Parental Child Abduction and Interstate Jurisdiction Cases
Parental child abduction is the offense of a Parent wrongfully removing, retaining, detaining or concealing their child from the other parent. This often occurs when parents separate or divorce proceedings begin. The abducting parent may consensually remove or retain the child to gain an advantage in pending child-custody proceedings or because the parent fears losing the child in the divorce proceeding. Many times the abducting parent may refuse to return a child at the end of an approved visit or may flee with the child to prevent the other parent from seeing the child or in fear of domestic abuse.
Many abducting parents try to take the child across state lines (Interstate Jurisdiction issues) or out of the country to make sure that the child will never be found by the other parent. They would rather live a fugitive than lose their child.
Are there any laws to stop this child abduction to another state or country? The Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act (UCAPA) provides remedies with valuable enforceable tools in deterring both domestic and international abductions by parents and unethical people or agents on their behalf. This Act empowers courts to impose measures designed to prevent child abduction both before and after a court has entered a custody decree. Unfortunately, the UCAPA has only been enacted in eleven states (Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Utah) and District of Columbia, since its inception.
In Texas Interference with child custody is a felony!
Texas currently follows the Texas Penal Code 25:03, Interference with Child Custody:
Sec. 25.03. INTERFERENCE WITH CHILD CUSTODY. (a) A person commits an offense if the person takes or retains a child younger than 18 years of age:
(1) When the person knows that the person’s taking or retention violates the express terms of a judgment or order, including a temporary order, of a court disposing of the child’s custody;
(2) when the person has not been awarded custody of the child by a court of competent jurisdiction, knows that a suit for divorce or a civil suit or application for habeas corpus to dispose of the child’s custody has been filed, and takes the child out of the geographic area of the counties composing the judicial district if the court is a district court or the county if the court is a statutory county court, without the permission of the court and with the intent to deprive the court of authority over the child; or
(3) Outside of the United States with the intent to deprive a person entitled to possession of or access to the child of that possession or access and without the permission of that person.
(b) A noncustodial parent commits an offense if, with the intent to interfere with the lawful custody of a child younger than 18 years, the noncustodial parent knowingly entices or persuades the child to leave the custody of the custodial parent, guardian, or person standing in the stead of the custodial parent or guardian of the child.
(c) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a) (2) that the actor returned the child to the geographic area of the counties composing the judicial district if the court is a district court or the county if the court is a statutory county court, within three days after the date of the commission of the offense.
(C-1) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under Subsection (a) (3) that:
(1) The taking or retention of the child was pursuant to a valid order providing for possession of or access to the child; or
(2) notwithstanding any violation of a valid order providing for possession of or access to the child, the actor’s retention of the child was due only to circumstances beyond the actor’s control and the actor promptly provided notice or made reasonable attempts to provide notice of those circumstances to the other person entitled to possession of or access to the child.
(C-2) Subsection (a) (3) does not apply if, at the time of the offense, the person taking or retaining the child:
(1) Was entitled to possession of or access to the child; and
(2) Was fleeing the commission or attempted commission of family violence, as defined by Section 71.004, Family Code, against the child or the person.
(d) An offense under this section is a state jail felony: Minimum term: 180 days to Maximum Term of 2 years; fine up to $10,000.00
Hopefully, in the near future, more states will adopt the Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act, but until then, if you think you have a problem with your ex trying to kidnap your child, find out what can be done in your state to stop this before it happens!
The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act
If a child and one of the child’s parents live in Texas, a child support order or paternity determination may be established without the assistance of another state. If the parents have already had sufficient contact with Texas, the Attorney General of Texas may be able to enter an order even if the parents do not currently reside here. If another state’s assistance is needed the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act enables Texas and other states to cooperate to establish a child support order.
The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act permits only one active support order for a case at a time. This cuts down on delays and confusion. If several orders exist, the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act has rules to determine which order should be followed (the “Controlling Order”).
Orders may be registered in different states for enforcement and modification purposes. Orders registered from another state are enforced as an order issued by the responding state.
States now have more power to collect payments from child support obligors who live in other states. The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act allows states to enforce their orders without the assistance of the state where the obligor lives. In many cases, a withholding order can be sent directly to an out-of-state non-custodial parent’s employer, requiring that child support be deducted from the parent’s wages.
The order can be registered by the other (responding) state for enforcement, but it cannot be changed by that state. The responding state has the authority to pursue collection using enforcement hearings, license suspension and incarceration of the delinquent non-custodial parent if necessary.
