Child tax exemption/more visitation/new modification problem

[416021va]

I live in VA but child lives in FL. I am the NCP.

Tax Relief Question Summary -

In a verbal stipulation between CP and NCP attorneys, it was stipulated that I could receive a tax credit for my child ever other year .

That verbal stipulation never made it to the final dissolution.

CP claims child on income taxes every year based on that as legally permissable.

Now that I live 1,000 miles away from the child, I was wondering if I will be less likely to obtain a judge ruling that permits such. I am pretty sure that my child's visitation time does not meet the classic definition of a "dependent" by the IRS. However, I do not know if a judge ruling could supercede that.


My question concerning tax relief is as follows:

1) Would a judge be less likely to provide a favorable ruling with respect to tax relief every other year now that I am 1,000 miles away from my child when CP is directly opposed to such?

Increased Visitation Question Summary -

CP and I recently stipulated to 23 days of visitation in the summer.

CP also agreed to split transportation costs and allow 6 year old child to travel as an unaccompanied minor.

Since that time, Florida has apparently extended summers.

I may be petitioning the court for other items in my case shortly so I wanted to make this part of my petition if possible.

My questions concerning increase of visitation time are as follows:

1) Are longer summers in the area of the child's primary residence reasonable ground to petition for longer visitation.

2) Would the fact that I recently stipulated with CP, but now want more hurt my case?

3) Might the travel cost now be put entirely on me if the judge gets involved?

4) Might the judge stop the child from travelling as an unaccompanied minor? (I heard that some judges doesn't like kids traveling alone if they are under 12).

New Modification Problem Summary -

In a previous post, I indicated that I reside at the crossroads of several States and the District of Columbia.

I want my child to be able to visit with me within the DC metro area.

FYI, my child resides in Florida which has been prone to natural disasters. I have been doing plenty of reading, and have noticed/experienced that natural disaster can play havoc with family law.
e.g. the court which has legal jurisdiction over my child was shut down, or my child cannot return to Florida because there is a hurricaine there?

Additionally, the order does not provide for any scenario should the child end up going to summer school. I don't know if summer school supercedes visitation, or if summer school can be excercised here. CP would oppose summer school here by default, so I am looking for protective language if possible.

Finally, I would like to be able to take my child to other states for visitation with other family members if possible. We discussed this in another thread, but I would like to include language in my newest petition to request that I could take child to another State upon written notice to CP. (Bearing in mind that CP will perpetually be opposed to this).

My questions concerning New Modifications Problems are as follows:

1) When I wish to clarify where my child can visit with me, am I simply filing another petition to modify visitation?

2) Is there any case law that you know of that provides for visitation agreements in the event of natural disaster, or do you have any other ideas?

3) What effect does summer school have on visitation, and what protective wording could I provide in my latest modification?

4) Could I include language in my petition to allow child to visit with me and travel to different states upon written notice to CP?

Thanks SOC

[socrateaser]

>My question concerning tax relief is as follows:
>
>1) Would a judge be less likely to provide a favorable ruling
>with respect to tax relief every other year now that I am
>1,000 miles away from my child when CP is directly opposed to
>such?

No. The only time that the court will grant an NCP the tax exemptions is when the other parent doesn't work and thus the exemption produces no value to the child.

>My questions concerning increase of visitation time are as
>follows:
>
>1) Are longer summers in the area of the child's primary
>residence reasonable ground to petition for longer
>visitation.

Definitely a change in circumstances. But, it depends on how much time you have now, and how much you would have if the same percentage of time were allocated based on the longer summer vacation. If it's only a couple of days, you could have some difficulty, because the court could say that this is not substantial enough to order something different over the parent's prior agreement. However, I'm leaning towards your side of the argument, all things being equal.

>
>2) Would the fact that I recently stipulated with CP, but now
>want more hurt my case?

Not if FL changed its rules after that stipulation occured. Otherwise, I think you'll have a problem, unless there was no reasonable means of you knowing about the change before entering into the agreement.

>
>3) Might the travel cost now be put entirely on me if the
>judge gets involved?

Doubt it, if the other parent has already agreed to pay some of it, because the agreement between you is evidence of what you believed was in the child's best interests at the time it was made, which in this case is not long ago.

>
>4) Might the judge stop the child from travelling as an
>unaccompanied minor? (I heard that some judges doesn't like
>kids traveling alone if they are under 12).

