Sentences with phrase «joint custody of the child there»

Suntan12 - While I agree that both parents should have joint custody of the child there can be problems with that arrangement as well.

Not exact matches

A court in the District of Columbia assumes that joint custody is in the best interests of the child unless there's a history of child abuse, neglect, parental kidnapping or family violence.

At the time of this writing, courts in Clark County, Nevada, favor joint custody unless one of the parents lives at too far of a distance from the children's schools to make it feasible to transport them there several days per week.

California: There is no presumption in favor of joint or sole custody; custody shall be awarded to both parents jointly or to either parent as is in the best interests of the child.

If there is no agreement or if the agreement is not in the best interests of the child, the court shall award joint custody, unless custody by one parent is shown by clear and convincing evidence to serve the child's best interests.

Oregon courts also do not typically modify a joint custody agreement unless there is strong evidence of a change in circumstances that could adversely affect the child.

Joint custody may be awarded if both parents request joint custody, and if they so request joint custody, there is a presumption that joint custody is in the best interests of the cJoint custody may be awarded if both parents request joint custody, and if they so request joint custody, there is a presumption that joint custody is in the best interests of the cjoint custody, and if they so request joint custody, there is a presumption that joint custody is in the best interests of the cjoint custody, there is a presumption that joint custody is in the best interests of the cjoint custody is in the best interests of the child.

Under California Family Code § 3080, there is a presumption that joint custody (physical and legal — California Family Code § 3002) is in the best interest of the child.

When parents separate after the child is born, the default rule is «joint custody» of the child unless there are circumstances that demonstrate one parent or the other should have sole custody.

There are two types of legal custody: (i) «sole legal custody» refers to when only one of the parents has these rights; and (ii) «joint legal custody» is where both parents have the same rights and responsibilities for the major decisions for the child.

Nevada law favors joint custody if the parents have agreed to it, unless there is evidence of domestic violence or some other indication that the parents will not be successful in working together for the benefit of their child.

So, clearly there is an overlap here where, in the case of either Joint or Sole Physical Custody, the would - be non-custodial parent could have the children between 111 - 140 nights.

The court must presume that joint legal custody is in the child's best interests — that is, both parents have decision - making authority, unless there is evidence of interspousal battery or domestic abuse.

However, if there is a domestic violence issue, then you can usually show this paperwork to the agency as proof that you don't want to pursue joint custody and only want to file for sole custody of the children.

Joint custody is one of the best decisions that the court can make because there is less emotional strain on the child than in other child custody agreements.

In Long Island, New York, physical custody refers to the place where the child primarily lives regardless of whether there is a joint custody agreement between the parents.

Others thought that joint custody should be granted even if there was no agreement as it is in the best interest of the children to cooperate.

There is typically one circumstance during the court case which makes the child custody issues easier: if the parents decide they are willing to have joint custody of the children.

Though joint custody is favorable, there are instances that this is not beneficial for the child, especially in cases where the welfare of the child is at risk.

Regardless of each state's position for or against a presumption or preference in favor of joint custody and whether or not it has been specifically authorized, overall there appears to be a growing trend in favor of joint custody and more and more bills are being introduced to adopt a presumption that joint custody is in the best interest of the child unless certain circumstances apply (such as convincing evidence that a parent is unfit or that it would not be in the best interest of the child to award joint custody).

There are a variety of joint custody arrangements available, but — at minimum — joint custody means parents share in decision - making regarding the child.

«There are many things wrong with this unthinking rush to joint custody, but the primary objection is that it changes the focus of custody away from the «best interests of the child» to the best interests of the parents — or, more precisely, to the best interests of the father.»

When joint physical custody is granted, there is no «visitation» schedule because the children live between the two homes and all responsibilities of childcare are shared.

In many Western countries, an increasing number of children with separated parents live in a joint physical custody arrangement, that is, live equally (or close there to)... Continue reading →

There are two kinds of legal custody for a minor child; joint legal custody and sole legal custody.

