Big day tomorrow. Family Court at 9.45am...

I looked further and the law stated that it applied in New South Wales....

FAMILY LAW ACT 1975 - SECT 69ZE
Extension of Part to the States
(1)
Subject to this section and section 69ZF, this Part extends to New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia and Tasmania.

Ah, good catch!

Mr. Stillwater, like freeduck, I am late to this thread--late to many threads as I tend to go for long periods between a2king.

You have my admiration for your dedication to maintaining your family, including your littlest daughter even though you aren't her biological father. That said, is there any way you can afford an attorney? Debra_Law has given you excellent advice.

[size=7]BTW, you better lay off the lawyer jokes![/size] :wink:

Stilly ....? Where are you? Are you OK?
I hope you're listening.
Hey, hang in there!

Questions
Mr. Stillwater:



You said that your wife brought the new baby home from the hospital, she failed to mention that the child was not your biological child.

You accepted your youngest daughter into your home as your child.

Questions:

When did you find out the child was not your biological child?

Has the biological father ever stepped forward to develop a relationship with the child and to support the child?

Has the biological father executed an acknowledgment of paternity or parentage?

If you are excluded from the child's life, is the biological father ready, willing, and able to step forward and be the child's father (with all rights and duties)? or will the child be left without a father?

Is there an interim order in effect concerning custody/visitation/support that the parties must follow while the divorce is pending?

Is there a court order that specifically prevents you from exercising visitation with the youngest child or is this something the wife has decided all on her own?

What have you and your wife told the children with respect to why you are allowed to visit the two oldest children but not the youngest child?

Are you fighting for full custody of your children or for reasonable visitation privileges?

Hey, Stilly? You OK? I'm worried.

Another question:

Did you have paternity tests completed that definitively prove that you're not the biological father or are you just taking your wife's word on this matter?

Well, Stilly, a couple of us are really worried by now!

A thought: I think Stilly usually posts from work, I think. So maybe the simple solution to his absence here today is that he's not at work today.

Oh no, does that mean we won't hear from him until tomorrow??? Oops, it is almost tomorrow in OZ.

Err, I am at work - it is just that cruel fate has doomed me to NO free access to the net at present! I am forced to wait till after work and pay for it (arrgggghhhhh, money!! ). Such is the life of a contract worker in the 21st Century.

I'll need to clarify a coupla points*......






*though not paternity to all of Elle Macpherson's children! Damn!

Glad to hear from you, anyway, Stilly. I'm such a worry-wort!

(Don't talk to me about contracts! Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr )

Thanks for the posts to Orstraylian law guys - up to now I thought the only thing illegal in this country was waiting till it was your 'shout' (round of beer) and excusing yourself to the toilet to leave the pub. Oh, and bringing 'light' beer to a party.


Seriously, the 'Family Law Act' is there to protect and nurture children, not their parents. Whether it actually does this is moot, but it is law and you do not f*ck with black-letter law unless you are a very senior barrister (not me, I checked!).

When this case took off in March last year I (and my cheatin' spouse) signed a 'consent order'. This is a private agreement between parties (as opposed to a direct order by a Registrar (judge of the Family Court). It has, however, the same legal force as one and is the bane of my present condition.

At that time, there was NO determination of the paternity of daughter no. 3 AND any agreement in place to let me see ANY of the children. We made an agreement AT THAT TIME that turns out to be more permanent than we expected (at least me), because the first court date we were allocated WAS THE 22ND OF FEBRUARY 2005!!

Exactly nine calender months in the future!

.....or tomatoes? Or was it that Melbourne weather? I am such a forgetful fellow..........

Back to the big stuff!!



So, we are effectively locked into an agreement (the consent order) until either,

1. the Court hears the matter, or
2. one of us petitions the Court to change it, or
3. we make a NEW consent agreement.

Seems very simple, no?



So, by June of that year (2004) the little one (she has a name, it is Sarah - it means 'princess') is starting to come along with us on our outings. This is not a bad thing. I enjoy having all the girls, and her mum has a free day. This is good, no?

No - it ain't. As we have a 'gentleman's* agreement' it is still subject to one of us pulling the plug. My ex does exactly that at Christmas. I am rather pissed, but I still give her the benefit of changing her mind. I wait for a month. No change, Sarah is not coming along anymore.

Right - so I file a petition. Sarah is to accompany her sisters. At the same time we are almost at the magic nine months. We are just about ready to proceed with the case in the Court. Have I been premature? Should I have waited?




*No jokes Deb, I can be as big a gentleman as the next man - it might just take a while to find one to stand next to...........

Stilly

Only someone like Debra could give you a good legal opinion on that one. But in my (lay person's) view, you did the right thing. To me it indicates that the exclusion of Sarah mattered & was important to you. That you weren't just going to complacently wait around for the court case to resolve the situation. Your wife broke your "gentleman's agreement for no apparent reason & didn't take the child's interests into account. To me, it looks like she was using the child in some sort of power play with you. Not nice! It certainly says something about HER character.

NOPE!!!!

I have made the right call here! Ex's side do not comply with the order to provide documentation to make the trial proceed - they have opted to let the case go into 'default'.

This means that a senior member of the Court will direct how the case will proceed. As a self-represented litigant I would not have such an option, if I was to NOT comply with ANY direction it would be total proof of my incapacity to do anything - the lawyers would have a field day!

The lawyers also fire off a letter telling me that I am mucking up the process and they are going to seek indemnity costs. I write back telling them that I am not gonna wait, they can seek costs AND (my big ace!) last year my miserable ex sort-of-almost-promised-to-maybe-make this agreement permanent*.

But, when her solicitors and father found out that I HAD been taking Sarah along for six months they must have freaked! Bang! Down came the barrier - NO visitations! NO discussions (and we ARE THEIR parents! Who else should discuss this!).

One very unhappy little girl. One very, very, very cranky Stillwater.



*and she did! I said that all she had to do was get her lawyers to vary the order and all we had to do was sign it.

The sad thing, Stilly, is that it appears to be purely tactical motivation from your wife's side .... Too bad she's making her daughter so unhappy & confused!