a user-friendly guide to… pennsylvania’s new child custody law · one individual to assume...

A User-Friendly Guide to…

Pennsylvania’s New Child Custody Law

February 24, 2011

This guide is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information on child custody law.Nothing in this publication is to be construed as the rendering of legal advice. Readers areresponsibleforobtainingsuchadvicefromtheirownlegalcounsel. Thispublicationis intendedforeducationalandinformationalpurposesonly.Theguide isa training resourcedevelopedandproducedby thePennsylvaniaCoalitionAgainstDomesticViolence,andmayonlybereproducedordistributedwithexpresswrittenpermissionofPCADV.Ifyouwould like to request training inyourarea,oryouare inneedof technicalassistanceondomesticviolenceissues,pleasecontact:

PennsylvaniaCoalitionAgainstDomesticViolence3605VartanWay,Suite101Harrisburg,PA17110717.671.4767–888.235.3425www.pcadv.org

Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence - 1-888-235-3425 - www.pcadv.org - 2011 - of 49

SAFETYASAPRIORITYINCHILDCUSTODYCASES DOMESTICVIOLENCEISPREVALENTINCUSTODYDISPUTES

Inthe20%ofcaseswhereparentsneedcourtinterventiontodecidecustodyforthem,domesticviolenceisprevalent;familiesinthesecontestedcustodycasespresentthecourtwithissuesofdomesticviolenceupto75%ofthetime.JanetJohnstonetal.,AllegationsandSubstantiationsofAbuseinCustody‐DisputingFamilies,43FAM.CT.REV.284(2005).

ABUSIVEPARTNERSABUSECHILDREN

According to theAmericanPsychologicalAssociation, “40%‐60%ofmenwhoabusewomenalso abuse children.” Whenoneformofabuseofafamilymemberispresentitisimportanttolookforandpreventabuseofotherfamilymembers.AM.PSYCH.ASS’N,VIOLENCEANDTHEFAMILY:REPORTOFTHEAMERICANPSYCHOLOGICALASSOCIATIONPRESIDENTIALTASKFORCEONVIOLENCEANDTHEFAMILY80(1996).

AFTERSEPARATION,CHILDRENAREATRISK

Post-separation risks to children include: Exposure to threats or acts of violence towards the mother Underminingmother‐childrelationships Physicalorsexualabuseofthechildbythebatterer Children[emulate]thebattererasarolemodel Rigid,authoritarianparenting;neglectfulorirresponsibleparenting Psychologicalabuseandmanipulation Abduction Exposuretoviolenceinthebatterer’snewrelationshipNAT’LCOUNCILOFJUVENILE&FAMILYCT.JUDGES,OFFICEOFJUVENILEJUSTICE&DELINQUENCYPREVENTION,CHILDREN’SEXPOSURETODOMESTIC

VIOLENCE:GUIDETORESEARCHANDRESOURCES59(2006).

Theabusermayattacktheotherparentwhenhe/shevisitsthechildren,continuetomakethreatsorverballyand/oremotionallyabusethechildrenevenwhentheabuser’scontactwiththechildrenisinasupervisedfacility.AM.PSYCH.ASS’N,VIOLENCEANDTHEFAMILY:REPORTOFTHEAMERICANPSYCHOLOGICALASSOCIATIONPRESIDENTIALTASKFORCEONVIOLENCEANDTHEFAMILY40‐41(1996).

Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence - 1-888-235-3425 - www.pcadv.org - 2011 - of 49

Theabusermaythreatentoharmorkidnapthechildreninanefforttoregaincontrolovertheotherparent.Thisbehaviormaybedirectedatrestoringtherelationship,oritmaybeaimedatgeneratingfearanddistress.Althoughthreatstoabductarenotalwayscarriedout,theeffectistocausefearandanxietyinboththethreatenedparentandthechild.AM.PSYCH.ASS’N,VIOLENCEANDTHEFAMILY:REPORTOFTHEAMERICANPSYCHOLOGICALASSOCIATIONPRESIDENTIALTASKFORCEONVIOLENCEANDTHEFAMILY40‐41(1996).

CHILDRENREACTTODOMESTICVIOLENCE

Abusecommitteddirectlyagainstachild,orviolencecommittedinthechild’spresence,canmakeachildmorevulnerabletoavariety of adverse consequences. Changes may occur in behavior, school performance, eating and sleeping habits, physicalsymptomsand/orfriendships.Signscaninclude:

Drugandalcoholuse “Perfect”behaviorwhileinthepresenceoftheabuser Actingliketheparentorattemptingtoprotectotherfamilymembers Angertowardoneorbothparents Abusivebehaviortowardoneparent,usuallytheat‐riskparentSeeNAT’LCOUNCILOFJUVENILE&FAMILYCT.JUDGES,AJUDICIALGUIDETOCHILDSAFETYINCUSTODYCASES,BENCHCARD1(2008).