If the child has traveled that way already without incident, then I see no reason why the court would be concerned.

>My questions concerning New Modifications Problems are as
>follows:
>
>1) When I wish to clarify where my child can visit with me, am
>I simply filing another petition to modify visitation?

It would be part of a motion/OSC to modify visitation/custody and support.

>2) Is there any case law that you know of that provides for
>visitation agreements in the event of natural disaster, or do
>you have any other ideas?

No, but in an emergency you must act in the child's best interests, which includes protection from danger, so what you're thinking about trying to get by an adversarial action will make you appear to be "uninformed" (i.e., wasting the court's time and acting frivolously).

>
>3) What effect does summer school have on visitation, and what
>protective wording could I provide in my latest modification?

Summer school, by itself does not overrule the existing parenting plan. If the child is not doing well, then that is a substantial change in circumstances warranting a hearing for a different parenting plan. It is also potentially evidence that the other parent is not a very good custodial parent, at least in the area of fostering education. However, it also could be that the child has learning disabilities. It opens a pretty big can of worms.

>4) Could I include language in my petition to allow child to
>visit with me and travel to different states upon written
>notice to CP?

I see no reason why you shouldn't be able to travel wherever you wish within the U.S., nor do I see any reason why the other parent wouldn't stipulate to this if asked in an amicable way. I would not go to court to force this issue adversarially until I had written a nice letter to the other parent asking for a stipulation to permit you to travel with the child within U.S. borders.

The refusal of the other parent to cooperate about a relatively trivial matter would be a demonstration of general unreasonablness.

[416021va]

SOC - Thanks again, and again in advance.

I would like to explain something here. I am not trying to be vengeful, but it is important to make you aware of my experience because it dictates how I proceed. The other parent never stipulates to anything unless I file a motion.

I did not fully understand your response on my suggestion to add emergency provisions to my petition to modify.

Your response also brought some light in on "best interest of the child" and substantial change of circumstances. When I drafted my petition to modify visitation, I just went by Florida guidelines that I found on the internet because I couldn't find anything else. Now I realize that I could have asked for more e.g. getting Thanksgiving Break ever year not every odd year.

So some new questions have popped up.

1) If I can by chance get the other parent to stipulate to travel within U.S. borders, wouldn't that stipulation need to be part of the visitation modification? (If not I am concerned that a stipulation would have to be drafted everytime we left to the District of Columbia for example).

2) Why not include "emergency" provisions in my petition? If I act in the best interest of the child and arrive late, I could be arrested.

3) Based on the fact that I have always had to file a motion before the CP listens and may very well have to do so again, could I ask CP to pay for (or part of) my filing costs and supply costs to file each time CP asks me to stipulate right after filing? If I ask CP to do that, isn't that considered extortion?

4) How does one stipulate without extorting in general? (you mention extortion quite a bit and I am concerned as there seems to be a fine line)

5) Can I petition for more visitation after the stipulation for parts of the year were there was no substantial change in circumstances e.g. Christmas every year?

Thanks SOC

[socrateaser]

>So some new questions have popped up.
>
>1) If I can by chance get the other parent to stipulate to
>travel within U.S. borders, wouldn't that stipulation need to
>be part of the visitation modification? (If not I am concerned
>that a stipulation would have to be drafted everytime we left
>to the District of Columbia for example).

Yes.

>
>2) Why not include "emergency" provisions in my petition? If I
>act in the best interest of the child and arrive late, I could
>be arrested.

While it is legally possible in FL to be arrested for withholding the child beyond the point permitted by the custody/visitation orders (custodial interference), in an emergency where law enforcement is busy trying save endangered lives and property, it will not be spending much time dealing with custodial interference.

Also, under FL Code 787.03(4)(a), it is a defense that the person reasonbly believed the interference was necessary to protect the child from danger.

So, while you could be arrested, you have a valid defense, and I think you're unreasonably concerned about a situation that is not likely to come up in the real world.

>
>3) Based on the fact that I have always had to file a motion
>before the CP listens and may very well have to do so again,
>could I ask CP to pay for (or part of) my filing costs and
>supply costs to file each time CP asks me to stipulate right
>after filing? If I ask CP to do that, isn't that considered
>extortion?

