Guardian living off nephew's ok?

From the way you describe the situation, I see only two choices:

1. Accept the situation as it is and try to make the best of it.

2. As to the remaining child who is under 18, as I have said before, and I quote myself:

"If new facts or evidence demonstrating that the woman who was awarded custody is not a fit parent for the children then there might be grounds to go into court and change custody."

From the context of what you wrote, it sounds like most of the additional detail you have provided either was or could have been raised in the first court proceeding over custody. If so, raising it again now would be a long shot at best.

I am sorry that the experience has been so traumatic for you but the more you keep running it over in your own mind, rather than accept the things you cannot change, the longer it will bother you.

I just wanted to add that my idea of a family is suppose to mean something to you and to tell one to 'Accept the situation as it is and try to make the best of it' is a not easy thing to do just do for me. Not that I want to keep adding stress in my life but how does one walk away and try too not be effected by it when his own sister intruded in on her brother's life only because it looked better then hers?]

As for the 2nd option may I ask why 'raising it again (which wasn't actually raised to begin with) now would be a long shot at best'?... because of the time the that has lapsed I presume maybe? Would it be worth asking the court to have a home study done? Perhaps in that, DFS could see she is not able to take care of them properly?

Your first point is more philosophical than legal. Yes, I am sure accepting the situation is difficult for you. Many things in life are. Losing a loved one, dealing with a serious physical illness, being the victim of a violent crime and not effectively being able to do anything about it, etc. My only response is that unless you can deal with the reality of the situation, you will not be able to move on. You can get stuck in an endless loop of remorse and anager that goes nowhere except to more depression and ultimately despair.

My statement about the difficult of raising an issue that was or could have been raised the first time around in the earlier custody battle refers to both law and judicial pragmatism. As a general legal principle, parties come to court to have their disputes resolved and there is one and only one decision. There can be limited remedies on appeal to make sure that trial court decisions are not totally arbitrary, but there is a strong policy in having a final decision on a dispute. This extends not only to the issues actually litigated, but related issues that could have been litigated the first time. There are legal doctrines which refer to this principle, such as "res judicata" or "issue preclusion", but the technicalities are not important. The principle of finality is.

Now, when child custody is the issue, the rules are not quite as strict. There is recognition that changed circumstances can make a difference in the welfare of the child, so there is a little bit more room to come back into court to challenge the status quo.

However, even there judges tend to leave things the way they were decided the first time. That is simply an observation of human nature. Having made a decision, a judge likes to think that she or he made the "right" decision. It takes an awful lot to change a person's mind and to seriously get them to consider that maybe the first decision has not worked out for the best.

Hind sight tells me I should of made some post's smaller for the reponse from one tells me readers don't want to read alot.

A couple more questions...

"Now, when child custody is the issue, the rules are not quite as strict. There is recognition that changed circumstances can make a difference in the welfare of the child, so there is a little bit more room to come back into court to challenge the status quo."

With the motive of a free ride off the kid's money in mind along with the fact she is very obese, has several health issues, has a history of mental illness, and she has been in the hospital several times over the last few years. She has outsiders helping her to a maid cleaning the house because she is not physically able too. She lacks in being able to give proper structure because she is physcially not able too, as well as her alienating the children possibly good enough reason to change it?


"However, even there judges tend to leave things the way they were decided the first time. That is simply an observation of human nature. Having made a decision, a judge likes to think that she or he made the "right" decision. It takes an awful lot to change a person's mind and to seriously get them to consider that maybe the first decision has not worked out for the best."

So, Do judges have tendency let first decision stand weather they hear the case or not?

First, obesity is irrelevant.

Second, I am puzzled about alienation of the children when you previously said that they would testify for her.

Third, as to the rest, if you really feel that there are changed circumstances that justify changing custody for the remaining child, consult a local attorney competent with these matters and ask if there is any realistic chance of changing the status quo. Yes, it will cost you money to do that.

[color="MediumTurquoise"]So, Do judges have tendency let first decision stand weather they hear the case or not?[/quote]

Yes.

GentleGrace and I have really tried to help you, but we only have so much time to donate here. My general sense of the purpose of this site is to help posters gain a better understanding of the issues so that they can gauge whether they need specific legal counsel beyond that. I believe that your questions have been answered several times over and we are going in circles, like I warned you about in a more general sense. I wish you the best, but I don't intend to follow this thread further.