Voluntary international relocation with a finnish child

[ritan7471]

The whole premise of the case is to prove reckless abandonment against the father and i am using in adequate legislation to prove my case, and that is legal.

I've been following this thread for the circus atmosphere that cors is providing. The thread has been long but what I see is that your "premise" involves despicable, underhanded maneuverings on the mother's part by abandoning her child to the care of the father, with the hope that with enough pressure he will break and prove himself "unfit" at which point the woman will swoop back in and demand full custody. Under those circumstances and with the court rightly considering the welfare of the child, the mother might not get full custody either. Because a fit, mentally stable parent does not abuse her child by abandoning it to someone she believes is not fit, and mentally stable people do not abuse the court system in this way in order to steal custody from the other parent. A sane court would see that the mother has been with purpose attempting, with the help of friends, to drive the father of her children to an emotional breakdown which results in him, at least temporarily being unable to care for his children. Luckily, the court would be able to home the children with a stable environment while he is provided with the medical and psychological care he needs and the parenting resources to once again give a loving home to his children.

Your "adequate" legislation isn't adequate at all. As far as I can see through the really execrable English you write, all your "legislation" is a crazy mishmash of your own opinion of how the courts in Finland should behave, which as far as I know is not legislation at all.

This weird idea you have about bogging down the courts with evidence and opinion statements to make the court dance to the mother's tune is ridiculous. I am certainly "defending" my, to your opinion, crazy ideals, if by "ideal" I mean that I believe everyone should be treated the same under the law, and that people should not be allowed to manipulate the court into getting special treatment for their own case. I also believe that barring truly extreme circumstances that exist without the mother needing to jerk the dad around for awhile first, both parents have equal right to their children.

[cors187]

The whole premise of the case is to prove reckless abandonment against the father and i am using in adequate legislation to prove my case, and that is legal.

I've been following this thread for the circus atmosphere that cors is providing. The thread has been long but what I see is that your "premise" involves despicable, underhanded maneuverings on the mother's part by abandoning her child to the care of the father, with the hope that with enough pressure he will break and prove himself "unfit" at which point the woman will swoop back in and demand full custody. Under those circumstances and with the court rightly considering the welfare of the child, the mother might not get full custody either. Because a fit, mentally stable parent does not abuse her child by abandoning it to someone she believes is not fit, and mentally stable people do not abuse the court system in this way in order to steal custody from the other parent. A sane court would see that the mother has been with purpose attempting, with the help of friends, to drive the father of her children to an emotional breakdown which results in him, at least temporarily being unable to care for his children. Luckily, the court would be able to home the children with a stable environment while he is provided with the medical and psychological care he needs and the parenting resources to once again give a loving home to his children.

Your "adequate" legislation isn't adequate at all. As far as I can see through the really execrable English you write, all your "legislation" is a crazy mishmash of your own opinion of how the courts in Finland should behave, which as far as I know is not legislation at all.

This weird idea you have about bogging down the courts with evidence and opinion statements to make the court dance to the mother's tune is ridiculous. I am certainly "defending" my, to your opinion, crazy ideals, if by "ideal" I mean that I believe everyone should be treated the same under the law, and that people should not be allowed to manipulate the court into getting special treatment for their own case. I also believe that barring truly extreme circumstances that exist without the mother needing to jerk the dad around for awhile first, both parents have equal right to their children.

I've been following this thread for the circus atmosphere that cors is providing. The thread has been long but what I see is that your "premise" involves despicable, underhanded maneuverings on the mother's part by abandoning her child to the care of the father, with the hope that with enough pressure he will break and prove himself "unfit" at which point the woman will swoop back in and demand full custody.

You have actually combined 2 separate condition , neither of them are related.Back to the drawing board is you could be bothered!
Just to clarify and you can re post if you like , but despicable cannot and will never be established in a condition where one parent forces the other parent to confront a certain situation,whether its staged or has real circumstances.So to the first idea about testing the guy your going to do 18 years for , YES, YES and YES, we do even more in married life, WE TEST each others comfort zones so we dont put to much strain to break the marriage , What were you thinking when you wrote that?
To the second part(the imaginary court case) is a separate situation that is trying to shed light on how in real life that legislation basically sets up an immigrant mother to be in a situation that voids her from any meaningful return to her mother country and also defers the bulk of social, ethical, development solely into the Finnish Order.Which is crap anyway,!

