FFathers Are Parents ProjectHelp the Fight

A father. A daughter. More than thirteen months of silence.

A fit father is a parent, not a visitor.

I have not seen my daughter or had any communication with her in more than 13 months. I am approximately $60,000 in debt after years of litigation, and I am still fighting to restore our relationship.

Read My StoryHelp Me Keep Fighting

Why this exists

This started as my case. It cannot end there.

Family-court disputes are intensely personal, but the public-policy questions are larger: Are parenting orders enforced consistently? Can ordinary parents afford meaningful due process? What happens when a parent-child relationship disappears while litigation continues?

This project will collect documented experiences from parents across the country and turn individual stories into patterns that journalists, advocates, researchers and lawmakers can actually examine.

A father walking up courthouse steps

The standard

Evidence before accusation.

Children before clicks. Reform before revenge.

My Story

I ran out of money before I ran out of reasons to keep fighting.

I have not seen or communicated with my daughter for more than 13 months while continuing to pursue a court-directed path toward reunification.

I have accumulated approximately $60,000 in debt from attorneys, filings, hearings and related costs. This project exists both to help me continue that fight and to document whether other families are experiencing similar structural problems.

Beginning in July 2025, my scheduled parenting time stopped. Since then, Mother has withheld my parenting time, and I have had no communication of any kind with my daughter. This site will document the orders that were in effect, whether any court order authorized that complete cutoff, the court's responses, and what happened afterward. Rather than ask readers to accept accusations, I will publish the redacted records and let the record speak for itself.

22M+U.S. parents estimated to be non-reciprocating targets of parental alienating behaviors.Harman et al., Children and Youth Services Review, 2019
3.8M+U.S. children estimated to be moderately to severely alienated from a parent.Harman et al., Children and Youth Services Review, 2019
26% vs. 6%Reported a period of estrangement from fathers versus mothers in a national longitudinal U.S. study.Reczek et al., Journal of Marriage and Family, 2023
72%of domestic-relations cases in a national study involved at least one self-represented party.Family Justice Initiative / National Center for State Courts & IAALS, 2018
Explore the Research Library

Case Timeline

What happened, in the order it happened.

This timeline separates court records from firsthand accounts and identifies where supporting documentation is available or still pending.

2016
Case history

Family-court litigation begins

The parties' domestic-relations case began in 2016. What followed became a years-long series of parenting-time, custody, therapy, enforcement and related proceedings.

Source: Hamilton County Domestic Relations case history.

View: Case Filings Timeline
May 1, 2017
Court order

Original parenting framework established

The Final Decree of Divorce designated Mother as residential parent and legal custodian and provided Father parenting time under the incorporated Parenting Agreement.

Source: Final Decree of Divorce and incorporated Parenting Agreement, entered May 1, 2017.

View: Final Decree of Divorce with Attachments
Feb. 8, 2021
Agreed entry

Father's parenting time substantially expanded

The parties entered an Agreed Entry establishing a rotating schedule that provided Father approximately six overnights every fourteen days during the school year and eight during summer, plus holidays and extended parenting time.

Source: Agreed Entry entered February 8, 2021.

View: Agreed Parenting-Time Entry
Aug. 15, 2022
Court decision

Parenting time significantly reduced

A Magistrate's Decision reduced Father's school-year parenting time. The decision also continued therapy-related requirements and directed the parents to work toward expanding Father's parenting time as circumstances improved.

Source: Magistrate's Decision with Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, August 15, 2022.

View: Magistrate's Decision
May-Aug. 2023
Case history

Parties return to the 2021 parenting schedule

The parties resumed the February 2021 summer schedule in May 2023 and later resumed the 2021 school-year schedule in August 2023.

Source: Case chronology and subsequent filings documenting the schedule being followed.

View: Case Filings Timeline
Oct. 3, 2024
Evaluation

Custody evaluation recommends a 5-2-2-5 schedule

A court-ordered Partial Custody Evaluation recommended a regular 5-2-2-5 parenting schedule.

Source: Partial Custody Evaluation report, October 3, 2024.

Feb. 2025
Court record + account

A renewed parenting-time dispute begins

A new dispute arose over which school-year parenting schedule controlled. Father later filed contempt and make-up parenting-time motions alleging that parenting time required by the existing orders was being withheld.

