Line 4998 – Fails to recognize if the parent had the ability to pay or if
they even knew they were financially responsible. If CSEA
administratively creates a child support order, that notice is mailed by
snail mail, and delivery proof is not provided.
Line 5001 – No order has been issued at this point by which this
factor can be judged.
Line 5004 – Why do the sponsors keep adding “legal custodian” when
it is a person appointed for a disabled person? For many, the only
relationship they had before was between the sheets.
Line 5009 – Factors in only past performance, and until the filing parent has filed to establish
themselves, they would not have had the opportunity in the past.
Line 5014 – No definition of what a positive or negative environment is.
Line 5015 – Domestic violence advocates often suggest that a mother leave the area to avoid cases.
Line 5018 – Overly broad factor, what is close proximity for some is not for others.
Line 5020 – No clarification of the Guardian Ad Litem and how they make their recommendations in a
gender neutral or unbiased manner.
Line 5021 – There would not have been a parental coordinator at this point. Parent coordinators are
nothing more than a babysitter for adults, and unless they are an attorney have not been able to make
any decisions.
Line 5022 – No mediation has been ordered at this point. The contents of the mediation report have not
been admissible in court traditionally. That allows the mediation to happen freely as each party argues
their side of the situation.
Line 5023 – No specification that these investigations or evaluations are done in a gender neutral and
unbiased manner.
Line 5025 – No definition of what these classes are required to teach the parents.
Line 5028 – Relative safety is subjective, and urban areas have higher crime rates than rural areas.
Line 5030 – This would properly fall under perjury, not a factor for determining a parent’s right to
visitations or time with their child. No cross-reference to Ohio’s perjury statute.
Line 5035 – Fails to state to what degree and party must support that the action was unjustified.
Line 5040 – Overly broad factor and total subjection by the judge or magistrate.
Line 5041 – While this seems to state that the courts are to remain unbiased, it also states that they are
to consider the financial status of a parent indicates that a parent can be denied simply because they are
poor.
Line 5044 – The most used fact by the courts in divorce or never-married custody cases is that the
parents can’t get along. This will not change that.
Line 5047 – Judges and magistrates are legally trained, not medically trained. What abilities would they
possess that qualify them to make such and decision, and what are the consequences if the court picks
the work program?
Line 5053 – Is this parent education or indoctrination into the way the court thinks? The sponsors have
confused abuse and neglect cases with the “original” filings for allocation of parental rights and physical
custody.
Line 5058 - Is this parent education or indoctrination into the way the court thinks?
Line 5061 – First, the sponsors want it ordered, and now they allow the court to waive the requirement.
Which is it going to be?
Line 5063 – Is this to educate or indoctrinate that child? A child’s education is best left to a qualified
educator.
Line 5066 – FERPA controls all issues related to education.
Line 5069 – Is the child to submit this report through a “next best friend”?
Line 5073 – Overly broad list of investigations. Many of these are not relevant to the proceedings.
Line 5078 – Does not list who is qualified to evaluate these listed medical conditions. While it lists some,
it does not specify what their qualifications are.
Line 5083 – Rules 16.50 through 16.55 of the rules of Superintendence of the Court.
Line 5085 – Fails to specify who the evaluator may talk to and if the person is qualified to speak in an
unbiased manner. We are talking never-married cases.
Line 5091 – As they should be when reporting to the court and testifying in a court proceeding.
Line 5095 – Fails to list how the apportionment is done and what information is used.
Line 5098 – In camera interviews will allow the child to speak their mind to the court, BUT they are too
often done after the trial and need to be done before trial, so parents and the attorney have all available
information in hand.
Line 5103 – The most neutral place is the courtroom; another location could affect the seriousness of
the situation in the child’s eyes.
Line 5108 – Does not specify how sufficient reasoning is determined or from whom they gather the
information.
Line 5109 – Fails to qualify what the special circumstances are, or does not determine if it would fail to
be in the best interest of the child.
Line 5112 – Fails to completely list those who are necessary for this proceeding.
Line 5116 – Needs to qualify that the Guardian ad litem is to remain silent and only observe.
Line 5118 – This is about the only sensible section in this bill. A cookie-cutter list of questions from the
judge will not draw out the information that the child wants to give the court.
possess that qualify them to make such and decision, and what are the consequences if the court picks
the work program?
Line 5053 – Is this parent education or indoctrination into the way the court thinks? The sponsors have
confused abuse and neglect cases with the “original” filings for allocation of parental rights and physical
custody.
Line 5058 - Is this parent education or indoctrination into the way the court thinks?
Line 5061 – First, the sponsors want it ordered, and now they allow the court to waive the requirement.
Which is it going to be?
Line 5063 – Is this to educate or indoctrinate that child? A child’s education is best left to a qualified
educator.
Line 5066 – FERPA controls all issues related to education.
Line 5069 – Is the child to submit this report through a “next best friend”?
Line 5073 – Overly broad list of investigations. Many of these are not relevant to the proceedings.
