Child Custody Analysis

A state that undertakes custody of a child is declaring that it can do a better job providing protection. This system is a powerful agent of support, providing positive nurturing environments that enable a child to reach his or her potential. Nonetheless, when children suffer additional abuse in the system, this government intervention should be questioned.

     According to many the custody of a child should be determined with the best interest of the child in mind. However, it is not easy for a

Child custody have been an issue for many years but no clear rules have been established until approximately in the 1970’s. In the early colonial years, the arrangement was unappealing to children and their mothers and possibly doing psychologically damage. Luckily, history has evolved and children’s well-being has become a priority in divorce cases.

One popular example is the case of Neville & Neville [2007] where there was a dispute on who had custody of the child. The courts ruled that since the child had a ‘strong emotional connection’ with the mother, that she was to live with her mother but also share substantial time with her father as both shares equal parental responsibilities. However, the best interest of the child is not necessarily what they personally explicitly want, as shown in the successful appeal by the father in the case Moose & Moose [2007]. In a situation such as this, despite the children apparently afraid of their fathers ‘sexual abuse’, the courts decided that a once- monthly visit in a supervised contact centre would be beneficial as he was a ‘person who can advance their welfare’ and that such a connection ‘should not be severed’. Such a decision may be deemed as questionable due to the severity of the claims.

This amicus brief reflects the balance between psychology and law by applying them both to decide which is the best option for child placement. The law states that the child should be place with a relative when possible. However, the attorneys are also reaching out to see what effect this could have on the child psychologically. They are using them together to decide what location would be the best for Arnes. The law does state that they should place with a relative when available, while also referring to the fact that a preexisting attachment to a family could also be the same. They refer to what type of damage could occur, if it is short term or would cause long term complications. The law itself is written to allow for interpretation

According to the 2010 Plan for the Future of the New York City Family Court, the main goal of family court relies on ensuring “the highest standard of justice for each and every litigant who enters the courthouse” (2010). This is done by executing a sequence of processes and by providing different resources to individuals involved in the case. There are three major organizations that serve an important role in Family Court. These organizations ensure justice for individuals entering the family court system by providing a variety of different services. These organizations include the Administration for Children’s Services, the Legal Aid Society and the Panel of 18b Attorneys. Each of the three organizations mentioned, work to ensure the welfare of children and service to families by providing a variety of different services.

I hope to use my law degree to change the lives of mistreated children from all over the world. As a victim of child abuse, serving this community has become a part of my identity. My aspiration to represent mistreated children, albeit vitalized by personal turmoil, has been intensified through professional experience. Through my work with Child Protective Services (CPS), during an internship with a family law attorney, I developed my passion for advocating on behalf of children. While working on CPS cases, I have seen how the lives of children can improve through diligent efforts by authority figures. However, I have also witnessed the shortcoming of the system as well where there is room for improvement. These vulnerable children deserve

Another issue of doing research with foster children is the reality that some of those children might be being abused. The issue of consent is again complicated because of the relationship between abused child and abusive guardian. Kinard provides three special situations where procedures for interviewing an abused child might need provisions: when a child is distressed by the interviewing or testing; when a child’s answers or test results indicate emotional problems; and when a child’s answers or comments indicate that the child is being abused. Kinard comments that the decision regarding whether to inform the guardian and/or others about the child’s answers must balance a guardian’s right to know against the child’s right to privacy. However, she notes that the decisions made under these circumstances require intense deliberations (1985).-need to put in quotes? Or change wording-exact copy from study

Kline Pruett, M., Williams Y., Insabella, G., and Little, T.D., 2003) Counselors who Are Court-Appointed as Child Custody Evaluators. Retrieved from

Accounts of neighbors, bystanders or the child themselves need to be considered, and in some cases, more heavily than a visit by the caseworker. Emotions can be staged, it’s easy to lie, and a bystander could a valuable witness- they offer an objective evaluation- clearly impossible while following the family preservation model, and a family member may see the family more often than the caseworker, and therefore have a better evaluation of the situation. An important aspect is objectivity. Yes, the caseworker is going to become attached, but the main operation is to understand the situation, establish if abuse or neglect is occurring and find the best solution for the child. The family preservation model is not ineffective, but it produces an obligation for caseworkers to operate in the interest of the whole family, which can overlook certain problems for the betterment of the whole. As much as the model needs clear and precise guidelines and procedures, it restricts the ability to operate in a variety of situations. For me the problem resides in the contradictory job of being a mediator and enforcer. One would think that being a mediator helps to understanding how to effectively enforce, but the overlap produces inconsistencies, as you can never equally fulfill both roles. The caseworker is asked to too much at once, abuse is abstractly developed and enforced and sometimes rooted in more than

The City Attorney hired a mediator to mediate issues regarding a foster child. The parties are Helen and Jeffrey, the biological parents, and Bianca and Jorge, the foster parents. Before mediation begins, the attorney calls the parents and foster parents separately to schedule the mediation and prepare them for the case. During the telephone call, the attorney told Helen and Jeffrey that they have only two choices: voluntarily relinquish their parental rights or have the courts do it for them. Furthermore, he told them that it is better for them to give up their parental rights voluntarily because he knows the judge will terminate their rights in court.

Although the federal government controls the funding that will enhance the family relationship by supplying services, this unfortunately does not always rectify the family situation. If the system in place doesn’t work and the parent isn’t ready to have the child returned, this will leave a negative impact on the parent-child relationship. The parent may become frustrated and resort to behaviors such as substance abuse, physical abuse, and verbal abuse jeopardizing the parent-child relationship. As stated in Foster Care at issue, by Debra Bloom, family reunification is less likely to occur when parents are involved in the correctional system. Reporting that 16 % of mothers with children in foster care are arrested within 18 months, with the arrest occurring after the child has been placed in foster care. Suggesting that child welfare look beyond the system when developing potential outcomes.

The assistance of other professionals may also become necessary. For example, if custody or visitation is contested, the court may appoint a Guardian ad Litem to conduct an investigation. Guardians charge hourly for their services as well, and the parties are responsible for these costs. Should the services of forensic accountants, child psychologists, or other

In 1997 the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) created the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) to replace the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA), which was created in 1968. Like the UCCJA, the new and improved UCCJEA served the purpose of “deter[ing] the removal or kidnapping of children, eliminat[ing] interstate jurisdictional competition, and prevent[ing] states from relitigating custody decisions from other states.” (Ehrlich, p. 411) Since its creation, the UCCJEA has been a major go-to reference for Courts in all states except Massachusetts and Vermont, who have not yet adopted said act, when considering the technicalities of jurisdiction for child custody cases.

The lawyers highly support a joint custody that would benefit the child. The lawyers argue the case on two different aspects.