New York Family Law Blog
In New York custody and support cases, courts consider whether a parent’s actions interfere with the other parent’s rights. Custody decisions are based on what is in the best interests of the child. When a parent asks to change a custody order or support obligation, the court must determine whether a change in circumstances has occurred. A change in circumstances refers to a significant development that affects the parenting arrangement or the child’s relationship with a parent. In Matter of Morgan v. Morgan, the court addressed whether a parent’s interference with visitation rights could justify suspending child support.
Background Facts
The parents were divorced and had two daughters born in 2004 and 2006. After the divorce, the children lived in the Dominican Republic with their maternal grandmother. In 2009, they moved to New York to live with their mother. The mother was granted sole custody, and the father was ordered to pay child support.
Over the years, the father filed several petitions to gain access to his children. In some cases, the court ordered therapeutic parental access. Despite these efforts, the father struggled to maintain a relationship with the children.
In July 2019, the father asked the Family Court to suspend his child support payments. He claimed that the mother had interfered with his relationship with the children and had engaged in a pattern of parental alienation.
Question Before the Court
Whether the father’s child support obligation should be suspended based on the mother’s actions. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the mother deliberately interfered with the father’s right to visitation to the extent that it justified a suspension of child support.
Court’s Decision
After a hearing, the Family Court granted the father’s request and suspended his child support obligation. The court found that the mother had taken repeated actions that interfered with the father’s efforts to have a relationship with the children.
The mother appealed, arguing that the court made errors in reviewing the evidence and relying on the testimony of a forensic evaluator. The appellate court affirmed the Family Court’s decision.
Discussion
In New York, parents have a legal duty to support their children until the age of 21. However, child support can be suspended when a noncustodial parent is denied meaningful access to the child because of the custodial parent’s actions. The law requires proof that the custodial parent has deliberately frustrated or actively interfered with visitation.
In this case, the court found sufficient evidence of interference. The forensic evaluator testified that the mother engaged in a pattern of alienation. For example, the mother refused to bring the children to parenting time sessions, especially after visits that had gone well. The evaluator noted that the mother would claim the children had been traumatized by these visits, even though the reports showed the visits had been appropriate and productive.
The court also considered testimony about the children’s perceptions of the father. One of the children held strong negative views about the father and claimed not to believe he had visited them, even when shown photos and travel records. The evaluator found these beliefs to be distorted and inconsistent with the facts.
The mother also refused to cooperate with court-ordered evaluations. She allowed one session but refused to bring the children for follow-up visits, claiming one child had been traumatized. The evaluator stated that nothing traumatic had occurred and that the mother’s claims were not supported by her observations.
There was additional testimony that the mother spoke with the children about the father’s child support payments and encouraged them to view the father negatively. The court found that the mother had used the children to express her dissatisfaction with the father and that her actions made it difficult or impossible for the father to maintain a relationship with them.
Courts take these situations seriously. While support is a separate obligation from visitation, the law allows for suspension of support in rare cases when access is deliberately blocked. Here, the court determined that the mother’s actions were not just occasional lapses but part of an ongoing effort to interfere with visitation.
The appellate court agreed with the Family Court’s findings. It held that the testimony and evidence presented at the hearing supported the decision. The court rejected the mother’s argument that the evaluator’s testimony was improper, noting that this objection had not been raised at trial.
Conclusion
Matter of Morgan v. Morgan shows how courts in New York respond when one parent interferes with the other’s access to the children. The decision affirms that child support may be suspended when a custodial parent deliberately frustrates the noncustodial parent’s visitation rights. In this case, the mother’s repeated refusal to produce the children for visits and her influence over their perceptions of the father led to the suspension of the father’s child support obligation.
Custody and support cases are often complex and depend on detailed facts. If you are involved in a custody or support dispute and believe your rights are being violated, speak with an experienced New York child custody lawyer. Contact Stephen Bilkis & Associates to learn how we can help protect your rights and guide you through the legal process.