Stability Can Be an Important Factor for a Divorce Lawyer to Understand How a Court Might Rule

Jan 8
15:43

2012

Will Beaumont

Will Beaumont

  • Share this article on Facebook
  • Share this article on Twitter
  • Share this article on Linkedin

Courts often like to look to how the parents have been raising their child to determine what they should order. This article explains the law and gives examples of this.

mediaimage

In Louisiana,Stability Can Be an Important Factor for a Divorce Lawyer to Understand How a Court Might Rule Articles a divorce lawyer oftentimes looks at the Louisiana Civil Code when making their decisions about various family law issues.  One such issue is child custody.  As the reader might imagine, there are a number of different and complex determinations that must be made by a family court in ensuring that they place the child in the most loving and supportive environment possible.

One quick and easy checklist for the divorce lawyer to use is in Louisiana Civil Code article 134.  Article 134 has twelve different elements for a court to look at when awarding custody.  Today’s essay deals specifically with section (12), which instructs the court that “the responsibility for the care and rearing of the child previously exercised by each party” is relevant to where the child should be placed.

Unlike some of the other sections in article 134, this one is pretty straightforward.  Basically, section (12) tells a court that it should likely take into account which parent (or to what degree each parent) was raising these children before a custody determination had to take place.

Many times, one of the parents will be more of the caretaker of the child than the other parent.  A divorce lawyer sees that this is particularly true in younger children, who are still dependent on their parents for most things.  It is almost as though section (12) of article 134 wants to make sure that this bond between child and parent is not broken.

Also, the parent who has a longer track record of caring for the child frankly has a more likely chance of caring for that child in the future. 

Let’s say you have two Parents: Parent A and Parent B.  Parent B lives at home with the child, who is seven years old.  Parent A has not lived with them for three years.  One day they get into a disagreement over how often Parent A should be allowed to see the child.  Parent B gets so upset that she locks the door to her apartment and does not answer the phone when Parent A calls.

If Parent A went to a divorce lawyer to try and get custody of his child, under section 12, he would have a hard time proving his case to the court.  If he literally just drops in to see the child intermittently, like once a week or once a month, he really is not raising the child.

Let’s take another example where the other parent does have experience raising the child.  Parent A and Parent B are separated.  They have one son who they take turns seeing every week.  Parent A has noticed that every time her son comes back from being with Parent B he is acting very funny.  His manner and his body language change.  She does a little investigation, and Parent A concludes that her son is smoking marijuana with the child. 

Under section (12) of article 134, if it can be proven, a court will likely consider heavily Parent B’s sub-par parenting of the child in determining where to award custody.

This article is written with the sole intention of providing information.  It is not legal advice.  Will Beaumont is a divorce lawyer in New Orleans, La.