I guess you would need to emphasize that SHE left her own child....but I would definitely be careful because you can't unilaterally cut off communication with her, even if she is a horrible parent. Since the best defense if a good offense, maybe HE should go to court for his cause -- and if she doesn't show, that would just help his case that she isn't responsible enough to care for her child (Brittany Spears...?!)

Yeah, the family thinks that they have her on abandonment but my fear is that she'll say she left to better her life and then return for her child. I know she'll say that she left because he would not let her see him and she had to get back to her job before they fired her (in Cali) I know he wont take this to court himself, he thinks she's gone for good, but I don't. It may take her a while but I think she'll be back and he'll be in for a rough court battle.

Did they have a custody order?

If not, and they were not married, BM has full legal and sole custody.

Abandonement would consist of no contact by BM's willful choice for ONE YEAR.

They are in trouble. Big trouble. When the Judge hears that the new wife cut off communication, I will bet my last bottom dollar that he will issue a restraining order on new wife. BF at the least will get supervised visitation at the most will get charged with kidnapping (contigent on if there was a custody order or if they were married.)

The new wife has no right whatsoever for any reason to cut off communication.

**disclaimer: The following is my personal opinion and may not have a legal basis. I am not an attorney and cannot give legal advice. If you need advice on how to proceed, please contact an attorney.

Nivea is right, the new wife was completely out of line if she gets in between the mother and her child. It is wrong if the father of the child decides after a month that she has 'abandoned' the child. My oldest son's father walked away and didn't see him for FOUR YEARS. When he finally got arrested for literally running away from child support, THEN he decided he wanted to have visitation. The court gave it to him. If she straightens out even a little bit, the court isn't going to care much if she cut off communication for a month.. If she says she was in another state but then tried to call and the new wife cut her off, then she might even have a case to TAKE custody. The courts look at the best interest of the child, and one parent cutting off the other without an order from the court is proof to the court that the parent cutting off the other parent, is the BAD parent.

But Nivea, I have never heard of one parent having full legal and sole custody because they are not married. I'm in CA and as far as I know, if there is no court order, they are both equal parents in the eyes of the law. There isn't 'kidnapping' unless BM gets an order giving her custody. He can't cut off communication (or let his wife do so) unless he has an order giving him custody and it specifies that the mother can't talk to the child. Bottom line, BM could come get her child and unless he has a court order to stop her, she would not be 'kidnapping' either.

Hi imamommy,

In some states, the BM is awarded custody if there wasn't a marriage. It really is state-specific.

I'll need some more info from the OP to give the best and worst case scenario.

-Is there a custody order? If so, what does it state specifically?

-If no custody order, were they married?

-If not married, was paternity establishd?

-What state has the child resided in for the past six months?

Imamommy,

Yes, worst case scenario the SS could be charged with kidnapping. Doesn't mean he will get convicted. I really need those questions answered before I can say.

However, I can say that if BM has not been restricted by a Judge in not seeing her child...they are going to be in a world of trouble.

They were not married and there was no custody order, the baby has been living in Kansas his whole life. So you think that she could come back and take him completely away? Get full custody? I told her when she called me that the number she has is still my SS's and that it was the new wife messing with her. She ended up texting the new wife stating that I told her that she had the right number and the new wife told her to call me back and tell me I'm wrong. She's a real peach!! But since I've told the BM the truth about the number could my SS still get into trouble?

Somebody had better get SS to contact his child's mother & apologize for any misunderstanding & express his sincere wish to work with her.

At this point, if I were the child's mother, I'd file kidnapping charges against both of them.

theothermother,

Was paternity established? Did SS get a DNA test or sign the birth certificate?

I'm an unfamiliar with Kansas laws, so I'm still doing some research.

However, it is already not looking too good. I would make it very clear to SS that he is treading into treachorous waters. Yes, I have seen Judges award custody to the parent that has been cut off. It is not seen as favorable.

Additionally, the new wife does have a very good chance of being issued a restraining order from the child.

This is taken very seriously.

**disclaimer: The following is my personal opinion and may not have a legal basis. I am not an attorney and cannot give legal advice. If you need advice on how to proceed, please contact an attorney.

38-1337
Chapter 38.--MINORS
Article 13.--CHILD CUSTODY JURISDICTION

38-1337. Definitions. (UCCJEA 102). As used in K.S.A. 38-1336 through 38-1377:

(1) "Abandoned" means left without provision for reasonable and necessary care or supervision.

