As a father I picked my children up from kindergarten and then Picked them up from school I was primarily the caregiver But when we split I as a man was perceived as a secondary caregiver Lost everything
As a father of two young boys, I am sorry to hear it. Unfortunately, the family court system is far from perfect. There are many holes in the system. At times, these holes can be exploited -- especially regarding fathers with young children. With that said, I hope that you and your family are healthy and well. Best wishes!
Same happen to me. I had a biz that let me stay at home, raised them for 4 years. Sexist system. 3 year on legal battle my children keep saying they want to spend time with me
Thank you for sharing that insight. The question becomes: are judges doing an intelligent thing by not issuing 50/50 for infants and toddlers? When our son was 3 years old and we were mediating, the mediator was a child psychologist. He specifically told us that a child between 0 to 4 years old should not go more than 3, or maybe 4, days without seeing the other parent....that was harmful for the child psychologically. Based on that analysis, I concluded that judges are acting in the worst interests of children when they make a lopsided custody decision for infants and toddlers. And let's remember that child psychologists have to deal with the ramifications of bad custody decisions for children...While judges do not have any ramifications
Preach! One of my friends has a PhD in child development and is the head of the department. I had him review ABQ family court's suggested visitation guidelines. My friend and his colleagues were BLOWN AWAY when they saw the suggested guidelines. His comments were in line with yours above. Part of the problem is that family court judges are all powerful. They decide what best serves a child. In almost 15 years of practicing family law I've never seen or heard of an attorney successfully overturning a judge's best interest of the child, visitation decision through appeal. The court of appeals hates dealing with family law issues and basically defers to to the judge. Judges know this. Judges also know that almost no parent has the money to go through the expensive court process and then an appeal process. It's simply too expensive. Appealing a family court judge's best interest decision is like banging your head against a nail studded wall. On top of that, even if you win the appeal guess who the case gets sent back to -- the same judge that decided the issue! So judges basically have all power. You know what they say about absolute power. Anyways, happy Father's Day and best wishes to you and your children!
@@505sanchez Thanks for your insight into the appeals process in New Mexico. My experience in my state was totally different. During my custody trial, I read hundreds of child custody and child support decisions by the Appellate Courts. My general conclusion was: A) The lower courts exist to rubberstamp the mother, regardless of the best interest factors...and B) when a custody decision is appealed, the appellate courts exist to apply intelligent thought, and review the best interests of the child and they often overturn the judge. That conclusion was not true 100% of the time, but very, very often. One day I will pull all of these decisions, and methodically show how the lower courts actively ignore the guidance of the Appellate Courts. Also based on my Appellate case reviews, I weaponized everything I learned from the Court of Appeals, and used it all to shut down my judge and her biased opinions. That was a central part of the reason why I was awarded custody. Basically, I stood in the shoes of the Appellate Court while providing my testimony and evidence. I spoke the way a Court of Appeals judge would speak. With that mindset, I steamrolled my judge and all of the lawyers in the room. And I am sharing this because it's important for society-at-large to understand that judges are not all-powerful and there are ways to cut them off at the knees. Happy Father's Day to you as well!!
That's awesome to hear! We may be comparing apples to oranges, based on the courthouse, county, and judge. I'd be very interested to know your courthouse, county, and judge. The court process can vary wildly within the same courthouse, universes apart from one county to the next -- and completely different law from one state to the next. With that said, it's awesome to hear that you were successful appealing your judge. That truly is exceptional and rare in New Mexico! Cheers!
@@505sanchezyour a lawyer? Let's educate people. Judges aren't all powerful.. but they take that stance. WE THE PEOPLE.. and everyone is equal under the law. Name the creative ways based in law to prevent these nothing strangers from destroying lives and possibly endangering in certain situations..like mine. Creative ways to call out jurisdiction. The fact our rights are god given and we have rights to self determination. Also, the courts have no idea what's best interest..no stranger does..that's idealism at best. Bring a suit against that judge and have them removed. The thing about all caps name I believe is true, as a means for jurisdiction and authority. Let's stop giving up, and use any and all codes, statutes, to go e the parent all the rights. We know child support is unlawful and corrupt..but no one tells the client or helps. The system is incestuous and corrupt. Lawyers don't fight back..stand up. Call out non sense. Afraid of sanctions, disbarment..be a McKenzie friend and actually help. Corpus juris secundum states the client is last on the list of who the hired lawyer looks out for. Stop screwing with men and families..and fight these judges. If nothing else, call out conflict of interest due to financial interest. The bonds..the account they access..the c.r.i.s fund? It's improper and conflict. Let's do better.. kids lives are ruined. And mother's aren't best..look at society and all the studies. But it's a money business. Clearfield doctrine states courts are reduced to corporations operating in commerce..they have no actual authority. Be a godly human..we operate under gods laws, not these codes derived from roman law. We are free creations. Our rights are god given. But cowards won't stand up against it. It's paydays..large retainers.. and crap humans operating in a job capacity while having relations with all the players in court. It's disqusting.
But frequent switching is also bad for the child. It’s a lose lose situation. We had 50/50 and the frequent switching ended up causing serious anxiety issues that our son struggles with 10 years later.
1. The constitution says you have an unalienable right to raise your offspring without interference from the government. 2. There is a presumption of 50/50 custody is in the BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD unless one parent is PROVED as unfit (abuse, neglect, abandonment, or domestic violence) 3. All states Best interest of the child FACTORS point to 50/50. Look it up. 4. I don't "visit" my child, I PARENT my child. Change the court's verbiage from "visitation" to PARENTING TIME. Chane the court's verbiage from "respondent" to FATHER. So on, and so forth... It doesn't matter what the court likes. Argue what the law says. Then make the judge state on the record the findings of facts based on the totality of the circumstances and the court's conclusion of LAW.
Thanks for the comment and thought! I whole heartedly agree that judges SHOULD presume that 50-50 timesharing is in a child's best interests. I have ZERO interest to ever be a judge -- or family court judge -- but if I did, my platform would be to bring fairness to the system by promoting 50-50 visitation. Alas, this is not how most cases play out in Albuquerque, New Mexico. It's also important to note that the end result GREATLY depends on the courthouse, jurisdiction, and judge that one's case is in. Results can vary greatly with two judges in the same courthouse -- much less two judges in different jurisdictions and counties -- much less courts in different states. I've heard that some states do presume that 50-50 visitation is in a child's best interests. Cheers to those states. With that said, in Albuquerque, the judges tend to rely on the "Suggested Guidelines," created by the court. These Guidelines do not believe that 50-50 best serves young children (children under 5). Consequently, the court almost never will grant 50-50 timesharing when the decision is put into their hands. This has been my personal observation for over 14 years of practice. I am not agreeing with this fact, or tendency. I am merely relaying the fact. New Mexico law does presume that a child is best served by joint legal custody. With that said, joint legal custody relates to decision making ability, whereas physical custody relates to visitation and timesharing. Physical custody is always based on a child's best interests. In other words, there is no presumption that children -- or young children for that matter -- are best served by 50-50. Ultimately, the judge determines the child's best interests -- and appealing that decision is VERY difficult. In any event, I hope that you and your family are healthy and well!
There's an increasing number of people dissatisfied with family court judges. Remember --> judges are elected officials. Rock the vote and make a change. Best wishes!
And this insight right here is why American family law is a dumpsterfire. Men always get nailed over this stuff and are easily alienated by mother based on this right here.
Preach! Your words echo the growing sentiment of men that post comments. To date, I've never had a Father/Man praise the family court system. The system certainly has holes and issues. With that said --> judges are elected officials. Therefore, rock the vote!
the 1st things that parents must to look are the wellness of the children... but father and mother are fighting for money for that and other reasons are in court... irrational parents generally is the problem...
Are there clauses that automatically change custody to 50/50 when the child gets to be older than six and how can the layman bring this to light without having to pay $thousands of dollars to initiate the court action slash request? Inquiring minds want to know.
All men have equal rights and right to association with their children. You or a judge or a coram non judice do not get to change the laws and tell anyone what to do with their kids unless they are causing harm or 100% unfit. You attorneys are all in on it and have a contract with child support. You get grants and incentives. The deception and the lies make the children grow up in broken homes so they can break the law and pay out more money on the bonds you steal from them.
1. The constitution says you have an unalienable right to raise your offspring without interference from the government. 2. There is a presumption of 50/50 custody is in the BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD unless one parent is PROVED as unfit (abuse, neglect, abandonment, or domestic violence) 3. All states Best interest of the child FACTORS point to 50/50. Look it up. 4. I don't "visit" my child, I PARENT my child. Change the court's verbiage from "visitation" to PARENTING TIME. Change the court's verbiage from "respondent" to FATHER. So on, and so forth... It doesn't matter what the court thinks. Argue what the law says. Then make the judge state on the record the findings of facts based on the totality of the circumstances and the court's conclusion of LAW.
@siraajmadyun6681 Excatly, we are not stupid. You don't visit with your own kids. This is a trip to the beach. We have a legal right to custody of our kids. Some men are starting to realize the court is filling a contract with child support enforcement. Right in the federal contract, it says all government agencies involved share the money also includes custody and visitation.
@Mrjones-ed7hi It's so corrupt that it's almost unbelievable. The Constitution which is the LAW OF THE LAND and nothing trumps the Constitution says any dispute over $20 you have a right to trial by your peers/jury. Wonder why family court isn't consistent with the Constitution.... Also, there are laws against locking people up for non payment of child support. Look up the Dear Colleague Letter from the Department of Justice. You are also supposed to get free representation by an attorney if they are threatening to put you in jail for non payment. Then even before that, they are supposed to have a hearing and gather evidence of your ability to pay and see if the person is "willfully not paying". Lastly, the contract is between the mother and the state, not the Father. This is illegal to make a Father pay a debt he didn't sign up for. Its indentured servitude. Slavery. Then the interest on Child Support, how the state can make you pay interest on your offspring is crazy.... The mother gets state assistance and child support which keeps the debt going. It's corrupt beyond measure.
@@505sanchez Its not a concept, it states it in the statutes. They get all kind of grants and incentives. The only perspective is, your lies have become truth to the mothers and its deemed unconstitutional and fraud. We will fight til DOR goes away, promise you that.
Title IV-D! Under Title IV-D, the federal government reimburses states $2 for every $3 the state spends on eligible program costs for providing child. support services
Another reason that this is flawed thinking by judges is because the needs of a child is different from the ages of 1 to 4, VS 5 to 11, VS 12 to 18 years old. And both parents have different skill sets incapable of meeting those needs at different ages. Therefore, it is extremely myopic to think that giving one parent custody from the ages of 1 to 4 means that same parent should be the primary custodial parent from the ages of 5 to 18. Furthermore, the parent more likely to get custody when a kid is 1 to 4 years old is the parent that is unemployed and available. But being unemployed and available does not make you a better parent. The analysis has to go so much deeper.
Absolutely. I especially agree with the point about the unemployed parent. In a bit of a twist, in one case the other side was an unemployed father with a laundry list of issues (you name it -- he had that issue). Nevertheless, because he was the "primary caregiver" the case was a complete curveball. I certainly don't agree with this tendency -- I'm calling the tendency as I see it.
My twins got given 50:50. Before they turned 1🙄 they’re turning 2 and dad doesn’t even pick them up it’s just a control tactic and the family courts just fail to do wats best
Consider filing a Motion to Modify. Sadly, not many praises about family court with my comments. However, I hope that you and your family are healthy and well!
Kentucky made 50 50 the default. That is the go to here. Usually the sharing looks like this. Parent A 4 days on Parent B3 days on Parent A 3 days on Parent B 4 days on. As long as you can get the children to school then it is split equally. Child support is only ordered if there is a difference in incomes in each household and the parent ordered to pay will pay for half of the month versus the whole month. There has to be a reason for a parent to not get equal timeshare then they will have the regular every other weekend visitation. They changed the laws around 2018.
Preach! Ironically, I just got back from the Kentucky Derby last night. Needless to say, there are HUGE differences between Kentucky and Albuquerque in virtually every way. Anyways, best wishes to you and your family!
Well how does one prove the mother is alienating the child, which is the whole reason the father hasn't been the primary. What if the mother takes the child and refuses visitation from the father and getting tied up in court, what then?
Parental alienation is a legal conclusion. Accordingly, the court usually only finds that parental alienation is present if an appointed expert, or attorney that represents the child (Guardian ad Litem), conducts an investigation and makes a finding of alienation.
my case.... the alienation is coming from the father.... you can record the child when is showing the alienation... the lawyers only make bigger the problem between the parents.. only they want money... not the child!
Late comment but as a young/teenager child with divorced parents, what would be the legal age if the child would like to go live with a parent PERMANENTLY
In New Mexico, the law is that at age 14 the courts must consider the child's desires. Nevertheless, the court must only consider the child's desires -- and the child's desires are one factor among many. By policy, from my experience, Albuquerque courts usually allow a child that is 16 to "decide with their feet" with whom they want to live. Best wishes!
I'm sure there are BIG differences between New Mexico and Florida child custody laws and policies. There certainly are HUGE differences in almost every other respect (politics, geography, weather, culture, population, etc.). Florida undoubtedly will also play a much bigger role in the upcoming presidential election than New Mexico. With that said, best wishes to you and your family in Florida!
visitations can be different for every case... 14% visitation for parent without custody and joined legal custody... physical custody for one parent... factor: place where the parents live, Scholes age, works from the parents, etc, who is better for provide stability for the child, etc)
1. The constitution says you have an unalienable right to raise your offspring without interference from the government. 2. There is a presumption of 50/50 custody is in the BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD unless one parent is PROVED as unfit (abuse, neglect, abandonment, or domestic violence) 3. All states Best interest of the child FACTORS point to 50/50. Look it up. 4. I don't "visit" my child, I PARENT my child. Change the court's verbiage from "visitation" to PARENTING TIME. Change the court's verbiage from "respondent" to FATHER. So on, and so forth... It doesn't matter what the court thinks. Argue what the law says. Then make the judge state on the record the findings of facts based on the totality of the circumstances and the court's conclusion of LAW.
You’re high as a kite! 10000 cases to every 1 50/50 custody time in CA. You obviously havnt been through the system, that or the mother was smoking crack and in and out of jail.
Awesome! I'd lean towards 50-50 if I was a judge. Also, from my experience, judges in small towns tend to be open to 50-50 at a young age. With that said, each case and county varies. The video is geared towards parents in Albuquerque/Bernalillo County/2nd Judicial District Court. Also, the court will almost always approve 50-50 by stipulation. Cheers and best wishes to you and your family!
In Albuquerque, NM it is highly unusual for a judge to award 50-50 timesharing with a child under five. This is especially true if one parent has not established a bonding attachment with the other parent. With that said, this can change if there are highly unusual facts that impact the child's best interests.
While I agree that a baby should be with there mothers 3 and under, what the judicial system needs to consider is that times have changed. 50/50 should be the default if both parents have a pretty clean record as those rules created in 1980s need to be revamped for various reasons. Issue is the family law attorneys and the courts won’t do that which is actually the best interest of the child to have have equal time with both parent because money is more important to everyone instead of doing what’s right for the child.
Preach. Back in the day there was a legal principle called the Tender Years Doctrine. This basically said that children young children (under 5/6) are best served by being primarily raised by the mother, unless she is unfit to care for the children. The last time that this doctrine was cited in case law, in New Mexico, was 1962. Nevertheless, the ghost of this doctrine still hovers around NM family courts. Consequently, the reality is that most of the times, mother get primary custody with children under 5/6. I feel your frustration. I have two children under 5. If my wife divorced me, realistically, the only way that I'm getting 50-50 is if she agrees. If not, no chance in ABQ.
@@505sanchez Certain states have already i believe adapter 50/50. To give the child more time with one parent than the other is absurd. Times have certainly evolved and so should the system. Women use to get these in the 80s and prior because at that time women were stay at home moms and also only the men worked. That’s how the 20% of your paycheck came to be. But alot of women make there own money and more now and the system should reflect that. I guarantee you alot of women would turn over the child to there dads if the system was built to give the child without any compensation if child support. What’s more interesting is the name child support is the support of the child, but no custodial parents are ordered by the courts to report if in fact the support was used for the child. Again, alot of issues in this system.
But what is "reasonable and fequent".. in ny case, which i was not not awarded primary, the judge left the order wide open with just awarding our son " reasonable and frequent visitation and contact" with myself and his sibling. For nine years i had to fight just to see my child. My coparent and his new spouse, who was 48 and with no children of her own, gor to decise what they fwlt was reasonable. We'd go months with no contact...and when wed get in front of the judge, nothing would be done.
That's a bad order. "Reasonable and frequent" depends on a wide variety of factors, but ultimately "the best interests of the child." Nevertheless, the order should have set clear parameters, such as: Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday from 3:30 PM to 7:30 PM, etc. An order that only states "reasonable and frequent" is too ambiguous and lacks teeth for enforcement. Sorry to hear about your experience. That vague order set you up for issues and failure. Otherwise, I hope that your family are healthy and well!
@@505sanchez Says who???? Who's choice is it to take them to daycare, to take them to the doctor? Its not the judge, its not the attorney. Its the "parents" and unless your DNA is part of my daughter, no one and I mean no one will tell me what time sharing to have or what I need to do, or what day is best. its 50/50 and state needs to stay out of our lives
I'm not endorsing the court's preference -- just calling it how I've seen it over 14 years of trial practice. As a father of two young boys, I personally believe that the court should presume that 50-50 visitation best serves children. Best wishes to you and your family!
They want a primary parent that creates child support payments. Has nothing to do with the child. How do you stick one parent with all the custody and tell the other parent normally the father you get a visit on Friday - Sunday. That's makes you not a parent by definition. Then once the child gets older or faces alienation pushed by mom then the judges don't want to change the order. To keep the contract fulfilled.
Not really sure what you mean. However, I often write and talk about how you guys (i.e. the general public) re-elect the same judges over and over again. Remember: judges are elected officials. Therefore, rock the vote and make a change.