In these cases the mother are saying, its crap.

[cors187]

Your "adequate" legislation isn't adequate at all. As far as I can see through the really execrable English you write, all your "legislation" is a crazy mishmash of your own opinion of how the courts in Finland should behave, which as far as I know is not legislation at all.

I don't have legislation , i will use the legislation to prove something i want to prove.

Just remember that in real courts evidence submitted changes the course of the court , so as an imaginary lawyer i just asked the judge to throw out your comments as in consistent, a mishmash of 2 separate stories that can be proven as not connected .Next!

[cors187]

This weird idea you have about bogging down the courts with evidence and opinion statements to make the court dance to the mother's tune is ridiculous.

This part of your argument had better not be in your thesis, its bias!

And here is your ideal coming out.
How could it possibly be that the Finnish court system in all its Glory, could be forced to hear about a simple immigrant woman s life in a way that people could understand there is a problem that could have a remedy too.
No visible problem , no remedy, No complaints, no remedy needed!

Yet this problem isn't singular at all , infact its wide spread and may be even rather large.
There is no tune , there are plain facts that are presented through documents.

Here is more of this Finnish mentality. It tries to procure intelligence, yet is bias and neglectful.

[cors187]

I've been following this thread for the circus atmosphere that cors is providing.

Thanks

[007]

Fight for child custody at court is all legal but to ask for sole custody because she is a woman, more importantly an immigrant woman is a no-brainer, at least for people like me who believe that a child should have rights to both parents equally.

[rinso]

The whole premise of the case is to prove reckless abandonment against the father and i am using in adequate legislation to prove my case, and that is legal.

I've been following this thread for the circus atmosphere that cors is providing. The thread has been long but what I see is that your "premise" involves despicable, underhanded maneuverings on the mother's part by abandoning her child to the care of the father, with the hope that with enough pressure he will break and prove himself "unfit" at which point the woman will swoop back in and demand full custody. .........

ritan thank you for your post. In a few lines you have clarified 8 pages of cors blabbering and misconceptions.

[ritan7471]

[quote="rinso]ritan thank you for your post. In a few lines you have clarified 8 pages of cors blabbering and misconceptions.[/quote]

Thanks rinso. I haven't been long in Finland, nor do I have legal training, but bulls#()" is bulls#()"

I still think the core issue is "should one parent be deprived a close relationship with his/her children because the other parent wants to move overseas?"

cors can go on and on with his babblíng but my answer will always be, no, no and still no, and any parent who follows cors's advice to stage a high pressure custody situation in order to break the other parent should lose custody because that mentality can only harm children caught in the middle. My parents split up when I was young, and in spite of the many problems he had at the time, my mother gave him almost unlimited access to come over at any time and visit with us kids. When he pulled himself together and they got back together, it was a lesson to me that separately or as a couple, parents need to work together for what's really best for their kids. What's best is both parents having close relationships with the kids.

I don't have children myself, but I am passionate about this, and no amount of crazy will make me change my mind. The only reason I won't disappear from this thread is that I wouldn't want cors to mistakenly believe his "logic" has defeated me.

[cors187]

Thanks rinso. I haven't been long in Finland, nor do I have legal training, but bulls#()" is bulls#()"

I still think the core issue is "should one parent be deprived a close relationship with his/her children because the other parent wants to move overseas?"

cors can go on and on with his babblíng but my answer will always be, no, no and still no, and any parent who follows cors's advice to stage a high pressure custody situation in order to break the other parent should lose custody because that mentality can only harm children caught in the middle. My parents split up when I was young, and in spite of the many problems he had at the time, my mother gave him almost unlimited access to come over at any time and visit with us kids. When he pulled himself together and they got back together, it was a lesson to me that separately or as a couple, parents need to work together for what's really best for their kids. What's best is both parents having close relationships with the kids.

I don't have children myself, but I am passionate about this, and no amount of crazy will make me change my mind. The only reason I won't disappear from this thread is that I wouldn't want cors to mistakenly believe his "logic" has defeated me.

Again your not correct , there is no custody battle, you are creating your own case because mine doesn't concern itself with the child.
I guess im going to have to ask the judge to remove your comments from the records as -ambiguous comments that allude to a custodian decision, when clearly our present case doesn't refer to one.

Look i agree with your sentiments on your conclusion of parents working together.
But i dont want to get in the way of your history.

[cors187]

I still think the core issue is "should one parent be deprived a close relationship with his/her children because the other parent wants to move overseas?"

This is of interest though to the discussion.
Even if one parent moves to each end of Finland(north/south), there still would be more contact if one parent was in hamina and the other in St peterburg, could you agree on that conclusion?
http://maps.google.fi/maps?hl=fi&ie=UTF ... =7&vpsrc=6

[cors187]

Fight for child custody at court is all legal but to ask for sole custody because she is a woman, more importantly an immigrant woman is a no-brainer, at least for people like me who believe that a child should have rights to both parents equally.

This is exactly true, i dont know of any such cases.

[Tiwaz]

In any form of legal maneuvering its extremely important to have verified document. We all know this because Guess what , Finland wanted everything verified,infact paper trailing seems to be what Finland Needs for everything we do here.But we knew that already.If you dont paper trail it means you never did anything outside your house.Your Studies require paper trails, Job without paper trail?
Proof is paramount.Using systems that verify documents is normal business.

You idiot. Court is not interested what kind of flimsy excuse mother had when abandoning the child.
All they need to know is that mother left child to father and left country. At that point in eyes of law she has abandoned the child and father can easily demand, and receive, full custody as mother would no longer be available to give her agreement to variety of decisions required over the life of child.
Thus, in interest of child, father would be made sole custodian so that mother would no longer be needed to make decisions for the child.

This effectively means that mother would lose custody and not get it back.

Your idiotic assumptions are further increased by your idea of "security net" which would somehow protect the child. Except this "security net" would have no authority in Finland, thus should anything go wrong, only Finnish social security would be permitted to interfere. If "security net" attempted something, they would be taken into nice blue and white car by people wearing dark blue clothing.
Hint, they are called "poliisi" in here.

[Tiwaz]

Your "adequate" legislation isn't adequate at all. As far as I can see through the really execrable English you write, all your "legislation" is a crazy mishmash of your own opinion of how the courts in Finland should behave, which as far as I know is not legislation at all.

I don't have legislation , i will use the legislation to prove something i want to prove.

Just remember that in real courts evidence submitted changes the course of the court , so as an imaginary lawyer i just asked the judge to throw out your comments as in consistent, a mishmash of 2 separate stories that can be proven as not connected .Next!

No you dumbass... You do not provide "surprise evidence" to change the course of action.
Also... THIS IS NOT USA! OUR LEGAL SYSTEM IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT!

[cors187]

Tiwaz,
Im being worn out , you've almost broken me.

Judicial system in Finland
http://www.oikeus.fi/8108.htm
The judicial administration provides legal security. Legal security is a fundamental right of the people. Under the Constitution of Finland, everyone is entitled to have his or her case heard by a court or an authority appropriately and without undue delay.

In addition, under the Constitution everyone is entitled to have a decision affecting his or her rights or obligations reviewed by a court or another judicial authority. Furthermore, the Constitution contains a fundamental provision on the guarantees of a fair trial and good public administration. Some of the most important such guarantees are the openness of proceedings, the right to be heard, the right to receive a reasoned decision and the right to appeal against the decision.

The judicial administration consists of the independent courts of law, prosecution service, enforcement authorities, who see to the enforcement of judgments, The Criminal Sanctions Agency, who sees to the enforcement of custodial sentences, and Bar Association and the other avenues of legal aid.

In Finland the Ministry of the Interior is responsible for the guidance and supervision of

I know your saying my imaginary case (leaks water)holes in it everywhere, Good legal council and legal teams try to contain leaks ,plugging them up in a sense.Most of the cases requiring a person to prove something and another one to defend something does have holes, and this experiment has such big holes in it, i am kind of happy i have held on to it this far.
Good luck

Anyway im glad the mods dont delete your posts even though your annoying as crap.

[cors187]

I mean stick around and bash the case , i would, what else have you got to do? discuss Russian /Finnish ancestry, i should start a case there actually,lol