The Effects of Joint Legal Custody on Mothers,Fathers, and Children Controlling for Factors That Predispose a Sole Maternal versus Joint Legal Award

Findings from comparisons of joint and sole custody families that do not control for predivorce differences in demographic and family process variables (factors that may predispose families to choose or be awarded joint custody) are of limited generalizability, since obtained group differences may be attributable to predisposing (self-selection) factors, custody, or both. This study compared a random sample of 254 recently separated, not-yet-divorced families on 71 predivorce variables that might plausibly differentiate between families awarded joint legal versus sole maternal custody. Twenty such factors were identified and controlled for in subsequent comparisons of 52 sole maternal and 26 joint legal custody families 2 years postdivorce. Families with joint custody had more frequent father–child visitation, lower maternal satisfaction with custody arrangements, more rapid maternal repartnering, and fewer child adjustment problems (net of predivorce selection factors). Moreover, these effects did not appear to be moderated by level of predecree parental conflict. No association between custody and fathers' compliance with child support orders was obtained.     

CURRENT RESEARCH ON CHILDREN'S POSTDIVORCE ADJUSTMENT

This article reviews the current research on the effects of marital conflict, parental adjustment, custody, and access on children following divorce. Evidence from research demonstrates that significantly more adjustment problems confront children, especially boys, of divorced parents compared to those in never-divorced families. However, when assessed in years following the divorce, these children are functioning in normal limits and do not appear "disturbed," although the media report the opposite. The article discusses an important British study finding that marital conflict and not the divorce affect children and that divorce may mitigate some of the more destructive effects. The analysis of research dealing with joint custody brings together both current and ongoing studies. A surprising finding in one study was that mothers who share custody are more satisfied than those having sole custody and whose children see their father periodically. However, both groups expressed more satisfaction with their residential arrangement than did sole-custody mothers whose children had no paternal contact. Court-ordered joint custody was less satisfactory than when the parents voluntarily agreed to that arrangement, and spouses reporting high levels of marital conflict tended to do less well in joint custody arrangements than did families with less conflict.     

CHILDREN'S RIGHTS IN EUROPEAN LEGAL PROCEEDINGS: WHY ARE FAMILY PRACTICES SO DIFFERENT FROM LEGAL THEORIES?

Debates about child custody following parental separation often have been framed in terms of a battle between the competing rights of different family members. In the United States, advocates of mothers’ rights square off against proponents of fathers’ rights, with each side claiming to truly represent children's rights. Of course, not all advocates lay claim to children's rights in contact and custody disputes merely as a tactical maneuver. Some experts believe that children are entitled to (and benefit from) their own, independent legal advocate in custody cases. In theory, at least, the position that children lay claim to a third set of independent rights is strongly held in Europe, more strongly than in many U.S. states, because of the adoption of United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in Europe, but not in the United States. In this article, we examine children's rights in custody disputes from a European perspective, particularly children's legal right to contact with their parents, as well as the children's right to be heard in custody and contact disputes. We find that, despite differences in legal theory, tradition, and family demographics, European countries ultimately face a familiar reality: Custody and contact disputes are, in reality, more about renegotiating family relationships than they are a matter of a mother's, father's, or child's rights.     

Family Law and Social Change: Judicial Views of Joint Custody, 1998–2011

Rapid changes in family life over the last forty years have led to substantial alterations in family law policy; specifically, most states now endorse joint custody arrangements for divorcing families. However, we know little about how lower court judges have embraced or resisted this change. We conducted in‐depth interviews with judges in twenty‐five Indiana jurisdictions in 1998 and 2011. Our findings suggest that judges' views of joint custody dramatically changed. Judges in Wave II indicated a strong preference for joint custody—a theme that was relatively absent in Wave I. The observed change in judicial preferences did not seem to be related to judicial replacement, gender, age, or political party affiliation. Although our conclusions are exploratory, we speculate that shifts in judicial views may be related to changing public mores of parenthood and, relatedly, Indiana's adoption of Parenting Time Guidelines in 2001.     

Maternal and joint custody

The present study examined differences between 40 couples who agreed to traditional mother custody and 12 couples who agreed to joint custody as the postdivorce arrangement for their children. Data were collected by interview and questionnaire within six months of the filing of the divorce petition. Differences emerged in the social context of the decision process, the criteria used, and the application of criteria to parents' particular circumstances. The findings are then organized into a framework that suggests a model for the process by which parents make their decision about custody.     

CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATION PRACTICES: A 20‐YEAR FOLLOW‐UP

This study surveyed 213 experienced child custody evaluators utilizing the same questionnaire in the Ackerman & Ackerman 1997 and Keilin & Bloom 1986 studies. Demographic information, evaluation practices, custody decision‐making, and recommendations were surveyed. Comparisons were made across all three studies to identify the similarities and differences in child custody evaluation practices over the past 20 years. This study added questions about risk management and ethical issues, and current practices in placement/access schedules. The reader is advised that not engaging in the practices performed by a majority of psychologists could result in a difficult testimony experience.     

