The Case Of Painter V. Bannister

Identify and investigate these contemporary issues relating to family law and evaluate the effectiveness of legal and non-legal responses to these issues

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.

The Family Court ensures that each case and judgement concerning marriage/relationship breakdowns involving children is treated equally with emphasis on the child and its best interests. At times mutual agreement on the shared parental responsibility (the underlying principle of the law

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.

Family law is the most complex aspect of the Australian legal system as it is constantly under review and reform pursuing to adopt society’s continual change in values and principles. The changing of laws in an attempt to be parallel with society is a strenuous process. Nevertheless, legislations are reflective of contemporary society’s values and ethics. Numerous legal issues arise in regards to family including, same sex relationships, domestic violence and divorce ideally on the best interest of the child, where family laws have been imposed to protect individuals and aim to achieve justice.

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.

We know much more about incarcerated mothers than we know about incarcerated fathers. For example, over 70% of female inmates are mothers of dependent children under the age of eighteen. Almost 90% of incarcerated females are single parents and heads of households. According to some estimates, a quarter of a million children are separated from their parents each year by jail and prison (Glick & Neto, 1977; McGowan & Blumenthal, 1978; McPeek & Tse, 1988; U.S. Department of Justice, 1992). We do not have this kind of information about incarcerated fathers. The lack of statistics concerning fathers in prison may suggest that they are a forgotten group.

Patel, Samir H; Choate, Laura Hensley. Journal of Mental Health Counseling 36.1 (Jan 2014). Conducting Child Custody Evaluations: Best Practices for Mental Health

The second account of a changing stance toward children’s rights was evolution alongside women’s rights. Before this time, women and children were seen as unimportant under the law, whereas a father was given almost total control over all matters regarding his wife and children. If a father was violent or neglectful, society simply turned their shoulder to it. In the latter half of the nineteenth century, laws pertaining to the family system began to change. A new law recognized the equal rights of fathers and mothers with the mother’s rights reigning over the fathers in regards to the children. Also, the legal system began viewing children as important to the future of society, therefore “appropriate objects of the court’s

The debate of a child’s involvement in divorce and child custody mediation is one that involves “family empowerment” and comes at a time when children “experience considerable modifications in the construction of their family unit.” It is then at the mediator and the family’s discretion the degree to which children are involved in the process. It is the mediator’s role to ensure both parents have their input on this decision.

The Parent-Child Relationship Inventory (PCRI) assessment would not appear to be affect in a custody case because of the documented autonomy discrepancies between the mother-adolensce and father adolensce relationship. Coffman, Guerin & Gottfried, 2006) cleared defined the father and adolensce relationship being one of the flaws of the PCRI. However, the study did show the PCRI did note that there is a difference in relationships, therefore, I would be hesitate to use this assessment in a custody case.