Changes in circumstances, such as job promotions, prolonged unemployment or disability, may affect the noncustodial parent’s payment status in the years following the establishment of the support order. Such changes may justify a modification in the support order.
The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act sets the ground rules for modification based on the state issuing the order, the states of residence of the parents and children, and the controlling order. If either of the parents or the child still lives in the state that issued the controlling order, any change in the support amount must occur in that state.
If all parties involved have left the state that issued the controlling order, that state may not be able to change the support amount. To change support, the order must be registered for modification in the state of residence of the parent who is not seeking the modification. If more than one state has issued an order, and none of the parties lives in those states, none of the orders is controlling.
All of the orders should be registered in the state that has jurisdiction over both parties. That state will calculate the amount of support to be paid and will issue a new controlling order.
The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act also allows both parents to agree in writing that a state where one parent resides may modify the order and take control of the case.
Once a state properly modifies another state’s order, the new amount of support is the amount to be collected by all states.
Texas Cohabitation – Domestic Partnership Agreements for Boomer & Senior Couples
Premarital and post-marital agreements in Texas have a complex history immersed in the community property presumption, the state constitution, statutes and case law. Originally, such agreements were found to be unenforceable. But with amendments to the Texas Constitution, evolving statutes, recent case law, and improved draftsmanship, such agreements are now enforceable under contract law.
For many Boomer and Senior couples, living together is a precursor to marriage; for others because of family issues or commitments, there is no intent to ever marry. The simple fact is, domestic partnership agreements address a wide variety of circumstances, many involving established adults who want to be together but because of prior financial and family commitments prefer to have an applicable contractual agreement for their legal needs.
Many couples choose to live together so they do not lose certain benefits under current rules of social security, military and insurance disability programs, or to stop those benefits from being taken away from their children. In other cases, couples who are divorced, and who may have children, may want to protect certain assets. In situations such as trust funds or inherited funds, beneficiaries simply do not want to place family money at risk. Other couples choose to shelter their own resources from the real or perceived obligations of their partner.
The marital agreement is considered to be a contract under Texas law. The premarital agreement must be in writing and signed by both parties. No actual consideration is required; however, to conform to contractual law, it may be wise to provide benefits for the non-monied party to avoid a later finding of unconscionably, particularly if the financial or physical condition of the non-monied party under the agreement is poor.
Matters that may be dealt with in a premarital agreement include, but are not limited to, the following:
- the right to buy, sell, use, transfer, exchange, abandon, lease, consume, expend, assign, create a security interest in, mortgage, encumber, dispose of, or otherwise manage and control property;
- The rights and obligations of each of the parties in any of the property of either or both of them whenever or wherever acquired or located;
- The disposition of property on separation, marital dissolution, death, or the occurrence or nonoccurrence of any other event;
- The modification or elimination of spousal support;
- The making of a will, trust, or other arrangement to carry out the provisions of the agreement;
- The ownership rights in and disposition of the death benefit from a life insurance policy;
- The choice of law governing the construction of the agreement; and
- any other matter, including their personal rights and obligations, not in violation of public policy or a statute imposing a criminal penalty.
In post-marital agreements, it has been noted that a fiduciary duty exists that is not present in pre-marital agreements between spouses or prospective spouses. Case law states that a confidential relationship between husband and wife imposes the same duties of good faith and fair dealing on spouses as required of partners and other fiduciaries. However, adverse parties who have retained independent counsel may not owe fiduciary duties to one another. Texas Legislature enacted Section 4.105 with the understanding that married spouses owing fiduciary duties to one another would negotiate and execute post-marital agreements. Notwithstanding these duties, the legislature manifested the strong policy preference that voluntarily made post-marital agreements are enforceable.
Beside a Cohabitation and Domestic Partnership Agreement, what other documents should you supplement for a more complete legal coverage?
- A will with a designated executor to handle execution and distribution of all assets
- A durable financial power of attorney
- A durable medical power of attorney, directive to physicians, and a HIPPAA release form
- Partnership agreement to set out and clarify property rights, define ownership and related issues upon dissolution
Cohabitation, domestic partnership, premarital and post-marital agreements may be as creative as a party determines necessary. However, care must be given to see that such agreements protect the party, keep with public policy, and adhere to current Texas family law and applicable contractual law.