Once an action is filed, the law permits meaningful negotiation towards settlement. If you can prove that the CP has a pattern of refusing to negotiate until after an action is filed, and that he/she immediately settles as soon as you file, then that would be reasonable grounds to ask the court for the CP to share your filing fees. But, the parent is entitled to wait until you've filed, so there are no grounds for having all of your fees reimbursed -- only some portion (e.g., half).

>
>4) How does one stipulate without extorting in general? (you
>mention extortion quite a bit and I am concerned as there
>seems to be a fine line)

The line is not so fine. If you have a legal right to something, then demanding that the other party negotiate in exchange for your foregoing legal action to ois not extortion. However, if you do not have a legal right to the thing you are requesting, then demanding negotiation is extortionate.

Example:

1. Legal: I won't file for the extra support that I'm entitled to, if you agree to stipulate to it now.

2. Extortion: If you don't agree to pay me the extra support that I'm entitle to without a legal action, then I will drag you through the courts and instruct my attorney to spend as much time on discovery as possible and then claim that you stalled and that I am entitled to have you reimburse me for my attorney fees.

>5) Can I petition for more visitation after the stipulation
>for parts of the year were there was no substantial change in
>circumstances e.g. Christmas every year?

The burden of the substantial change (which means clear and convincing evidence of a change), is what is required to get the court to reconsider a current custody order. After you get past the initial hurdle of the buden of proof, then for any hearing that follows you can ask for whatever you want related to custody/visitation.

[416021va]

SOC- I don't feel that this thread should die. I am still a little bit confused....

I can deal with contempt over an arrest. I don't want to leave my child and my second family instantaneously stranded. That is how I see it. Put it this way, it would be just my luck for something like that to happen.

Besides, if there was a storm that causes a delay (and I am sure there will be) the child and I would be in Virginia at the airport. I usually don't travel to Florida. If an authority (local or federal) comes up to me and says you are in definance of a court order you are under arrest. I need to prepare for something stupid to happen like that. (Yes I am worried, I don't have the best of luck).

Last time that happened, I carried a copy of the FL district court's closing with me.

My questions concerning the above are as follows:

1) Do you know of any VA or Federal Code that is similar to Florida? (if so I will carry a copy of that with me). (I will search to).

2) Florida requires that there be a substantial change of circumstances when petitioning to modify visitation, not just during matters of custody.
How could I ask the court to give me more visitation based on that?

The "Still stumped on travel Summary"

Lastly and related more to my last post, I still do not understand how CP can take the child to a foreign country without notifying me, but I am under the impression that I need to notify the other parent to do the same thing? (I understand that the issue of travel to a country is a "bigger deal", but there is nothing in the order restricting travel to anywhere (Except for the vague virginia part). (No point showing you the entire orders since there is nothing pertinent pertaining to that).

I am aware that you may have provided the answers already, but I am still stumped on this.

Disclaimer: I am not trying to kidnap my child.

My questions concerning foreign travel are as follows:

1) Do I really need CP's permission to take child out of the country on visitation? If so, then doesn't CP need mine when CP does the same? (Remember there is noting in the court order barring such except for the vague Virginia Part).

2) If I don't need CP's permission, do I really have to give CP notice? (I think that notice is a good idea, but I haven't gotten a notice in a long time from CP during the other parent's trip to South America, so I just can't figure out why I need to give such notice).

3) Are you pretty sure that a judge wouldn't allow visitation time in the UK on occasion?

4) What might the local NYC police do if they are faxed a copy of my present court order by the CP that says "child visits with NCP in the State of Virginia" when we are at his great grandmother's house in NYC? (an example but CP would do this).

5) If I file a motion or stipulation clarifying that child can only visit with me within the US borders, aren't I screwing my chances of any foreign travel with him? (If I had a chance at all)

Thanks a million zillion SOC -

[socrateaser]

>>My questions concerning the above are as follows:
>
>1) Do you know of any VA or Federal Code that is similar to
>Florida? (if so I will carry a copy of that with me). (I will
>search to).

This issue is controlled by the law of the state where the offense occurs. So, if you're in VA and you refuse to return the child to FL, then VA law would control. However, since such a withholding of the child in VA requires that you intend to withhold, which if it's an emergency, you don't, because you're merely attempting to protect the child, you would not be guilty in either jurisdicition. As far as carrying a copy of the law around, well, just Google "VA code" and "FL Code" and look under crimes chapter section on kidnapping and you'll find the statutes.

I believe that you are being unreasonbly paranoid in worrying about this sort of eventuality. It has never occured to my knowledge.


>2) Florida requires that there be a substantial change of
>circumstances when petitioning to modify visitation, not just
>during matters of custody.
>How could I ask the court to give me more visitation based on
>that?

Based on "what?" I don't understand.
>My questions concerning foreign travel are as follows:
>
>1) Do I really need CP's permission to take child out of the
>country on visitation? If so, then doesn't CP need mine when
>CP does the same? (Remember there is noting in the court order
>barring such except for the vague Virginia Part).

You need the other parent's signature to get a passport for the child, so as a practical matter, yes, you need permission. Your current order arguably restricts visitation to the State of VA. If you want to clarify your rights, you need to file a motion to clarifly.

>
>2) If I don't need CP's permission, do I really have to give
>CP notice? (I think that notice is a good idea, but I haven't
>gotten a notice in a long time from CP during the other
>parent's trip to South America, so I just can't figure out why
>I need to give such notice).

Depends on your court order, but it's not clear to me that you don't need the other parent's consent. The order is ambiguous such that a contempt order is not likely, but that doesn't mean you're not actually restrained from taking the child outside of VA.

>
>3) Are you pretty sure that a judge wouldn't allow visitation
>time in the UK on occasion?

I don't read tea leaves. It's not what "a" judge would do. It's what "YOUR" judge would do. If I were a judge, I would not let any minor child of divorced or never married parents leave the U.S.

>
>4) What might the local NYC police do if they are faxed a copy
>of my present court order by the CP that says "child visits
>with NCP in the State of Virginia" when we are at his great
>grandmother's house in NYC? (an example but CP would do
>this).

I don't know. Local law enforcement is unpredictable where the law is not entirely clear and they have some discretion to act or forebear from action. So, if you want to know what they might do, then call them up, provide them with a copy of your order and ask them.

>
>5) If I file a motion or stipulation clarifying that child can
>only visit with me within the US borders, aren't I screwing my
>chances of any foreign travel with him? (If I had a chance at
>all)

As I already stated, if you don't have a passport for the child, then this is a moot point, because without a court order or the other parent's signature, you won't get a passport from the Federal government.

If you do have a passport for the child, then whether you go or not is up to you. I think it highly dangerous to simply take the position that the order is vague so push it to the extreme. You may end up with a judge who will cut your legs out from under you for being so aggressive in your legal interpretation.

[416021va]

Soc - DS-3053 part 5 allows me to explain why I want the child's US passport.

http://travel.state.gov/passport/forms/ds3053/ds3053_846.html

As a matter of fact, I just signed off on it for the other parent. Maybe they will be as amicable as me (if applicable). The other parent provides the passport to me sometimes.

I do agree that the present language is too vauge for certain types of travel.

A few more questions:

1) Is there such a thing as getting a duplicate passport?

2) Does implicit and explicit (in my court order) shared parental rights, or the fact that I am a parent permit me to obtain a duplicate passport (if applicable) should the other parent be unwilling to provide me with his passport or sign off on a DS-3053?

Thanks SOC

[socrateaser]

>Soc - DS-3053 part 5 allows me to explain why I want the
>child's US passport.
>
>http://travel.state.gov/passport/forms/ds3053/ds3053_846.html
>
>As a matter of fact, I just signed off on it for the other
>parent.

That wasn't real smart. There went your leverage.

Maybe they will be as amicable as me (if applicable).
>The other parent provides the passport to me sometimes.
>
>I do agree that the present language is too vauge for certain
>types of travel.
>
>A few more questions:
>
>1) Is there such a thing as getting a duplicate passport?

Only if you swear that the original was lost, which would invalidate the original, and would be a lie under oath. This is post 911 USA, and messing with the passport authority will get you a very long prison sentence.

>
>2) Does implicit and explicit (in my court order) shared
>parental rights, or the fact that I am a parent permit me to
>obtain a duplicate passport (if applicable) should the other
>parent be unwilling to provide me with his passport or sign
>off on a DS-3053?

There's no such thing as a duplicate. If you want to use the child's passport and the other parent won't give it to you, then you must ask the court for an injunction ordering that parent to produce it for your use.

If you have joint legal custody, then you should be able to get use of the passport from the court. If not, then you won't be able to get it.

[416021va]

You are right SOC. I lost my leverage, and I was a dummy, I can't win them all, but speaking with you has given me some other ideas for the longer haul e.g. the premise that I was amicable etc.
enough to sign. Besides the passport will expire again, and new leverage will exist.

Soc, in Florida it is my understanding that "Joint Custody" doesn't exist.

It is "Primary Residential Custody" and "Shared Parental Responsibility" as per F.S. 61.046 (14).

http://www.jud6.org/RepresentingYourself/CourtInfoAndResource/SharedPR.htm F.S. 61.046 (14).

CP is the Primary Residental Parent and I am the Secondary Residential Parent. This is what we stipulated to in our latest modification to modify visitation and other relief.

However, I think I did something else that wasn't very smart. I had to do something though.

I worded the pertinent part of our stipulation as follows:

"Parental responsiblity for the minor child will be:

NCP will have access to minor child's medical, educational, counseling, and any other records, except for his financial records"

I think that if I clarified as follows, I would be better off:

"Parental responsiblity for the minor child will be shared:

NCP will also have access to minor child's medical, educational, counseling, and any other records, except for his financial records"


My questions are as follows:

1) Does the pertinent part of my present stipulation provide me enough access to obtain my child's passport?

2) Is the above part of my present stipulation considered Shared Parenting?

3) With respect to the unique situation presented in Florida, is Shared Parenting considered joint custody?

Thanks as usual Soc.

[socrateaser]

>Soc, in Florida it is my understanding that "Joint Custody"
>doesn't exist.

Your understanding is wrong, based on that website's interpretation of FS 61.046(14). (which could be wrong, but I haven't read Shultz v. Shultz to see what the case actually says. If you really want to know, you should get that case and read it yourself.

Anyway, the website's interpretation is exactly equivalent to joint custody, i.e., both parents have joint rights to make major decisions re the child's heath, education and welfare.
>However, I think I did something else that wasn't very smart.
>I had to do something though.
>
>I worded the pertinent part of our stipulation as follows:
>
>"Parental responsiblity for the minor child will be:
>
>NCP will have access to minor child's medical, educational,
>counseling, and any other records, except for his financial
>records"
>
>I think that if I clarified as follows, I would be better
>off:
>
>"Parental responsiblity for the minor child will be shared:
>
>NCP will also have access to minor child's medical,
>educational, counseling, and any other records, except for his
>financial records"

Don't know why you are limiting yourself on financial records. No reason to do so and you have a right to see them.

>
>My questions are as follows:
>
>1) Does the pertinent part of my present stipulation provide
>me enough access to obtain my child's passport?

No. This gets into some knarly constitutional law issues, but it's like this (Conlaw 101 in a nutshell):

"No person shall be denied life, liberty or property without due process of law." This is the fundamental tenet of the Bill of Rights, from which all personal freedom in the USA is derived. The Founders put the rights in order of their value to the People.

(1) life: government cannot deprive a person of his/her right to live without a HUGE amount of due process -- that's why criminals on death row sit there for years waiting on appeals through the court system -- it's what the Founders wanted, even though it's not what a lot of modern citizens want anymore;

(2) liberty: government cannot restrain a person's freedom of movement without substantial due process -- ultimately proof of criminal guilt beyond reasonable doubt is the requirment and it is a stiff burden.

Among the liberty interests is the fundamental right to freely associate and communicate with other persons and to travel within the USA. These rights cannot be limited unless the government demonstrates that it has a compelling interest and that it is acting via the least restrictive alternative means. In practice, this burden is usually insurmountable (but not always).

Unfortunately, the right to EXIT the USA is NOT a fundamental liberty interest, and that's where the passport problem starts to get gray for parents who wish to take their minor children out of the country;

property: government cannot permanently take your property, or destroy substantially all of its economic value, without paying just compensation (fair market value in the hands of the owner at the time of taking), nor may government restrain your property or your use without showing a reasonable relationship to a legitimate governmental interest. In practice, this last test is almost never overruled by the court, i.e., it requires that a person who's property is restrained show that no rational leglislature in possession of all of the facts would act in such an arbitrary, unfair or capricious manner to interfere with your use of property.

But, because government generally must pay the same price for taking a person's property as it would be forced to pay on the open market, government chooses the easier road and just buys what it wants on the open market after taxing the snot out of the property owners! This is an indirect taking of property, but because it goes to the "general welfare and common defense" of the People, for which the people supposedly receive "just compensation" (military, roads, police, fire, schools, etc.), it's allowed, vs. taking unique property from one private person without paying for it.

Finally, PRIVATE persons are not required to meet any of the above standards. They can do any of the things that government cannot do, and an injured person's recourse is to sue them for the injury caused or call the police if the injury rises to the level of a crime.

And, minor children's life, liberty and property interests are all constrained, first by the authority of their parents to reasonably care for those children and second by the government's recognized "compelling" interest in the minor child's health, education and welfare.

OK, with that background:

A passport is a property interest, because it is a tangible physical thing, but it is also the evidence of a person's liberty interest to exit and enter the USA, and which as I already mentioned, is not as strong an interest as the right to travel within the USA. The interest that a person has in his/her passport is intermediate, i.e., government must show that its actions are substantially related to an important governmental interest.

Well, protecting the borders of the USA is not just substantial -- it's compelling, so it's trivial for government to restrain a person from leaving or entering the USA, unless it's obvious that the government is acting arbitrarily as applied to a particular person.

So, what we have here in this passport is the nexus of a load of interests and constitutional rights: government's interests in protecting the borders, in the child's welfare, parents' interests in the child's welfare, parents' separate interests apart from the child's interests. And all of that is just the liberty interest component. We've also got everyone's property interest in that little book with the dark blue cover.

And, on top of all of this, there's one more interest, which is the 4th Amendment right of a person to be "secure in their persons and PAPERS from UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND SEIZURE." And, since that little blue book is sitting inside someone else's HOME, getting it out of there is subject to an entirely different set of constitutional standards. Getting a person's papers from their home without their permission requires a warrant issued from a neutral magistrate stating the places to be searched and the things to be seized, and permission is given based upon consideration of the "totality of circumstances."

But, once again here, PRIVATE persons are not subject to the above requirements. A private person can just sneak in and take stuff and the owner's recourse is to file a burglary and theft report, or if they happen to confront the burglar in the act, then the private person can, within the confines of that person's own home, use reasonable, and even deadly force to repel an intruder. Pretty cool, huh?

So, you still want this passport? OK:

1. The passport is the GOVERNMENT'S property, not the parents' or the child's. However, the CHILD has a license to possess the passport, and the parent's have authority to care for, and consequently move/travel with, the child from one location to another.

2. You have the identical rights as the other parent to travel with or refuse to permit travel with, the child. So, what's left is the government's interest in the child's welfare. Thus, you must convince the court that the child's interest in traveling with you is great enough to justify the court ordering the other parent to produce that passport, under threat of (1) money sanctions; (2) arrest and confinment; (3) forceable entry onto the premises by law enforcement so as to seize the passport from the other parent's home.

By now, you can understand that getting that little blue book out of the other parent's house is not like checking a book out of the library. It's a REALLLY BIG DEAL! Which is why I said that you lost your leverege when you let the other parent keep the passport.

Now, what will you tell the court? "Your honor, I want to take my child with me to the UK to visit his/her relatives." Judge: "Your a British national aren't you?" You: "Yes." Judge: "How do I know you will return to the USA after the vacation ends?" You: "Um, because I promise." Judge: "Uh huh...motion denied!  (bangs gavel down)."

That's what you're up against. Nothing less. You could offer to post a cash bond of some extraordinarily large amount in proportion to your net worth, and maybe that would convince the other parent to stipulate to permitting you to travel, on the belief that at some point, money is thicker than blood. But, absent some sort of deal, NO JUDGE in the USA is gonna let you leave the USA with the child, once that judge KNOWS that you are not a U.S. citizen with greater emotional ties the USA than to some other nation.

And, if you're wondering who to thank for all this, well, YOU BRITISH are the ones who were depriving all us colonists of our freedoms, so we went out and wrote this damn constitution and told ya'll to stick it!

So you have no one to blame but ya' bad self!


>2) Is the above part of my present stipulation considered
>Shared Parenting?

Probably.

>3) With respect to the unique situation presented in Florida,
>is Shared Parenting considered joint custody?

Yes.