More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Terri Weiss

Terri Weiss

Posted: February 25, 2011 09:17 PM

Let's discuss the bad, no, let's make that the absolute worst, court order in family law cases where kids are involved: The temporary order of protection, more affectionately known as the TOP.

First, a disclaimer: Some TOPs have validity, and some actually work. There are people who seriously need to be protected from abusive or threatening individuals, and are at imminent risk of harm. The resulting TOP will work if the respondent has a lingering remnant of respect for the law, or fear of repercussion -- like arrest or imprisonment -- if s/he violates the order. (Many doubt that a simple piece of paper will dissuade a truly violent person from his/her intended harm.) And the TOP is better yet if the police are quick to enforce it. These are the meritorious orders. Who in their right mind can quarrel with them?

But bogus TOPs are more often the norm, and they hurt everyone.

In meritorious cases, family court judges can become so inured to requests for TOP's that at-risk people may be denied the protection they need, sometimes with horrific consequences. It happens, and not just in big cities, either.

What about the respondent in the completely bogus TOP case? S/he is usually cut off from the kids, suddenly and indefinitely -- with little or no physical, telephone, written or even electronic contact -- while the case gets adjourned ad nauseum, based on allegations s/he never even had a chance to contest in court prior to the issuance of the TOP.

And the kids in these cases? Usually they're confused by the abrupt disappearance of one parent. If they're lucky, they won't get poisoned too much by the petitioner or his/her friends and relatives. Chances are, they will. Therapists, come on and join the gang of total strangers (judges, law guardians, child protective services, forensic evaluators, etc. etc.) now intruding on this family.

Let's not forget the petitioner, who thinks s/he has just scored big-time in the impending custody battle. S/he may not have noticed the damage s/he has just caused his/her family - which no custody award in his/her favor will ever erase. And s/he runs the risk that a very patient respondent -- one who's prepared to ride the waves of mostly negative rulings for a while, and who's hired a good lawyer - will eventually expose the phony claims. If the respondent has a fair amount of facts in his/her favor, s/he may even prove it's the petitioner who's really harming the family. Boom. Custody unexpectedly awarded to the respondent.

And everyone will have nice hefty legal fees for their efforts.

There, now, wasn't that a productive exhibition of hostility?

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 134
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fb0252
10:34 PM on 03/10/2011
maybe OP is about rich upper class order of protection. most such orders are for the lower classes, are done without any legal fees at all, and judge's are compelled to grant them for fear of e.g. a murder if the judge fails to grant. most judges are very balanced concerning other orders associated with the Order such as custody or support. If there is a collateral custody case the cases are likely to be consolidated with the custody judge along with a temporary order of protection. I am unable to understand the headline here. Orders of protection serve an important need for a lot of people. In the wrong hands, of course, there are problems, but so it is with any incompetent judge or court.
07:35 AM on 03/11/2011
No. My ex is wealthy and she used it on me. She used it solely as a tactic to push me out of the picture. They really serve no other purpose. If someone was truly "murderous" an order of protection would do nothing. It's just another example of guilty until proven innocent in family law. It's not coincidental that it's mostly women who file them against men. It's just more dad bashing.
09:58 AM on 03/11/2011
It's odd that your wife would have consented initially to 50/50 custody then later gone so far as to take out an order of protection. Obviously the courts were involved to the extent they deemed supervised visitation to be necessary. Can you please explain the circumstances so that we have some context? Not everyone automatically assumes the mom is a devil who takes no interest in her child's best interests. Outside of men's rights groups, people understand that divorce with children is a complex topic, not something that can be reduced to statistics, nor explained away as "dad bashing".
02:12 PM on 03/10/2011
Indeed, this TOP ploy is used by parents angling for full custody and encouraged by family lawyers as an effective legal tactic. It often works! However, it can ruin reputations, parental relationships, and do serious emotional harm to innocent children.
You point out how it could backfire and the Petitioner may loose custody if the respondent sticks it out for the long haul. This did not happen in my case or in many others I have learned about. Often false allegations are proven UNFOUNDED, (in my case right away) but to no avail. The power of a domestic violence claim, (true or false) is staggering. Many "lousy" Family court Lawyers know this and without regard for the children, will collect fees from Petitioners until the money to pay them is gone.

Sad but true!
02:11 AM on 03/12/2011
Ron, I can't disagree with you, although I wish I could. I've come up against more than a few adversaries who pulled this stunt to get a leg up on their custody cases. Always nice to see that tactic go down in flames....