Texas Family Laws : Effective Date Sept 1, 2015
The 2015 Texas Legislature was active on family law bills and changes to the Texas Family Code! These many changes to various provisions of the family code could legally affect you and your family.
Some of the more important 2015 Family Laws, Amendments, and Revisions:
House Bill 826 amends the Family Code to require a child support order to contain a specified statement regarding the circumstances under which a court may modify a child support order. Effective: 9-1-15
House Bill 1447 amends the Code of Criminal Procedure to expand the persons authorized to file an application for a protective order for certain victims of sexual assault or abuse, stalking, or trafficking and to entitle victims of those offenses or the victim’s parent or guardian to additional crime victims’ rights relating to the protective order to provide the notice in the prescribed manner a Class C misdemeanor. Effective: 9-1-15
House Bill 1500 amends the Family Code to require a person who files a motion for a temporary order in a suit for modification of the parent-child relationship to execute and attach to the motion an affidavit that contains facts that support the allegation that the child’s present circumstances would significantly impair the child’s physical health or emotional development. The bill establishes a court’s duty to schedule a hearing if those facts are adequate to support the allegation. Effective: 9-1-15
House Bill 1782 amends the Family Code to establish, for purposes of a family violence protective order, the presumption that family violence has occurred and is likely to occur in the future if the respondent has been convicted of or placed on deferred adjudication community supervision for an offense involving family violence against the child for whom the petition is filed, the respondent’s parental rights with respect to the child have been terminated, and the respondent is seeking or attempting to seek contact with the child. Effective: 9-1-15
House Bill 1923 amends the Civil Practice and Remedies Code to include a retired or former statutory probate court judge among the judges eligible to serve as a special judge in certain civil or family law matters. Effective: 9-1-15
Senate Bill 206 amends the provisions of the Education Code, Family Code, Government Code, and Human Resources Code relating to the functions and administration of the Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS). The bill revises and streamlines agency procedures involved in adoption cases and child protective services cases by changing various record keeping, notification, and casework documentation requirements and provisions governing the investigation of a report of abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a child and by condensing and updating provisions governing procedures in a child protection suit, including adversary and permanency hearings, and the performance of a child placement review for a child under DFPS care. The bill establishes annual reporting requirements for DFPS regarding key performance measures and data elements for child protection and sets out notification requirements relating to significant events for a child in DFPS conservatorship involving the child’s placement, medical condition, prescribed drugs, and school performance; revises provisions governing foster care, including requirements that foster children be provided access to certain personal information and documents; and sets out requirements for implementing foster care redesign. The bill consolidates and restructures provisions regarding prevention and early intervention services, including the child abuse and neglect primary prevention program, and requires the development and implementation of a strategic plan for those services within DFPS. The bill revises provisions relating to public school admission and attendance of, and eligibility for an exemption from tuition and fees for, students under DFPS conservatorship.
The bill broadens the authority of DFPS to obtain criminal history record information regarding certain persons; authorizes the executive commissioner to adopt rules regarding the purpose, structure, and use of advisory committees by DFPS; and requires the development and implementation of an annual business plan for the child protective services program to prioritize the department’s activities and resources to improve the program. The bill provides for an enforcement policy for the regulation of certain child-care facilities, homes, and agencies and revises provisions governing administrative remedies for those regulated entities.
