Voluntary international relocation with a finnish child

[Rip]

Ask any stay at home mom who breastfeeds a baby if there is such thing as a primary caregiver. They're not unicorns, they do exist. And it is illegal. Google Hague convention.
And it would suck for the parent to have to move. Exactly as much as it sucks for the non Finn to have to stay in Finland. Who cares how much it sucks, the discussion should be where would the child have the brightest future?

If the mother has been so abject failure making decisions regarding her own life that she finds herself in such a predicament while still breastfeeding, then why should I think she is that great in taking care of somebody else's life?

(getting irritated by the underlining theme that children really have only one parent that matters, their mother)

[rinso]

I think the foreign woman has a case if it can be proven that the citizen father destroyed the marriage through unfair means.
This 1st ruling can give rise to the notion of a 2nd hearing that can remove the" citizen parent default rule" .Then a new trial for legal custody of the child can be heard.

After obtaining the victory over the diminished citizen, the foreigner applies for baby passport and goodbye to this thread.

The case is proving reckless detachment that is shown to be of a permanent nature, Which gives rise to the petition of the second case.Its a civil case, infact divorce only adds weight to the permanency.Next!

If the father was a potential danger to the child that would/should have come up during the divorce procedures. It could have had influence on his visiting rights or even gave sole custody to the mother.
Since that didn't happen (not important enough to bring it up?) there is very little chance to get sole custody in a new procedure because the mother is unhappy and the father will not give in.

(again; the happiness of the mother or the relation between the parents is not an argument to deny the father his rights)

[Tiwaz]

Take kid with you?
Kidnappin. Criminal act which WILL have you lose your position as guardian, you will not see your child without someone present to ensure you do not pull it off again. Child lost.

Unless you get someone from consulate to smuggle the kid...

Considering that kid was kidnapped in this case by mother against legally binding agreement, it is more case of returning correct status quo.

[Tiwaz]

there was a few missing parts that i just presumed people would understand.

Actually, your idea had lots of missing parts where you do not understand the law.

The security net is when the woman is leaving(preparing to leave) , having no rent agreement , no bills etc etc,all documented details formally ended.
She needs a safety net for her child to live in, of-course the mum is with the child.All the legal child status documents are ready.

So basically she dumps her all links to Finland. Will raise lots of bells in Finland.

Woman hands child over to father and says .Im leaving, and if you want to sign these, then sign them , then woman leaves country.Woman already has her 2nd plan already with document trail to home country about leaving the country for a valid reason that was needed.

You do not need valid reason to leave Finland. You can go if you want, nobody gives a crap. And if you leave child behind, that is viable too.
Though it DOES effectively make you unlikely to ever be permitted to have sole custody. You know, abandoning the child. Attempt at blackmail "sign child to me alon or else"... Yeah, not going to be found to be decent mother.

The security net is still working for her, so after a while if ex husband breaks down , bam instant help in finalnd by the support group.

No there isn't.
If dad breaks down, social security is ones who will move in. Finnish social security will not permit mothers self made arrangements to endanger the child.

Imagine the horror when a woman putting herself out for 20 years, (for a man so he can get to have some contact with his child) ,when infact if he was given the prime carer position decided that life was to difficult and decided to give the child away to be raised by another , or some other thing happens, like your security net getting proof that the father could not handle the situation and didn't do the most correct things(you were hoping your ex would falter and you had your safety net ready).I mean this stuff is what detective work is all about , forming the legal opinion through evidence that the child is better with the mother.

Mother who left country. An again, self made "security nets" are not valid. Social security does not let someone not closely blood related to just take the child from father. If father was found to be unfit for parenting, child would be taken into custody by officials.
Oh yes, and father would have had case to sue for sole custody.

Giving your child to their other biological parent is in no way neglect.
Or sit around for 20 years.Whatever!