Source: 2025 parenting-time enforcement filings and subsequent trial record.

View: Father's Closing ArgumentView: Mother's Closing ArgumentView: Case Filings Timeline
July 25, 2025
Related court proceeding

Protection-order proceeding filed; ex parte relief denied

Mother filed a Domestic Violence Civil Protection Order petition on behalf of the Minor Child. Ex parte relief was denied and the matter was scheduled for a full hearing.

Source: Domestic Violence Civil Protection Order proceeding, July 25, 2025.

July 25-27, 2025
Court record + account

Routine and extended parenting time do not occur

Father's scheduled routine parenting time did not occur, followed by the scheduled start of extended summer parenting time, which also did not occur. Father maintains that Mother withheld the parenting time. He reports that this became the beginning of the continuous separation and complete loss of communication with his daughter.

Source: Parenting-time filings, subsequent trial record and Father's firsthand account.

View: Father's Closing ArgumentView: Parenting-Time Withheld Summary
Aug. 18, 2025
Court decision

Protection-order petition dismissed

After a full hearing, the Domestic Violence Civil Protection Order petition was dismissed.

Source: DVCPO dismissal, August 18, 2025.

Aug. 26, 2025
Magistrate decision

Court orders facilitation and make-up parenting time

A Magistrate's Decision ordered facilitation of parenting time and make-up parenting time following the interruption.

Source: Magistrate's Decision, August 26, 2025.

Sept. 8, 25 & 30, 2025
Trial

Multi-day trial addresses the 2025 disputes

The court conducted a multi-day trial addressing the parties' contempt, enforcement and parenting-time motions. Both parties later submitted written closing arguments presenting competing interpretations of the evidence.

Source: Trial record and parties' written closing arguments filed October 10, 2025.

View: Father's Closing ArgumentView: Mother's Closing Argument
Late 2025
Transcript requested

Phone conference addresses withheld parenting time

Father recalls the magistrate stating that there was no reason Mother should be withholding parenting time and rejecting opposing counsel's disagreement. The transcript has been requested. Until it is obtained, this event is presented only as Father's firsthand recollection and not as a verified quotation.

Oct. 16, 2025
Court order

Court directs a structured path toward reunification

A Temporary Order found reunification therapy to be in the Minor Child's best interest and established a structured therapeutic process intended to move toward reunification.

Source: Temporary Order on Therapy for Father, October 16, 2025.

View: Temporary Order on Therapy
Oct. 16, 2025
Court order

Separate order removes the Minor Child's therapist

In a separate sua sponte order, the magistrate removed the Minor Child's therapist and ordered an independent second-opinion assessment. That removal order did not remain in effect permanently and was later set aside.

Source: Order removing Minor Child's therapist, October 16, 2025.

View: Order Removing Minor Child's Therapist
Jan. 8, 2026
Judge's order

Therapist-removal order is vacated on due-process grounds

The Judge granted Mother's Motion to Set Aside and vacated the October 16 therapist-removal order because the issue had not been properly noticed for determination. The ruling addressed the lack of notice and opportunity to be heard; it did not resolve the merits of every criticism contained in the earlier order.

Source: Order granting Motion to Set Aside, January 8, 2026.

View: Order Granting Motion to Set AsideView: Scheduling Entry for Set-Aside Hearing
Jan. 15-20, 2026
Agreed entry

Reunification therapy expressly established

The parties finalized an Agreed Entry establishing reunification therapy. Its stated goal is parental reunification and resumption of Father's routine parenting time.

Source: Agreed Entry Establishing Reunification Therapy, January 2026.

View: Agreed Entry Establishing Reunification Therapy

The Question

How can a court direct a process intended to achieve reunification while a father and daughter remain completely without contact more than 13 months later?

That is the question this project will pursue with court records, timelines, and evidence rather than accusation, harassment, or online mob tactics.

Evidence Library

The record should speak louder than rhetoric.

The public Evidence Library contains redacted court records, filed party submissions, and supporting materials. Each item is labeled by evidentiary status so readers can distinguish court decisions from allegations, arguments, and firsthand accounts.

