I'll concede that this particular ruling does seem quite unfair; more in favor of the residential parent vs. the non-residential.
As of recent I have been searching for Tennessee case law regarding the rights of a non-residential parent to move a great distance from the child and how the Court feels this affects the child life as relates to interference with the child's chosen activities (ie sports, scouting). Unfortunately, there seems to be absolutely no precendence set for such.
It is my opinion that the current Parenting Plan set forth by Tennessee is very vague; often not covering issues that recently divorcing couples do not realize will arise, most likely, at a later date. For example, what is the assumption of a child's activities when the non-residential parent moves out of town? Why is it not specicially stated that each parent must provide a current address and telephone number (at least not within the ones used locally)? What is expected when inclement weather (ie snow, ice) is impending on a Sunday during the non-residential parent's visitation?
Simply too vague. If more of these "what ifs" were discussed, it may lessen the load of the Appeals Court.
Commenting by HaloScan