I'm sorry your case went badly for you. The outcomes of so many of these cases are dependent not only of their specific facts, but on the lawyers and, perhaps most important, on the judges. They, however, are a whole other topic (perhaps the subject of a separate article).
05:52 PM on 03/13/2011
It's unconscionable, incomprehensible to the average person and pretty sad that it's allowed to go every day. The blame pretty much lies with the feminist special interest groups that has created the hysteria surrounding DV and have the judiciary afraid for their careers. Again as an attorney stated, 70% of the TOP's that go through his office are bogus. Imagine having a dispute with a neighbor then receiving a letter that a hearing was held without your knowledge or being informed and you've been found guilty and have 15 minutes to leave your house.
11:43 PM on 03/13/2011
Mmmmm, I think you're overstating it, keystone30. Don't think you can blame any groups on this, or over-generalize. I think, more than anything, the judiciary is afraid that denying an ex parte application could result in real violence, so they err on the side of caution.

As far as who is to be blamed for the prevalence of these frivolous applications? Hard to say. Maybe it's the media, which screams about celebs getting TOPs against them and highlighting their easy availability. Maybe it's us matrimonial lawyers, discussing tactical maneuvers in custody cases.

No point playing the blame game. Better to think about how to position oneself to fight and prevail against a bogus TOP, whether the petitioner is male or female. Because me? I just want to win for the wrongfully accused client. I don't much care about what group is responsible for the woes of the world, ya know?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
IrishEyes21
Where are the games on this thing?
09:42 PM on 03/05/2011
My ex tried to get a TOP against me when I was 8 months pregnant. He said I tried to hit him. He even went to the local womens shelter to "hide" from me. He also accuses me of parental alienation.

A lot of times the false TOP is from a woman saying a man abused her - but there are men out there who will do this. My ex is one of them. I was the one who actually needed the TOP, but because he went to the womens shelter - the court now views me as the one with the temper problem.

And my daughter is the one who suffers for it.
02:38 PM on 03/06/2011
My husband's no-contact TOP against me is bogus. He and his attorney both admitted in mediation that my husband is not afraid of me, and the OP will be dropped when he gets the settlement he wants.
03:25 PM on 03/06/2011
In other words, the system can be manipulated regardless of gender. If the man is connected to the judiciary or has the resources, he can do it to the woman.
08:46 PM on 03/05/2011
My sister was accused of domestic violence, taken to jail so the husband could keep control of the house and kids. Socked with a restraining order first from her husband, then for the kids. She has gone to court twice to get permission to see her kids, but a box wasn't checked (it didn't have to be, but this judge was unaware of the change) so permission was denied. Went back in with a statement from another judge informing the judge of the change, but was still denied permission we feel because of an ego issue.....meanwhile my sister hasn't seen her kids at all for 34 days....she was a stay-at-home mom so the kids were mostly with her all the time. She is going to fight the domestic abuse charge because it can be used against her in divorce court.....
02:25 AM on 03/07/2011
This is the kind of TOP that troubles so many people - removing a parent from the children without a hearing for a long period of time, so the validity of the order has yet to be determined. While the bulk of these orders tend to be directed against fathers, there is no question that mothers - such as your sister - can be hit with them also, and the resulting pain is just as difficult to endure regardless of the gender of the respondent.
Obviously an expeditious hearing would be one way (and in my view, the best way) to resolve the problem. Another way would be to increase the evidentiary obligations of the petitioner before issuing the ex parte order (e.g., requiring a police report or hospital record), although that could irreparably prejudice the respondent in his/her absence. Some think ex parte TOP's should be prohibited entirely but, given the validity of some - SOME - TOP's, I think that would be an imprudent move.
I hope everything works out for your sister and your family, lovely1.
--Terri
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dadw5boys
Disabled Vietnam Vet
11:35 PM on 03/04/2011
A friend of mine called for me to come over. When I got there I heard the kids playing all around the house.
He had put tapes of kids he made in VCR's and turned the TV's up loud. It sounds just like his house on a weekend kids running everywhere playing.
Told me she had left and took the kids after his Business took a downturn.

She had demanded more control of the money but all the money came from and was in the Business he started 5 years before meeting her. He gave her total control she gave it up in a few days saying she was not that good a juggler, it is hard to keep a business and family afloat financially when times are bad.

