The rise of false accusations of abuse in child custody proceedings attorney staten island is very disturbing. Courts often choose to "err on the side of caution," and refuse to grant custody to the accused parent. Sometimes, the accused parent cannot even obtain parenting time (child visitation), even after investigation finds no evidence of abuse.
Making a false abuse allegation is a horrible thing to do to a child. The child will often have to undergo unnecessary and intrustive medical and psychological examinations. If the allegations are of sexual abuse, the physical examinations of the child can be extremely embarrassing to the child. Also, depending upon the circumstances and the age of the child, the false accusations can cause a permanent rift between the child and the accused parent, the accusing parent, or both.
Historically, parents who complained of false accusations were ignored. However, recent studies illustrate how common false allegations are. In Ontario, an analysis of child abuse allegations attorney staten island in the Ottawa area revealed that 60% of accusations of abuse were related to marital breakup, and in two thirds of those cases there was no evidence of any abuse.
It is no longer professionally reasonable for a psychologist to presume the truth of abuse allegations made in the context of divorce. The irresponsibility of parents who make false accusations to hurt their spouse, or to stop a child custody action attorney staten island, has caused grave harm to children who actually are abused -- the significant numbers of false allegations make it less likely that true allegations will be believed.
Showing posts with label child custody. Show all posts
Showing posts with label child custody. Show all posts
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Monday, February 1, 2010
Divorce with the Child's Best Interests at Heart
A Michigan judge recently awarded custody of a 3-year-old girl to her father rather than continue custody with her mother with whom the child had lived since she was born. The father planned to have his mother take care of the little girl. The judge said he believes it is in the child's best interests to be in the daycare of her paternal grandmother rather than in paid daycare while her mother attends classes at the University of Michigan as a scholarship student.
The judge has been severely criticized by thinking men and women, including newspaper editors and columnists Ellen Goodman and Anna Quindlen. All the criticism argues that the judge's decision is unfair to the mother. Anna Quindlen pointed out that if the mother had not gone to college but rather had stayed home and applied for welfare benefits, she would not have lost custody of her daughter, although, because raising children is not recognized as "work" by many Americans, she would surely have been criticized for "not working".
It is unquestionable that this decision was unfair to the mother, but the law says that custody decisions are to be based on what is best for the child, not what is best for the mother or best for the father.
A more productive topic for the critics to explore would be: What do the words "best interests" of a child mean and how should the Courts determine the "best interests" of a child?
According to the Michigan judge the best interests of this child require her to be cared for by blood relatives, not licensed, paid daycare providers. He did not explain, to my knowledge, the basis for that belief.
Most persons educated and experienced in child development matters would say that it is in the best interests of any child to remain in the care of the parent to whom the child is primarily bonded, unless that parent has significant parenting flaws. The child will almost always be primarily bonded to the parent who feeds, clothes, bathes, plays with, comforts, and nurses the child most of the time.
In the Michigan case, it may have been the maternal grandmother to whom the child was primarily bonded, if the news reports were accurate that it was she who raised the child while the mother completed high school. However, the law in America has consistently held that parents' rights outweigh grandparents' rights when it comes to determining custody of a child. That is, the law says it is in the best interests of a child to be raised by parents rather than grandparents, unless the parents are unfit.
Obviously, the words "best interests of the child" have no one, single meaning, which is why laws in most States define "best interests" by listing a number of factors. In New Mexico judges are directed to consider
•the wishes of both parents;
•the wishes of the child;
•the relationship between the child and his parents, siblings and others important in his life;
•the child's adjustment to home, school & community; and
•the mental & physical health of everyone involved.
Whether daycare should be a factor in deciding what is in a child's best interests is the question the Michigan appellate courts must now decide. More accurately, the question may be whether daycare is properly the deciding factor as the Michigan judge seems to believe.
However, it is important to keep in mind that in custody cases, it is the child's best interests that matter, not the parents.
The judge has been severely criticized by thinking men and women, including newspaper editors and columnists Ellen Goodman and Anna Quindlen. All the criticism argues that the judge's decision is unfair to the mother. Anna Quindlen pointed out that if the mother had not gone to college but rather had stayed home and applied for welfare benefits, she would not have lost custody of her daughter, although, because raising children is not recognized as "work" by many Americans, she would surely have been criticized for "not working".
It is unquestionable that this decision was unfair to the mother, but the law says that custody decisions are to be based on what is best for the child, not what is best for the mother or best for the father.
A more productive topic for the critics to explore would be: What do the words "best interests" of a child mean and how should the Courts determine the "best interests" of a child?
According to the Michigan judge the best interests of this child require her to be cared for by blood relatives, not licensed, paid daycare providers. He did not explain, to my knowledge, the basis for that belief.
Most persons educated and experienced in child development matters would say that it is in the best interests of any child to remain in the care of the parent to whom the child is primarily bonded, unless that parent has significant parenting flaws. The child will almost always be primarily bonded to the parent who feeds, clothes, bathes, plays with, comforts, and nurses the child most of the time.
In the Michigan case, it may have been the maternal grandmother to whom the child was primarily bonded, if the news reports were accurate that it was she who raised the child while the mother completed high school. However, the law in America has consistently held that parents' rights outweigh grandparents' rights when it comes to determining custody of a child. That is, the law says it is in the best interests of a child to be raised by parents rather than grandparents, unless the parents are unfit.
Obviously, the words "best interests of the child" have no one, single meaning, which is why laws in most States define "best interests" by listing a number of factors. In New Mexico judges are directed to consider
•the wishes of both parents;
•the wishes of the child;
•the relationship between the child and his parents, siblings and others important in his life;
•the child's adjustment to home, school & community; and
•the mental & physical health of everyone involved.
Whether daycare should be a factor in deciding what is in a child's best interests is the question the Michigan appellate courts must now decide. More accurately, the question may be whether daycare is properly the deciding factor as the Michigan judge seems to believe.
However, it is important to keep in mind that in custody cases, it is the child's best interests that matter, not the parents.
Monday, December 14, 2009
Sharing Custody
"Do what's best for the kids."
Everyone says that during a divorce. But determining "what's best" often becomes a mud-slinging tug-of-war where no one wins - especially the children.
Shared parenting plans attempt to diffuse the fighting, putting the children first. Both parents get joint legal and physical custody. The terms "custodial parent" and "visiting parent" no longer apply.
Supporters say joint custody helps fight the "fading father" syndrome, keeping dads emotionally and financially involved.
It makes sense. In a perfect world, children should grow up in a loving, supportive environment with both parents. And in a perfect world, both parents should share equal responsibilities, eradicating "traditional" gender roles where the father's the sole breadwinner and the mother's the sole caregiver.
The only time shared parenting doesn't work better than other custody arrangements is if the parents continue to fight, says Luevy. Arguing, crying and all the other emotional baggage that's hard to shed hurts the children more than anything else. (Of course, joint custody isn't possible if one of the parents is abusive or unfit in other ways).
Joint custody is now the preferred and presumed custody arrangement in 26 states and the District of Columbia. And more than one out of five divorces has shared parenting arrangements, says a 1997 report from the National Center for Health Statistics.
But even the courts are increasingly favoring joint custody, instead of choosing one parent over the other. A divorced couple in Boston made headlines when an Appeals Court ruled that the mother and father would rotate school years, so that one parent gets the child during the school week and the other parent gets the child for the weekends for one year. Then the parents will reverse the schedule the next year. Both parents had asked for sole custody
Eric M. Gansberg is your #1 source for custody laws in New York and Staten Island! He has the background and experience to make sure that everybody wins when it comes to the law. Choose Eric M. Gansberg for all your child custody law needs!
Everyone says that during a divorce. But determining "what's best" often becomes a mud-slinging tug-of-war where no one wins - especially the children.
Shared parenting plans attempt to diffuse the fighting, putting the children first. Both parents get joint legal and physical custody. The terms "custodial parent" and "visiting parent" no longer apply.
Supporters say joint custody helps fight the "fading father" syndrome, keeping dads emotionally and financially involved.
It makes sense. In a perfect world, children should grow up in a loving, supportive environment with both parents. And in a perfect world, both parents should share equal responsibilities, eradicating "traditional" gender roles where the father's the sole breadwinner and the mother's the sole caregiver.
The only time shared parenting doesn't work better than other custody arrangements is if the parents continue to fight, says Luevy. Arguing, crying and all the other emotional baggage that's hard to shed hurts the children more than anything else. (Of course, joint custody isn't possible if one of the parents is abusive or unfit in other ways).
Joint custody is now the preferred and presumed custody arrangement in 26 states and the District of Columbia. And more than one out of five divorces has shared parenting arrangements, says a 1997 report from the National Center for Health Statistics.
But even the courts are increasingly favoring joint custody, instead of choosing one parent over the other. A divorced couple in Boston made headlines when an Appeals Court ruled that the mother and father would rotate school years, so that one parent gets the child during the school week and the other parent gets the child for the weekends for one year. Then the parents will reverse the schedule the next year. Both parents had asked for sole custody
Eric M. Gansberg is your #1 source for custody laws in New York and Staten Island! He has the background and experience to make sure that everybody wins when it comes to the law. Choose Eric M. Gansberg for all your child custody law needs!
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Custody Visitation & Parenting Time
Physical custody determines where the child will reside and the determination is based on the best interest of the child. The child's best interest is determined by examining the emotional, physical, and financial needs of the child. Legal custody enables the parent to make decisions on behalf of the child, in the best interests of the child. These issues are very delicate and must be handled by an attorney with a solid background in family law.
Experienced Staten Island Child Custody Attorney:
They have been representing mothers, fathers, grandparents, and stepparents in child custody and visitation hearings for over twenty years. Eric Gansberg specializes in family law, and has even written a book about if for paralegals. He understands how sensitive of an issue child custody is, so he does his best to attempt to resolve any conflicts peacefully. But, he will fight zealously to protect your interests!
Legal Issues:
Some of the more common legal issues involving child custody and visitation are:
-Parental relocation, particularly in circumstances involving out-of-state relocation
-Non-parent custody issues, typically involving a grandparent or stepparent
-Non-parent visitation issues, often involving grandparents and siblings
-Parental visitation issues, including birthdays, holidays, weekends, special events, extracurricular activities
-Child custody or child visitation modifications, in cases involving a substantial change of circumstances
-Some factors that are taken into consideration when determining custody are the ability of the parents to provide for the needs of the child and what is in the best interest of the child.
Eric M. Gansberg is your #1 choice for child custody advice in Straten Island. He has years of experience and a solid record to put your interests first when concerned with Family Law and Child Custody in Arden Heights!
Experienced Staten Island Child Custody Attorney:
They have been representing mothers, fathers, grandparents, and stepparents in child custody and visitation hearings for over twenty years. Eric Gansberg specializes in family law, and has even written a book about if for paralegals. He understands how sensitive of an issue child custody is, so he does his best to attempt to resolve any conflicts peacefully. But, he will fight zealously to protect your interests!
Legal Issues:
Some of the more common legal issues involving child custody and visitation are:
-Parental relocation, particularly in circumstances involving out-of-state relocation
-Non-parent custody issues, typically involving a grandparent or stepparent
-Non-parent visitation issues, often involving grandparents and siblings
-Parental visitation issues, including birthdays, holidays, weekends, special events, extracurricular activities
-Child custody or child visitation modifications, in cases involving a substantial change of circumstances
-Some factors that are taken into consideration when determining custody are the ability of the parents to provide for the needs of the child and what is in the best interest of the child.
Eric M. Gansberg is your #1 choice for child custody advice in Straten Island. He has years of experience and a solid record to put your interests first when concerned with Family Law and Child Custody in Arden Heights!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
