[blindlaw] [BULK] Re: child custody

[Dittman, Robert]

Mr. McBride keep in mind that I'm just a juris doctor so cannot practice law yet however something that I would do if I were practicing in this case is first what does the court order actually say second was the noncustodial parent default against invest the only reason that they've custodial parent got supervised visits is because they ask for it and the other party was not present you contestant number three the presumption in Texas is that both parents should be joined conservators although this presumption can Bieber budded if there's ample evidence to show the court that it is in the best interest of the child that sole conservatorship and possessory conservator ship be ordered what was the reasoning of the court to award sole conservatorship to the custodial parent and possessory conservator ship to the noncustodial parent just some food for thought now back to studying for the barge 

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 13, 2012, at 20:49, "Daniel McBride" <dlmlaw at sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> There are no other issues.  The sole issue is his blindness and the child's
> age.
> 
> Further, it would be more accurate to refer to the condition of possession
> as "chaperone" than "supervision".  A subtle distinction I know, but a
> distinction nonetheless.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Steven
> Johnson
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 8:44 PM
> To: 'Blind Law Mailing List'
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] child custody
> 
> Out of curiosity, is there any other Child Protective History with this
> potential client?  Take out the blind aspect, is there anything else that
> has been provided that would suggest that supervised visits are necessary?
> For example, Hx of drug, alcohol or other substance use, maltreatment at any
> level, a criminal background that could suggest that such supervision is
> necessary?
> 
> I am not a lega expert, but I do work in the Child Protective Service field.
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Daniel
> McBride
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 8:29 PM
> To: Blind Law Mailing List
> Subject: [blindlaw] child custody
> 
> Potential client has Suit Affecting Parent Child Relationship pending in
> Texas.  Potential client is granted Possessory Conservatorship with the
> Family Code standard visitation of first, third and fifth weekends of the
> month.
> 
> 
> 
> However, potential client is blind, the child is a 19 month old daughter and
> the Court has conditioned his possession of the child on him having sighted
> assistance by any competent adult during his periods of possession.
> Potential client asks whether the condition of possession violates any
> concepts of discrimination pursuant to the Americans With Disabilities Act.
> 
> 
> 
> I would appreciate any thoughts you have.  Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel McBride, Attorney
> 
> Fort Worth, Texas
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/blinddog3%40charter.ne
> t
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dlmlaw%40sbcglobal.net
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rdittman%40stmarytx.edu