In Philadelphia, child custody matters are generally divided into three main categories:
- Legal Custody: This is the authority to make decisions that affect a child’s life—such as education, healthcare, and religious upbringing. Often, even after a marriage ends, both parents share legal custody.
- Physical Custody: This refers to who has actual, day-to-day care of the child; it involves the child’s living arrangements and daily supervision.
- Shared Custody: Custody can be allocated as either sole (full) or joint (shared). Shared custody might pertain to legal rights, physical care, or both. In most instances, legal custody is shared between the parents.
Jurisdiction in Child Custody Cases
Philadelphia follows the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act to prevent conflicts between states over custody and visitation, whether for initial rulings or later modifications. This Act outlines how to determine a child’s home state, which holds exclusive and ongoing jurisdiction:
- The home state is typically where the child currently resides and has lived for at least six months before the custody case begins.
- If no state meets this requirement, jurisdiction shifts to the state where the child resided during the past six months, provided that at least one parent or guardian still lives there.
- If neither condition applies, a state where the child and one parent share significant ties—and where substantial evidence exists regarding the child’s well-being—can assume jurisdiction over custody orders or modifications.
The court that issues the initial custody order maintains exclusive authority unless the parties subsequently move out of the state or the child loses significant ties to that state.
When a Court May Decline Jurisdiction
Even when a court has proper jurisdiction, it might opt not to exercise it if the forum is inconvenient. Factors that might lead to such a decision include:
- Instances of domestic violence where another state may better protect the child.
- The length of time the child has lived outside Philadelphia.
- The distance between the Philadelphia court and the alternative court.
- The financial circumstances of the parties.
- Any existing agreements on jurisdiction.
- The nature and location of relevant evidence, including the child’s testimony.
- Each state’s ability to resolve the matter swiftly.
- The court’s familiarity with the case facts.
- Situations involving “unjustifiable conduct,” such as the wrongful removal of a child from another state.
Temporary Emergency Jurisdiction
A Philadelphia court can exercise temporary emergency jurisdiction to protect a child from abuse—whether the threat is immediate or potential.
Enforcement of Custody Orders from Other States
To enforce a custody order issued by another state, the order may be registered with the appropriate Philadelphia court. This registration can occur with or without an accompanying request for enforcement by filing two copies of the order. Once registered, the receiving court can offer any available relief to enforce the order.
For expedited enforcement, the process requires a court appearance at a hearing on the first judicial day following service of the order. Immediate physical custody will be granted unless:
- The order was not properly registered.
- The issuing court did not have proper jurisdiction.
- The order was stayed or vacated.
- The respondent, though entitled to notice, did not receive it prior to the issuance of the order.
- The order was subsequently stayed or vacated after registration.
Best Interest of the Child
The standard for custody decisions is based on what is in the best interest of the child. The assumption is that parents are generally best suited to care for their children unless evidence suggests otherwise. Notably, there is no longer a presumption favoring the mother—even for very young children. Instead, courts now focus on who has been the primary caregiver since the separation, emphasizing the child’s current daily care and the quality and quantity of time spent with each parent at the time of the hearing.
Factors Considered in Custody Decisions
When determining what arrangement serves the best interests of the child, courts review a broad range of factors, including:
- Which parent is most likely to foster and support ongoing, frequent contact between the child and the other parent.
- Evidence of present or past abuse by either parent or any member of their household.
- The performance of parental duties by each party.
- The need for stability and continuity in the child’s education, family life, and community involvement.
- The availability of support from extended family.
- The nature of the child’s relationships with siblings.
- The child’s well-reasoned preferences, taking into account the child’s maturity and judgment.
- Any efforts by a parent to alienate the child from the other parent (except in circumstances involving domestic violence where safety measures are paramount).
- Which parent is better positioned to offer a loving, stable, and nurturing environment.
- Which parent is more likely to address the child’s daily physical, emotional, developmental, educational, and special needs.
- The proximity of each parent’s residence.
- Each parent’s ability to provide care or secure appropriate child-care arrangements.
Additional considerations include:
- The degree of conflict between the parents and their willingness to cooperate.
- Any history of substance abuse by a parent or household member.
- The mental and physical health of each party.
- Any other factors relevant to the child’s overall safety and well-being.
Courts must give extra weight to considerations that impact the child’s safety. In making custody decisions, no preference may be based on gender, and the court is required to document the rationale for its decision either on the record or in a written opinion or order.
Federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act
This Act mandates that states must give full faith and credit to custody determinations made by courts in other states, provided those courts had proper jurisdiction. Failure to do so results in the other state’s custody order not receiving full recognition. The requirements for jurisdiction and modification under this Act are similar to those outlined in the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, with the primary distinction that emergency jurisdiction under the federal law is considered continuing rather than temporary.
Additional Considerations
When deciding on child custody, factors such as race, religion, prior sexual conduct, and gender cannot be used as bases for decision-making.
About Divorce Lawyer R. Badet
Divorce Lawyer R. Badet is a seasoned professional specializing in both divorce and child custody matters. He assists clients throughout every stage of the divorce process, including issues of alimony, spousal support, child support, and custody disputes. Recognized as a leading child custody attorney in Philadelphia and the surrounding counties, his expertise in family law and litigation ensures a comprehensive approach to each case. To learn more about your legal rights and available options, visit www.lawyersfordivorces.net or call 267-277-2641 for a free consultation.
Keywords for Legal Searches
- divorce lawyers nearby
- divorce and family law attorney
- low income divorce lawyers near me
- international divorce lawyer near me
- reasonable divorce lawyers
- best rated divorce lawyers near me
- finding a good divorce lawyer
- find divorce attorney
- divorce and family lawyer near me
- divorce lawyers for men near me
- black divorce lawyers near me
- male divorce lawyers
- family law divorce lawyers
- contested divorce lawyer
- best divorce lawyers
- best divorce lawyers near me
- child support attorney near me
- cheap divorce lawyers near me
- family court lawyers near me
- best divorce attorney
- family court attorney
These search terms are commonly used by individuals seeking experienced legal counsel for family law and child custody matters in Philadelphia and its surrounding areas.