Are courts changing?

[jewels]

Are courts changing?  Has anyone noticed if courts are indeed awarding custody more frequently to dads?  I was reading an article which used the term "gender neutral courts" and "the best interest of the child".  Is this how our court system operates or just how it is perceived due to legal lingo that indicates such?  Have we really come that far?

Any and all opinions are appreciated.  Thanks, jewels

[patton]

I'm a father who has sole custody.  I really did not go to court to gain custody the mother signed him over to me at one point.

But the Judge actually asked my attorney "Why I had not filed for custody?"  So I think even if the mother had not signed over custody at that point several years ago, that if I had filed that I would have been awarded custody.  My attorney was of the same opinion.

[wendl]

I think it has to do with each judge seperately, yes more and more fathers are gaining custody of their chidren, but the court system still has a long way to go.

I think when the men and woman in their 30's etc  who start to take over being judges that things will change much more. Their are still many many judges that are lost in the past and the misconception of the roles that men/woman play in raising children.

**These are my opinions, they are not legal advice**

[adassistant]

We have custody of SS15. BM just signed him over without us even going to court. She's kicking herself now though, because SS basically won't even speak to her and he only sees her for a few hours every few months... guess she thought this would be temporary. I can't seem him ever moving back. He's almost 16.

[NJDad]

Hi Jewels,


Well, the answer is both Yes and No.


Yes - The courts are changing if you don't get one of the stodgy old male judges who believes that the kids go with the mom.

I received custody of my four young children after the custodial parent (mom) showed herself to have a bit of borderline personality and was continually coaching the kids and trying to interfere with my time with them. The key is, you have to keep your cool through all of the games and don't allow yourselves to be pulled into petty BS.


If the Ex continually tries to play games, buy the book 'Stop Walking on Eggshells' and it's workbook. They are fantastic.


Take care,
Wayne

[Lawmoe]

It is changing, but changing slowly.  It varies between counties and individual Judges. The thing to do is change the law so it clearly places parents on equal footing.  The federal lawsuits filed were,by and large, poorly crafted and filed on a federal level. They did, however, draw attention to the issue.  THe real change must occur with teh state legilature on teh state level. In Minnesota, this is finally occurring after much lobbying.

Several laws have finally been proposed in Minnesota to establish a presumption in favor of joint physical child custody in marriage dissolution proceedings. This could make a presumption for joint physical custody a reality in a very short period of time. A presumption for joint physical custody simply means that both parents would be equally situated as a custodial parents and the court could deviate from an order requiring joint physical custody with the children by making express findings that a deviaion is in the children's best interests.

Very few states currently have a presumption for joint physical custody. The nearest state is Wisconsin which has a presumption in its statutes that time should be maximized wity each parent. This has been inmterpreted by many of Wisconsin's Circuit Court Judges as a presumption for joint physical custody. As a result, custody orders, particularly those entered in Wisconsin's Western Counties where I practice (Polk, Pierce, St. Croix, Burnett, Barron, Dunn), generally award joint physical placement to parents on a substantially equal scehdule where the parents continue to reside in the same county or school district and where the parent's work schedules allow for equal parenting. In my experience, this has significantly reduced litigation on the custoody/placement issue in Wisconsin. There is support for that conclusion as well as the conclusion that a presumption for joint physical custody has a much greater impact on divorce proceedings.

Many studies have been conducted nationwide that conclude that a presuimption for joint physical custody may, in fact, have an impact on divorce proceedings themselves by reducing the divorce rate, presumably by reducing the financial incentive to divorce. For information on these studies review
http://www.proactive-coach.com/divorce/statistics/research-rates.htm

For some information on the benefits of joint physical custody, review http://www.deltabravo.net/custody/jointbenefits.htmor http://www.thelizlibrary.org/~liz/liz/those-jointcustody-studies.html

In Minnesota, bill, SF 1408, was introduced by Sen. Sheila M. Kiscaden, Sen. Thomas M. Neuville and Sen. Dan Sparks on March 3, 2005, and seeks to establish a presumption in favor of joint physical custody in child custody cases. Parents would be required to enter a custody agreement within 90 days of the start of custody proceedings (HF779 Companion Bill). The bill was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 3, 2005.

On Feb. 22, another comprehensive family law bill, HF1191,
was introduced by Rep. Eastlund and others. Unlike Sen. Neuville's bill, this bill also addresses joint physical custody. The bill proposes "best interests of the child clarified relating to family law, joint legal and physical custody rebuttable presumption established, and child support guidelines provided."

Bill HF0779, which would also provide a presumption of joint physical custody (but does not include comprehensive family law provisions), was introduced Feb. 3 by Rep. Mahoney. Under current law, courts use a rebuttable presumption that joint legal custody is in the best interests of the child. This bill adds language that "joint legal and physical custody is in the best interests of the child." The bill also adds that "...if the parents fail [to agree on custody or on a parenting plan] the court must use a rebuttable presumption, except as otherwise provided by this subdivision, that upon request of either party joint physical custody involving an equal division of time between the parties is in the best interests of the child."

Another bill to modify child custody presumptions, requirements and procedures, Bill SF0604, was introduced in the Senate on Jan. 31 by Sen. Wiger. The bill proposes, "modifying certain presumptions, requirements and procedures affecting child custody; modifying the purposes of juvenile court laws relating to child protection, separating intent relatingto cases of no alleged parental abuse from cases of alleged parental abuse; requiring appointed guardians to be learned in family law, requiring the supreme court to adopt rules specifying training and experience requirements; authorizing challenges to guardian ad litem appointments for good cause; prohibiting the court from considering the preference of the parent in placing children in removal cases.

If you support these bills write to your state senators and state representatives.
_________________
Minnesota Divorce visit Http://www.divorceprofessionals.com

Divorce Answers visit http://www.divorceinstitute.com