COURTSCANMINIMIZETHEHARMTOCHILDREN

Emotionalabusecanbeasdamagingasphysicalabuse indestroying thechild’s self‐confidenceandself‐esteem.Being in thepresenceofoffensiveandabusivebehaviorisnotinthebestinterestofthechild.Researchshowsthatchildrenwhohavebeensubjectedorexposedtoviolenceintheirhomeshaveabetterchanceofminimizingtheharmsustainedtothemifallsystemsintervene,maximizing theirexposure tosupportive roleswithcaringadults,especially thenon‐violentparent,andminimizingtheexposuretotheviolenceanditsaccompanyingbehaviors.NAT’LCOUNCILOFJUVENILE&FAMILYCT.JUDGES,AJUDICIALGUIDETOCHILDSAFETYINCUSTODYCASES,BENCHCARD1(2008).

Pennsylvania Custody Law Comparison Chart

*For exact language, refer to the official statute. Nothing in this chart constitutes legal advice. Contact PCADV for permission to distribute. Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence - 1-888-235-3425 - www.pcadv.org - 2011 – of 49

FormerCustodyLaw Act112 EffectiveUntil1.21.11 Effectiveasof1.22.11

Difference

EffectiveDate

“Aproceedingundertheformerprovisions

of23Pa.C.S.Ch.53whichwascommencedbeforetheeffectivedateofthissectionshallbegovernedbythelawineffectatthetimetheproceedingwasinitiated.”H.B.1639,Section4.“Thisactshalltakeeffectin60days.”H.B.1639,Section5.

Act112wassignedonNovember17,2010.Thelawbecameeffective60dayslater,onJanuary22,2011.TheformercustodylawwillgovernanyactioncommencedbeforeJanuary22,2011.H.B.1639,Section4.Act112iscodifiedat23Pa.C.S.§5322‐40.

Declaration

ofP

olicy

“TheGeneralAssemblydeclaresthatitisthepublicpolicyofthisCommonwealth,wheninthebestinterestofthechild,toassureareasonableandcontinuingcontactofthechildwithbothparentsafteraseparationordissolutionofthemarriageandthesharingoftherightsandresponsibilitiesofchildrearingbybothparentsandcontinuingcontactofthechildwithgrandparentswhenaparentisdeceased,divorcedorseparated.”§5301.

Repealedandnotreplaced. TheDeclarationofPolicywasremovedfromthebillinitsseconditeration(PN3705).Forguidanceininterpretingthestatute,looktothebodyofthetext.




Difference

Definitions

Abu

se

Abusetobeconsidered:Presentandpastviolentorabusiveconductwhichmayinclude,butisnotlimitedto,abusiveconductasdefinedinthePFAAct.§5303(a)(3).

Abusetobeconsidered:Abuseistobeconsidered“[a]sdefinedinsection6102(relatingtodefinitions).”§5322

TheformercustodylawallowedthecourttoconsiderformsofabusenotcoveredbyPFAAct.ThenewlawlimitsabusetothePFAAct’sdefinitionofabuse.

Definitions

OtherDefinition

s

TypesofCustodyLegalCustody:“righttomakemajordecisionsaffectingthebestinterestsoftheminorchild.”PartialCustody:“righttotakepossessionofachildawayfromthecustodialparent…”PhysicalCustody:“actualphysicalpossession/controloverchild”SharedCustody:“orderawardingsharedlegal/physicalorboth…”Visitation:“righttovisitachild.Thetermdoesnotincludetherighttoremoveachildfromthecustodialparent’scontrol.”§5302.

TypesofCustody:LegalCustody:“righttomakemajordecisionsonbehalfofthechild.”SharedLegalCustody:“rightofmorethanoneindividualtolegalcustodyofthechild.”SoleLegalCustody:“rightofoneindividualtoexclusivelegalcustodyofthechild.”PhysicalCustody:“physicalpossession&controlofthechild.”PartialPhysicalCustody:“righttoassumephysicalcustodyofthechildforlessthanmajorityoftime.”PrimaryPhysicalCustody:“righttoassumephysicalcustodyofthechildforamajorityofthetime.”SharedPhysicalCustody:“rightofmorethanoneindividualtoassumephysicalcustodyofthechild,eachhavingsignificantperiodsofphysicalcustodywiththechild.”§5322(A).(cont.)

TypesofCustodyLiketheformercustodylaw,thenewcustodylawdefinesthevarioustypesofcustody.Thenewlawdelineatesbetweenphysicalandlegalcustodyandnolongerdefinestheterm“visitation."Theconceptofvisitationisnowencompassedintheterm“supervisedphysicalcustody.”Childrenandyouthserviceagenciesarenotconsideredan“agency”forthepurposeofmonitoringparent/childinteractionduringperiodsofsupervisedphysicalcustody(seedefinitionforagency).OtherDefinitions:Agency:Thenewlawaddsthedefinitionofagency,whichexcludeschildrenandyouthserviceagencies.(cont.)




Difference

Definitions(con

t.)

OtherDefinition

s(con

t.)

TypesofCustody:(cont.)SolePhysicalCustody:“rightofoneindividualtoexclusivephysicalcustodyofthechild.”SupervisedPhysicalCustody:“[c]ustodialtimeduringwhichanagencyoranadultdesignatedbythecourtoragreeduponbythepartiesmonitors…interaction.”OtherDefinitions:Agency:“Anyorganization,society,institution,courtfacilityorotherentitywhichprovidesforthecareofachild.Thetermdoesnotincludeacountychildrenandyouthservicesagency.”(emphasisadded)ParentalDuties:“Includesmeetingthephysical,emotionalandsocialneedsofthechild.”Relocation:“[C]hangeinresidenceofthechildwhichsignificantlyimpairstheabilityofanonrelocatingpartytoexercisecustodialrights.”§5322(A).

Relocation:Thenewcustodylawnowprovidesforadefinitionofrelocation.(Seechartbelow–Relocation).ParentalDuties:‘Parentalduties’isalsoanewdefinitioninthecustodylaw.Forapplicationofthedefinition,seechartbelow–Factor(3).




Difference

AwardsofC

ustody

Type

sofAwards/Reasonsfo

rAwards

Thereisnospecificsectionoutliningtypesofcustodyintheformerlaw.Partial,physicalorsharedcustodyorvisitationisavailableinanycombinationthatthecourtbelieveswillservethebestinterestsofthechild.§5302‐5304.

TypesofAwards:• Sharedphysicalcustody• Primaryphysicalcustody• Partialphysicalcustody• Solephysicalcustody• Supervisedphysicalcustody• Sharedlegalcustody• Solelegalcustody.§5323(a).InterimAward:“Thecourtmayissueaninterimawardofcustodytoapartywhohasstanding…"§5323(b).ReasonsforAward:“Thecourtshalldelineatethereasonsforitsdecisionontherecordinopencourtorinawrittenopinionororder.”§5323(d).SafetyConditions:“[I]fthecourtfindsthatthereisanongoingriskofharmtothechildoranabusedpartyandawardsanyformofcustodytoapartywhocommittedtheabuseorwhohasahouseholdmemberwhocommittedtheabuse,thecourtshallincludeinthecustodyordersafetyconditionsdesignedtoprotectthechildortheabusedparty.”§5323(e).(cont.)

TypesofAwards:Thenewlawdelineatesthepossiblecombinationsofcustodyawards.Thenewlawalsocodifiesthecourt’sabilitytoissueaninterimcustodyawardpursuanttoRule1915.13(specialrelief).CourtOrder/ReasonsforAwards:Thenewlawrequiresthecourttostatethefactorsitconsideredwhenenteringafinalordereitherinopencourt,intheorder,orinawrittenopinion.Thiswasnotarequirementintheformercustodylaw.SafetyConditions:Thenewlawrequiresthecourttoincludesafetyprovisionstoprotectthechildandtheabusedpartyifthereisanongoingriskofharmtoeitherthechildortheabusedparty.(Seechartbelow‐AbuseAsaFactor).(cont.)




Difference

(con

t.)

(con

t.)

Enforcement:Inawardingcustody,thecourtshallspecifythetermsandconditionsoftheawardinsufficientdetailtoenableapartytoenforcethecourtorderthroughlawenforcementauthorities.§5323(f).

Enforcement:Thenewlawrequiresthecourttodraftanorderwithsufficientdetailtoallowlawenforcementtoenforcetheorder.

Stan

ding

Thereisnospecificsectionprovidingstandingforparentsorinlocoparentis.GrandparentStanding:Whenaparentisdeceased,thechild’sgrandparentorgreat‐grandparentsmayseek“reasonablepartialcustodyorvisitationorboth.”ThecourtmaygrantsuchpartialcustodyorvisitationifitisinBIOCandwillnotinterferewiththeparent‐childrelationship.Courtistoconsidertimespentwiththegrandorgreat‐grandparents.§5311.Ifthechild’sparentsaredivorced,grandparentsorgreat‐grandparentsmayseekpartialcustodyorvisitation.Sameconsiderationsaswhenparentdeceased.§5312(emphasisadded).(cont.)

Specificallydefineswhohasstanding.Includesaparent,apersoninlocoparentistothechild,oragrandparentwhoisnotinlocoparentis(iftheadditionalrequirementsexplainedbelowaremet).§5325(1)‐(3).GrandparentStanding:Physical/LegalCustody:Grandparentswhoarenotinlocoparentishavestandingtofileforanyformofphysical/legalcustodyif:(i)therelationshipbeganwiththeconsentofaparentorunderacourtorder,(ii)thegrandparentassumesoriswillingtoassumeresponsibilityforthechild,and(iii)oneofthefollowingconditionsismet:1)thechildisdependentunder42Pa.C.S.Ch.63(juvenilematters);2)“thechildissubstantiallyatriskduetoparentalabuse,neglect,drugoralcoholabuseorincapacity”;or3)thechildresidedwiththegrandparentforatleast12monthsandisremovedfromhomebyparents(ifgrandparentfilesforcustodywithinsixmonthsofremoval).§5324(3)(emphasisadded).(cont.)

Thenewlawspecificallydefineswhohasstanding,includinginlocoparentis,thusincorporatinginlocoparentisdoctrinefromcaselaw.Thenewlawdoesnotdefineinlocoparentis.Caselawwillstillgovernthistypeofstanding.GrandparentStanding:Physical/LegalCustody:Thenewlawreturnsgrandparentstandingforanyformofphysicalorlegalcustodytothepre‐Baxterinterpretation.R.M.v.Baxter,777A.2d446(Pa.2001).Agrandparentmustmeetallthreecriteriatohavestandingtopetitionforlegalorphysicalcustody.(cont.)




Difference

Stan

ding

Ifthechildhasresidedwiththegrandparentsfor12monthsormoreandisremovedbytheparents,grandparentsmayseekreasonablepartialcustodyorvisitation.CourtshallgrantifBIOCandwillnotinterferewithparentchildrelationship.§5313(a)(emphasisadded).ThePa.Sup.Ct.heldthatgrandparentshaveautomaticstandingbasedonthegrammaticalconstructionofthestatute.Grandparentmayseekphysicalandlegalcustody;automaticstandingderivedfromtheBaxtercase.R.M.v.Baxter,777A.2d446(Pa.2001).

GrandparentStanding:Partial/SupervisedPhysicalCustody:Grandparentshavestandingtoseekpartialphysicalcustodyorsupervisedphysicalcustodyif(1)aparent(grandparent’schild)is

deceased,(2)parentsareseparatedatleastsix

months,or(3)childresidedwithgrandparentfor12

months(ifactionfiledwithin6mo.ofremoval).

§5325(emphasisadded).

GrandparentStanding:Partial/SupervisedPhysicalCustody:Liketheformerlaw,thenewlawgivesgrandparentsstandingforpartial/supervisedphysicalcustodywhereaparentisdeceasedorthechildresidedwiththegrandparentsfor12months(iffiledwithin6mo.oflivingwithgrandparent).Thenewlawadds,“wheretheparents…areseparatedforatleastsixmonths,”replacingtheformerlaw’sstandingforgrandparentswhereparentsaredivorced.




Difference

Factors

Safety–W

eighted

“[T]hecourtshallconsidereachparentandadulthouseholdmember’spresentandpastviolentorabusiveconductwhichmayinclude,butisnotlimitedto,abusiveconductasdefined[inthePFAAct].”§5303(a)(3).Thisisoneofthreemainarticulatedfactors.

Inorderinganyformofcustody,thecourtshalldeterminethebestinterestofthechildbyconsideringallrelevantfactors,givingweightedconsiderationtothosefactorswhichaffectthesafetyofthechild,includingthefollowing...”§5328(a)(emphasisadded).16factorsareenumerated,includingarangeofconsiderations.Factors(2),(8),&(13)allspecificallyrefertoabuseordomesticviolence.

