Win your child custody case faster and cheaper with Easy to Use Motions that Protect Your Rights and Your Child’s Rights…*
These motions show you how to argue that you are equal to the other parent.
Are you being told that you are going to have to pay child support but want to argue that you support your child directly?
Your parental authority and the control over your financial future depends on proper due process and protection of your fundamental parental rights.
But you don’t understand how to ask the court to do this?
The motions on this page will help you with that. The path to parental equality…equal rights and equal time to your child starts right here on this page.
These motions give you argument to protect you and your child from abuse of power.*
Want these arguments, get the comprehensive motions and petitions here:
What good was knowing you had rights if you didn’t know how to use them? Now you can use them quickly and easily with these motions. (Motions can be used in every state.)
This first motion is used to argue for equal protection.
The second motion is used to argue for DUE PROCESS protection of your substantive rights.
The third motion is used to argue for DUE PROCESS Procedural protection.
The Fourth item is a Petition. This is argument to be added into your counterpetition to frame your case and prepare the court for the motions.
All of these motions and the Petition are designed to be used together as a comprehensive way to persuade your court that you have what it takes to get them overturned if they abuse their discretion or their authority and attempt to infringe or burden your rights.
Most parents get overwhelmed when it comes time to present to their attorney or the court that they have equal rights and get told that it will be super expensive to fight the court’s abuse of power, so the Palmers have made it cheap and easy by creating motions that protect your parental equality. The protection of your rights are built right into these motions. (These motions are FOR EVERY STATE in the U.S. The motions are in Word format so that you can type directly into them.)
Want to learn how to use these motions, go to the webinar page and register for one of the training webinars. TAKE ME TO THE WEBINAR PAGE
Stop the courts dead in their tracks today by using these motions to protect you and your child from the damaging orders that the court will make if you don’t!
When the judge tells you:
- that your rights don’t apply in family court
- that you don’t know the law
- that your rights don’t apply because the dispute is between two parents and not the state
When the attorney tells you:
- that you only have these rights in termination cases
- and “that’s not how things are done”
Now you can fight back with confidence and use these motions to protect yourself from being punished for protesting instead of feeling trapped, forced, and bullied into giving in.*
These rights arguments have already been proven to work…
One appellate court in Wade v. Wade (the case is in the package with the motions) shows that 1st and 4th amendment are protected even when it is between two parents and not a termination proceeding. This case shows:
- that the constitutional principles that we teach absolutely do apply in child custody cases even when it is not a termination case!
- that a parent has to be found unfit before the court can invade their privacy. (Yep, this court actually uses the word fit and unfitness! And yep this is a case between two parents with no cps involved!
- that the burden is on the party requesting and the party facing accusations and allegations does not have to prove anything. Allegations and accusations are conclusory and do not support the requirements of “good cause.” This comes from 4th amendment protections. Even though this court does not specifically call out 4th amendment, it is where these requirements and protections come from. (Ha so much for statutes placing the burden on the accused parent in this district in Florida! And so much for the court stating that they are ordering for the best interest of the child.)
- that the issue has to be one that is “in controversy” so if it was not properly plead, i.e. if the mental health of the parent was not brought into the pleading and evidence was not more than just allegations then it is only conclusory. And conclusory is not sufficient to meet the “due cause” requirements. And this court mentions that their “in controversy” and “good cause” requirements closely mirror the federal requirements.
- that if the parent being accused volunteers their own mental health then it is brought in (exactly why we tell parents not to consent voluntarily and not to give in to the court making demands if the court did not prove properly)
- that even after meeting the two prongs to justify the ordering of a psych eval the court also has to prove that the parent is unable to meet the child’s “special needs.”
- that challenging these invasive orders can prevail in the appellate courts and the appellate courts issue a quash order. (We have on our website and in our videos that parents should file a protection order/quash order whenever the court orders invasion of their privacy or the other party requests it in the form of discovery. This further supports the quash order approach.)
- that the appellate court ties their case law into the current case they are evaluating and comments that they are dealing with a very similar case. Here is what they said:
- “Here, we have a very similar case. There has been no evidence, other than the Father’s conclusory allegations in his Emergency Motion, that any of the Mother’s behavior has had, or will have, an adverse effect on the children, or that the Mother cannot meet the needs of the children. To reiterate, the trial court ordered that the children should go home with the Mother for visitation the very same afternoon that it ordered her to undergo a mental evaluation. Thus, the trial court clearly did not think there was “good cause” to believe that the Mother’s mental status jeopardized the children’s well-being. We agree that the Mother’s actions in front of the Illinois courthouse erroneously suggested that she was homeless, but this is insufficient to satisfy the “good cause” prerequisite under rule 1.360.
- We conclude that the pleadings and the admissible evidence presented at the hearing do not demonstrate that the Mother’s mental condition is “in controversy” or that “good cause” exists to subject her to a compulsory mental examination, and thus, the trial court’s order departs from the essential requirements of law. Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of certiorari and quash the portions of the order relating to the compulsory psychological examination of the Mother and the Mother’s participation in the oldest child’s therapy.
- Petition granted; order quashed in part.”
(Wade v. Wade is a 3rd district appellate court in Florida and is not controlling in every state. The principles that they used regarding “good cause” and “in controversy” and the fitness analysis and the things that we mentioned in the bullet points above are universal for every state. You use this case as advisory and can search for cases in your state appellate courts on scholar.google.com.)
Now when the courts abuse you and you protest and they try to punish you for protesting you can protect yourself by following these 5 simple easy steps:
- Get the motions.
- Customize the motions to your case.
- Use the motions as you see fit in your case.
- Argue the motions orally in a hearing to get the declarations and your rights established and protected in your court.
- If your court refuses to respect and protect these rights you will have something with teeth to appeal
Why didn’t the appellate court in Wade call out the 1st and 4th amendment specifically? The appellate courts do not have time or necessity to connect every dot to every constitutional protection. They make rulings on principles without explaining the detail of where those principles come from. That is our job as scholars and educators here are Fix Family Courts. We help you understand where these principles come from so that you can direct the courts to the appropriate principles and their sources in your pleadings. This is how you frame the discussion and lead the judges down the proper constitutional path.
You can also use these motions in conjunction with a motion for a protective order against discovery and in conjunction with a motion for a quash order too.
*Be aware that a judge can still punish you at any time. These motions help you argue to overturn them if you have proven that they should not have applied that consequence or that they did not properly apply the consequence.
DISCLAIMER: *There are never any guarantees that you will prevail or win in your case. The authors are not attorneys and are not practicing law. The authors are not making any guarantees. Anything that you use from this writing and from this website you use at your own risk. The authors are not responsible for any damages. You are responsible for deciding what is appropriate in your case. You are encouraged to seek an attorney to help you present your rights. This is education protected by the 1st amendment.