(2) "Act" means the uniform child-custody jurisdiction and enforcement act.

(3) "Child" means an individual who has not attained 18 years of age.

(4) "Child-custody determination" means a judgment, decree or other order of a court providing for the legal custody, physical custody or visitation with respect to a child. The term includes a permanent, temporary, initial and modification order. The term does not include an order relating to child support or other monetary obligation of an individual.

(5) "Child-custody proceeding" means a proceeding in which legal custody, physical custody, or visitation with respect to a child is an issue. The term includes a proceeding for divorce, separation, neglect, abuse, dependency, guardianship, paternity, termination of parental rights, and protection from domestic violence, in which the issue may appear. The term does not include a proceeding involving juvenile delinquency, contractual emancipation, or enforcement under K.S.A. 38-1358 through 38-1374 and amendments thereto.

(6) "Commencement" means the filing of the first pleading in a proceeding.

(7) "Court" means an entity authorized under the law of a state to establish, enforce, or modify a child-custody determination.

(8) "Home state" means the state in which a child lived with a parent or a person acting as a parent for at least six consecutive months immediately before the commencement of a child-custody proceeding. In the case of a child less than six months of age, the term means the state in which the child lived from birth with any of the persons mentioned. A period of temporary absence of any of the mentioned persons is part of the period.

(9) "Initial determination" means the first child-custody determination concerning a particular child.

(10) "Issuing court" means the court that makes a child-custody determination for which enforcement is sought under this act.

(11) "Issuing state" means the state in which a child-custody determination is made.

(12) "Modification" means a child-custody determination that changes, replaces, supersedes, or is otherwise made after a previous determination concerning the same child, whether or not it is made by the court that made the previous determination.

(13) "Person" means an individual, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, limited liability company, association, joint venture, government; governmental subdivision, agency, or instrumentality; public corporation; or any other legal or commercial entity.

(14) "Person acting as a parent" means a person, other than a parent, who:

(A) Has physical custody of the child or has had physical custody for [a] period of six consecutive months, including any temporary absence, within one year immediately before the commencement of a child-custody proceeding; and

(B) has been awarded legal custody by a court or claims a right to legal custody under the law of this state.

(15) "Physical custody" means the physical care and supervision of a child.

(16) "State" means a state of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, or any territory or insular possession subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

(17) "Tribe" means an Indian tribe or band, or Alaskan Native village, which is recognized by federal law or formally acknowledged by a state.

(18) "Warrant" means an order issued by a court authorizing law enforcement officers to take physical custody of a child.

38-1348
Chapter 38.--MINORS
Article 13.--CHILD CUSTODY JURISDICTION

38-1348. Initial child-custody jurisdiction. (UCCJEA 201). (a) Except as otherwise provided in K.S.A. 38-1351 and amendments thereto, a court of this state has jurisdiction to make an initial child-custody determination only if:

(1) This state is the home state of the child on the date of the commencement of the proceeding, or was the home state of the child within six months before the commencement of the proceeding and the child is absent from this state but a parent or person acting as a parent continues to live in this state;

(2) a court of another state does not have jurisdiction under paragraph (1), or a court of the home state of the child has declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that this state is the more appropriate forum under K.S.A. 38-1354 or 38-1355 and amendments thereto, and:

(A) The child and the child's parents, or the child and at least one parent or a person acting as a parent, have a significant connection with this state other than mere physical presence; and

(B) substantial evidence is available in this state concerning the child's care, protection, training, and personal relationships;

(3) all courts having jurisdiction under paragraph (1) or (2) have declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that a court of this state is the more appropriate forum to determine the custody of the child under K.S.A. 38-1354 or 38-1355 and amendments thereto; or

(4) no court of any other state would have jurisdiction under the criteria specified in paragraph (1), (2), or (3).

(b) Subsection (a) is the exclusive jurisdictional basis for making a child-custody determination by a court of this state.

(c) Physical presence of, or personal jurisdiction over, a party or a child is not necessary or sufficient to make a child-custody determination.

History: L. 2000, ch. 171, 43; July 1.

In my opinion, the SS should not be allowing his wife to keep the child's mother from having contact. The fact that he can't control his wife is going to reflect poorly on him. It's not going to excuse the fact that the mother isn't able to contact her child. He is the parent and it's HIS responsibility to make sure the child has frequent & continuing contact with the other parent. If the mother wasn't calling, he has less of an obligation to seek her out, but she is trying to call her child and no matter how annoyed he is with her or thinks it's not important to her because she doesn't behave how he would like when she does visit (ie. staying on her cell phone the whole time), that's not up to him to decide. She can act however she wants as long as it's not abusive to the child. There are many NCP's that use their time with the child and sit them in front of the TV and don't 'spend time' with them, but that's not up to the CP to decide. If he doesn't realize that his child's mother has rights, then the court will remind him. And it could cost him custody of his child. Not to mention, the child has a right to speak to his/her parent. A step parent does not have a right to interfere with that. PERIOD.

38-1112
Chapter 38.--MINORS
Article 11.--DETERMINATION OF PARENTAGE

38-1112. Relationship not dependent on marriage. The parent and child relationship extends equally to every child and to every parent, regardless of the marital status of the parents.

History: L. 1985, ch. 114, § 3; July 1.

38-1113
Chapter 38.--MINORS
Article 11.--DETERMINATION OF PARENTAGE

38-1113. How parent and child relationship is established. The parent and child relationship between a child and:

(a) The mother may be established by proof of her having given birth to the child or under this act.

(b) The father may be established under this act or, in the absence of a final judgment establishing paternity, by a voluntary acknowledgment of paternity meeting the requirements of K.S.A. 38-1138 and amendments thereto, unless the voluntary acknowledgment has been revoked pursuant to K.S.A. 38-1115 and amendments thereto.

(c) An adoptive parent may be established by proof of adoption.

History: L. 1985, ch. 114, § 4; L. 1997, ch. 182, § 62; July 3.

38-1114
Chapter 38.--MINORS
Article 11.--DETERMINATION OF PARENTAGE

38-1114. Presumption of paternity. (a) A man is presumed to be the father of a child if:

(1) The man and the child's mother are, or have been, married to each other and the child is born during the marriage or within 300 days after the marriage is terminated by death or by the filing of a journal entry of a decree of annulment or divorce.

(2) Before the child's birth, the man and the child's mother have attempted to marry each other by a marriage solemnized in apparent compliance with law, although the attempted marriage is void or voidable and:

(A) If the attempted marriage is voidable, the child is born during the attempted marriage or within 300 days after its termination by death or by the filing of a journal entry of a decree of annulment or divorce; or

(B) if the attempted marriage is void, the child is born within 300 days after the termination of cohabitation.

(3) After the child's birth, the man and the child's mother have married, or attempted to marry, each other by a marriage solemnized in apparent compliance with law, although the attempted marriage is void or voidable and:

(A) The man has acknowledged paternity of the child in writing;

(B) with the man's consent, the man is named as the child's father on the child's birth certificate; or

(C) the man is obligated to support the child under a written voluntary promise or by a court order.

(4) The man notoriously or in writing recognizes paternity of the child, including but not limited to a voluntary acknowledgment made in accordance with K.S.A. 38-1130 or 65-2409a, and amendments thereto.

(5) Genetic test results indicate a probability of 97% or greater that the man is the father of the child.

(6) The man has a duty to support the child under an order of support regardless of whether the man has ever been married to the child's mother.

(b) A presumption under this section may be rebutted only by clear and convincing evidence, by a court decree establishing paternity of the child by another man or as provided in subsection (c). If a presumption is rebutted, the party alleging the existence of a father and child relationship shall have the burden of going forward with the evidence.

(c) If two or more presumptions under this section arise which conflict with each other, the presumption which on the facts is founded on the weightier considerations of policy and logic, including the best interests of the child, shall control.

(d) Full faith and credit shall be given to a determination of paternity made by any other state or jurisdiction, whether the determination is established by judicial or administrative process or by voluntary acknowledgment. As used in this section, "full faith and credit" means that the determination of paternity shall have the same conclusive effect and obligatory force in this state as it has in the state or jurisdiction where made.

(e) If a presumption arises under this section, the presumption shall be sufficient basis for entry of an order requiring the man to support the child without further paternity proceedings.

(f) The donor of semen provided to a licensed physician for use in artificial insemination of a woman other than the donor's wife is treated in law as if he were not the birth father of a child thereby conceived, unless agreed to in writing by the donor and the woman.

History: L. 1985, ch. 114, § 5; L. 1994, ch. 292, § 5; July 1.