Child Custody And Divorce: Free Legal Advice
Child Custody And Divorce: Free Legal Advice
Child Custody And Divorce: Free Legal Advice
- - - - - - - - - -
Just like the physical health of the parties, the mental health of the parties is at issue as well. If you are in significantly better (or worse) mental health than the other party, you will want to go over this with your lawyer, because that fact can have a bearing on the case. Judges order mental evaluations of both parties, when requested, but it isn't that common. You should understand that this factor (or "half" of a factor, since the child custody statute dictates that the judge will examine
"g. The mental and physical health of the parties involved.")
is, in many cases IGNORED by both sides. The attorneys, and the judge, will be trying, from the earliest days of the case, to get a feel for just what is, and what is not, going to be an issue in this dispute. You, and the other party, are informing them, without meaning to do so. How? By your CONDUCT, by the way you behave, by the way you solve this problem, or that problem, or the next problem to come along.
In a divorce case where child custody is not an issue, the judge doesn't want to get to know you very well. The judge wants to cut up the marital pie, give a fair share to each side, and move along to the next case. In a child custody dispute, the law says that the judge MUST examine, among other factors, "the mental and physical health of the parties". The law doesn't say that the judge may, if he wants to, examine the mental and physical health of the parties, the law says he MUST. And he will.
Here is Rule Number One: Bizzare Conduct Gets You Disqualified.
Please read that one again: Bizzare Conduct Gets You Disqualified.
The judge is going to be making a decision, going to be asking himself, generally, "Do I want to send this kid to live with this person? Would that be good for the kid, or bad for the kid?"
In real life, the judge sounds like this: "Counsel, tell me about the football game. I've got a petition here to restrict your client's visitation, claiming that he took the child to a school football game, got into a shouting match with the referee, and actually punched the referee in the nose, right in front of everybody. Is that true? Isn't that a little crazy?"
That last question is what did it for you. Try this one: "Counsel, I have your petition here, asking that Dad be compelled, by Court order, to take his daughter to dance class on Fridays, because the dance classes are already paid for by Mother. But the other side's answer is that Mother has signed that kid up for art classes on Mondays, girl scouts on Tuesdays, church choir on Wednesdays, swimming on Thursdays, dance class on Fridays, and on Saturday, it's soccer. I understand that three weeks ago that child wasn't into any of these activities. Did your client sign the child up for all those lessons, just before Dad's three weeks with the child? Isn't that a little crazy?"
And, of course, it's that last question again: "Isn't that a little crazy?" If the answer just might be "yes", then you're in trouble. If there are more than one of these bizzare incidents, you are in very serious trouble. A whole campaign of bizzare conduct? Forget it. The lawyer might only hear it in the judge's chambers, during one of those pre-trial conferences. "Well, counsel, I appreciate that your client loves the child, but the fact is, Mom's a little crazy...."
The judge is going to evaluate you the same way that we all evaluate new people, people that we just met: a little at a time, but it all adds up. First impressions count, but don't forget that all the other impressions count as well, and those impressions aren't likely to be forgotten. Do you really want to be facing a three-day custody trial, where each of these factors is important, and have the judge ask your lawyer "Is this the guy who punched the referee last year?" Or, "Isn't this the dance lesson lady?"
As I mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, usually this particular factor gets ignored by the attorneys and judges: most people are in good mental health and physical health, and let's just not spend any time on this issue.
("Well, the Court finds that the parties are equal on factor 'g', the mental and physical health of the parties. They're both fine people, both healthy, and the Court will score this factor as a tie, and I find that neither parent has an advantage over the other in that regard. That's one of the things that makes this case a difficult one, from a judge's point of view. These are both fine people, and I don't have any concern for the child when the child is with either parent, in that regard. Now let's talk about the next factor....")
Your lawyer doesn't want to hear from the judge "Isn't this the guy who was following his wife around?"
"Counsel, is this the lady who wanted her husband to have a mental examination? You know, I sent both of them to be examined, and I'd be more interested to see her report. She's made four or five allegations against that guy, and none of them turned out to be true. She's a little crazy isn't she? No? Well, maybe not. Let's go out and start the trial."
Yeah, judge, let's go start the trial. I can't wait.
("Well, to continue, when we get to factor 'g', the mental and physical health of the parties, these people are both healthy, physically, but I have a concern about the Mother's obvious over-reacting, her theatrics, and her accusations against the Father in this case. I even entered an order, a year and a half ago, that the Father was to take drug tests whenever the Mother's attorney delivered a written demand, and that's what happened. These log books, and these drug test results, that I reviewed during the trial here, show that Father never once delayed his showing up at the clinic, never once claimed that he didn't get the message, he showed up within an hour of the demand, and each test came back negative for drugs of any kind. We also have the two other incidents that we talked about, one at the beginning of the case, over a year ago, and the one just recently. Now we don't have any mental tests in this case, and I'm not a psychiatrist, and I'm not saying that Mother has mental problems, but it's plain to me that Father is certainly the more stable of the two parents, more able to deal with problems in a constructive way. And why Mother told the child that Father had to submit to this drug testing is frankly a little beyond me. It served no purpose, certainly wasn't good for the child, to be hearing about all that. The difference may be small, but it exists, and I find that Father is the more, well, stable of the two parents, for the reasons I discussed, and I'm going to rule that factor 'g' goes to the father. It may be true that this child will someday have to deal with serious problems of one sort or another, and the Father has shown more stability, more strength, by his own example, in that regard, so I'm ruling that factor 'g' goes to the Father. Now the next factor...."
So you see, we're not usually dealing with people who are addicted to Valium, need mood altering drugs just to get through daily life. We're dealing with CONDUCT, in many cases. Let's not disqualify ourselves.
Good luck with it.