According to the facts discussed on the court’s decision, a mother sought to relocate with a child to another state. The mother and father, who never married, separated shortly after the child’s birth. The family court previously granted the mother temporary custody and physical possession, and it granted the father visitation. After being furloughed from her job, the mother relocated to Massachusetts to accept a new position and lived with her parents. As a result, the mother filed an emergency motion to permanently relocate to Massachusetts with the child. Later, she accepted a third position close to her parents’ home, which was nearly two hours from the father’s Rhode Island town. In her motion, she explained that she was previously paying $2,000 in rent in Rhode Island, commuting almost two hours to work, and working long hours. In Massachusetts, she could stay with her parents, reduce her living expenses, and rely on her parents for childcare assistance. The magistrate judge granted the mother’s motion to permanently relocate to Massachusetts, finding that relocation was in the best interests of the child. The father appealed to family court, which affirmed the decision. The father then appealed to the Rhode Island Supreme Court.

On appeal, the father argued that the primary reason the mother asserted for her relocation, her new job, was no longer valid since she accepted a third position. Therefore, the father suggested that the mother should have looked for new employment and housing closer to his Rhode Island home. The Rhode Island Supreme Court disagreed. The court concluded that the family court properly found no error with the magistrate’s decision. In reaching its conclusion, the court cited the mother’s desire to be closer to her parents and save costs on rent and childcare. The magistrate appropriately recognized the mother’s desire to prioritize her son’s emotion well-being and compensated for a loss of income to spend more time with him. By contrast, the father testified that he had no family in Rhode Island who provided additional daycare for the child. While the father offered the mother financial support and intended to change his work schedule to be a primary caregiver, the magistrate properly recognized that the mother had taken more action to make herself available for her son. Finally, the court noted that the family court record reflects the magistrate’s conclusion that the father’s relationship with his son will continue. Specifically, it explained that the mother was willing to make arrangements around the father’s work schedule and keep the father informed about the child’s medical appointments. Therefore, the court found that the family court did not err in affirming the magistrate’s decision to grant the relocation order based on the child’s best interests.

Do You Plan to Relocate with Your Child?

Whether you receive a better job offer or need to be closer to family, you may wish to file a motion to relocate in court. However, your child’s other parent may object to the order. In response, you may need to present evidence that relocation is in your child’s best interests. If you are seeking to relocate with your child, contact the experienced Rhode Island family law attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo. Our attorneys have successfully represented clients in relocation cases. Through our skilled advocacy, we can help make the strongest argument to the judge that relocation is in your child’s best interests. To schedule a free consultation with an experienced Rhode Island family law attorney, call us at 401-300-4055.

The trial court granted DCYF’s petition to terminate the mother’s parental rights. Specifically, DCYF had sufficiently proven that it offered the mother services to correct the situation that led to the separation, and the mother was unfit based on her “seriously detrimental” mental health symptoms. On appeal, the mother argued that the district court erred in finding that the DCYF made reasonable efforts at reunification when she was hospitalized. She further alleged that DCYF failed to offer services reasonably designed to address her mental health needs. However, the Rhode Island Supreme Court court rejected these claims.

The Reasonable Efforts Standard

As the court explained, DCYF must prove by clear and convincing evidence that it made “reasonable efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship” before a court can terminate a parent’s rights. Rhode Island courts must determine the reasonableness of DCYF’s efforts based on the particular facts of each case.

The Court’s Decision

Ultimately, the court found that the district judge did not err in determining the DCYF made reasonable efforts at reunification. DCYF made ongoing requests for the mother to sign releases, which the mother refused. Then, her hospitalization further impeded DCYF’s ability to communicate with her. Additionally, during her hospitalization, visitations with her child became virtually impossible because there was no opportunity for supervised visitation. Because DCYF made ongoing attempts to communicate despite these setbacks, the agency’s efforts were reasonable, given the unfortunate circumstances.

Provision of Mental Health Services

The court also rejected the mother’s argument that DCYF failed to employ “reasonable efforts” because it did not provide services during her hospitalization. As the court explained, the law does not require DCYF to act as the sole service provider to the parents of children in DCYF custody. Rather, DCYF can offer services, or the parent can receive them elsewhere. Because the mother was receiving mental health services at the hospital, DCYF had no obligation to provide additional services. The court also credited caseworkers’ testimony that the hospital staff would not acknowledge the mother’s presence at the hospital, meaning the DCYF would have to go to extraordinary lengths to work with staff to provide services. DCYF thereby met its burden of proving that the mother received services to correct the situation that led to her child’s removal. Accordingly, the high court upheld the district court’s decision to terminate the mother’s parental rights.

Skilled Legal Services for Parents in Custody Proceedings

If you or a loved one is undergoing a custody or termination proceeding, it is crucial that you have an experienced Rhode Island family law attorney to represent you. Trial judges may unfairly credit DCFY’s claims unless a skilled representative can advocate for your side of the story. The attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo possess years of experience navigating the complicated child welfare system to help reunite families. Through our compassionate representation, we will defend your right to maintain the care of your children. To schedule a free consultation and discuss your case, call us at 401-300-4055.

The appellant in the recently decided appeal is the father of a young child born in 2018. Based upon existing neglect and termination proceedings concerning the mother’s other children, the DCYF immediately opened a neglect case in regard to the child once they learned of the birth. As part of the neglect case, a case plan was developed to allow the father to demonstrate his fitness as a parent. The father and mother were no longer a couple when the neglect case was initiated, so the DCYF assigned individual case plans to each of the parents. The father, who allegedly admitted to selling drugs in the past to a DCYF-referred therapist, was instructed to abstain from drugs and alcohol and enter into substance abuse treatment with random drug screenings as part of the case plan.

According to the facts discussed in the appellate opinion, the father attempted to comply with many portions of the case plan, attending parenting classes and supervised visits with the child. The father did not, however, submit proof that he attended a substance abuse evaluation or provide drug screening results as expected. While the case plan was in effect, the father was arrested for possession of heroin and incarcerated. In response to his arrest and incarceration, the DCYF chose to pursue termination proceedings against the father. A trial was held on the matter, where the family court determined that the father was unfit to parent the child, that he was unlikely to become a fit parent in a reasonable amount of time, and that the child’s current placement in a foster home was healthy and likely to result in an adoption. Based on those findings, the family court entered an order terminating the father’s parental rights.

