The purpose of this paper was to give some insight into the vicious battles that take place over child custody. It is important to mention that raising children is difficult even with two parents, now when there is only one parent the difficultly increases by leaps and bounds. The idea of joint custody seems to sound like a good solution however, Smith (2003) stated
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.
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.
With fault based divorce in the 1960s, child custody depended primarily on the child’s age. If the child was under seven years old, also known as the ‘tender years,’ the mother would receive physical custody. This was because of the belief at the time that women are good caregivers and it was their job to take care of the children at home. However, if the children were older, custody would be granted to the parent of the same sex. Sometimes judges would also award custody of children dependent on martial or sexual conduct of the spouses. When custody was awarded in this way, the presiding judge could be more focused on the rights of the parents than what is best for the child in that situation. Either way, it was quite noticeable that child custody was based on the judge and their opinion, which could change from case to case.
One hundred years ago, the Illinois legislature enacted the Illinois Juvenile Court Act (1899 Ill. Laws 132 et seq.), creating the first separate juvenile court. The policy debates raging around the country in this centennial year(1899), however, make it uncertain whether the traditional juvenile court will prevail. Early in the 19th century, juveniles were tried along with adults in criminal courts. In common law, children under
Christopher Lambesis (Father) and Erin Lambesis (Mother) were divorced in 2013. In the divorce decree, Father was ordered to pay Mother $100 per month for child support for the two minor children. In October 2014, Father filed a Petition to Modify Child Support. Based on his own calculations using the Parent’s Worksheet for Child Support, he requested Mother pay him $100 per month. Mother requested a hearing in response including her own calculations indicating that Father should be paying her $123 per month. An evidentiary hearing was held and the court ordered Father to pay mother child support amounting to $149.30 per month. Father filed a Motion for a New Trial stating that he was not provided with documentation regarding Mother’s financial status in a timely manner and that the family court’s child support obligation calculations were incorrect. Mother filed an Application for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. The court denied Father’s request for a new trial and granted Mother’s request for attorney fees. Father filed a motion to reconsider the allocation of parenting time coordinator’s fees. This motion was also denied. Father appealed the court’s decision.
But back in 1891, a bill was introduced in the Illinois General Assembly proposing a children’s court. The person most instrumental in introducing this bill was Timothy D. Hurley, president of the Catholic-controlled Chicago Visitation and Aid Society. The bill would give county courts the power to commit dependent children to any nonprofit child welfare organization incorporated under Illinois law (Tannenhaus, 2002). In addition, the bill proposed that county courts be empowered to commit to private child-saving organizations any child “being trained or allowed to be trained in vice and crime” (Platt, 2009, p. 123 – 124). Lucy Flower supported this bill because it would give judges more discretion in handling dependent cases (Tannenhaus, 2002).
When making welfare decisions, the courts are obligated to take into consideration the Child’s wishes and feelings.
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.
DR4 Complaint For Custody Petition is a form intended to request the custody of a child due to various reasons not favorable to the child/ren. The petitioner must specify his/her relationship with the child and seek custody of the child based on the options provided in DR4 form. Attaching the most recent orders by the court/s is indispensable as an evidentiary proof of the cases mentioned in section 5 and 6 of DR4 form. You have to be very specific for mentioning the cause of the petition for the custody of the child/ren along with your choices of interactions of the child/ren with the other parties involved in some or the other way. The document DR4 also has the provision for seeking insurance and financial support for the child/ren through the court order. File form DR4, Complaint for Custody before the honorable judge of the Circuit Court in your county.
A court battle is erupting over the fate of a 3-year old named Braelynn. Her adopted family claims that she is theirs since they legal adopted her when her biological mother gave away all here parental rights. However, the father was incarcerated at this time and did not have a say in the ordeal. But now that he is out, he wants his daughter back since his parental rights should have never been terminated due to his incarceration. The Dalsings had adopted her from three weeks old and Braelynn has never met her biological dad. Yet a judge agreed with the biological father’s argument and vacated the adoption. Braelynn is still living with the couple but have requested a re-hearing at the state court of appeals.
About 3 weeks ago, mom came from Texas to get the children. Mom said she has full legal custody. Dad had the children for a two month time period for 2-3 weeks. He wouldn't let the mother know the children's whereabouts. Dad had the children because mom asked him to step in and help enroll them in school, buy uniforms, and school clothes. Dad took the children and ran with them. He didn't enroll them immediately but when he did they went to Woolmarket for two weeks. He took them out and 3 weeks later enrolled Elizabeth at Bay St. Louis-Waveland Elementary, Haley at North Bay Elementary, and Alexis at North Bay Waveland Middle. Mom said she had to enroll Elizabeth at Bay St. Louis Waveland Elementary. When they did go to school, they only had one uniform to wear
Laws tend to make the lives of every individual safer and pleasant. The subject of this paper focuses on evaluating and identifying the Constitutional safeguards within the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments of the United States Constitution. How these safeguards to the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendment will apply to juvenile and adult court proceedings. Finally, this paper will focus the impact that these safeguards, such as speedy trial, Miranda warning, exclusionary rule, and right to counsel will have on the day- to- day operation for juvenile and adult courts.
In the courts, the mediator has an essential role in the dissolution of marriages and relationships, especially when it comes to child custody. According to California Family Code 3161, the purposes of custody mediation proceedings are: