California Family Rights Act (CRFA) allows for intermittent leave without employer consent, if leave is taken for blocks of two weeks or more. The first two times can actually be for a smaller period of time.
A: You're correct. See 2 Cal. Code Regs. § 7297.3(d).
That said, are you saying that unforeseeable consequences are limited to medical conditions requiring child/spouse care? If that is so, then you're saying there can be no unforeseeable consequences in case you're taking bonding leave several months after birth, since taking time off for child/spouse care is not bonding leave, and can be taken at any time (not just first year).
A: Title 2 Cal. Code Regs. § 7297.3(d) provides: "(d) Minimum duration for CFRA leaves taken for the birth, adoption, or foster care placement of a child. CFRA leave taken for reason of the birth, adoption, or foster care placement of a child of the employee does not have to be taken in one continuous period of time. Any leave(s) taken shall be concluded within one year of the birth or placement of the child with the employee in connection with the adoption or foster care of the child by the employee. The basic minimum duration of the leave shall be two weeks. However, an employer shall grant a request for a CFRA leave of less than two weeks' duration on any two occasions." [emphasis added]
The above-bolded regulatory text suggests that your conclusion may be incorrect. My argument here is that time off being requested is not actually related to the birth of the child. It's related to the child's mother's desire to visit her father. Based on these facts the leave request is invalid.
If you want to claim that the reason for the leave is simply to bond with the child, unrelated to the mother's desire to visit her father, then the question is: since the child is already 10 months of age, how is this leave request unforeeseeable? You need a valid reason for providing less than 30-day notice (in my opinion).
Hope this helps.