Well, leaving for another country to live in is grounds to sue for sole custody, as other parent cannot be realistically present to sign for quite a large variety of things that have to be done with child with agreement of both custodians.

[ajdias]

If the father was a potential danger to the child that would/should have come up during the divorce procedures. It could have had influence on his visiting rights or even gave sole custody to the mother.
Since that didn't happen (not important enough to bring it up?) there is very little chance to get sole custody in a new procedure because the mother is unhappy and the father will not give in.

This theme "abusive partner = unfit parent" is really annoying. Not to mention that partners have a keen interest in portraying their exes in the worst possible light - it's natural but at some point people must move on and recognize that they probably had a role in their own misery, if nothing else by accepting it and putting on with it for so long.

It is rarely a black and white case. Yes, there are relationships where one of the partners is fully innocent, was fully mislead and puts up with an abusive partner for the sake of children and/or beliefs, passion..More often than not, both partners are abusive towards each other, whether physically or emotionally. Someone said that people tend to mate with those who complement their own functionalities: emotionally healthy people will not tolerate abusive partners and will look for someone else.
I do not want to blame the legitimate victims, nor do I confuse blame with contribution (eg. triggering the other's anger by pushing certain buttons.) It is just so irritating that these things are taken at face value, just because someone said, so and so is abusive.

[cors187]

there was a few missing parts that i just presumed people would understand.

Actually, your idea had lots of missing parts where you do not understand the law.

The security net is when the woman is leaving(preparing to leave) , having no rent agreement , no bills etc etc,all documented details formally ended.
She needs a safety net for her child to live in, of-course the mum is with the child.All the legal child status documents are ready.

So basically she dumps her all links to Finland. Will raise lots of bells in Finland.

Woman hands child over to father and says .Im leaving, and if you want to sign these, then sign them , then woman leaves country.Woman already has her 2nd plan already with document trail to home country about leaving the country for a valid reason that was needed.

You do not need valid reason to leave Finland. You can go if you want, nobody gives a crap. And if you leave child behind, that is viable too.
Though it DOES effectively make you unlikely to ever be permitted to have sole custody. You know, abandoning the child. Attempt at blackmail "sign child to me alon or else"... Yeah, not going to be found to be decent mother.

The security net is still working for her, so after a while if ex husband breaks down , bam instant help in finalnd by the support group.

No there isn't.
If dad breaks down, social security is ones who will move in. Finnish social security will not permit mothers self made arrangements to endanger the child.

Imagine the horror when a woman putting herself out for 20 years, (for a man so he can get to have some contact with his child) ,when infact if he was given the prime carer position decided that life was to difficult and decided to give the child away to be raised by another , or some other thing happens, like your security net getting proof that the father could not handle the situation and didn't do the most correct things(you were hoping your ex would falter and you had your safety net ready).I mean this stuff is what detective work is all about , forming the legal opinion through evidence that the child is better with the mother.

Mother who left country. An again, self made "security nets" are not valid. Social security does not let someone not closely blood related to just take the child from father. If father was found to be unfit for parenting, child would be taken into custody by officials.
Oh yes, and father would have had case to sue for sole custody.

Giving your child to their other biological parent is in no way neglect.
Or sit around for 20 years.Whatever!

Well, leaving for another country to live in is grounds to sue for sole custody, as other parent cannot be realistically present to sign for quite a large variety of things that have to be done with child with agreement of both custodians.

you've misunderstood basically everything
tard

[Upphew]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiio%27s_laws

RIP

[cors187]

I think the foreign woman has a case if it can be proven that the citizen father destroyed the marriage through unfair means.
This 1st ruling can give rise to the notion of a 2nd hearing that can remove the" citizen parent default rule" .Then a new trial for legal custody of the child can be heard.

After obtaining the victory over the diminished citizen, the foreigner applies for baby passport and goodbye to this thread.

The case is proving reckless detachment that is shown to be of a permanent nature, Which gives rise to the petition of the second case.Its a civil case, infact divorce only adds weight to the permanency.Next!

If the father was a potential danger to the child that would/should have come up during the divorce procedures. It could have had influence on his visiting rights or even gave sole custody to the mother.
Since that didn't happen (not important enough to bring it up?) there is very little chance to get sole custody in a new procedure because the mother is unhappy and the father will not give in.

(again; the happiness of the mother or the relation between the parents is not an argument to deny the father his rights)

Your asking me why a probably scared and lonely foreigner might just "cop it sweet".

cop it sweet
Web definitions
to take what's coming to you without trying to get back at them.

Why not i say , its Finland.Its like asking foreign women, do you know that if your citizen spouse and you come a bust ,your children cant leave the country and its most likely that you will have to live in the country under the poverty line , in a broken family.
Or ask the foreign husband, i can offer you my statement.
I will take the risk because i know the kids are "better off" with my wife.If there is a foreign husband here who disagrees, let him speak.

This whole un savory situation makes me think of some foreign woman in a Finnish hospital whos just given birth to her child.The doctor leaves the room and in come the hospital lawyer saying,Hello Mrs soininatie , if your baby is inducted into the standard system and you and your spouse break up , did you know that you children will "by default" "have to remain in Finland"!
Its just such a crap story, it needs a Finnish car salesman in it to make it believable.

[cors187]

Actually, your idea had lots of missing parts where you do not understand the law.

What law? People fight in courts to make laws?
The former cases(peoples) are why the judge can say yes or no.
What law are you bringing to my attention?

[Rip]

Actually, your idea had lots of missing parts where you do not understand the law.

What law? People fight in courts to make laws?
The former cases(peoples) are why the judge can say yes or no.
What law are you bringing to my attention?

Finnish system is a not a common law system, so the judges rules much less based on precedents and much more based on statue. Lot of the time it seems hard to understand what you're trying to say, but obviously somebody who moment ago didn't know Finland has a no-fault divorce can't really know much anything about relevant legislation in Finland.

[cors187]

Actually, your idea had lots of missing parts where you do not understand the law.

What law? People fight in courts to make laws?
The former cases(peoples) are why the judge can say yes or no.
What law are you bringing to my attention?

Finnish system is a not a common law system, so the judges rules much less based on precedents and much more based on statue. Lot of the time it seems hard to understand what you're trying to say, but obviously somebody who moment ago didn't know Finland has a no-fault divorce can't really know much anything about relevant legislation in Finland.

This is the point im trying to show, the divorce is irrelevant, the divorce is standard procedure. Im not primarily concerned with the divorce.
Ok so i am trying say that even though the legislation is standard, it can take a non standard ruling to over ride standard rules.(no one can say that is not true about any law court)

There is a certain liability a citizen has when they invite a foreigner into the country to share their life with.
The legal maneuvering i am suggesting may take years of evidence to procure, even with the first evidence that the citizen divorced the foreigner.Not the other way around.
A divorce initiated by a citizen is somewhat evidence that the decision by the citizen was permanent.


Are you or anyone else going to say that a case such as this cannot be tried?, can you say that a case like this has not been tried before?
I know for a fact that if my wife was stuck in my country its 100% without question that my country will provide better support for my wife, better job opportunities,better life.All those things impact of my child's domicile residence.But mental anguish impacts just as much,possibly detrimental the former thing my country offers.

For a half g*assed country such as Finland who evaluates the emotional content of every detail , this thread paints a pretty picture.
Come to think of it my wife and I had already discussed this same situation in our family before we got married.Actually I discussed it as my wife had no idea of the impact,i would feel rather retarded if i found myself in this situation and not understanding the possible consequences of my direct actions.

Honey will you marry me , we can live in my country and everything will be ok , you dont need a job ,you can stay at home and raise the children, everything will be great, you will love my country as its a very honest and transparent country.

this guy is wonder of amazement , a true commander!

Do you think that any foreign woman coming to Finland to marry a Finnish guy isn't told almost the exact same thing, with possible inclusions , (the language is difficult, the people are not social,the country is expensive to live in, if you were by yourself it would be considered hardship, but with me its easy.

[Tiwaz]

you've misunderstood basically everything
tard

No, you are failing to grasp that this is not La-La-land, your La-La-standards to not apply. Idiot.

[Tiwaz]

This is the point im trying to show, the divorce is irrelevant, the divorce is standard procedure. Im not primarily concerned with the divorce.
Ok so i am trying say that even though the legislation is standard, it can take a non standard ruling to over ride standard rules.(no one can say that is not true about any law court)

No you fool. Court has no reason to make any non-standard decision.
Here law is as it is stated in the book. Judges to nod "override" laws over here. Specially since here it is not judge, but judgES who determine the outcome (except on lowest level, where there is judge and couple lay people)

There is a certain liability a citizen has when they invite a foreigner into the country to share their life with.

Show me where in Finnish law this liability is established.

The legal maneuvering i am suggesting may take years of evidence to procure, even with the first evidence that the citizen divorced the foreigner.Not the other way around.

No, you are suggesting pulling off idiotic La-La-land maneuver which is irrelevant in the end, as it goes against Finnish legislation to permit something like that to take place. You can leave Finland without any "paper trail". Nobody gives a @#$%. But when you leave like that, you are handing spouse "Get sole custody"-card based on fact that you are obviously not returning (no home, job etc) and have dumped the kid on the remaining spouse.

After that, if spouse is found unfit, it is task of Finnish social security. Your "network" would be taken in by police if they tried to move in on the kid.
A divorce initiated by a citizen is somewhat evidence that the decision by the citizen was permanent.

Are you or anyone else going to say that a case such as this cannot be tried?, can you say that a case like this has not been tried before?

What is there to put into trial? What LAW has been violated?

I know for a fact that if my wife was stuck in my country its 100% without question that my country will provide better support for my wife, better job opportunities,better life.All those things impact of my child's domicile residence.But mental anguish impacts just as much,possibly detrimental the former thing my country offers.

Yes, I am sure you think La-La-land is nice place. But realitycheck, most likely it is not like you think. In Finland, it definitely is NOT like you think.
Uprooting a child from established home is considered to be unacceptable here.

For a half g*assed country such as Finland who evaluates the emotional content of every detail , this thread paints a pretty picture.

Furriner wants to go, furriner can go. Kid cannot be taken without permission of spouse. If kid stays and furriner goes, furriner no longer custodian.

Do you think that any foreign woman coming to Finland to marry a Finnish guy isn't told almost the exact same thing, with possible inclusions , (the language is difficult, the people are not social,the country is expensive to live in, if you were by yourself it would be considered hardship, but with me its easy.

Cry me a river. If you buy everything others tell you and do not check yourself, it is your own problem.
Welcome to real world, you @#$% up, you hurt.

[cors187]

OMG boys. Sometimes silence speaks louder. Please refrain from slinging immature insults at one another. As usual, you've killed the interest of others to discuss the topic for the sake of actually helping someone out.

I cant reply to every misconception,im deep enough into it already.
upphew's link summed it up.

[cors187]

I can only reply to you on your first premise , the remaining premises are misguided and defective,so there is no point arguing those.
I am providing legal literature that proves if your first reply is faulty, then your argument is also faulty.