Pending

Phone Conference Transcript

Requested to verify recalled oral statements concerning withheld parenting time. Until obtained, those statements are identified only as a firsthand recollection and not as a verified quotation.

Transcript requested
Publishing ruleEvidence status matters.

A party's allegation is not a judicial finding. A closing argument is not a court decision. A personal recollection is not a transcript. Public claims on this site are labeled accordingly.

Explore the Full Evidence Library13 public redacted documents currently available

The Movement

From isolated cases to measurable reform.

This is a father-led effort, not an anti-mother project. The target is unfair process, inconsistent enforcement, unaffordable litigation, and systems that allow parent-child relationships to deteriorate without effective resolution.

Equal dignity

Fit fathers and mothers should enter court as parents, not primary and secondary classes of parent.

Enforceable orders

Parenting orders should be understandable, timely and meaningfully enforceable.

Evidence-based decisions

Serious allegations deserve serious investigation. Findings must be distinguished from accusations.

Affordable due process

A parent-child relationship should not depend on who can finance litigation longest.

Reunification that reunifies

When reunification is ordered, goals, progress and accountability should be clear enough to prevent indefinite limbo.

Children first

Advocacy must protect children from public exposure, adult conflict, harassment and retaliation.

What we are building

Turn individual experiences into usable evidence.

  • A privacy-conscious national database of family-court experiences.
  • State and county-level summaries once sample sizes become meaningful.
  • Documented case studies that separate findings, allegations and firsthand accounts.
  • A network of state organizers, lawyers, researchers and parent advocates.
  • Evidence-based policy briefs and legislative testimony.
  • A media resource center built around verifiable source material.

National Story Intake

Tell us what happened. Leave the children out of the spotlight.

Dates, costs, orders, filings, and outcomes are useful. Children's identifying information is not.

Protect the child first.

Do not submit a child's full name, birth date, home address, school, medical information, therapy records, photographs, or other identifying details.

How may the project use this information?

Build the Network

A movement needs jobs, not just followers.

This project will need people who can organize, verify, research, analyze, communicate, and build responsibly. The goal is a durable national network, not a comment section with matching opinions.

State organizer

Build a state network and track reform opportunities.

Story verifier

Help turn narratives into document-supported timelines.

Data volunteer

Clean anonymized submissions and identify defensible patterns.

Legal professional

Contribute general education, policy analysis, and public-material review.

Researcher

Help create surveys and reports that can survive scrutiny.

Media / storyteller

Interview parents responsibly and communicate verified cases.

Community ambassador

Recruit participants and organize local events without targeting individuals.

Fundraising volunteer

Build sustainable, transparent support for advocacy and research.

Share Your CaseVolunteer and professional contact options will be added before public launch.

Media & Advocacy

A source page built for verification.

The project began with the case of an Ohio father who reports that he has not seen or communicated with his daughter since July 2025 while continuing litigation concerning parenting time and a court-directed path toward reunification. He estimates approximately $60,000 in legal and court-related debt.

The Fathers Are Parents Project uses that case as a starting point to collect and examine other parents' documented experiences involving parenting-time access, enforcement, litigation cost, due process, and prolonged parent-child separation.

Interview topics

  • Financial barriers to family-court litigation
  • Parenting-time enforcement and delay
  • How reunification processes are defined and measured
  • Responsible public use of court records
  • Building an anonymized national dataset

Privacy & Publishing Standards

Protect children. Label evidence. Don't weaponize the audience.

Credibility depends on how information is handled, not just what is published. These standards apply to case materials, submitted stories, media work, and future research produced by this project.

Children's privacy

No intentional publication of children's full names, birth dates, home addresses, schools, medical records, therapy notes, photographs, or other identifying information.

Evidence labels

Judicial findings, party allegations, filed arguments, firsthand accounts, supporting materials, and pending verification are treated as different categories of information.

No harassment

No doxxing, threats, review-bombing, intimidation, or campaigns targeting former partners, children, judges, lawyers, therapists, court staff, witnesses, or other individuals connected to a case.

Corrections

Material factual errors should be corrected prominently. Court records and verified transcripts take priority over memory or recollection when they conflict.