Difficult question indeed, so thank you for sharing this information. Children go through ages of 2 through 5 so fast and men who take parenting classes and understand the importance of bonding during this precious and tender time, that men asking for 2-3-2 or 3-4-3 parenting are trying to establish an access-precedent, knowing that they would rather not come back to court as it is expensive. Those (2-3-2 and 3-4-3) are forms of 50/50 and not talking about week on, week off, which would be too long for a toddler to preschool. Mothers or dads can use the imbalance as a power leverage and limit access to fathers or mothers unless an equal-access order is in place. Also, when parents are unmarried and have a new step-parent, the child can be confused as to who is their dad. Give equal access and THEN allow parents to work out the details to avoid power imbalances. Asking parents to figure it out during a breakup appears shortsighted in my opinion, and doesn't seem to work, as it does not account for psychology, mental states, envy, jealousy, contempt, and other real but ugly human natures. Even the judges and attorneys themselves recollect their own cases and challenges.
Preach! The family court system is far from perfect and has holes that can be exploited. I like your idea of shifting the burden to avoid power imbalances. I'm just describing the policy and system as I see it -- I'm not agreeing with it. I have a PhD friend that is the head of the Psychology's child development department. He was blown away when he saw/heard how judges decide timesharing for children under 5 --> with many thoughts and points similar to yours. With all this said, judge are elected officials. Rock the vote! I hear growing rumbles about the family court system. Despite those rumbles, the same judges are elected over and over and over again. How can you change policies and procedures with the same people running the show?
@@505sanchez your content is well received and very well appreciated, and I do understand our family law system is the way it is, imperfect but still a good system that can be improved. I also understand as a licensed attorney you are an official with ethical requirements to respect and uphold the integrity our judicial system, as must I and the other dads going through the process so no problem there. Thank you for providing your valuable content, how to navigate the system, including this thoughtful reply, as it gives me hope and reminds me to VOTE! I totally forgot that we vote some of the judge officials, in the first place. That might be a good video segment, on when the judges get voted in and at what point can we ask them these difficult questions about their philosophy of parenting. Wish me luck on my CA evidentiary hearing in two weeks and thank you Attorney Matthew Sanchez!
Man! 50/50 gives parents a break while going through a divorce, which is one of the most stressful things a person can go through Plus the child gets to bond with both parents and both parents get enough time to gain good parenting skills, you aren’t born with them
My ex doesn’t want to give me 50/50. I know her friends tell her not too and are coaching her through this. And she also wants my sons to bond with her sister more than they bond with me.
@davidjuarez7822 she is trying to isolate you from them. If she hasn't already, when you want to get your kid, she will send him to her sister house or somewhere else. Document everything.
I feel you. The decision is largely based on which parent was the child's primary caregiver before and after the separation. With that said, many men are far from happy with timesharing for children under 5. Best wishes!
Cmon folks!! These judges still need their pensions and extra money to send their kids to college. Of course they’ll never support 50/50 custody if they don’t have to
The family court system in Alabama is a disgrace fathers should have just as much of a right to their children as the mother, it’s their children too. To rape a father financially to the point he can’t appeal his case is despicable. The mothers get everything free while fathers sometimes are forced to live in their cars to get more than every other weekend with their own kids.
Really?? I have a 10 month old baby, the father barely met her four months ago when she was six months old. He put him on a step up plan, but this last hearing there is no stepping up. He made a bad, harsh crule temporary ordero 50/50! I have been the primary caregiver, and he still granted that. Can you please help and explain this.. Thank you
There are many different factors at play. The big factors are the state, county, courthouse, judge, and case facts. In Albuquerque, NM that ruling would be highly unusual and would suggest very unique case facts.
That's highly unusual. I would be shocked if that ruling came from an Albuquerque family court judge. Results can vary from courthouse to courthouse -- and county to county. I'd be interested to know the city and state that the ruling came from.
1. The constitution says you have an unalienable right to raise your offspring without interference from the government. 2. There is a presumption of 50/50 custody is in the BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD unless one parent is PROVED as unfit (abuse, neglect, abandonment, or domestic violence) 3. All states Best interest of the child FACTORS point to 50/50. Look it up. 4. I don't "visit" my child, I PARENT my child. Change the court's verbiage from "visitation" to PARENTING TIME. Change the court's verbiage from "respondent" to FATHER. So on, and so forth... It doesn't matter what the court thinks. Argue what the law says. Then make the judge state on the record the findings of facts based on the totality of the circumstances and the court's conclusion of LAW.
As a father I picked my children up from kindergarten and then
Picked them up from school
I was primarily the caregiver
But when we split I as a man was perceived as a secondary caregiver
Lost everything
As a father of two young boys, I am sorry to hear it. Unfortunately, the family court system is far from perfect. There are many holes in the system. At times, these holes can be exploited -- especially regarding fathers with young children. With that said, I hope that you and your family are healthy and well. Best wishes!
Same happen to me. I had a biz that let me stay at home, raised them for 4 years. Sexist system. 3 year on legal battle my children keep saying they want to spend time with me
Thank you for sharing that insight. The question becomes: are judges doing an intelligent thing by not issuing 50/50 for infants and toddlers? When our son was 3 years old and we were mediating, the mediator was a child psychologist. He specifically told us that a child between 0 to 4 years old should not go more than 3, or maybe 4, days without seeing the other parent....that was harmful for the child psychologically. Based on that analysis, I concluded that judges are acting in the worst interests of children when they make a lopsided custody decision for infants and toddlers. And let's remember that child psychologists have to deal with the ramifications of bad custody decisions for children...While judges do not have any ramifications
Preach! One of my friends has a PhD in child development and is the head of the department. I had him review ABQ family court's suggested visitation guidelines. My friend and his colleagues were BLOWN AWAY when they saw the suggested guidelines. His comments were in line with yours above. Part of the problem is that family court judges are all powerful. They decide what best serves a child. In almost 15 years of practicing family law I've never seen or heard of an attorney successfully overturning a judge's best interest of the child, visitation decision through appeal. The court of appeals hates dealing with family law issues and basically defers to to the judge. Judges know this. Judges also know that almost no parent has the money to go through the expensive court process and then an appeal process. It's simply too expensive. Appealing a family court judge's best interest decision is like banging your head against a nail studded wall. On top of that, even if you win the appeal guess who the case gets sent back to -- the same judge that decided the issue! So judges basically have all power. You know what they say about absolute power. Anyways, happy Father's Day and best wishes to you and your children!
@@505sanchez Thanks for your insight into the appeals process in New Mexico. My experience in my state was totally different. During my custody trial, I read hundreds of child custody and child support decisions by the Appellate Courts. My general conclusion was: A) The lower courts exist to rubberstamp the mother, regardless of the best interest factors...and B) when a custody decision is appealed, the appellate courts exist to apply intelligent thought, and review the best interests of the child and they often overturn the judge. That conclusion was not true 100% of the time, but very, very often. One day I will pull all of these decisions, and methodically show how the lower courts actively ignore the guidance of the Appellate Courts.
Also based on my Appellate case reviews, I weaponized everything I learned from the Court of Appeals, and used it all to shut down my judge and her biased opinions. That was a central part of the reason why I was awarded custody. Basically, I stood in the shoes of the Appellate Court while providing my testimony and evidence. I spoke the way a Court of Appeals judge would speak. With that mindset, I steamrolled my judge and all of the lawyers in the room.
And I am sharing this because it's important for society-at-large to understand that judges are not all-powerful and there are ways to cut them off at the knees.
Happy Father's Day to you as well!!
That's awesome to hear! We may be comparing apples to oranges, based on the courthouse, county, and judge. I'd be very interested to know your courthouse, county, and judge. The court process can vary wildly within the same courthouse, universes apart from one county to the next -- and completely different law from one state to the next. With that said, it's awesome to hear that you were successful appealing your judge. That truly is exceptional and rare in New Mexico! Cheers!
@@505sanchezyour a lawyer? Let's educate people. Judges aren't all powerful.. but they take that stance. WE THE PEOPLE.. and everyone is equal under the law. Name the creative ways based in law to prevent these nothing strangers from destroying lives and possibly endangering in certain situations..like mine. Creative ways to call out jurisdiction. The fact our rights are god given and we have rights to self determination. Also, the courts have no idea what's best interest..no stranger does..that's idealism at best. Bring a suit against that judge and have them removed. The thing about all caps name I believe is true, as a means for jurisdiction and authority. Let's stop giving up, and use any and all codes, statutes, to go e the parent all the rights. We know child support is unlawful and corrupt..but no one tells the client or helps. The system is incestuous and corrupt. Lawyers don't fight back..stand up. Call out non sense. Afraid of sanctions, disbarment..be a McKenzie friend and actually help. Corpus juris secundum states the client is last on the list of who the hired lawyer looks out for. Stop screwing with men and families..and fight these judges. If nothing else, call out conflict of interest due to financial interest. The bonds..the account they access..the c.r.i.s fund? It's improper and conflict. Let's do better.. kids lives are ruined. And mother's aren't best..look at society and all the studies. But it's a money business. Clearfield doctrine states courts are reduced to corporations operating in commerce..they have no actual authority. Be a godly human..we operate under gods laws, not these codes derived from roman law. We are free creations. Our rights are god given. But cowards won't stand up against it. It's paydays..large retainers.. and crap humans operating in a job capacity while having relations with all the players in court. It's disqusting.
But frequent switching is also bad for the child. It’s a lose lose situation. We had 50/50 and the frequent switching ended up causing serious anxiety issues that our son struggles with 10 years later.
1. The constitution says you have an unalienable right to raise your offspring without interference from the government.
2. There is a presumption of 50/50 custody is in the BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD unless one parent is PROVED as unfit (abuse, neglect, abandonment, or domestic violence)
3. All states Best interest of the child FACTORS point to 50/50. Look it up.
4. I don't "visit" my child, I PARENT my child.
Change the court's verbiage from "visitation" to PARENTING TIME.
Chane the court's verbiage from "respondent" to FATHER.
So on, and so forth...
It doesn't matter what the court likes. Argue what the law says.
Then make the judge state on the record the findings of facts based on the totality of the circumstances and the court's conclusion of LAW.
Thanks for the comment and thought! I whole heartedly agree that judges SHOULD presume that 50-50 timesharing is in a child's best interests.
I have ZERO interest to ever be a judge -- or family court judge -- but if I did, my platform would be to bring fairness to the system by promoting 50-50 visitation.
Alas, this is not how most cases play out in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
It's also important to note that the end result GREATLY depends on the courthouse, jurisdiction, and judge that one's case is in. Results can vary greatly with two judges in the same courthouse -- much less two judges in different jurisdictions and counties -- much less courts in different states.
I've heard that some states do presume that 50-50 visitation is in a child's best interests. Cheers to those states.
With that said, in Albuquerque, the judges tend to rely on the "Suggested Guidelines," created by the court. These Guidelines do not believe that 50-50 best serves young children (children under 5). Consequently, the court almost never will grant 50-50 timesharing when the decision is put into their hands. This has been my personal observation for over 14 years of practice.
I am not agreeing with this fact, or tendency. I am merely relaying the fact.
New Mexico law does presume that a child is best served by joint legal custody. With that said, joint legal custody relates to decision making ability, whereas physical custody relates to visitation and timesharing. Physical custody is always based on a child's best interests. In other words, there is no presumption that children -- or young children for that matter -- are best served by 50-50.
Ultimately, the judge determines the child's best interests -- and appealing that decision is VERY difficult.
In any event, I hope that you and your family are healthy and well!
Yes because it brings down their revenue in court
There's an increasing number of people dissatisfied with family court judges. Remember --> judges are elected officials. Rock the vote and make a change. Best wishes!
That is the number one key it's about the money
And this insight right here is why American family law is a dumpsterfire. Men always get nailed over this stuff and are easily alienated by mother based on this right here.