Here is Tiwaz
No you fool. Court has no reason to make any non-standard decision.
Here law is as it is stated in the book. Judges to nod "override" laws over here. Specially since here it is not judge, but judgES who determine the outcome (except on lowest level, where there is judge and couple lay people)

The first evidence i will provide proves clearly that case-law comments within legal publications and successive changes made to the consulted documents
are the main reasons why judges act.
When a new case comes to court, the ability for that "competent court" to build case law and to submit that individual case law to the legal publications is why changes come about.
The simple example is how document after document after document has amendments (parts added or taken away).Heres a quick link of the social welfare act, but its the same with the marriage document and , really its everywhere in finnish acts and decrees, the documents themselves are evolving according to case-law comments within legal publications and successive changes made to the consulted documents
Here is just one example- welfare act 1982, but shows evidence that its a changing document

Section 2 amended by Act 385/2011 is in force on a temporary basis from 4 May 2011 to 31 December 2014. Previous
wording:

http://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset ... 820710.pdf

Below is an English overview of Finlex and its purpose.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/n-lex/info/inf ... dex_en.htm
Finlex is a free public Internet service that gives access to legislative information. It is a bilingual website in Finnish and Swedish, the two official languages of Finland. The home page is also available in English and some 300 full-text translations of Finnish acts of Parliament (mostly in English) can also be consulted.

Finlex is maintained by the Ministry of Justice of Finland together with Edita publishing, a private company.

Finlex consists of more than 30 databases, which are gathered together under five main sections:
Legislation

This heading gives access to six different sections:

the consolidated texts of acts and decrees (available from 1918 to 2004 and for some years before 1918);
the original texts of acts and decrees (available from 1918 to 2005 and for some years before 1918);
a reference database that lists the successive changes made to the consulted documents (available from 1900 to 2005 and for some years before 1900);
a database in Sámi language (Lapland’s regional language) consisting of all Sámi language acts and decrees;
a database of Finnish acts and decrees translated mostly into English (available from 1940 to 2004 and for some years before 1940);
the most recent acts dating from 1995 onwards.

Case-law

Case-law for the supreme court, the supreme administrative court, the courts of appeal, the administrative courts, the market court, the labour Court and the insurance Court is available at national level.

It is also possible to search for case-law comments within legal publications. In addition, summaries of judgments of the European Court of Human rights and of the Court of Justice of the European Communities are also available.

This information is legitimate proof that any amendments or changes in anyway to legislation by the "official body" must be and i repeat must be proven through the use of case-law comments within legal publications and successive changes made to the consulted documents
Its the basis of Law and Justice.
The constitution of such case laws are only found in real cases that are being heard, it doesn't matter how crazy they sound to anyone else, if there is a spark of justice, this spark can continue to flame the use of case-law comments within legal publications and successive changes made to the consulted documents.

It really doesn't matter if my theoretical case doesn't reach the supreme court for legislative adaptation, but it matters because its possible to be heard.
How else does the "official body" look over the evidence to make the right amendments without case-law comments within legal publications and successive changes made to the consulted documents.

I am reporting to you all that it is imperative that the "official body" that has the power to change legislation also has reference notes of all the "FAILED CASES" within the consulting documents..
How could the "official body" in any meaningful terms submit changes to legislation that governs the "whole", without have reference notes of all "FAILED cases"?
They cant!
So the failed cases have impact on current and changing legislation as much as the cases that show evidence that legislation should be modified.
Without 1 person standing up and taking on the challenge of this "system that they believe is holding them down", then even the "official body" does not concern itself with "your life" because your life was not even in the "reference material of FAILED CASES".

Heres a link of the latest Finnish acts and decrees that are being updated, all those acts have the original conception date as well as the updated date.
Its proof that across a whole range of areas, the "official body" is updating(adding or taking away) according to"the real problems", Successful,failed or criminal. http://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/uusimmat/

I know the idea of-
1. Female immigrant coming here.
2. having a baby.
3. then her and the child are abandoned(fatherless) to the welfare state.
i think it a genuine problem that needs addressing.

Members of the court, im requesting you strike tiwaz statements from the records, because I myself dont want to see his disillusioned remarks being filtered into the case-law comments.

dis·il·lu·sioned
Adjective
Disappointed in someone or something that one discovers to be less good than one had believed.