The father appealed the termination of his parental rights to the Rhode Island Supreme Court, arguing that the terms and conditions of his case plan were not clearly laid out and that he substantially complied with the case plan to demonstrate his fitness as a parent. The appellate court acknowledged that the father took action in compliance with the case plan and may have attempted to obtain substance abuse treatment and drug screenings, but he did not sufficiently comply with the case plan as a whole. The appellate court further found that the father’s subsequent arrest and conviction for a serious drug crime while participating in the case plan was a firm determiner as to his unfitness as a parent. As a result of the high court decision, the father’s parental rights will remain permanently terminated.

If you or a loved one has been confronted with a Rhode Island child welfare investigation or termination proceeding, the development of a case plan in conjunction with the DCYF is an important part of retaining your parental rights and regaining custody of your children. The knowledgeable family law and child welfare attorneys with Bilodeau Capalbo, LLP understand how to assist our clients in developing a reasonable case plan with DCYF, and we can ensure that your compliance with the plan is relayed to the family court. With our guidance and support, you can protect your parental rights and prevent the DCYF or courts from taking your children away. If you have questions about a Rhode Island family law issue, we’re here to help. Call us at 401-300-4055 for a free consultation.

The appellant in the recently decided appeal is the natural father of a nine-year-old boy who has been the subject of a DCYF investigation that was opened in 2018 as a result of the appellant reporting the child’s mother for neglect. As part of their investigation, the DCYF convinced the family court to temporarily place the child in the custody of his maternal grandmother. In late 2018, the DCYF created a case plan for the father to participate in to demonstrate his ability to properly care for the child as his primary custodian. The DCYF requested that the father attend substance abuse and mental health treatment, and participate in supervised visits through a parenting program. Although the father did attend some treatment appointments and scheduled visits, he ultimately abandoned the case plan.

In January 2020, the DCYF filed a petition to terminate the father’s parental rights and have the child permanently placed in the care of his grandmother. After a six day trial, the Family Court granted the DCYF petition, finding that the father was not fit to care for his son and that it was in the child’s best interests to be permanently placed in the custody of his maternal grandmother. The father appealed the Family court ruling, arguing that he was justified in abandoning the DCYF case plan, and that he was a fit father. The Supreme Court found that the findings of the lower court were valid, ruling that the father’s objections, while valid, were not sufficient to overcome the judgment of the family court. As a result of the appellate opinion, the father’s parental rights are permanently terminated.

Child welfare and termination proceedings are stressful, and undesired rulings can be permanent and devastating to a parent. The DCYF is notorious for treating parents arbitrarily, and individual case workers may make vastly different findings from each other, depending on their personal biases. Any parent facing a child welfare proceeding should seek competent legal counsel to assist them in maintaining custody of their child and protecting their parental rights. DCYF case workers and court-appointed psychologists should not simply be accepted and believed without further investigation. A qualified family law attorney can ensure that qualified experts offer testimony in each case, and prevent a DCYF claim from going off the rails.

If you or a loved one is facing a Rhode Island child welfare investigation or termination proceeding, it is essential to retain an experienced Rhode Island family law attorney early in the process to ensure your case proceeds fairly. The knowledgeable family law and child welfare attorneys with Bilodeau Capalbo, LLP understand how to assist our clients in convincing the courts to retain custody and parental rights of their children. With our guidance and support, you can protect your parental rights and get the DCYF and the courts off of your back. If you have questions about a Rhode Island family law issue, we’re here to help. Call us at 401-300-4055 for a free consultation.

Mediation is an officially sanctioned negotiation process where parties to a dispute can meet with a neutral third party to discuss the issues of their case and attempt to reach a resolution. Mediators may be attorneys, social workers, or even retired family court judges. The job of the mediator is to facilitate communication between the parties, while also offering advice as to how a court may rule on the contested issues. The goal of the mediation is to have the parties agree to an enforceable resolution of all or some of the issues in the case, to avoid a judge having to rule against one party or the other in an adversarial dispute.

Mediation has several benefits. Parties are more likely to accept and follow a family court order that is the result of mediation, because each party agreed to the order, and cannot claim that it was imposed upon them. Mediation is also generally more time efficient and less expensive than a resolution obtained through court proceedings and trial. Additionally, meditation can benefit families by facilitating face-to-face interaction between conflicted couples, which can lead to an improved co-parenting dynamic in the future.

Mediation in Rhode Island only includes the parties and the mediator, as attorneys are not allowed to be present. That said, it is helpful for mediating parties to have a competent Rhode Island family law attorney to advise them before and after the mediation. An attorney can help ensure that the agreement on paper reflects the understanding made in mediation. An order arising from a mediated agreement is not enforceable by the court until the court approves it. While most mediations resolve some of the outstanding issues in a divorce or custody case, the issues that are not resolved can be scheduled for trial. Even a partial mediation agreement can result in thousands of dollars in savings compared to pursuing all the issues through a trial.

Finding a Qualified Rhode Island Family Law Attorney

If you or a loved one is anticipating or going through a divorce or custody dispute in Rhode Island, deciding on an attorney can be an overwhelming task. The experienced Rhode Island family law attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo have helped resolve hundreds of custody and divorce cases, often helping our clients obtain favorable agreements through mediation. Whether your case is appropriate for mediation or not, we can help you decide how aggressively to pursue your case to get the desired results. Bilodeau Capalbo is a full-service Rhode Island family law firm, and we represent clients with family law issues statewide. Contact our offices today and schedule a free consultation by calling 401-300-4055.