Custody decisions in Alabama before and after the abolition of the tender years doctrine

This study investigated the impact of the abolition of the tender years doctrine on custody decisions in divorce cases. This doctrine supported the presumption that the mother is the more suitable parent for young children. In March of 1981, the Supreme Court of the State of Alabama found this doctrine to be unconstitutional. To assess the hypothesis that this ruling had a significant effect on custodyrelated decisions, a sample of court records for divorce cases in an Alabama county was examined as representative of the state on a number of key variables. Overall, no significant differences were found on indicator variables for the comparisons before and after the ruling. There was neither an increase in custody grants to fathers nor an increase in custody requests by fathers.     

COMMENTARY ON “EMPIRICAL AND ETHICAL PROBLEMS WITH CUSTODY RECOMMENDATIONS:” WHAT NOW?

Replying to the paper by Tippins and Wittmann, this commentary notes that the problems they identify have been recognized for many years, yet this has resulted in little change in the practice of child custody evaluations. Three underlying reasons are offered for the stalemate that frustrates the implementation of standards for an empirically based child custody evaluation practice: (a) the economics of child custody evaluation practice; (b) inconsistencies between proposals to restrict testimony in this area and the lack of similar restrictions in most other areas of forensic practice; and (c) inadequate motivation for researchers who might contribute an empirical base for child custody evaluations. Directions for breaking the stalemate are offered for each of these problems.     

Chapter 10: International Child Custody and Abduction Cases

This chapter will familiarize judges in the U.S. with the state and federal law applicable to international child custody, visitation and abduction disputes. These laws are UCCJA s? 23, the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (Hague Convention), and the International Child Abduction Remedies Act (ICARA). When a custody order from a foreign country is presented for recognition and enforcement, UCCJA § 23 controls. If notice and opportunity to be heard were given to all affected persons, state courts are to enforce foreign custody decrees. When a petition is filed seeking the prompt return of a child to another country based on allegations that the child's removal or retention was wrongful, the Hague Convention and ICARA govern. If the child's removal or retention is wrongful within the meaning of the Convention, and no exceptions to return are proved, a court in the U.S. must order the child's return forthwith. A return order is not a decision on the merits of custody.     

AND HOW ARE THE CHILDREN?

Recent innovations in American child custody law have affected both the substantive law and the procedures by which custody decisions are reached. Professor Bruch describes these developments, analyses their underpinnings in psychology and ideology, and identifies both intended and unrecognized effects of the dispute resolution process on the custody decision. She concludes that many new doctrines and procedures that have been widely assumed to benefit children, including joint custody and mediation, often disserve children's interests.     

Bias in the Family: Race,Ethnicity, and Culture in Custody Disputes

This essay examines the role of racial, ethnic, and cultural bias in custody cases. It analyzes cases where the court explicitly considered the parents’ racial, ethnic, or cultural background and cases where the court did not acknowledge these factors but where it is clear from the court's opinion that biases influenced its decision. It then briefly describes the literature on implicit bias to demonstrate how biases may influence the assessments of custody evaluators, lawyers, and judges despite best efforts to make fair and impartial decisions. Drawing on studies suggesting that individuals can reduce their implicit biases and their effects on decision making, the essay explores individual strategies and institutional reforms to address bias in custody disputes.     

Raised By a Predator: Sex Offender Parents and an Effort To Keep Them Out of the Child's Home

Registered sex offenders are obligated to comply with rules put forth by their state's registry. While there are stringent guidelines regarding the offender's interaction with the public, a sex offender's ability to obtain custody of their child is less rigid. Statutes differ on the level of scrutiny referencing their right to parent, which leaves an opening for offenders to abuse their child. This Note proposes the adoption of a model statute in which registered Tier III sex offender parents who were convicted for a crime involving a minor are precluded from gaining physical or legal custody of their child.     

Children Exposed to Domestic Violence: Making Trauma‐Informed Custody and Visitation Decisions

This article explores the risks for young children and the challenges for courts that emerge when parents who are victims or perpetrators of intimate partner violence seek court decisions on child visitation or custody matters. We focus particularly on children age five and younger, a group that is disproportionately represented in families affected by intimate partner violence, and especially vulnerable to its traumatic impact. We examine the literature on children's response to violence between their parents and the literature on parental alienation, a counter‐charge that may arise when one parent alleges violence as a reason to limit the other parent's access to the children. We look at challenges faced by both mental health professionals and courts involved in custody determinations and make policy recommendations to help courts make trauma‐informed decisions that best serve children.     

INTERNATIONAL PARENTAL CHILD ABDUCTION: WHY WE NEED TO EXPAND CUSTODY RIGHTS PROTECTED UNDER THE CHILD ABDUCTION CONVENTION

The Child Abduction Convention, an international treaty, protects custody rights internationally among its member states by providing a remedy of return in cases where a child was wrongfully removed in violation of a parent's custody right. There is no such remedy for the violation of a parent's access (or visitation) rights. A ne exeat clause in a child custody agreement restrains a custodial parent from removing a child from a predetermined jurisdiction (such as a particular country) and can be issued when there is a risk that the custodial parent might flee to another country with the child(ren). Currently there is a circuit split within the United States as to whether a ne exeat right coupled with the right of access should equal a protected custody right under the Convention. Most international courts protect the ne exeat right under the Convention; however some do not. A ne exeat right should convey a protected custody right for policy reasons. The beneficial implications of a ne exeat right creating a protected custody right under the Child Abduction Convention clearly outweigh the detriments. While there is no instant solution to the inconsistencies among various courts in interpreting the Child Abduction Conventions’ scope in regard to a ne exeat right, there are ways to resolve the problem. If consistency in judicial interpretation cannot be achieved, a movement needs to be initiated to create a protocol to the Child Abduction Convention to further explain the scope of custody rights and ne exeat rights under the Convention.     

Evaluating the Probative Value of Child Custody Evaluations

It has previously been argued that a competent forensic work product is defined, in part, by the evaluator's use of conventional forensic methods and procedures applied to child custody evaluations (Gould, 1998) and that the more judges and other legal professionals understand about forensic methods and procedures, the better they are able to critically weigh the substance and merit of a child custody evaluation (Gould & Bell, 2000). These forensic methods and procedures have their foundation in the behavioral sciences and are characteristic of competent and comprehensive forensic evaluations conducted for other legal purposes. In this paper, we provide a more detailed model for critiquing the forensic competence of a child custody report. Such a model better assists courts and lawyers in understanding how to assess the substance and admissibility of custody reports.     

Mental health at the intersections: The impact of complex needs on police contact and custody for Indigenous Australian men

Indigenous Australians experience significant social risk, vulnerability and disadvantage. Nowhere is this more starkly demonstrated than in the levels of contact that Indigenous Australians have with the criminal justice system, particularly the police. Utilizing a linked dataset of extant criminal justice, human and health service administrative data in New South Wales (NSW) Australia, this paper explores patterns of police contact and custody for a cohort of Indigenous males with complex needs. Four significant factors are identified that alone or in combination appear to impact on the frequency with which these men experience police contact and custody, including young age at first police contact, experiencing out of home care as a child, alcohol misuse, and limited locational mobility. Whilst it might be expected that the presence of mental ill-health and/or cognitive disability would be a key predictor of the frequency and intensity of police contact and custody, the findings suggest rather that the presence of multiple disadvantages beginning in the early years and compounding throughout individuals' lives, in which mental illness may or may not be a factor, is more significant than the presence of any one diagnosis in precipitating police contact and custody for this group.     

HOMOSEXUAL PARENTS

This article will first examine the approaches used by the courts in making custody decisions that involve homosexual parents; second it will review the assumptions commonly made about homosexuals and the effect homosexual parenting has on a child, and how these rationales are in fact used to justify a denial of custody or the imposition of restrictions on the homosexual parent; third, it will discuss what implications the courts' treatment of this issue has for legal practice.     

The Place for Custody Evaluations in Family Peacemaking

Custody evaluations can serve the dual purpose of providing neutral, objective information to the court while also contributing to the possibility of earlier settlement, which coincides with the therapeutic jurisprudence goal of more positive outcomes for children and families. Research suggests that most cases settle after custody evaluations. However, most of the literature is focused on the use of custody evaluations for litigation. Evaluators, attorneys, and mental health consultants can influence parents to focus more on children's needs and less on their conflict as they go through the evaluation process. This article urges family courts to develop processes and require professionals to learn skills needed for an interdisciplinary process to utilize evaluations in peacemaking.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• All custody evaluation processes should aim to reduce and/or shorten children's exposure to parental conflict.
• Evaluators, attorneys, and mental health professional consultants should use the evaluation process to influence parents to be more aware of their children's needs and less invested in their adversarial positions.
• Evaluators should learn to write and orally present information and state opinions with consideration of the parents themselves as consumers of the custody evaluation as well as the court.
• Attorneys and mental health professional consultants should help clients review the report, process their emotional reactions, and consider their options for settlement versus litigation in terms of emotional and financial costs to the family.
• Court processes should be developed to contain the time and cost of custody evaluations and provide dispute resolution after custody evaluations.

     

DIVORCED PARENTS' FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF THEIR CHILDREN'S COLLEGE EXPENSES

Reliable, quantitative, and current information is needed to inform the policy debate about whether parents, most commonly noncustodial parents, should be compelled to provide support for their children's higher education. We report data from a large study of the financial support college students reported receiving from their divorced mothers and fathers in a state where such payment is completely voluntary. Mothers' and fathers' financial resources did not differ greatly; when these were statistically controlled for, mothers and fathers contributed remarkably similar amounts of college support. Among other findings, fathers contributed more proportionately than mothers in families that had joint legal custody but less in sole maternal custody families. Our findings suggest policies that will likely encourage more voluntary support for higher education from divorced families.