Preach! Your words echo the growing sentiment of men that post comments. To date, I've never had a Father/Man praise the family court system. The system certainly has holes and issues. With that said --> judges are elected officials. Therefore, rock the vote!
the 1st things that parents must to look are the wellness of the children...
but father and mother are fighting for money for that and other reasons are in court...
irrational parents generally is the problem...
Are there clauses that automatically change custody to 50/50 when the child gets to be older than six and how can the layman bring this to light without having to pay $thousands of dollars to initiate the court action slash request? Inquiring minds want to know.
All men have equal rights and right to association with their children. You or a judge or a coram non judice do not get to change the laws and tell anyone what to do with their kids unless they are causing harm or 100% unfit. You attorneys are all in on it and have a contract with child support. You get grants and incentives. The deception and the lies make the children grow up in broken homes so they can break the law and pay out more money on the bonds you steal from them.
Thanks for your thoughts. Best wishes to you and your family!
1. The constitution says you have an unalienable right to raise your offspring without interference from the government.
2. There is a presumption of 50/50 custody is in the BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD unless one parent is PROVED as unfit (abuse, neglect, abandonment, or domestic violence)
3. All states Best interest of the child FACTORS point to 50/50. Look it up.
4. I don't "visit" my child, I PARENT my child.
Change the court's verbiage from "visitation" to PARENTING TIME.
Change the court's verbiage from "respondent" to FATHER.
So on, and so forth...
It doesn't matter what the court thinks. Argue what the law says.
Then make the judge state on the record the findings of facts based on the totality of the circumstances and the court's conclusion of LAW.
@siraajmadyun6681 Excatly, we are not stupid. You don't visit with your own kids. This is a trip to the beach. We have a legal right to custody of our kids. Some men are starting to realize the court is filling a contract with child support enforcement. Right in the federal contract, it says all government agencies involved share the money also includes custody and visitation.
@Mrjones-ed7hi
It's so corrupt that it's almost unbelievable.
The Constitution which is the LAW OF THE LAND and nothing trumps the Constitution says any dispute over $20 you have a right to trial by your peers/jury. Wonder why family court isn't consistent with the Constitution....
Also, there are laws against locking people up for non payment of child support. Look up the Dear Colleague Letter from the Department of Justice. You are also supposed to get free representation by an attorney if they are threatening to put you in jail for non payment. Then even before that, they are supposed to have a hearing and gather evidence of your ability to pay and see if the person is "willfully not paying".
Lastly, the contract is between the mother and the state, not the Father. This is illegal to make a Father pay a debt he didn't sign up for. Its indentured servitude. Slavery.
Then the interest on Child Support, how the state can make you pay interest on your offspring is crazy....
The mother gets state assistance and child support which keeps the debt going.
It's corrupt beyond measure.
Child support funds judges retirement!!
Interesting perspective.
@@505sanchez Its not a concept, it states it in the statutes. They get all kind of grants and incentives. The only perspective is, your lies have become truth to the mothers and its deemed unconstitutional and fraud. We will fight til DOR goes away, promise you that.
Title IV-D! Under Title IV-D, the federal government reimburses states $2 for every $3 the state spends on eligible program costs for providing child. support services
Another reason that this is flawed thinking by judges is because the needs of a child is different from the ages of 1 to 4, VS 5 to 11, VS 12 to 18 years old. And both parents have different skill sets incapable of meeting those needs at different ages. Therefore, it is extremely myopic to think that giving one parent custody from the ages of 1 to 4 means that same parent should be the primary custodial parent from the ages of 5 to 18.
Furthermore, the parent more likely to get custody when a kid is 1 to 4 years old is the parent that is unemployed and available. But being unemployed and available does not make you a better parent. The analysis has to go so much deeper.
Absolutely. I especially agree with the point about the unemployed parent. In a bit of a twist, in one case the other side was an unemployed father with a laundry list of issues (you name it -- he had that issue). Nevertheless, because he was the "primary caregiver" the case was a complete curveball. I certainly don't agree with this tendency -- I'm calling the tendency as I see it.
My twins got given 50:50. Before they turned 1🙄 they’re turning 2 and dad doesn’t even pick them up it’s just a control tactic and the family courts just fail to do wats best
Consider filing a Motion to Modify. Sadly, not many praises about family court with my comments. However, I hope that you and your family are healthy and well!
Kentucky made 50 50 the default. That is the go to here. Usually the sharing looks like this. Parent A 4 days on Parent B3 days on Parent A 3 days on Parent B 4 days on. As long as you can get the children to school then it is split equally. Child support is only ordered if there is a difference in incomes in each household and the parent ordered to pay will pay for half of the month versus the whole month. There has to be a reason for a parent to not get equal timeshare then they will have the regular every other weekend visitation. They changed the laws around 2018.
Preach! Ironically, I just got back from the Kentucky Derby last night. Needless to say, there are HUGE differences between Kentucky and Albuquerque in virtually every way. Anyways, best wishes to you and your family!
Well how does one prove the mother is alienating the child, which is the whole reason the father hasn't been the primary. What if the mother takes the child and refuses visitation from the father and getting tied up in court, what then?
Parental alienation is a legal conclusion. Accordingly, the court usually only finds that parental alienation is present if an appointed expert, or attorney that represents the child (Guardian ad Litem), conducts an investigation and makes a finding of alienation.
my case.... the alienation is coming from the father....
you can record the child when is showing the alienation...
the lawyers only make bigger the problem between the parents.. only they want money... not the child!
@ladyro4525 the longer the case goes on the more money the attorney can make. All of this has nothing to do with the child.
Late comment but as a young/teenager child with divorced parents, what would be the legal age if the child would like to go live with a parent PERMANENTLY
In New Mexico, the law is that at age 14 the courts must consider the child's desires. Nevertheless, the court must only consider the child's desires -- and the child's desires are one factor among many. By policy, from my experience, Albuquerque courts usually allow a child that is 16 to "decide with their feet" with whom they want to live. Best wishes!
Lol. Well you should take a look at here in Florida
I'm sure there are BIG differences between New Mexico and Florida child custody laws and policies. There certainly are HUGE differences in almost every other respect (politics, geography, weather, culture, population, etc.).
Florida undoubtedly will also play a much bigger role in the upcoming presidential election than New Mexico.
With that said, best wishes to you and your family in Florida!
In CA, the default is 50/50 regardless of age.
Cheers to CA! That certainly is not the case in NM. Best wishes to you and your family!
visitations can be different for every case... 14% visitation for parent without custody and joined legal custody... physical custody for one parent... factor: place where the parents live, Scholes age, works from the parents, etc, who is better for provide stability for the child, etc)
1. The constitution says you have an unalienable right to raise your offspring without interference from the government.
2. There is a presumption of 50/50 custody is in the BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD unless one parent is PROVED as unfit (abuse, neglect, abandonment, or domestic violence)
3. All states Best interest of the child FACTORS point to 50/50. Look it up.
4. I don't "visit" my child, I PARENT my child.
Change the court's verbiage from "visitation" to PARENTING TIME.
Change the court's verbiage from "respondent" to FATHER.
So on, and so forth...
It doesn't matter what the court thinks. Argue what the law says.
Then make the judge state on the record the findings of facts based on the totality of the circumstances and the court's conclusion of LAW.
You’re high as a kite! 10000 cases to every 1 50/50 custody time in CA. You obviously havnt been through the system, that or the mother was smoking crack and in and out of jail.
@@roberts735 I got divorced in CA. Default is 50/50 unless one parent can prove the other should have less time.
We got 50/50 when my son was 2
Awesome! I'd lean towards 50-50 if I was a judge. Also, from my experience, judges in small towns tend to be open to 50-50 at a young age. With that said, each case and county varies. The video is geared towards parents in Albuquerque/Bernalillo County/2nd Judicial District Court.
Also, the court will almost always approve 50-50 by stipulation.
Cheers and best wishes to you and your family!
It’s 50/50 by standard in Kentucky buddy
Good for Kentucky. Huge difference between Kentucky and New Mexico. Best wishes to you and your family!
How about in California
Speak with an experienced CA family law attorney. Best wishes to you and your family!
…ive been told by attorneys it is the most common thing to get 50-50, but the timing of the judge of him granting this was abusive discretion.
In Albuquerque, NM it is highly unusual for a judge to award 50-50 timesharing with a child under five. This is especially true if one parent has not established a bonding attachment with the other parent. With that said, this can change if there are highly unusual facts that impact the child's best interests.
Its a scam!!
As a father of two young boys, I definitely feel your frustration!
@@505sanchez Then be the attorney that exposes the fraud in child support.
While I agree that a baby should be with there mothers 3 and under, what the judicial system needs to consider is that times have changed. 50/50 should be the default if both parents have a pretty clean record as those rules created in 1980s need to be revamped for various reasons. Issue is the family law attorneys and the courts won’t do that which is actually the best interest of the child to have have equal time with both parent because money is more important to everyone instead of doing what’s right for the child.
Preach. Back in the day there was a legal principle called the Tender Years Doctrine. This basically said that children young children (under 5/6) are best served by being primarily raised by the mother, unless she is unfit to care for the children.
The last time that this doctrine was cited in case law, in New Mexico, was 1962. Nevertheless, the ghost of this doctrine still hovers around NM family courts. Consequently, the reality is that most of the times, mother get primary custody with children under 5/6.
I feel your frustration. I have two children under 5. If my wife divorced me, realistically, the only way that I'm getting 50-50 is if she agrees. If not, no chance in ABQ.
@@505sanchez Certain states have already i believe adapter 50/50. To give the child more time with one parent than the other is absurd. Times have certainly evolved and so should the system. Women use to get these in the 80s and prior because at that time women were stay at home moms and also only the men worked. That’s how the 20% of your paycheck came to be. But alot of women make there own money and more now and the system should reflect that. I guarantee you alot of women would turn over the child to there dads if the system was built to give the child without any compensation if child support. What’s
more interesting is the name child support is the support of the child, but no custodial parents are ordered by the courts to report if in fact the support was used for the child. Again, alot of issues in this system.
But what is "reasonable and fequent".. in ny case, which i was not not awarded primary, the judge left the order wide open with just awarding our son " reasonable and frequent visitation and contact" with myself and his sibling. For nine years i had to fight just to see my child. My coparent and his new spouse, who was 48 and with no children of her own, gor to decise what they fwlt was reasonable. We'd go months with no contact...and when wed get in front of the judge, nothing would be done.
That's a bad order. "Reasonable and frequent" depends on a wide variety of factors, but ultimately "the best interests of the child." Nevertheless, the order should have set clear parameters, such as: Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday from 3:30 PM to 7:30 PM, etc. An order that only states "reasonable and frequent" is too ambiguous and lacks teeth for enforcement. Sorry to hear about your experience. That vague order set you up for issues and failure. Otherwise, I hope that your family are healthy and well!
@@505sanchez Says who???? Who's choice is it to take them to daycare, to take them to the doctor? Its not the judge, its not the attorney. Its the "parents" and unless your DNA is part of my daughter, no one and I mean no one will tell me what time sharing to have or what I need to do, or what day is best. its 50/50 and state needs to stay out of our lives
You paying child support? If you are it's not going to change. But keep putting paperwork to back in court or try to get that judge removed.
As a father I just wanted to spend time with my two daughters, fighting for 15 years and nothing but court thought my money was enough! 100-0 Dad
As a father of two, I am sorry to hear that. Best wishes and I hope that you are healthy and well!
And that is the best interest of child who whan to see both parents?
Is court for the child rights or???
I'm not endorsing the court's preference -- just calling it how I've seen it over 14 years of trial practice. As a father of two young boys, I personally believe that the court should presume that 50-50 visitation best serves children. Best wishes to you and your family!
They want a primary parent that creates child support payments. Has nothing to do with the child. How do you stick one parent with all the custody and tell the other parent normally the father you get a visit on Friday - Sunday. That's makes you not a parent by definition. Then once the child gets older or faces alienation pushed by mom then the judges don't want to change the order. To keep the contract fulfilled.
Mother or a judge creates father’s rights.
Mother by mutual agreement, or judge by "best interests of the child."
Wv made a law an now they have to do that
Cheers to WV! Best wishes from NM.
Why dont you giys talk about how these administrative judges are contracted buy the css. Money that goes into the retitrement coffers of the judges.
Not really sure what you mean. However, I often write and talk about how you guys (i.e. the general public) re-elect the same judges over and over again. Remember: judges are elected officials. Therefore, rock the vote and make a change.
@@505sanchezif your a lawyer how are you going to act like you don't know what the social security act says?
F the judges
Judges are elected officials. Put down the key board and pick up an election ballot. Rock the vote and make a change.
@@505sanchez they all corrupt no need to vot
Disgusting. - dad
I feel your frustration. - dad
Difficult question indeed, so thank you for sharing this information.
Children go through ages of 2 through 5 so fast and men who take parenting classes and understand the importance of bonding during this precious and tender time, that men asking for 2-3-2 or 3-4-3 parenting are trying to establish an access-precedent, knowing that they would rather not come back to court as it is expensive. Those (2-3-2 and 3-4-3) are forms of 50/50 and not talking about week on, week off, which would be too long for a toddler to preschool.
Mothers or dads can use the imbalance as a power leverage and limit access to fathers or mothers unless an equal-access order is in place.
Also, when parents are unmarried and have a new step-parent, the child can be confused as to who is their dad.
Give equal access and THEN allow parents to work out the details to avoid power imbalances.
Asking parents to figure it out during a breakup appears shortsighted in my opinion, and doesn't seem to work, as it does not account for psychology, mental states, envy, jealousy, contempt, and other real but ugly human natures.
Even the judges and attorneys themselves recollect their own cases and challenges.
Preach!
The family court system is far from perfect and has holes that can be exploited. I like your idea of shifting the burden to avoid power imbalances. I'm just describing the policy and system as I see it -- I'm not agreeing with it.
I have a PhD friend that is the head of the Psychology's child development department. He was blown away when he saw/heard how judges decide timesharing for children under 5 --> with many thoughts and points similar to yours.
With all this said, judge are elected officials. Rock the vote! I hear growing rumbles about the family court system. Despite those rumbles, the same judges are elected over and over and over again. How can you change policies and procedures with the same people running the show?
@@505sanchez your content is well received and very well appreciated, and I do understand our family law system is the way it is, imperfect but still a good system that can be improved. I also understand as a licensed attorney you are an official with ethical requirements to respect and uphold the integrity our judicial system, as must I and the other dads going through the process so no problem there. Thank you for providing your valuable content, how to navigate the system, including this thoughtful reply, as it gives me hope and reminds me to VOTE! I totally forgot that we vote some of the judge officials, in the first place. That might be a good video segment, on when the judges get voted in and at what point can we ask them these difficult questions about their philosophy of parenting. Wish me luck on my CA evidentiary hearing in two weeks and thank you Attorney Matthew Sanchez!
Man! 50/50 gives parents a break while going through a divorce, which is one of the most stressful things a person can go through
Plus the child gets to bond with both parents and both parents get enough time to gain good parenting skills, you aren’t born with them
Sadly, some parents don't see things the same, reasonable way as you. I'm sure you're a great mother. Best wishes!
Because the women want to hold on the child it comes with financial benefits.
My ex doesn’t want to give me 50/50. I know her friends tell her not too and are coaching her through this. And she also wants my sons to bond with her sister more than they bond with me.
@davidjuarez7822 she is trying to isolate you from them. If she hasn't already, when you want to get your kid, she will send him to her sister house or somewhere else. Document everything.
Thats pretty sexist
I feel you. The decision is largely based on which parent was the child's primary caregiver before and after the separation. With that said, many men are far from happy with timesharing for children under 5. Best wishes!
@@505sanchez I was the primary care giver but I dont have a vagina.
Cmon folks!! These judges still need their pensions and extra money to send their kids to college. Of course they’ll never support 50/50 custody if they don’t have to
Preach!
505sanchez have you ever had your child taken away from you?
No. My heart goes out to any parents that have. Best wishes!
The family court system in Alabama is a disgrace fathers should have just as much of a right to their children as the mother, it’s their children too. To rape a father financially to the point he can’t appeal his case is despicable. The mothers get everything free while fathers sometimes are forced to live in their cars to get more than every other weekend with their own kids.
Sorry to hear it. I hope that you and your family are healthy and well!
Anything less that 50% isn't frequent. Ask any woman with 60/40. Lol
Calling it as I've seen it. Cheers to Florida!
Not when they are doing g illegal and u ethical practices
Consider this: Judges are elected officials. Rock the vote and be the change!
Really?? I have a 10 month old baby, the father barely met her four months ago when she was six months old. He put him on a step up plan, but this last hearing there is no stepping up. He made a bad, harsh crule temporary ordero 50/50!
I have been the primary caregiver, and he still granted that. Can you please help and explain this..
Thank you
There are many different factors at play. The big factors are the state, county, courthouse, judge, and case facts. In Albuquerque, NM that ruling would be highly unusual and would suggest very unique case facts.
I have a 2 year old now and dad want to keep the child Fri-Sun and he has not met her yet!!
That's highly unusual. I would be shocked if that ruling came from an Albuquerque family court judge. Results can vary from courthouse to courthouse -- and county to county.
I'd be interested to know the city and state that the ruling came from.
50/50 is ridiculous for any child under 12
There certainly are strong opinions on both sides of the argument. Cheers!
sto lying
Best wishes to you and your family!
1. The constitution says you have an unalienable right to raise your offspring without interference from the government.
2. There is a presumption of 50/50 custody is in the BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD unless one parent is PROVED as unfit (abuse, neglect, abandonment, or domestic violence)
3. All states Best interest of the child FACTORS point to 50/50. Look it up.
4. I don't "visit" my child, I PARENT my child.
Change the court's verbiage from "visitation" to PARENTING TIME.
Change the court's verbiage from "respondent" to FATHER.
So on, and so forth...
It doesn't matter what the court thinks. Argue what the law says.
Then make the judge state on the record the findings of facts based on the totality of the circumstances and the court's conclusion of LAW.