Philadelphia Child Custody Lawyer

Philadelphia Child Custody Lawyer

There are three different types of child custody that you need to be aware of:  (1) Legal Custody; (2) Physical Custody; and (3) Shared Custody.

  • (1) Legal Custody:  legal custody is the right to make decisions affecting the child’s life; most of the time legal custody is shared by the parents, even after a marriage end.
    • (2) Physical Custody: physical custody means the actual physical possession of the child (i.e., physical care and control of the child), and
    • (3) Shared Custody:  Custody may be characterized either as sole custody, (i.e., full custody), or shared custody, (i.e., joint custody).  Shared custody can be either legal or physical, or both.  Most cases involve shared legal custody.

Jurisdiction for Child custody:

Philadedelphia has adopted the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement. Its purpose is to prevent inter-state court disputes over child custody and visitation, including initial determinations and modifications.  The Act contains rules for determining the child’s home state, which has exclusive continuing jurisdiction.

  • (1) The home state is generally where the child currently resides and has resided for 6 months prior to the beginning of the custody proceedings;
    • (2) If no state meets that criteria, then jurisdiction is in the state that was the child’s home state in the past 6 months, assuming one of the child’s parents or guardians continues to live in that state, and
    • (3) If no state has jurisdiction, and the child and at least one parent have a significant connection with a state, AND there is substantial evidence within that state that is relevant to the child’s care and protection, then a court in that state can enter or modify a custody order.

 

  Exclusive Continuing Jurisdiction:

The court that makes the initial custody determination continues to have exclusive jurisdiction, unless:

  • (1) The parties no longer reside in that state; or
    • (2) The child no longer has a significant connection to that state, including the availability of relevant evidence.

 

Declining Jurisdiction:

Even if a court has proper jurisdiction, it may decline to exercise that jurisdiction if it determines that it is an inconvenient forum based on the following factors:

  • (1) There is domestic violence as it relates to the state best suited to protect the child;
    • (2) The length of time the child has resided outside of Philadelphia;
    • (3) The distance between the Philadelphia court and the other court that would assume jurisdiction;
    • (4) The parties’ relative financial circumstances;
    • (5) Any agreement of the parties as to jurisdiction;
    • (5) The nature and location of relevant evidence (including the child’s testimony);
    • (6) The ability of each state’s court to decide the issue expeditiously;
    • (7) The familiarity of each court with the facts and issues in the pending litigation; and
    • (8) NOTE that a court may also decline jurisdiction based on “unjustifiable conduct” such as the wrongful removal of a child from another state.

Temporary Emergency Jurisdiction:

A court may assume temporary emergency jurisdiction in order to protect the child from abandonment or abuse (actual or threatened).

 

Enforcement of Other State’s Orders:

This may be done through the registration of the order, with or without a simultaneous request for enforcement by submitting 2 copies to the appropriate Philadelphia court. This allows the receiving court to grant any relief available for enforcement of the registered order.

Expedited enforcement:  Expedited enforcement occurs through the requirement of a court appearance at a hearing on the first judicial day after the order has been served. The petitioner will be awarded immediate physical possession of the child, unless:

  • (1) The order was not property registered;
    • (2) The issuing court did not have jurisdiction;
    • (3) The order was stayed or vacated;
    • (4) The respondent was entitled to notice, but did not receive notice before the order was issued; or
    • (5) The order was stayed or vacated after being registered.

Best Interest of the Child:

The Best Interest of the Child standard presumes that parents are in the best position to care for their child unless proven otherwise.  There is no longer a presumption of custody in favor of the mother, even for young children (i.e., the tender years presumption does not exist anymore).

Many courts consider who has been the primary caretaker (once a separation has occurred) as a strong indicator in the case of a child custody battle.  Philadelphia has held that the primary caretaker doctrine focuses on the day-to-day care, as well as the quantity and quality of time the child spends with each parent at the time of the hearing (rather than time spent with the child in the past.)

Factors for child custody:

There are 16 factors for the courts to consider when deciding what is in the best interests of the child.

  • (1) Which party is more likely to encourage and permit frequent and continuing contact between the child and the other party;
    • (2) Present and past abuse committed by a party or member of the party’s household;
    • (3) Parental duties performed by each party on the child’s behalf;
    • (4) The need for stability and continuity in the child’s life, including education, family life, and community life;
    • (5) The availability of extended family;
    • (6) The child’s relationships with siblings;
    • (7) The well-reasoned preference of the child, based on the child’s maturity and judgment;
    • (8) The attempts of a parent to turn the child against the other parent, except in cases of domestic violence where reasonable safety measures are needed to protect the child from harm;
    • (9) Which party is more likely to maintain a loving, stable, consistent, and nurturing relationship with the child;
    • (10) Which party is more likely to attend to the daily physical, emotional, developmental, educational, and special needs of the child;
    • (11) The proximity of the parties’ residences;
    • (12) Each party’s availability to care for the child or ability to make appropriate child-care arrangements;
    • (13) The level of conflict between the parties and the willingness and ability of the parties to cooperate with one another;
    • (14) The history of drug or alcohol abuse of a party or member of the party’s household;
    • (15) The mental and physical condition of a party or member of the party’s household; and
    • (16) Any other relevant factor.
  • NOTE: In considering these factors, the courts should give weighted consideration to the factors that affect the child safety:
    • Also note that in making a determination of child custody using these factors, no party may receive preference based upon gender.
    • Furthermore, the court is required to explain the reasons for its award on the record or in a written opinion or order.

Federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act:

This Act mandates that states give full faith and credit to another state’s child custody determination if jurisdiction is proper.  The failure to comply with the Federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act results only in full faith and credit notbeing given to another state’s child custody order.  The jurisdiction and modification requirements under theFederal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act are very similar to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act.  Part of the difference is that the emergency jurisdiction under the Federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act is determined to be continuing rather than temporary.

Additional Considerations when awarding child custody:

  • (1) Race or religion cannot be determining factors,
    • (2) Prior sexual conduct cannot be a determining factor, and
    • (3) Gender cannot be a determining factor.

Divorce Lawyer R. Badet is an experienced divorce lawyer and child custody lawyer and dedicated to helping his clients at every stage of the divorce process and child custody process. He is also known in Philadelphia and the surrounding counties as Child Custody Lawyer R. Badet. His practice includes simple and complex divorces, alimony, spousal support, child support, and child custody. Divorce Lawyer R. Badet is a knowledgeable divorce attorney and child custody attorney.  He has the experience needed to obtain the best possible outcome for your situation! Visit his website to learn more about your legal rights and options: www.lawyersfordivorces.net or call his office for a free consultation @ 267-277-2641.  He is a highly respected and experienced attorney with many years of experience. He is an experienced litigation attorney who represents his clients in both Divorce matters and Child Custody matters. If you are looking for a Divorce Lawyer near you or a Child Custody Lawyer near you and you live in Philadelphia County, Delaware County, Bucks County and Montgomery County, you should definitely call Divorce Lawyer R. Badet @ 267-277-2641.