The bill requires DFPS to study whether provisions governing authorization agreements between the parent of a child and a nonparent relative should be expanded to include authorization agreements between a parent of a child and a person who is unrelated to the child. Effective September 1, 2016, the bill updates provisions governing the licensing and certification of certain child-care facilities, homes, and agencies. Effective: 9-1-15
Senate Bill 314 amends the Family Code to detail what information the Department of Family and Protective Services and a court appointing a nonparent as managing conservator of a child must provide to the nonparent. Effective: 9-1-15
Senate Bill 550 amends the Family Code, Government Code, Insurance Code, and Labor Code to establish a court’s duty to render an order for the dental support of a child in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship or in a proceeding under the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act. Effective: 9-1-15
Senate Bill 813 amends the Family Code to establish that a digitized signature on a pleading or order in a proceeding involving the marriage relationship, the child in relation to the family, or a protective order satisfies the requirements for and imposes the duties of signatories to pleadings, motions, and other papers identified under the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Effective: 9-1-15
Senate Bill 814 amends the Family Code to establish the authority of a party to a suit to remove the disabilities of minority, a suit to change a person’s name, or a suit affecting the parent-child relationship to waive the issuance or service of citation. The bill revises requirements for a waiver of service in a suit for dissolution of a marriage. Effective: 9-1-15
Senate Bill 815 amends the Family Code to expand the types of activities a court may prohibit by temporary restraining order in a suit for the dissolution of marriage. Effective: 9-1-15
Senate Bill 818 amends the Family Code to require a court to order that each conservator of a child has the duty to inform the other conservator of the child of certain information regarding the conservator’s involvement with a person who is the subject of a final protective order or if the conservator is the subject of such an order. The bill establishes deadlines for providing the notice and makes a conservator’s failure to provide the notice in the prescribed manner a Class C misdemeanor. Effective: 9-1-15
Senate Bill 1726 amends the Estates Code, Family Code, and Government Code to revise and clarify provisions relating to suits affecting the parent-child relationship, including provisions relating to Class 4 claims against an estate, the conditions under which a court is authorized to order that certain information not be disclosed to a party to a suit, notice requirements regarding enrollment in or termination of benefits under an employer’s health insurance plan, and notice requirements and enforcement mechanisms for certain child support orders. Among other provisions, the bill provides for electronic notarization of required signatures in a proceeding filed under provisions relating to the parent-child relationship. Effective: 9-1-15
To view more information on the 2015 Texas family law bills, amendments, and revisions go to Texas Legislature Online @ http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/
The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA) : How it can Affect Your Family Interstate Jurisdiction Problems
Are you a parent having trouble collecting your child support for the children because your EX-spouse lives in another state? This has been a problem for many families for a long time. The United States Congress recognized this problem and mandated all states to adopt the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA) to facilitate collection of child support across state lines.
It is no surprise that people move, but when trying to collect child support from an out-of-state parent you may need legal help to avoid unpleasant surprises.
When more than one state is involved in establishing, enforcing or modifying a child or spousal support order, the UIFSA determines the jurisdiction and power of the courts in the different states. The Act also establishes which state’s law will be applied, an important factor as support laws vary greatly among the states.
If there is no current child support order and the child and one parent live in Texas, the order or paternity determination may be established without another state’s involvement. If the parents have sufficient contact with Texas, the court may be able to enter an order even if one parent does not currently live in the state. UIFSA enables Texas and another state to cooperate to establish a child support order if another state’s assistance is needed because of residency issues.
UIFSA permits only one active support order for a case at a time. When there are multiple orders, UIFSA determines which support order will be followed, known as the “controlling order.” Orders may be registered in a different state for enforcement and modification purposes. The initiating state sends the order and documents to the responding state. The responding state registers the order and sends a notice to the other parent. The other parent has 20 days to file written objections regarding the order. If objections are made prior to the deadline, the court will hold a hearing and decide whether the order should be registered.
UIFSA also allows parents to enforce their support orders without the assistance of the state where the obligor (paying parent) lives. A withholding order, in many cases, can be sent directly to the out-of-state obligor’s employer requiring child support be deducted from the parent’s wages. The responding state also has the authority to pursue collection through enforcement hearings, license suspension, or incarceration of the delinquent, non-custodial parent.
If financial or other circumstances have changed, you may also request the court to modify a child support order. UIFSA sets the rules for modification. If either of the parents or the child still lives in the state that issued the controlling order, changes in the support amount must occur there. Otherwise the order may be registered and modified in the child’s home state. The child’s home state is generally where the child has resided for six (6) months with a parent.
If all parties have left the state that issued the controlling order, that state cannot change the support amount. To modify support, the order must be registered for modification in the state of residence of the parent not seeking modification.
UIFSA allows both parents to agree in writing that the state where one parent resides may modify the order and take control of the case. When a state modifies another state’s order, the new support amount is the amount to be collected by all any state in which the obligor resides.
Parents often turn to the Texas Attorney General for assistance in the collection and enforcement of child support, and that can be a good choice. However, parents – especially those who are experiencing continued delays and roadblocks – can hire a private attorney to advocate on their behalf and for the benefit of their children. An attorney can also provide guidance in enforcing and modifying terms of visitation.
NACOL LAW FIRM P.C.
8144 Walnut Hill Lane
Suite 1190
Dallas, Texas 75231
972-690-3333
Office Hours
Monday – Thursday, 8am – 5pm
Friday, 8:30am – 5pm
OUR BLOGS
SEARCH
JOIN OUR NETWORK
Attorney Mark A. Nacol is board certified in Civil Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization
