Saturday, March 1, 1997 | 11:59 a.m.
A Family Court judge, over the vehement objections of the mother, ordered that a boy's name on his birth certificate be changed to include his mother's former boyfriend.
Judge Fran Fine also ordered that the man share custody of the boy because he was the only father the 4-year-old has known.
The mother, whom we'll refer to only as Deborah, says the man was "in and out" of her life for several years but was never a real father to her son. They were never married. He is not the biological father, she says, pointing to a DNA test she says proves it. She adds that he never adopted the boy.
The man, whom we'll refer to as Mike, is the father of Deborah's second child, a 2-year-old girl.
And while she is not objecting to visitation between Mike and his daughter, she is against the relationship the court is establishing between Mike and her son.
She is appealing the custody decision to the Nevada Supreme Court, which may hear the case within the next two months.
"It's against the law to give away a mother's son just because a man is in and out of her life," Deborah says.
The fact she had a relationship with Mike "doesn't make him a parent or a father," she says.
Deborah is not placing all the blame on the judge, nor does she want to castigate Mike, even though they have had a stormy relationship.
She says the Family Mediation and Assessment Center report on the situation was not thorough.
"No one came to my home; no one looked at my family. I wanted Social Services to go to (Mike's) and see the conditions there (but they didn't)," she says.
The children are with Mike from 10 a.m. Mondays to 6 p.m. Tuesdays. He has them on certain holidays.
According to an FMAC report, Mike "has established a warm, loving relationship" with the boy, "equal to, if not greater than, that of father and son."
Deborah says she left Mike after he tried to choke her. She says he was convicted of charges in the incident, but Mike appealed and a new trial has been scheduled.
According to a psychologist's letter, Mike and Deborah's relationship "has a large potential for continued abuse." FMAC recommended Mike undergo anger management counseling.
According to court papers, Mike wants to be a father to the boy, as well as to his own daughter.
Judge Fine initially said Mike had to pay child support for both children, but another judge later ruled that since he was not the boy's father, he only owed support for his daughter.
Deborah has a seizure disorder, which Mike contends in court papers affects her ability to care for the children. She's on medication, and, according to a letter from a physician, her condition does not affect her ability to parent. She's on SSI, and she and the two children live with her parents in a comfortable home.
Deborah's case is one of many the Assembly Judiciary Committee likely will hear when it conducts a hearing Friday on Family Court problems.
Increasing numbers of families upset by court decisions have stepped up protests of Family Court and plan to attend the committee hearing.
As in nearly all Family Court cases, black and white issues blend into a thousand shades of gray. There are three sides to every story.
The most bitter disputes often involve allegations of domestic violence and sexual abuse of the children.
Judges vary in how much weight they give those allegations, some of which are difficult to prove.
That only adds to the parents' frustration, as shown in the following two cases:
* A UNLV professor says his wife has a history of mental problems and tried to commit suicide at least three times. One time, he says, she hooked up the exhaust pipe to the car in the garage -- and their two young children were with her.
When the couple divorced, she was given primary physical custody of the children. They share legal custody.
The professor, whom we'll call Ed, has the children three weekends a month and four hours on Wednesday. He says his 7-year-old daughter and 4-year-old boy scream and run around the neighborhood when it's time to return to their mother.
In court papers, the mother claims her suicide attempts and emotional outbursts were the result of abuse by Ed. He denies any abuse. He says if his ex-wife would get the proper medical attention and he knew the children would be safe in her care, he would not object to joint physical custody.
She fears he may flee the country with the children. He cites his many years in Las Vegas and says he has no reason to leave.
Like Deborah, Ed says the FMAC investigation was not thorough. He is back in Family Court before a new judge whom he says "read the file and listens, which is unusual."
* A Henderson man has been waging all-out war for five years to spend more time with his three children. His 10-year-old daughter and sons, age 8 and 6, have all been diagnosed as having Attention Deficit Disorder and are on medication.
Al questions the dosage and the need for the medication, even though several other doctors have concurred with both.
Time and time again he has brought up allegations of abuse of his daughter by his ex-wife and her husband of four years, but he says his pleas have been ignored. In 1992, he says, his daughter told him of being sexually abused by Ann's former boyfriend. The allegation was investigated but was found to be unsubstantiated.
A woman with a social work background who became friends with Al says his daughter told her about abusive incidents, but no one has listened to her, either.
But this is not a simple case. Al and his ex-wife, whom we'll refer to as "Ann," have been at war for several years spanning two states. In that time, the daughter, especially, has exhibited increasingly violent and aggressive behavior -- which is a common reaction in such strained environments. An FMAC report noted that the children desperately need peace in their lives.
Because of his relentless efforts, some consider Al a "hothead" who's obsessed. Others respond by asking: "What would you do if you were in his shoes and they were your children?"
Ann and her present husband, described in one corner as a "nice couple," are frustrated by Al's continual allegations. They also want peace in their lives.
In court papers, Ann says the children need protection from Al's abusive, inconsistent parental style. She says he has emotionally abused the children for years.
They say Al uses repeated litigation to continue battering Ann.
He says he's a "tenacious person, especially when it comes to my kids.
There are conflicting reports from psychiatrists and therapists as to the suitability of Al and Ann to co-parent.
Al's friend who worked in Child Protective Services in California suggests an "unbiased attorney" be appointed for the children to determine what's in their best interest.
Al has been admonished by Family Court for continuing to raise "old issues" such as the abuse and for repeatedly bringing Ann back to court.
According to a clinical psychologist's report, "it was obvious that a history of hurt and rejection had left him (Al) burned and obsessed with injustice. He once reported, 'I'm screaming for help and no one cares.'"
Everyone connected with the case agrees the children need "protecting." But from whom?
archive