Fact: Fewer child support awards are ordered in joint physical custody cases; there is a greater income differential between fathers» households and mothers» households post-divorce in joint custody situations than in sole custody situations; and fathers with joint custody are more likely to have higher incomes relative to their ex-wives than fathers in situations of maternal custody.

Fact: «While there was no clear evidence that either joint or sole custody promotes better child adjustment (and there were no differences found between effects of mother - only and father - only custody), a link was consistently found between frequency of visitation / transitions between parents and maladjustment.

There is a persistent and harmful misconception that joint custody predictably provides better long - term outcomes for children of divorce.

Some provisions in joint legal custody laws require a minimum visitation period for the noncustodial parent that can be limited only when there is a threat of physical harm to the child.

There are some cases that call for joint physical custody, which involves the child living with both parents for a significant amount of time.

Oregon courts also do not typically modify a joint custody agreement unless there is strong evidence of a change in circumstances that could adversely affect the child.

If there is an existing court order that allows other parties visitation rights with your child or you are moving out of state with joint custody, then you will need to fill out a number of court forms.

If there is a joint custody arrangement, the school should require the consent of both parents for all major decisions that affect the child.

There are a number of states that have adopted presumptive joint custody, or in other words, these states presume in a divorce that absent other evidence, the court should find that joint legal and shared physical custody is in the child's best interest.

A court in the District of Columbia assumes that joint custody is in the best interests of the child unless there's a history of child abuse, neglect, parental kidnapping or family violence.

Most family law professionals believe joint custody to be in the best interest of the child though there are certain stipulations that go along with it.

«While there was no clear evidence that either joint or sole custody promotes better child adjustment (and there were no differences found between effects of mother - only and father - only custody), a link was consistently found between frequency of visitation / transitions between parents and maladjustment.

While there is much spindoctoring of isolated and arbitrarily selected findings claiming here or there to discover benefits or «no difference» between child wellbeing outcomes in joint versus sole custody, these are specious, and overall, children do far better in more traditional arrangements.

There are concerns about presuming that joint custody arrangements and joint custody statutes are the only way of providing that a father can maintain contact with his children.

Results: «There was a significant difference in the perceptions of children in sole and joint custody.

«There are two key rationales which underlie and promote the concept of joint physical custody: one comes from a concern for the child, and it holds that equal or frequent access to both parents is in the best interest of the child (Wallerstein & Kelly, 1980).

Ohio State University Research News: Joint - Custody Arrangements Good for Children of Divorce — But Only if There is no Parental Conflict

A lot of people seem to be under the impression that if there is joint custody, child support is reduced.

While there are formulas within the statute for determining support in these cases, the only requirement that stands when joint physical custody is roughly equal is that the standard of living of the child should not be less than that of the noncustodial parent.

One of the reasons for negative child - rearing outcomes in divorced homes in which there is something other than sole authority in the custodial parent, e.g. the variety of joint custody «solutions,» is precisely that at every turn, the authority of the head of the children's household IS in fact undermined.

In contemplating a proposed joint custody order, the best interests of the child standard obliges the court to ensure that the parents have assessed all components of their joint agreement, * 803 that they are committed to making it work, that their proposal fully addresses the many contingencies, and that there is no reason to believe that the child's interests will not be served by the arrangement.

In the state of Alabama, in an effort to foster ongoing contact between parent and child, there is a presumption in favor of joint legal and physical custody.

When there is no such agreement or order, or when joint custody applies, the custodial parent is considered to be the parent who has physical custody of the child for most of the year.

In the amendment to both sections of the statute, the presumption in favor of joint custody seemingly is withdrawn where there is a showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that an intrafamily offense, an instance of child abuse or neglect, or an instance of parental kidnapping occurred.

According to Dawson, «There is no evidence... that adequate consideration has been given to the potential impact joint custody laws may have on AFDC families, particularly when faced with court custody proceedings initiated in the context of the federal child support enforcement program.»