How the Pennsylvania Courts Resolve Custody Contests Involving Third Parties

Custody disputes in Pennsylvania can often be emotionally charged. This is especially true in cases involving more than two parents. In cases where the child resided with someone other than their biological parents for an extended period of time, the court will often be called upon to determine whether the interests of the child would be served by returning the child to the parent. The case we’re about to review is an important example of a child custody claim between a natural parent and third-party caregivers.

Background of the case 

In the aforementioned family law case, the child had been living with third parties for a number of years. The mother of the child, as well as her husband, wanted to regain custody of the child and filed a petition in the trial court. When the case began, the third parties had been providing stability and a home environment for the child.

In this case, the trial court refused to allow the natural parents to have custody of the child and granted custody to the third parties. The court based its decision on the fact that the child had developed strong emotional ties in her current living situation and that changing her living situation could be detrimental to her well-being. The parents appealed the ruling, stating that as the natural parents of the child, they have a superseding right, and that the trial court should not have prevented them from taking custody of their children without a valid reason.

The appeal 

The Pennsylvania Superior Court reviewed the legal standards applicable to custody disputes. In this case, the court recognized the traditional rule that parents presumptively have a right to custody of their own children. However, this is not an absolute right.

The court pointed out that the most important consideration in any custody dispute is the child’s best interests, not those of the adult parties involved in the squabble. The court noted that when a child lived with third parties for a significant period of time, the trial court is required to make a thorough evaluation of whether a change in custody is in the child’s best interests.

After reviewing the facts of the case, the Pennsylvania Superior Court concluded that the trial court had made a discretionary decision in the child’s best interests, as supported by the evidence that the child was doing well living with the third parties.

Key takeaways

• Parental rights are not absolute – Although the law prefers natural parents, ruling in their favor is not always in the best interests of the child.

• Stability is a key factor in custody decisions – The stability of a situation is also an important consideration. A child’s present living situation as well as their emotional ties, are given considerable weight.

• Third parties can win custody cases – If the third party has been a caregiver for the child for a long time, it would be detrimental to the child to remove them from their home.

• It is difficult to overturn a custody decision on appeal – Trial courts have broad discretion when it comes to contested custody cases.

• The best interests of the child are the controlling factor – The totality of circumstances is used to determine the best interests of the child.

Talk to a Philadelphia, PA, Child Custody Lawyer Today 

The Law Offices of Lauren H. Kane represent the interests of Philadelphia residents involved in a contested custody battle. Call our Philadelphia family lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your next steps right away.

Source:

law.justia.com/cases/pennsylvania/superior-court/1977/249-pa-super-274-2.html