The DCYF recently succeeded in denying a natural grandfather the opportunity for placement and adoption of his grandson, after the natural father was found to be an unsuitable caretaker. Based on criminal and civil investigations, the DCYF initiated proceedings by taking the minor child from his natural father’s custody and placing him in a temporary foster home. The child’s grandfather attempted to have the child placed with him, both temporarily, and on a permanent basis. Proceeding without an attorney, the grandfather attempted to apply with the DCYF to have the child placed with him, although he did not follow the exact procedures required to make the request, and it was denied.

Later, the natural father’s rights were definitively and permanently terminated, and the child was adopted to an unrelated family, against the grandfather’s objections. The grandfather appealed to a higher court to challenge the denial of his attempts to adopt the child, seeking a declaratory judgment that would affirm that he had been wronged by the DCYF. On appeal, the court found that the grandfather lost all basis to challenge any of the courts’ determination because the father lost his parental rights, and at that point, the grandfather had no rights to the child. This ruling was made in spite of the fact that the grandfather started requesting placement and adoption long before the father’s rights were terminated.

Contact a Rhode Island Family Law Attorney for Immediate Assistance

The courts’ draconian and apparently unfair rulings stem in part from Rhode Island law’s insistence on procedural adherence, even when it buts up against fairness or any best-interest analysis. Although it seems unfair, it is a simple fact that the grandfather would have been more likely to succeed at his attempts to care for and adopt the child if he had hired a knowledgeable Rhode Island family law attorney to represent him from the start. If you or a loved one is interested in adoption or facing parental termination proceedings, the stakes are extremely high, and one strategic mistake could permanently doom your attempts. Reach out to a qualified Rhode Island family law attorney who works with Bilodeau Capalbo, and you can be sure that your case will be handled properly. Our experienced family lawyers understand Rhode Island courts’ reasoning in adoption and termination matters, and we can persuasively make your case to the court from the get-go. At Bilodeau Capalbo, we represent clients in all types of Rhode Island family law cases, including adoptions, termination proceedings, divorces, and custody claims. Contact us today to schedule a free consultation with an experienced Rhode Island family lawyer by calling 401-300-4055.

According to the facts discussed in the appellate opinion, the plaintiff in the recently decided case is the father of a child that he shares with the defendant. The parties were never married, but after they broke up, the plaintiff sought court orders to allow him visitation and partial custody of his child. After a trial, the plaintiff was granted partial custody and visitation with the child. After the entry of the custody orders, the defendant has since filed a motion with the court asking her to be allowed to relocate to Florida with the child. Rhode Island law requires that relocation by one parent against the wishes of the other parent can only be permitted if a court determines that the relocation would be in the best interest of the child.

The defendant argued that relocating was in the best interest of the child because she was struggling to raise her children as a single mother (she had another child from a previous relationship), and her mother would be available to help in Florida. Additionally, she had been offered a job in Florida. The family court evaluated the parties’ arguments and denied the mother’s motion. Specifically, the family court judge found that the mother failed to demonstrate how the relocation would be in the child’s best interest.

The mother appealed the ruling to the Rhode Island Supreme Court, where the lower ruling was affirmed. The high court found that the family court had properly applied the law to the facts of this case, and accepted the ruling that the child’s best interest would be better served if the mother was not permitted to relocate with the child. As a result of the appellate ruling, the defendant will not be permitted to move with the child to Florida.

Are You Considering Moving Out of State with Your Child?

If you or a loved one has been given an opportunity to move out of the state with your child and pursue a better life, obtaining permission for the relocation can be an uphill battle. Without the consent of the other parent, Rhode Island courts are hesitant to allow the primary custodian to leave the state with the child without a compelling reason to do so. If you are looking to move, it is essential to have all your ducks in a row before asking the court for approval. The experienced Rhode Island family law attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo have successfully argued for relocation in the past, and with our advocacy, we can demonstrate to a court that your proposed move will be in the best interest of your child. Contact us today to schedule a free consultation with an experienced Rhode Island real estate attorney by calling 401-300-4055.

In a recent state Supreme Court decision, the court affirmed a family court order denying a mother’s motion to relocate with the parties’ child. In the case at hand, the parties shared joint custody of their child, with physical placement with the mother. The mother filed a motion to relocate with her child from Rhode Island to New Jersey, stating reasons associated with her employment and overall welfare and happiness. The father filed an objection to the mother’s motion and emphasized the need for shared parenting and the fact that the parties’ families were both located in Rhode Island. After hearing testimony from both parties, the trial justice denied the mother’s request to relocate and held that it would not be in the child’s best interest to relocate as the mother requested.

On appeal, the mother argued that the trial justice erred in denying her motion because they overlooked and misconceived evidence. The Supreme Court, however, ultimately affirmed the family court’s order denying the mother’s motion to relocate with the parties’ child. Although the mother cited an increase in financial circumstances due to new employment in New Jersey as a reason for relocating, this was undermined by the fact that the mother already makes an amount equal to what she would have made at her new job after relocating. The presence of the child’s maternal and paternal relatives in Rhode Island also played a role in affirming the Court’s decision.

When reviewing such cases, the Supreme Court of Rhode Island typically does not disturb the decisions made by a justice in the family court when it comes to custody and best interests of the child unless the justice abused their discretion. Generally, the trial justice’s decisions concerning custody and the best interests of the child are affirmed unless the factual findings involved overlooking or misconceiving material evidence, or the decision was clearly wrong.

In Rhode Island, when determining whether a requested change is in the best interests of a child, several factors must be weighed. These factors include (1) the wishes of the child’s parent or parents regarding the child’s custody, (2) the reasonable preference of the child, if the child has enough understanding and experience to express a preference, (3) the interaction and relationship of the child with the child’s parent, siblings, and other individuals or family members who may affect the child’s best interest, (4) the child’s adjustment to their home, school, and community, (5) the mental and physical health of everyone involved, (6) the stability of the child’s home environment, (7) the moral fitness of the parents, and (8) the willingness of each parent to facilitate a continued close and continuous relationship between the child and the other parent.

Do You Need a Rhode Island Family Law Attorney?

If you or someone you know is struggling with a Rhode Island child custody or family law case, contact the attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo for assistance. Our lawyers will provide you with the experience, support, and advocacy you need to navigate your claim with ease. To schedule a free consultation today, contact us at401-300-4055.

The plaintiff in the recently decided case is the father of a six-year-old boy who sought partial custody and visitation with the child from the defendant, the mother of the child. According to the facts discussed in the judicial opinion, the mother claimed throughout the proceedings that the father suffered from psychological issues and was not able to safely be with the child one-on-one. After a trial that lasted nearly two years, the family court ultimately awarded the parties joint custody of the child, with the mother as the primary caretaker, and the father having reasonable visitation. In spite of the court order, the mother continued to refuse the father meaningful parent time with the child alone, ultimately leading to the family court holding her in contempt.

The mother appealed both the family court’s judgment and the contempt order to the Rhode Island Supreme Court, arguing that the court’s judgment was erroneous. The Supreme Court upheld the lower courts rulings, noting and applying the factors that Rhode Island law considers when determining child custody: (1) the wishes of the child’s parents; (2) the reasonable preference of the child; (3) the interaction and relationship of the child to the parents; (4) the child’s adjustment to his or her home, school, and community; (5) the mental and physical health of the individuals involved; (6) the stability of the child’s home life; (7) the moral fitness of the parents; and (8) the willingness of each parent to facilitate a close relationship between the child and the other parent. Finding that the decision to give the father joint custody and reasonable parent time considered and properly applied the relevant factors, the high court affirmed the family court’s ruling.

Considering the issue of the mother’s contempt, the high court praised the father’s perseverance and grit in fighting for a relationship with his son, and condemned the mother’s behavior in attempting to cut the father out of the boy’s life. The mother’s decision to ignore the orders of the family court was seen as disrespectful, and would not be allowed without consequences. The family court’s finding of contempt and application of sanctions against the mother was therefore upheld

How to Effectively Pursue a Custody Case in Rhode Island

Custody cases and divorces can get ugly, and angry or emotional parents are often unwilling to cooperate without the full force of the courts in enforcing their orders. In the event of a difficult custody dispute, parents must consider retaining a skilled and effective Rhode Island family law attorney to advise and represent them and their case, in order to ensure their relationship with their children and protect the children’s well-being. The experienced Rhode Island divorce and custody attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo are dedicated to compassionately representing loving parents throughout their legal cases, and with our effective representation, you can be confident that the results of your case will be fair and in line with the law. Call us at 401-300-4055 to schedule a free consultation with a qualified Rhode Island family law attorney and discuss your case.

In the recently decided case, the parties were a married couple with children who sought a divorce in Rhode Island family court. The mother, who was awarded primary physical custody of the children, sought to relocate to Ohio to be near her family after the divorce. The father, who was awarded joint legal custody of the children, as well as visitation privileges, challenged the mother’s relocation because he wanted to be closer to the children. The family court denied the mother’s request, requiring her to remain in Rhode Island with the children. The mother appealed the ruling to the Rhode Island Supreme Court.

On appeal, the high court discussed the factors for awarding child custody used in Rhode Island. According to the opinion, the courts focus broadly on factors to make a decision concerning relocation that is in the best interests of the children. These factors include considering the nature and quality of the relationship between each parent and the children, the reasonable likelihood that the relocation would enhance the general quality of life, including economic and educational opportunities, for both the parent and the children. Additional factors to be considered include the feasibility of maintaining a relationship and suitable visitation between the non-relocating parent and the children and the existence of extended family and other support systems available to the child in both locations.

A family court is supposed to weigh all of these factors together and make a decision whether the relocation would be in the best interest of the children. The family court in the recently decided case made such findings, and determined that it would be better for the children to stay in Rhode Island, and the Rhode Island Supreme Court did not find there was an abuse of discretion in that decision. As a result of this ruling, the mother will not be permitted to move to Ohio with her children and will instead be required to stay in Rhode Island.

Answers to Questions or Concerns About a Rhode Island Custody Case

If you are involved in or anticipating a custody dispute arising from a Rhode Island divorce or parentage claim, it is important to have a qualified Rhode Island family law attorney by your side from the start of the proceedings. Family courts are given wide discretion to make decisions that can greatly impact the lives of you and your children, and obtaining quality representation will give you the best chance to make your case effectively to the court. The experienced family law attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo understand Rhode Island child custody law and can help you get the results you desire. Contact us at Bilodeau Capalbo at 401-300-4055 to schedule a consultation with a family law attorney today.

The appellant in the recently decided case is a Rhode Island father of three children who was divorced from the mother of the children in early 2014. As part of the divorce agreement, the father was granted partial custody of the children with the right to visitation. In 2017, the mother of the children sought to suspend the father’s visitation, in part because of alleged animal abuse that occurred in the presence of the children. After hearing from witnesses, including both parents and the couple’s children, a family court judge granted the mother’s request to suspend unsupervised visitation. The judge also ruled that the father must complete a mental-health evaluation and seek leave from the court before resuming unsupervised visits with his children.

The father was displeased with the family court’s decision and appealed the ruling. The appeal eventually reached the Rhode Island Supreme Court. The father, representing himself throughout the process, argued that the lower court abused its discretion when it ruled that his behavior was harmful to the children. Additionally, the father alleged that incident involving the alleged animal abuse never occurred, and that it was the result of “false memories” that were created with the encouragement of the children’s mother and their maternal grandparents.

The Rhode Island Supreme Court rejected the father’s claims without allowing oral argument. In so doing, the court noted that broad discretion is given to family court judges in Rhode Island divorce and custody cases. The court explained that the record below contained adequate evidence to support all of that judge’s rulings. As a result of the recent decision, the appellant will be unable to resume unsupervised visits with his children until he submits to a mental health evaluation.

Are you Involved in a Rhode Island Custody Dispute?

Rhode Island family law judges are given broad discretion to determine custody and visitation issues in divorces and custody disputes, and it is important for parties to have knowledgeable counsel on their side throughout the process. The skilled Rhode Island family law attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC, have the necessary experience and judgment to help our clients get the results they want and deserve. Whether you are seeking a divorce or involved in a custody dispute with a former partner, our attorneys can advise and represent you zealously throughout the process. Contact a Rhode Island divorce attorney today to see how we can help. To schedule a free consultation to discuss your case with an attorney at Bilodeau Capalbo, contact our office at 401-300-4055. You can also contact us online.

The Facts of the Case

According to the court’s opinion, the plaintiff’s daughter was married to the defendant. The couple had two children. The couple eventually filed for divorce, but while the divorce was pending the plaintiff was shot and killed by law enforcement in a bank robbery.

Initially, the plaintiff maintained a good relationship with the defendant, taking his side over her daughters in the divorce. After the plaintiff’s daughter died, the plaintiff helped the defendant with child-care, because the plaintiff worked. However, the defendant noticed that after visits with the plaintiff, his children would come back with bags under their eyes, diarrhea, and symptoms of being sick. The children eventually started to exhibit behavioral problems at school, most notably after visits with the plaintiff.

On one occasion, the defendant recalled his children coming home terribly upset after a visit at the plaintiff’s home. During that visit, the plaintiff had shown the children their mother’s ashes and sorted through some of her old belongings. One of the children began to have nightmares, and also needed to see the school nurse when his heartbeat reached 200 beats per minute.

When the children got a little older, the defendant started to let them decide if they wanted to go over to the plaintiff’s home. The children never wanted to go, and the defendant stopped answering the plaintiff’s calls. The plaintiff later filed this petition seeking court-ordered visitation.

The Court’s Opinion

The court began its analysis by noting that Rhode Island law allows for a court to order grandparent visitation. A grandparent seeking visitation must also show:

• that visitation is in the best interest of the child;
• that the grandparent is a fit and proper person to have visitation;
• that the grandparent has tried to see the child in the 30 days immediately preceding the filing of the petition;
• that there is no other way to see the grandchildren without a court order; and
• that the grandparent presented clear and convincing evidence rebutting the presumption that the parent’s decision to refuse the grandparent visitation with the grandchild was reasonable.

Here, the court noted that there was no dispute that the defendant was a fit parent. Thus, the court explained that his decisions regarding his children were entitled to deference. The court determined that the plaintiff failed to overcome the presumption that the defendant’s choice to prevent visitation were reasonable. The court also found that the plaintiff was not a “fit and proper” person to have visitation. Thus, the court dismissed the plaintiff’s petition for visitation.

Are You involved in a Visitation Dispute?

If you are currently involved in a Rhode Island child visitation dispute, the dedicated attorneys at the Rhode Island family law firm of Bilodeau Capalbo can help. At Bilodeau Capalbo, we have extensive experience assisting clients with all types of family court issues, including visitation matters. To learn more about how we can help you with your situation, call 401-300-4055 to schedule a free consultation today.

See Related Posts: What Is an Easement in Rhode Island Real Estate Law?, Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Blog, February 13, 2019.

Can a Rhode Island Marriage Be Annulled or Declared Void?, Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Blog, March 4, 2019.

Each state has its own laws regulating how judges resolve child custody issues. In Rhode Island, courts use the “best interest” standard, which focuses primarily on what is in the best interest of the child. Of course, this may not necessarily be in line with the expressed interests of the child, especially if they are young. Interestingly, Rhode Island lawmakers never defined what factors courts should consider when deciding what is in the best interest of a child. Thus, in the 1990 case, Pettinato v. Pettinato, the Rhode Island Supreme Court listed several factors that should be considered. Since then, these factors have been termed the “Pettinato factors.” Therefore, when deciding what is in the best interest of a child, courts must consider each of the following:

• The wishes of the child’s parents;
• The preference of the child, if the child is “of sufficient intelligence, understanding, and experience to express a preference”;
• The child’s relationship with her parents, siblings, or anyone else who may impact the best interest of the child;
• The child’s adjustment to her home, school, and community;
• The physical and mental health of the child as well as the parents;
• The stability of the child’s home environment;
• The moral fitness of each of the child’s parents; and
• The willingness of each parent to foster a meaningful relationship with the other parent.

Under Rhode Island Statute section 15-5-16, the court must provide visitation rights to the noncustodial parent, unless the custodial parent can show good cause as to why visitation should not be granted. When a court orders visitation, both the custodial parent and the children are bound by that order.

If a custodial parent fails to comply with the court-ordered visitation schedule, the court has discretion in crafting a remedy. However, if the custodial parent again fails to comply, “the court shall consider this to be grounds for a change of custody to the noncustodial parent.”

Are You Involved in a Rhode Island Child Custody Dispute?

If you are currently going through a Rhode Island divorce, or are involved in a Rhode Island child custody dispute, the dedicated Rhode Island family law attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo can help. At Bilodeau Capalbo, we have a dedicated team of Rhode Island divorce lawyers who are experienced in handling a wide range of child custody issues for our clients. We understand that we enter our clients’ lives at a very difficult time, and take every precaution to make the process as straightforward as possible, while providing unwavering support and zealous advocacy. To learn more about how we can help you with your situation, call 401-300-4055 to schedule a free consultation today.

See Related Posts: What Is an Easement in Rhode Island Real Estate Law?, Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Blog, February 13, 2019.

How Do Courts Divide Assets in a Rhode Island Divorce?, Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Blog, January 29, 2019.

The Circumstances of the Case

The couple was married in 2010, and had two children during the marriage. The father is Canadian and the mother is American, but she became a Canadian permanent resident after the marriage. Every year the family would take a trip to Rhode Island together. However, during the 2017 summer trip the mother found emails that suggested that the father was having an affair with someone else. Instead of returning to Canada, the mother flew to Texas with a child and then relocated to Michigan.

Throughout this period, the father and mother were in contact and the father helped to enroll the child in school in Michigan. The parties emailed about an interim agreement regarding the custody of the child and the couple’s unborn child that would have the children staying with their mother in Michigan. However, the father never signed the agreement. He later filed a petition for the return of the children.

Rhode Island Law

The applicable law that the father used is the same as the law that would be used in Rhode Island. That is because it comes out of the Hague Convention, which is an international law that signatory countries have agreed to abide by. Specifically, it falls under the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. U.S. Congress passed a law that also covers similar areas called the International Child Abduction Remedies Act. This of course applies throughout the country, including Rhode Island.

Under these laws, the person petitioning for the return of their child needs to prove that the child has been wrongfully removed from the country. They must prove this by the preponderance of the evidence. Specifically, they need to show that the child’s habitual residence is the state they are trying to get the child returned to, the petitioner has custody rights of the child in that state, and the petitioner actually used those rights at the time of the wrongful removal.

The father was able to prove his case. However, the mother tried to rebut this case by alleging that the father consented/acquiesced to the removal of the child. However, the court agreed with the father. They noted that the interim agreement was not signed and therefore he had not actually agreed to anything.

Hire an Experienced Rhode Island Child Custody Attorney to Help You

If your spouse has wrongfully taken the children out of the country, or you are concerned that they may, you should contact a knowledgeable Rhode Island child custody attorney to help you. The attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC, can help you understand all of your custodial rights and responsibilities. Call (401) 300-4055 or use the form on this web site to contact us today for a free consultation!

See Related Posts: Child Custody Rights of Unmarried Parents in Rhode Island Rhode Island Couple Arrested After Taking Child Out Of DCYF Custody

Father’s Rights

When a married woman gives birth, her spouse is legally presumed to be the parent of the child. When the mother is not married, paternity first has to be established in order for the father to be given parental rights. Establishing paternity does not necessarily require a paternity test. The father of the child can acknowledge paternity of the child. He can do this through putting his name on the birth certificate or other means. Once the father has been established, then he will have equal parenting rights as the mother, though this does not necessarily mean equal time with each parent.

Best Interest of the Child

Now that both parents have been identified, the court will use a best interest of the child standard to determine who should have custody and visitation with the child. There are two kinds of custody: legal and physical. Legal custody is who gets to make important decisions for the child such as education and healthcare decisions. Physical custody is who the child will live with.

Parental rights can also be taken away from a parent that has proven to be abusive or neglectful. For parental rights to be involuntarily terminated, there usually needs to be significant proof and the parent is unwilling to make the changes necessary to provide a safe environment.

Courts have a strong interest in preserving the relationship between the child and both biological parents. This is true even when the parents are unmarried. The Rhode Island court has laid out the specific factors the court will consider, though no factor is determinative. The factors the court will look at include the wishes of the parents regarding custody, such as who wants to have the child live with them. For older children, the court will also consider the child’s preference. They will also look at the child’s ability to interact with people who are important to them while in the different homes. For example, if the child has siblings living in one of the homes, the court will want to help the child preserve their relationship with them if at all possible.

Another best interest of the child factor that the court will look at is the child’s adjustment to the home, community, and school. In other words, if a change in custody requires moving schools, the court will try to avoid that if possible. The court will also look at the mental and physical health or the parents, the moral fitness of the parents, as well as the stability of the home environment. Finally, the court will also look at the willingness of each parent to preserve the child’s relationship with the other parent.

Contact a Skilled Rhode Island Child Custody Attorney Today!

Just because you have never been married to your child’s other parent does not mean that you do not have parental rights. You should talk to a knowledgeable Rhode Island child custody attorney to determine what legal rights and responsibilities you have. The attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC, can help you to preserve one of the most important bonds: the bond between a child and parent. Email us using the form on this website or call (401) 300-4055 to set up your free consultation today!

See Related Posts: Rhode Island Couple Arrested for Taking Child Out of DCYF Custody Rhode Island Supreme Court Holds Mother Cannot Relocate Children to Australia

Child Snatching Charges

Rhode Island DCYF removed the couple’s infant child from their custody a few days before this incident occurred. The child was placed with a relative, and a family court order prohibited the couple from unsupervised contact with the child.

However, in defiance of the court order the couple went to the house and took their child. They told the relative that they would return the child soon but instead they took her to Florida. They were arrested in Florida, and their infant daughter and other child were returned to DCYF custody. The couple faces child-snatching charges.

Rhode Island Child Custody Laws and Traveling with Children

There may also be restrictions on when and where you can see your children even if they are not in DCYF custody. In Rhode Island there are two kinds of custody, physical and legal. Physical custody involves who the child lives with. Legal custody determines who gets to make major decisions for the child involving such matters as medical care, religion, and education.

What happens if one parent wants to take the children out of state for a vacation? It will depend on the situation. Many custody orders will require that one parent notify the other if they are taking the child a certain distance away from home. Even if it doesn’t, typically the court will look favorably on parents who keep the other parent updated on any planned vacations. The main issue comes if the other parent opposes the trip. In those cases it will depend on the parent’s reasoning and the custody situation. For example, a parent who has a good reason and is very involved in their children’s lives will usually be given more deference than a parent who is just trying to be obstinate.

It is important that if you share custody you make sure that you do not accidentally run afoul of the custody agreement. However, just because one parent opposes a trip doesn’t mean that all hope is lost. A skilled Rhode Island child custody attorney can assist you to petition the court for a change of custody either permanently or temporarily for a specific reason, like a trip. They can also help you to understand whether a proposed action is allowed under your current agreement.

Contact One of Our Experienced Rhode Island Family Law Attorneys Today!

If you have questions or concerns about your current custody situation, you should contact a skilled Rhode Island child custody attorney as soon as possible. The attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC can help you to understand your rights and obligations with your current custody situation or help you to petition the court to change your custody arrangement. Call (401) 300-4055 or use the form on this website to set up your free consultation today!

See Related Posts: Rhode Island Supreme Court Holds Mother Cannot Relocate Children to Australia Rhode Island Grandparent Petitions for Custody

Facts of the Case

The mother is a citizen of Australia and a legal permanent resident in the United States. The father is a citizen of the United States, and the children have dual citizenship. The parties were married in Australia, but currently live in Rhode Island. After the divorce, the children lived with the mother, but the father had frequent visitation.

The mother requested that the court allow her to relocate with the children to Australia. She testified that she wanted to move there to be closer to her family, to get more education, and have better job prospects. She proposed that the children could visit their father in Rhode Island during school breaks and he was welcome to visit them in Australia whenever he wanted. The father objected to the proposed move because it would interfere with his ability to see the children on a regular basis. While the father had some problems in the past with alcohol that disrupted his relationships with the children, he had been sober for years and was working on mending his relationship with the kids.

Best Interests of the Child

When family courts address relocation cases like this one, the standard they use is “the best interests of the child.” On this review, the Rhode Island Supreme Court can only overturn the family court ruling if they find that the family court judge abused their discretion, the outcome was based on misconstrued facts, or the outcome was clearly wrong. None of those factors applied in this case.

When deciding whether to allow relocation, there are many factors the court will look at to make the determination of whether the relocation is in the best interests of the children. Some of the factors that the court will look at include: the relationship between the parents and the children, the likelihood that the relocation will improve the quality of life for the children and parents, the impact of the relocation on the children, and the feasibility of preserving the relationship between the children and the non-relocating parent. Courts will also look at any other factor they find relevant, including the wishes of the children if they are old enough to express a preference.

Here, the trial court judge denied the relocation. The judge was concerned that the move would essentially sever the relationship between the father and his children. The costs of traveling to Australia are significant, and neither party in this case has a lot of money. Further, the judge was worried that the mother would take advantage of the geographic separation to further alienate the father, as the former couple had a very acrimonious relationship. The Appeals Court judges found no reversible error in the trial court judge’s analysis sufficient to overturn the decision. Thus, the denial of the mother’s relocation petition was upheld.

Contact an Experienced Rhode Island Family Law Attorney Today!

If your kids live with you and you want to move a significant distance, you may need approval of the family court. The knowledgeable family law attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC, can help make your case to the judge as persuasively as possible. Call (401) 300-4055 or use the form on this web site to contact us today for a consultation!

See Related Posts: Rhode Island Grandparent Petitions for Custody Rhode Island Divorce and Tracking Devices

Which Rights Do Grandparents Have?

Generally, parents are in charge of all of the decision making regarding their children, including whether their grandparents are allowed to see them. However, there are some circumstances in which the court may grant visitation to grandparents even over the objection of the parents.

Family courts use a standard of the “best interest of the child” to make their determinations. Therefore, in order to get visitation, the judge must believe it would be in the best interest of the child. However, the grandparents must also meet four other criteria.

First, the grandparents need to prove that they are physically and mentally capable of caring for a child. Second, they must have reasonably attempted to visit the child within the last three months but without success. Third, the parent or parents must have used unreasonable means to prevent the child from visiting the grandparents. Finally, the grandparents must have tried to find alternative solutions to this problem that have also been unsuccessful.

Grandparent Custody

The visitation provisions above presume that the parent(s) who have custody of the child are fit parents. The situation becomes very different when the parents are allegedly abusing or neglecting the child, whether due to drug addiction or other reasons. If the court agrees that the parents are not able to care for the child safely, DCYF will often look to grandparents or other “kinship care” (care by friends and relatives) first for custody of the children. As above, though, judges will look at all of the circumstances to determine what would be in the best interests of the children. If the child does have a fit parent who is able to care for the child, their rights to the child will usually prevail over the grandparents’ rights. However, everything is dependent on the specific circumstances of your case. A knowledgeable family law attorney can help you make your case persuasively to the judge.

What Should Concerned Grandparents Do?

If you are in Rhode Island, and you are concerned that any child – whether your grandchild or someone else – is being abused or neglected, call DCYF at 1(800) RI-CHILD as soon as possible. You should call 911 if the kids are in immediate danger. Once the immediate emergency has passed, you should contact a skilled Rhode Island grandparents’ rights attorney. A lawyer can help you make your case to the judge for custody or visitation.

Contact a Knowledgeable Grandparents’ Rights Attorney

If you are a grandparent seeking visitation or custody of your grandchild, a skilled family law attorney can help you exercise any rights you may have. Our experienced attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC, can help you try to attain a favorable result for your grandchild. Call us today at (401) 300-4055 or use the contact form on this website for your free consultation!

Related Posts: Rhode Island Supreme Court Holds Family Court Rightly Terminated Father’s Parental Rights Following Abuse Rhode Island Supreme Court Holds Family Court Erroneously Found Mother Neglected Child

Divorces are famous for bringing out the worst in people. Now, with rapid growth and innovation in technology, ex-spouses sometimes use these new products in ways that can hurt them in family court. In an attempt to gather evidence, people going through a divorce or considering one are using apps and programs to track each other and get recordings and other evidence to potentially use in court. However, many of these tactics are illegal, and even the ones that are not may hurt your case in family court. An experienced Rhode Island divorce attorney can help you with your case and make sure that you have safeguards in place so that your former spouse cannot gather any information without your knowledge. They can also help you stay within the law and refrain from doing anything that will damage your position.

What is Legal?

Divorce lawyers in Rhode Island have noticed that many of their clients are putting tracking devices in each other’s cars or using apps like the “find my iphone” app to keep tabs on each other. The ubiquity and relative inexpensiveness of these devices has made it much more common for divorcing partners to find out information about each other. Parents are also putting devices like cameras or location tracking on their kids when the children are with the other parent. While the separated individuals may think these tactics will give them evidence that will help them in court, that’s often not the case, and it’s easy to run afoul of the law.

In Rhode Island, it is legal to record someone as long as one of the parties consents and as long as there are no ill-intentioned or criminal purposes for making the recording. However, a law in 2016 makes it illegal to track a vehicle without consent of the owner. While the law was intended for victims of domestic violence, it has been used to prosecute people collecting information for divorce proceedings. Of course, it’s also illegal to alter communications like text messages or recordings to make it seem like someone said or did something that they did not do.

What Will a Family Court Consider?

Family court is very different from criminal court in terms of what the judge can consider when making a decision. For property division during a divorce, the court will look at all of the relevant factors to decide how to divide property and award maintenance (alimony) in an equitable fashion. Equitable does not always mean equal, and the court will look at the spouses’ ability to support themselves independently, the length of the marriage, their standard of living, the resources of each spouse, and any other legally procured evidence if the parties cannot come to a decision themselves. Things are even more complicated when children are involved because judges use the somewhat nebulous standard of “the best interest of the child” to decide how custody should be arranged. Thus, actions that show ill intent, such as cameras all over the house for spying (this actually happened!), may end up hurting your case more than any evidence gathered will help it.

Hire a Rhode Island Divorce Attorney to Help You!

If you are thinking about a divorce or have already separated, you should contact a skilled divorce attorney as soon as possible. They can help you gather evidence in ways that are legal and helpful while at the same time keeping you from running afoul of the law. A knowledgeable Rhode Island divorce attorney can also help you present your case to the judge in a persuasive way, which can be more complex than you may think. The attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC, can help you craft a legal and effective strategy for court. Call (401) 300-4055 or use the form on this website to contact us today for a free consultation!

Related Posts: Rhode Island Supreme Court Hears Common-Law Marriage Case Rhode Island Favors Rehabilitative Alimony

Petitioner and respondent began dating in the fall of 1984. Petitioner gave birth to their first child in 1986. She testified that she told respondent immediately after giving birth that the child was the child of another man. Respondent contradicted this testimony.

The parties married in December 1986. Respondent testified that he married respondent because he thought it was the right thing to do. The parties remained at his parents’ home until respondent moved out in 1987. After leaving respondent, petitioner gave birth to to their second child.

Respondent’s parents testified that petitioner failed to adequately care for the child. Moreover, a medical technologist testified that she genetically tested petitioner, respondent, and the first child, and that respondent could not possibly be the biological father.

The trial judge issued an interlocutory decision granting the petition of respondent for an absolute divorce and awarded him permanent custody of the first child, with visitation rights to petitioner.

On appeal, petitioner argued that the trial court improperly misconceived the expert testimony regarding genetic blood testing. Petitioner contended that she was entitled to full custody of the child as the natural parent.

Petitioner admitted that respondent had met the legal requirements of presumption of paternity. The parties married after the child was born, and respondent consented to being named as the child’s father on the birth certificate. Petitioner nonetheless contended that the genetic test provided the “clear and convincing” proof necessary to rebut the presumption of paternity.

The state high court expressed concern about a mother telling a man that he is her child’s father, wed, and live as a family, and then illegitimize the child during a divorce by challenging the legal presumption of paternity. After reviewing case-law from other jurisdictions, the Rhode Island Supreme Court concluded that petitioner could not defeat respondent’s presumption of paternity.

The court reasoned a mother should be equitably estopped from using genetic testing to abrogate a child’s paternity in a related divorce case. The equitable estoppel doctrine is based on the notion that a mother should be estopped from challenging paternity where the mother accepted a person as the child’s father. When the equitable estoppel doctrine applies, genetic testing is irrelevant.

The court believed the circumstances warranted application of the equitable estoppel doctrine. Respondent acted as the child’s natural father. He married petitioner based on the assumption that the child was his. He agreed to be named as the father on the child’s birth certificate. The three co-habituated and acted as a family. Petitioner never questioned respondent’s paternity until respondent filed for divorce. For these reasons, the court held that the genetic test results were not applicable because the evidence established legal paternity and actual paternity was not an issue.

Petitioner argued that regardless of the legal paternity, the trial judge improperly awarded custody to respondent because she was a more fit parent. The court held to the contrary that the evidence showed that respondent would better provide for the child. The Department for Children and Their Families domestic relations study found that respondent was a more stable parent. Further, there was evidence concerning petitioner’s unstable living arrangements and addressing petitioner’s restlessness when confronted with child-caring duties. The Rhode Island Supreme Court therefore concluded that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion.

For these reasons, the judgment was affirmed.

This case remains good law in Rhode Island, and was cited by the court in 2000 in a similar situation. There, two women agreed to become a child’s parents. They arranged for one of them to conceive via artificial insemination by an anonymous donor. Following the child’s birth, they raised him for four years while living together as domestic partners in the same household. Thereafter the women, separated but the biological mother agreed to allow the nonbiological parent to have informal visits with the child. The Rhode Island Supreme court answered whether the family court had jurisdiction over a petition brought to determine the existence of a mother and child relationship between the nonbiological parent and the child? If so, could the the family court enforce the domestic partners’ written agreement (embodied in a consent order previously entered by the court) to allow the nonbiological parent to have visitation with the child after the parents have separated. The court answered both in the affirmative.

Relying on the aforementioned case, the Rhode Island Supreme Court held family court had the power to determine the existence of a de facto parent-child relationship despite the absence of any biological relationship between the putative parent and the child.

The Maryland Court of Appeals also relied on the above-cited case the year after it was decided in a factually identical case. There, appellant filed for divorce in 1989. Appellant’s wife subsequently filed a counter-complaint. This case arose from a dispute regarding the issue of temporary custody of the child. Since the court held that the trial court erred in requiring appellant to submit to a blood test, it also concluded that the results of the blood test should not have been admitted into evidence, and that custody should not have been changed on the basis that the blood test excluded appellant as the biological father of the child. That court wrote that the Rhode Island Supreme Court applied the doctrine of equitable estoppel and concluded that a mother should be equitably estopped from using a blood test to disestablish a child’s paternity in connection with a routine divorce proceeding. The court also relied on a 1983 New York case, which held that for public policy reasons, respondent, having held her child out as the legitimate son of her husband for a substantial period of time, should be precluded from thereafter bastardizing the child for the sole purpose of furthering her own self-interest in obtaining exclusive custody of the child.

If you find yourself in the unfortunate situation of a divorce proceeding, our experienced insurance attorneys at Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC, are prepared to fight zealously for your rights. Call 401-300-4055 or schedule a complimentary consultation today.

More Blog Posts:

Rhode Island Supreme Court Holds That Defendant is Entitled to an Annuity Policy

Rhode Island Appellate Court Upholds Dismissal of Property Owner in Broken Staircase Injury Lawsuit Mistakes Dads Make During Divorce How to Prepare for High-Asset Divorce