Melissa Isaak’s “Anatomy of a Custody Case” Part 9: Your Children Have a Right to Their Parents & You Have a Right to be Their Parent

Before I close this series, I’d like to give a heartfelt thanks for your time and consideration in reading. More importantly, I’d like to ask a favor: if you found anything I’ve said or shared, or anything I’ve reiterated from Melissa’s workshop back in 2019, then please share the information with someone else. I’m not looking for clicks, likes, subscriptions or anything like that; my goal is simple: keep families from becoming alienated.
With that and without further ado, we’ll explore Isaak’s appeal strategies, her constitutional arguments for parental rights, a case study on fighting for shared custody of an infant, and key pitfalls to avoid in custody battles.

Mellissa outlined how to appeal unfavorable rulings. “You can do an appeal in almost every state that I’m aware of at the trial court level,” she said, citing Alabama’s Rule 59 motion to alter or vacate as a precursor to higher appeals. “You lay out your reasoning for the appeal,” she explained, focusing on the “best interest” standard’s misapplication or constitutional violations. She shared a case involving an unmarried father seeking shared custody of an infant: “We litigate this case, we do a phenomenal job. This is a baby, so we know we have our work cut out for us because we’re asking for shared custody of an infant.”

In the trial, Isaak’s team hit every “best interest” factor (Alabama Code § 30-3-152): “We bring in nephew who testified, ‘He pretty much raised me, he acted like my dad,’ brought in friends, everybody to meet all the standards.” The mother, a 24-year-old nursing student, offered little: “Nothing about the child. The only reason I knew that she was this child’s mother is because she gave birth to her.” Isaak challenged her testimony: “I haven’t heard you give any testimony that would say or suggest that you don’t think that he’s a fit and capable dad. She says, ‘Well, I never said he wasn’t, I just didn’t feel that our daughter was ready for overnight visits.’” The mother’s sole objection, child waking at night, was flimsy, yet the judge ruled against shared custody, granting the father “every other Wednesday night through Monday morning.”

Isaak appealed, arguing constitutional violations: “The Supreme Court has consistently upheld parental rights as a fundamental constitutional right. For my client to be stripped of that, overall fitness should be shown that he is not fit.” She cited Troxel v. Granville (2000), which affirms parental rights as fundamental, though she noted family courts often dodge strict scrutiny. “What this judge did is the judge said, ‘Well, you have joint legal custody, mom’s the primary physical custodian,’” she said. But “joint legal custody” in Alabama (Alabama Code § 30-3-151) grants no decision-making power, only access to records. “There’s no parenting when you’re a visitor,” she argued. Despite a strong case, the judge’s bias against shared parenting prevailed: “This judge does not believe in 50-50.”

Isaak remained hopeful: “The pendulum is swinging. We rarely get a straight-up every other weekend, full child support anymore. We’re getting 10 days a month, 12 days a month, a heck of a lot better than four days a month.” Her appeal strategy aligned with the Palmers’ convention push for constitutional challenges, urging fathers to make a record for higher courts.

She closed with pitfalls to avoid:

• Don’t text when angry: “Avoid the he-said, she-said at all costs,” she said, recommending Family Wizard apps for recorded communication.

• Don’t self-impose child support: “In most states, an order of support is also an order of custody. You sign up, start paying for child support, you just gave her custody,” she warned.

• Don’t delay legal help: “There’s no right to a lawyer in family court. If you walk in, ‘Hey, Judge, I don’t have a lawyer,’ you might still proceed.”

• Don’t wait for court intervention: Waiting a year risks establishing a status quo favoring the mother.

• Report domestic violence: “Don’t be ashamed,” she said, citing a case where a recorded assault led to the mother’s arrest.

Isaak’s appeal tactics and pitfalls gave fathers a blueprint to fight bias, reinforcing the convention’s call for systemic change. Her case study showed the uphill battle for shared custody, but also the progress driven by persistent, evidence-based advocacy.

I never thought over 15 years ago when I got married that’d Id be sitting here typing something like this up, never in my wildest imagination. The theme throughout all my advocacy has been: I never knew this could happen until it happened to me. When I met up with my fellow advocates in Las Vegas in 2019, I was surrounded by people from all walks of life with different situations and stories; and yet they were all the same. This isn’t about me or my pain, though I carry enough to last lifetimes, this is about making sure people don’t have to be tormented, both as parent or child, by alienation.

If you need someone to talk to, if you want to get involved, if you want to help, or anything else, then reach out to us on our social media, email, or through the form submission here on our website. It doesn’t have to be for/to us, we’re no gatekeepers here; we want to get you to wherever/whoever you need to get to and we’ll do our best to help. I’ll share our links below. I wish you all well. Thank you again for reading and sharing.

fathersanon.org
facebook.com/FathersAnon
info@FathersAnon

-David B
Fathers Anonymous