Cohabitating couple with a minor child, have many arguments that involve abuse by verbal, emotional, psychological some physical both minor and severe. (As described under Oregon definition of law) media and sexual abuse (guilting/threaten cheating if respondent doesn't accept advance) Petioner has history of all violence stated, in prior relationships. In current relationship, Petioner has caused habitual and emense abuse over course of 6yrs with only 3 incidences out of all; being of physical. However respondent out of continual provoking has reacted with physical. Petioner is clinically diagnosed narcissist and sociopath, and has filed and been granted a TPO out of fear of respondent fleeing the state with minor child. Due to threats claiming wanting to escape the intense, provoking, continual psychological abuse. No incidences have occurred in 180dys. But one occurred 15dys past the 180. However petioner was sleeping in same bed, having talk about moving together o/of state, physically expressing love the night before filing claim. Taking minor child and not allowing respondent time w/child even though parenting plan states should be w/them. Petioner has expressed the real
Your post is a bit hard to understand, partly because you got cut off at the end, but for other reasons too. I'm not sure what you mean by a "TPO." There are a number of different types of restraining orders under Oregon law, but that is not a formal term for any of them. Any restraining order based on allegations of domestic violence or abuse can be challenged by the respondent, and a hearing can be requested. At the hearing, the burden is on the petitioner to prove that the abuse they alleged really did occur, and that there is a reasonable danger of future abuse in the absence of the restraining order. This is the remedy that the law provides for restraining orders being granted without cause. Ultimately the reason that someone sought a restraining order is mostly irrelevant, except as it relates to whether they have a reasonable fear of abuse; what matters is whether the allegations are true and whether there is a danger of further harm.
By the same token, the way to win these cases is usually not to focus too heavily on the other party's alleged mental health diagnoses. Psychological conditions these days are treated as intensely value-laden, and we are often inclined to pathologize all kinds of bad behavior. Judges are not mental health experts, and are not inclined to make judgments on the basis of mental health diagnoses, nor should they. The law cares about what people can be proved to have done and what they can be inferred to be likely to do in the future - not who they "are" in their murky little souls (or mental health charts). Talking about mental health is at best a proxy for the real issue, which is behavior and conduct. In other words, we are not impressed by the claim that someone is "clinically diagnosed [as a] narcissist and sociopath." Mental health conditions can be managed. What matters is what they do. Having a mental health diagnosis does not excuse bad behavior, but it also is not a proxy for bad behavior.
It may also be that what was filed was a 'TPOR' - a temporary protective order of restraint. This is a temporary order that prohibits either of a child's parents from changing the child's placement, residence, or daily routine, while a custody case is worked out. If that's the case, then it makes sense that the parent would seek it out of fear that the other parent would flee the state with the child - the order is intended to prevent exactly that. Oregon law supports an ongoing relationship between a child and both of their parents, and doesn't approve of parents unilaterally leaving the state with their children.
There's clearly a lot going on. Ultimately if you want to contest a court order you need to consult in private with an attorney for assistance. No words over the internet will solve this problem for you.
Please read the following notice: Jay Bodzin is licensed to practice law in the State of Oregon and the Federal District of Oregon, and cannot give advice about the laws of other jurisdictions. All comments on this site are intended for informational purposes only, and are not intended to constitute legal advice, create an attorney-client relationship, or solicit business. No posts or comments on this site are in any way confidential. Each case is unique. Information not contained in these posts may create significant exceptions to the advice provided in any response. You are advised to have counsel at all stages of any legal proceeding, and to speak with your own lawyer in private to get advice about your specific situation.
There is a lot going on in your case. Your really need to be interviewed by an experienced lawyer and then get specific advice based on that interview.
Sign up to receive a 5-part series of useful information and advice about child custody law.
Years licensed, work experience, educationLegal community recognition
Peer endorsements, associations, awardsLegal thought leadership
Publications, speaking engagementsDiscipline