Line 5078 – Does not list who is qualified to evaluate these listed medical conditions. While it lists some,
it does not specify what their qualifications are.
Line 5083 – Rules 16.50 through 16.55 of the rules of Superintendence of the Court.
Line 5085 – Fails to specify who the evaluator may talk to and if the person is qualified to speak in an
unbiased manner. We are talking never-married cases.
Line 5091 – As they should be when reporting to the court and testifying in a court proceeding.
Line 5095 – Fails to list how the apportionment is done and what information is used.
Line 5098 – In camera interviews will allow the child to speak their mind to the court, BUT they are too
often done after the trial and need to be done before trial, so parents and the attorney have all available
information in hand.
Line 5103 – The most neutral place is the courtroom; another location could affect the seriousness of
the situation in the child’s eyes.
Line 5108 – Does not specify how sufficient reasoning is determined or from whom they gather the
information.
Line 5109 – Fails to qualify what the special circumstances are, or does not determine if it would fail to
be in the best interest of the child.
Line 5112 – Fails to completely list those who are necessary for this proceeding.
Line 5116 – Needs to qualify that the Guardian ad litem is to remain silent and only observe.
Line 5118 – This is about the only sensible section in this bill. A cookie-cutter list of questions from the
judge will not draw out the information that the child wants to give the court.
Line 5122 – A failure to list how the proceeding will be recorded. Will it be by a court reporter or by tape
that can fail or be turned off midstream by the judge? Lack of the recording would end any chance of
appeal by the parents.
Line 5126 – Does not change from current law in ORC 3109.04 (3)
Line 5132 – Again with the sponsor and drafter’s confusion about what a “Guardian” is. It would
hamper an attorney appointed for the child when a conflict exists between the child’s wishes and the
Guardian Ad Litem.
Line 5138 – The use of “Preponderance” instead of “Clear and Convincing Evidence” violates the
fundamental right to parent.
Line 5145 – As we read and work through this section, it is clear that the sponsors and LCS drafter do not
understand that custody cases are between fit parents and not those who are under investigation due
to allegations of abuse or neglect.
Line 5151 – These conditions require clear and convincing evidence to prove, and that is only after the
children’s service finds proof after a thorough investigation.
Line 5153 - These conditions require clear and convincing evidence to prove, and that is only after the
children’s service finds proof after a thorough investigation.
Line 5155 - These conditions require clear and convincing evidence to prove, and that is only after
children’s services finds proof after a thorough investigation. It also fails to qualify who is doing the
testing it requires.
Line 5157 - These conditions require clear and convincing evidence to prove, and that is only after
children’s services finds proof after a thorough investigation. The conditions listed are overly broad.
Line 5159 - These conditions require clear and convincing evidence to prove, and that is only after
children’s services finds proof after a thorough investigation. Overly broad and very subjective. These
conditions can only be determined after extensive psychological testing, which is expensive and
subjective on the part of the tester.
Line 5162 – Not a relevant factor, and these listed conditions are best reserved for a Show Cause
(contempt) proceeding.
Line 5165 - These conditions require clear and convincing evidence to prove, and that is only after
children’s service finds proof after a thorough investigation, and proof such by a qualified medical
doctor.
Line 5166 – Fails to state how this is determined and by whom. False information is too often used and
suggested by Domestic Violence advocates in an effort to deny a parent time with their child. The forms
used require a parent to disclose these conditions.
Line 5170- Forms require that these conditions exist. Sexual abusers are, by law, forbidden from being in
the presence of a child and are limited in how close they may be where children gather.
Line 5175 – Overly broad and lacks specificity on what the factors are.
that can fail or be turned off midstream by the judge? Lack of the recording would end any chance of
appeal by the parents.
Line 5126 – Does not change from current law in ORC 3109.04 (3)
Line 5132 – Again with the sponsor and drafter’s confusion about what a “Guardian” is. It would
hamper an attorney appointed for the child when a conflict exists between the child’s wishes and the
Guardian Ad Litem.
Line 5138 – The use of “Preponderance” instead of “Clear and Convincing Evidence” violates the
fundamental right to parent.
Line 5145 – As we read and work through this section, it is clear that the sponsors and LCS drafter do not
understand that custody cases are between fit parents and not those who are under investigation due
to allegations of abuse or neglect.
Line 5151 – These conditions require clear and convincing evidence to prove, and that is only after the
children’s service finds proof after a thorough investigation.
Line 5153 - These conditions require clear and convincing evidence to prove, and that is only after the
children’s service finds proof after a thorough investigation.
Line 5155 - These conditions require clear and convincing evidence to prove, and that is only after
children’s services finds proof after a thorough investigation. It also fails to qualify who is doing the
testing it requires.
Line 5157 - These conditions require clear and convincing evidence to prove, and that is only after
children’s services finds proof after a thorough investigation. The conditions listed are overly broad.
