Washington Parenting Plan

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on Petition for Residential Schedule/Parenting Plan or Child Support (FNFCL)

Superior Court of Washington

County of

I. Basis for Findings

The findings are based upon:

agreement of the parties.

an order of default entered on

a hearing held on . The following people attended:

Mother    Mother’s Attorney

Acknowledged Father    Acknowledged Father’s Attorney

Guardian ad Litem    Other:

II. Findings of Fact

Upon the basis of the court record, the court Finds:

2.1 Notice and Basis of Personal Jurisdiction Over the Parties

All parties necessary to adjudicate the issues were served with a copy of the summons and petition and are subject to the jurisdiction of this court. The facts below establish personal jurisdiction over the parties:

The mother and acknowledged father engaged in sexual intercourse in the state of Washington as a result of which the child was conceived.

Respondent was personally served with summons and petition within this state.

Respondent submits to jurisdiction of this state by consent.

Respondent resided with the child in this state.

Respondent resided in this state and provided prenatal expenses or support for the child.

The child resides in this state as a result of the acts or directives of respondent.

Other:

2.2 Period for Challenge to the Acknowledgement or Denial of Paternity

, the child’s acknowledged father and , the child’s mother signed the Acknowledgment of Paternity, which was filed with the Washington State Registrar of Vital Statistics on

the child’s presumed father, signed a Denial of Paternity, which was filed with the Washington State Registrar of Vital Statistics on

This proceeding was begun more than 60 days from the effective date of the Acknowledgement of Paternity and

a period of two years or more has passed since the date the acknowledgment and denial of paternity was filed with the Washington State Registrar of Vital Statistics.

less than two years has passed since the date the acknowledgment or denial of paternity was filed with the Washington State Registrar of Vital Statistics, and petitioner specifically alleges:

a) No man other than the acknowledged father is the father of the child; and

b) No proceeding to adjudicate the parentage of the child is currently pending; and

c) No other man is an adjudicated father of the child; and

d) Notice of this proceeding has been provided to all other men who have claimed parentage of the child.

2.3 The Child Affected in This Action

This action affects:

[Name], [Age].

[Name], [Age].

[Name], [Age].

2.4 Basis for Jurisdiction Over the Child

This court has jurisdiction over the child for the reasons set forth below:

This court has exclusive continuing jurisdiction. The court has previously made a child custody, parenting plan, residential schedule or visitation determination in this matter and retains jurisdiction under RCW 26.27.211.

This state is the home state of the child because

the child lived in Washington with a parent or person acting as a parent for at least six consecutive months immediately preceding the commencement of this proceeding.

the child is less than six months old and has lived in Washington with a parent or a person acting as parent since birth.

any absences from Washington have only been temporary.

Washington was the home state of the child within six months before the commencement of this proceeding and the child is absent from the state but a parent or person acting as a parent continues to live in this state.

The child and the parents or the child and at least one parent or person acting as a parent, have significant connection with the state other than mere physical presence; and substantial evidence is available in this state concerning the child’s care, protection, training and personal relationships and

the child has no home state elsewhere.

the child’s home state has declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that this state is the more appropriate forum under RCW 26.27.261 or .271.

All courts in the child’s home state have declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that a court of this state is the more appropriate forum to determine the custody of the child under RCW 26.27.261 or .271.

No other state has jurisdiction.

This court has temporary emergency jurisdiction over this proceeding because the child is present in this state and the child has been abandoned or it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because the child, or a sibling or parent of the child is subjected to or threatened with abuse. RCW 26.27.231.

There is a previous custody determination that is entitled to be enforced under this chapter or a child custody proceeding has been commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under RCW 26.27.201 through 26.27.221. The requirements of RCW 26.27.231(3) apply to this matter. This state’s jurisdiction over the children shall last until

There is no previous custody determination that is entitled to be enforced under this chapter and a child custody proceeding has not been commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under RCW 26.27.201 through 26.27.221. If an action is not filed in by the time the child has been in Washington for six months, , then Washington's jurisdiction will be final and continuing.

Other:

2.5 Child Support

Does not apply.

A child support order was entered on requiring to pay $ per month for the support of the child.

The child is in need of support and child support should be set pursuant to the Washington State Child Support Schedule. The order of child support signed by the court on and the child support worksheet which has been approved by the court are incorporated by reference in these findings.

Other:

2.6 Residential Schedule/Parenting Plan

Does not apply.

The residential schedule/parenting plan signed by the court on is approved and incorporated as part of these findings.

This residential schedule/parenting plan is the result of an agreement of the parties.

Other:

2.7 Reimbursement

Does not apply.

The state of Washington or is entitled to reimbursement for support or assistance provided to the child, for expenses incurred on behalf of the child.

2.8 Continuing Restraining Order

Does not apply.

A continuing restraining order against the father mother both parties is necessary because:

Other:

2.9 Protection Order

Does not apply.

A domestic violence protection order protecting from is necessary based upon declarations in the file or attached.

If the duration of this order exceeds one year, the court finds that an order of one year or less will be insufficient to prevent further acts of domestic violence.

2.10 Other

III. Conclusions of Law

3.1 Jurisdiction

The court has jurisdiction to enter an order in this matter.

The court does not have jurisdiction to enter an order because this matter was commenced less than 60 days from the effective date of the acknowledgment of paternity and the case is dismissed.

The court does not have jurisdiction to enter an order in this matter and it is dismissed.

3.2 Disposition

The court shall enter an order that:

Declares this proceeding was was not properly begun.

Makes provision for a residential schedule/parenting plan, or past and current support, and health insurance coverage for the child.

Awards court costs, guardian ad litem, attorney, and other reasonable fees.

Makes provision for reimbursement for support or assistance provided to the child, for expenses incurred on behalf of the child.

Makes provision for a domestic violence protection order with an expiration date of

Makes provision for a continuing restraining order.

3.3 Other

Notice of presentation waived: