parent full custody and says the other parent should have NO visitation, why would the parent with custody fight that?
It takes a lot from what I've heard in this county, for a father to get full custody.
Why should Jeremy be fighting for the mother to see her son? Isn't that HER job if she wants that?
He should absolutely do whatever he can to make him available, but going to court to demand visitation for the other parent? That seems a bit much.
I think we need more information on this... other than the docket itself. I think there is more to this.
I'm finding it hard to believe that Jeremy took the child and "hid" him from her in the house they all lived in together.
Or that they were unable to get visitation even though she wanted it and has had a lawyer all along.
It stinks to me.