Line 5159 - These conditions require clear and convincing evidence to prove, and that is only after
children’s services finds proof after a thorough investigation. Overly broad and very subjective. These
conditions can only be determined after extensive psychological testing, which is expensive and
subjective on the part of the tester.
Line 5162 – Not a relevant factor, and these listed conditions are best reserved for a Show Cause
(contempt) proceeding.
Line 5165 - These conditions require clear and convincing evidence to prove, and that is only after
children’s service finds proof after a thorough investigation, and proof such by a qualified medical
doctor.
Line 5166 – Fails to state how this is determined and by whom. False information is too often used and
suggested by Domestic Violence advocates in an effort to deny a parent time with their child. The forms
used require a parent to disclose these conditions.
Line 5170- Forms require that these conditions exist. Sexual abusers are, by law, forbidden from being in
the presence of a child and are limited in how close they may be where children gather.
Line 5175 – Overly broad and lacks specificity on what the factors are.
Line 5177 – Fails to state that a court shall make the following and support that decision with a finding
of facts and conclusion of law.
Line 5181 - Fails to state that a court shall make the following and support that decision with a finding of
facts and conclusion of law. Only the use of clear and convincing evidence can be used to infringe on a
parent’s fundamental right to parent.
Line 5183 - Fails to state that a court shall make the following and support that decision with a finding of
facts and conclusion of law. Only the use of clear and convincing evidence can be used to infringe on a
parent’s fundamental right to parent.
Line 5184 - Fails to state that a court shall make the following, and support that decision with a finding
of facts and conclusion of law.
Line 5185 – Already done by parents to protect themselves from previous false allegations.
Line 5187 – fails to state why supervised parenting is ordered and what brought the court to issue such
an order.
Line 5188 – No parent should have to pay to see their child.
Line 5190 – Overly broad conditions and no specifications on who will administer these programs. Are
the programs to be administered in a gender neutral manner? Who is paying the cost of these
programs? Abuse and neglect cases require parents facing the allegations to follow an agreed-upon
“case plan” to clear their name.
Line 5195 – How is this condition going to be monitored and by whom?
Line 5197 – Bond? Very questionable for a fit parent, or are the sponsors and LSC drafter confusing this
with the bond when a party is appointed a guardian of a disabled or incompetent person by the probate
court?
Line 5198 – Overly broad and fails to state the evidentiary standard to be used and how the court
intends to support their decision.
Line 5203 - Overly broad and fails to state the evidentiary standard to be used and how the court
intends to support their decision. Fails to state whether the domestic violence is criminal or merely a
civil order of protection based on alleged fear of the other party.
Line 5206 – Overly broad and fails to state the evidentiary standard that the court is required to use in
making and supporting its decision.
Line 5213 – The information contained here is required to be revealed in the initial paperwork when a
case is filed. Courts fail to confirm that information by checking other dockets, such as juvenile or
criminal courts.
Line 5219 - The information contained here is required to be revealed in the initial paperwork when a
case is filed. Courts fail to confirm that information by checking other dockets, such as juvenile or
criminal courts.
of facts and conclusion of law.
Line 5181 - Fails to state that a court shall make the following and support that decision with a finding of
facts and conclusion of law. Only the use of clear and convincing evidence can be used to infringe on a
parent’s fundamental right to parent.
Line 5183 - Fails to state that a court shall make the following and support that decision with a finding of
facts and conclusion of law. Only the use of clear and convincing evidence can be used to infringe on a
parent’s fundamental right to parent.
Line 5184 - Fails to state that a court shall make the following, and support that decision with a finding
of facts and conclusion of law.
Line 5185 – Already done by parents to protect themselves from previous false allegations.
Line 5187 – fails to state why supervised parenting is ordered and what brought the court to issue such
an order.
Line 5188 – No parent should have to pay to see their child.
Line 5190 – Overly broad conditions and no specifications on who will administer these programs. Are
the programs to be administered in a gender neutral manner? Who is paying the cost of these
programs? Abuse and neglect cases require parents facing the allegations to follow an agreed-upon
“case plan” to clear their name.
Line 5195 – How is this condition going to be monitored and by whom?
Line 5197 – Bond? Very questionable for a fit parent, or are the sponsors and LSC drafter confusing this
with the bond when a party is appointed a guardian of a disabled or incompetent person by the probate
court?
Line 5198 – Overly broad and fails to state the evidentiary standard to be used and how the court
intends to support their decision.
Line 5203 - Overly broad and fails to state the evidentiary standard to be used and how the court
intends to support their decision. Fails to state whether the domestic violence is criminal or merely a
civil order of protection based on alleged fear of the other party.
Line 5206 – Overly broad and fails to state the evidentiary standard that the court is required to use in
making and supporting its decision.
Line 5213 – The information contained here is required to be revealed in the initial paperwork when a
case is filed. Courts fail to confirm that information by checking other dockets, such as juvenile or
criminal courts.
Line 5219 - The information contained here is required to be revealed in the initial paperwork when a
case is filed. Courts fail to confirm that information by checking other dockets, such as juvenile or
criminal courts.