He never did get a reason for her leaving but all those experts were there in Court and he stood alone, no lawyer just surrendered so exhausted from missing his kids.
02:30 AM on 03/07/2011
An odd result, dadw5boys, and a sad way to deal with his loss. This doesn't quite sound like a "bogus TOP" case in the end, though - sounds, instead, like the result of a full-blown custody battle in which your friend, for whatever reason, did not retain counsel...Almost always an unwise decision ...
I'm sorry for your friend's loss.
-- Terri
12:29 PM on 03/01/2011
My husband was starting to have psychotic episodes, left abruptly during a fit of rage, took out a no-contact order of protection against me, and claimed he was in fear for his life. I believe he did this so I could not find him, help him, or get him a psychiatric evaluation and substance abuse treatment. He seems to have a strong desire to preserve his addiction and mental illness as they are. I hired an attorney to protect my assets, interests, and child from him, but he hired an attorney who is an extremely dirty fighter, just like he seems to be in his illness. I find that waiting it out and delaying court dates is keeping a judge from potentially handing my child over to his depraved father.
03:57 PM on 03/01/2011
Yes, MWB20, but the delay is also prolonging the uncertainty. Please accept my best wishes during this traumatic time in your lives -Terri
11:14 AM on 03/01/2011
Terri,
One other anecdote to add to the subject, anger management classes. Once again, with the mere accusation of DV, one is ordered under threat of contempt, at his expense, to patronize yet another part of the system. If he attends he's admitting guilt, if not God help you at the next hearing. What's your thoughts?? Oh, the attorney representing you would rather jump from a bridge than dispute the order with the judge.
04:09 PM on 03/01/2011
Right, well that's the kind of order you don't want to defy. Always good to cooperate with this sort of thing - I don't see it as an admission of anything other than a willingness to comply 100% with the court's instructions, show what a good person you really are, you have no problems listening to or obeying orders, you believe every offer of assistance is always good for your family, everyone should go, etc etc etc.

Think about it, keystone30: Denouncing the order to go to anger management classes? Nah. Sounds to me like you're angry. Like Charlie Sheen denying he's got a problem (oh Lord, what a boring guy he is...never shuts up....). When it comes to sounding defensive vs sounding easy-going, I'd vote for the latter any day. Set it up for the other side to go ballistic while you stay calm and compliant. JMHO.
10:19 AM on 03/02/2011
I agree with the non-friction/go with the flow approach but the problem is that it becomes a public record, and there's no proof (outside of allegations) or questioning of that the person has anger issues.
10:27 AM on 03/01/2011
Terri,
One other anecdote to the TOP debate, mandatory anger management classes. Once again, the mere accusation of domestic abuse will now require you to pay yet another part of the system. If you attend it's a court record, if you don't you're in contempt. What's your thoughts? Oh and the attorney representing you is afraid for their life to dispute the ordering of thses classes.
09:40 PM on 02/28/2011
I think my estranged wife is starting one of these orders with me. What are the details and processes in Maryland? She has family support and I have nothing. We've been living apart for nearly a year and have one five-year-old child. Can anyone direct me to pro bono assistance?
11:32 PM on 02/28/2011
Hi A1c3c8,
I suggest you contact your local county bar association for assistance.
Take care,
Terri
10:20 AM on 03/01/2011
I contacted the few local and state agencies that I could find last summer. The usual response was "we don't have enough lawyers to take on any more cases" or "our funding has been cut so we can't help you." I don't know what to do and I'm afraid that I won't be able to see my child. There seems to be no positive solution for me.
Guest211
Stars Exploded to Make Me
04:50 PM on 02/28/2011
Great article Terri. As you seem to be (the only one to be) willing to tackle the "real" issues of divorce, how about an article on Shared Parenting. Its interestin­­g. Right now we have 2 additional states who are breathtaki­­ngly close to passing Shared Parenting laws. Shared Parenting is likely the biggest social issue of our time regarding divorce and is being adopted in State after State. On HP however, we currently have stories about the "9 Oscar Nominees that spotlight marital strife", Kelsey Grammer, Ryan Reynolds, Miley Cirus, Rosanne Barr, David Arquette, Charlie Sheen and Jason Sudeikis
05:14 PM on 02/28/2011
Okay, I can do that! Trying to do roughly one post every 3 weeks or so, so people don't max out on me...
Guest211
Stars Exploded to Make Me
05:19 PM on 02/28/2011
Thx

BTW, given what I've seen, dont worry about "max out".

Just the opposite. You're a breath of Fresh Air.

I'm maxed out on "celebrity divorce" articles. (Perhaps someone can explain to me why they are relevant.)
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Henry Gornbein
12:23 PM on 02/28/2011
Hi Terri, Excellent post. In Michigan most judges will not grant an interim custody order unless there is a situation where the parties are separated, there is violence or danger of one parent removing the children. Keep up the good work.
Henry

Henry Gornbein
02:39 PM on 02/28/2011
Hi Henry,
NY generally stays clear of formal interim custody orders without a hearing, other than in the circumstances you describe. But when baseless TOP's are issued with "stay-aways" and there are kids involved, those TOP's are tantamount to de facto interim custody orders, and those are what I find so disturbing.
Sounds like this situation is a rampant problem in numerous states. The only solution I see is an immediate hearing...Wishful thinking....
02:59 PM on 02/28/2011
Interesting -- wait until the parties are separated to snatch the kids from the dad. That's certainly what happened in my case. I thought I'd be safe from that sort of tactic long after the divorce was completed, but nope. How dare the courts use disingenuous phrases like "best interests of the child" when the main goal of the courts seems to be to harm children as much as possible by inducing fatherlessness.
11:08 AM on 02/28/2011
The problem with these orders is the low/no burden of proof and the target's inability to respond to the allegations. This is an infringement on due process rights and should be challenged.
02:52 PM on 02/28/2011
Hi H0tr0d - It's less a due process issue, and closer, in my mind anyway, to a speedy trial issue. But yes, I agree with you on the often low burden of proof involved. It's a bad scene, no doubt about it...
10:33 AM on 03/06/2011
And to top it off HR, you're ordered (coerced) to have representation based on the allegations and if you don't the hearing may be postponned until you do, and the other side may ask the judge for reimburment (from you) for being there. This is the astounding unbelievable situation what goes on in these rapacious so called courts.
02:44 AM on 03/07/2011
Keystone30, I've certainly seen judges give respondents a chance to retain counsel, which necessarily involves an adjournment. But I haven't seen a judge force anyone to hire a lawyer, and I'm not sure I follow the reimbursement issue.
You know how troubling I find bogus TOP's and adjournments that summarily deny a parent access to his/her kids for weeks and months at a time; I'm far from unsympathetic to the problem. I'm also bothered by the quality of members of the judiciary who promote, or condone, the unnecessary harm to the respondent parent, and to the children....
11:01 AM on 02/28/2011
Teri, I feel like u wrote this just for me. My husband has an OP against me and uses it as a sword, calling the police on me 28 times last year alone - many times with my then 13 year old son in the car with him! Court awarded him Primary Residential parent as we have Joint Custody, but I have not seen my now 14 year old son since October 1, 2010, because of yet another bogus call to the police. (They didn't even entertain that call...) However, 4 times back to court since 10/1, and now I have only Therapeutic Visitaion with my son!!!! It is absolutely insane. I can only imagine all this time alone with his very angry father how much poisoning my son has been presented to. I was 'Mother 0f the Year' for the first 12 years of my boy's like, but since I wanted a divorce because of repeated mental and physical abuse......Order for Therapeutic Visitation was stamped in court February 9, 2011 and still not word from my husband as to saying he will compy!! I will bring myself back to court if I do not anything this week by Wednesday. I can not and will not stand for this any longer!
02:45 PM on 02/28/2011
My lord, aimee712,sounds like you're going through hell. I'm glad you posted your comment, too, since these TOP's don't just impact dads.
And you raise another important poin: Both parents need to comply with court orders - the one who has "visitation" (what a word!) AND the one who's supposed to facilitate it. Neither should be interfering with the parent-child relationship.
Good luck to you-
Terri
07:26 AM on 02/28/2011
I really appreciate this and to know other's have the same issue's with the court's. First order against me was 9 year's ago and now on the third one. Never physical abuse, not a bar fight or any domestic violence in my history. It seem's that i could get verbally abused then i return a comment in frustratration and i get served (personel liberties?). I also was fulltime at home dad but she was able to get primary caretaker even with a fulltime job on a 2 1/2 hour round trip commute. The hour's just couldn't add up the way i see it. Our son was named in order after i spent several year's changing diaper's, having breakfast, school bus stop's, and all the other joy's. I was getting alot of contact from her while the order in effect, she even showed outside courthouse for violation and admitted she was upset because she didn't get to see me as i was in and out on continuance motion and her late (she did not have to be there, strickly to see me). I have stopped the game's with her and hope i make it through the violation that occured. I also don't understand why i keep getting comment's by her that she is an only parent when i was removed at her request after being a father. She did lose her job and i guess i wasn't needed anymore?
Hope the way these order's are handed out changes.
Thank's
02:56 PM on 02/28/2011
Steve, I'm not sure I'm following all your comments, but you might consider avoiding violations, no matter how awful you think the orders are. The court has the power, not you...just a suggestion...
Good luck to you and your family -Terri
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Erinaleks
Architectural Artisan, Free Thinker
06:53 AM on 02/28/2011
Terri , thank you for bring attention to this subject. It has been a sore spot for me 14 years since my divorce. I did wind up with custody of my two children after 3 years. My lawyer was stunned.
02:49 PM on 02/28/2011
Sore spot with me, too, Erinalinks, having to fight the damn things!