Thenewcustodylawrequiresthecourttogive“weightedconsideration”tofactorsaffectingthesafetyofthechild.Theformercustodylawfocusedthecourt’sattentiononabuseasoneofthreeprimaryconsiderationsDiscussionofeachfactoranditsrelevancetosafetyfollows.

Factors

(1)–

Con

tinuingCon

tact

“Inmakinganorderforcustody,partialcustodyorvisitationtoeitherparent,thecourtshallconsider,amongotherfactors,whichparentismorelikelytoencourage,permitandallowfrequentandcontinuingcontactandphysicalaccessbetweenthenon‐custodialparentandthechild.”§5303(a)(2).Thisisoneofthreemainarticulatedfactors.

“(1)Whichpartyismorelikelytoencourageandpermitfrequentandcontinuingcontactbetweenthechildandanotherparty.”§5328(a)(1).

Factor(1)inthenewcustodylawuseslanguagefromtheformercustodylaw.Essentially,factor(1)reiteratesoneofthethreemainarticulatedfactorsfromtheformerbestinterestsanalysis.Inthenewlaw,factor(1)isoneof16factorsinthenewlaw,asopposedtooneofthreefactorsintheformerlaw.




Difference

Factors

(2)‐A

buse

“Thecourtshallconsidereachparentandadulthouseholdmember’spresentandpastviolentorabusiveconductwhichmayinclude,butisnotlimitedto,abusiveconductasdefinedinthePFAAct.”§5303(a)(3).Thisisoneofthreemainarticulatedfactors.*Caselawexpandedrelevantfactorstoincludearangeofconsiderationsbeyondthosespecificallyarticulatedinthestatute.

“(2)Thepresentandpastabusecommittedbyapartyormemberoftheparty’shousehold,whetherthereisacontinuedriskofharmtothechildoranabusedpartyandwhichpartycanbetterprovideadequatesafeguardsandsupervisionofthechild.”§5328(a)(2)(emphasisadded).AbuseDefined:“Asdefinedinsection6102[ofthePFAAct](relatingtodefinitions).”§5322.

ScopeofConsideration:Factor(2)ofthenewlawspecificallyrequiresthecourttoconsidertheriskofharmtoboththechildandtheabusedparent.ConsiderationofAbuse:Thenewlawrequirescourtstoconsiderpresentandpastabusebyapartyorbyahouseholdmember.Thisisthesameastheoldlaw.Thenewlawgoesontodirectthecourttodeterminewhetherthatabusepresentsacontinuedriskofharmtoeitherthechildortheabusedparty.Ifso,thecourtmustdecidewhichpartywouldadequatelyprotectandsafeguardthechildfromfurtherabuse.




Difference

Factors

(3)‐Paren

ting

“Inmakinganorderforcustodyorpartialcustody,thecourtshallconsiderchildpreference,aswellasanyotherfactorwhichlegitimatelyimpactschild’sphysical,intellectualandemotionalwellbeing.”§5303(a)(1).*Caselawexpandedrelevantfactorstoincludearangeofconsiderationsbeyondthosespecificallyarticulatedinthestatute.

“(3)Theparentaldutiesperformedbyeachpartyonbehalfofthechild.”§5328(a)(3).ParentalDutiesDefined:“Includesmeetingthephysical,emotionalandsocialneedsofthechild.”§5322.

Factor(3)requiresthecourttoexplorewhichpartyhashistoricallymetthephysical,emotional,andsocialneedsofthechildasawaytopredicttheirfuturebehavior.Thiswasnotanexplicitfactorintheoldlaw,butcourtsdidmakepredictionsaboutfutureabilitytoparentbasedonpastbehaviorunderthecatchalllanguageoftheformerlaw,whichallowedthecourtstoconsider“anyfactorwhichlegitimatelyimpactschild’sphysical,intellectualandemotionalwellbeing.”

Factors

(4)–Stability/Co

ntinuity


“(4)Theneedforstabilityandcontinuityinthechild’seducation,familylifeandcommunitylife.”§5328(a)(4).

Factor(4)isalsoapredictivefactor,andrequiresthecourttodecidewhichpartywill,inthefuture,provideforstabilityandcontinuityinthechild’slife.Thiswasnotanexplicitfactorintheoldlaw,butcourtsmadehistoricallybasedpredictionsoffutureconductunderthecatchalllanguageoftheformerlaw.




Difference

Factors

(5)&(6

)–Family

“[T]hecourtshallconsiderchildpreference,aswellasanyotherfactorwhichlegitimatelyimpactschild’sphysical,intellectualandemotionalwellbeing.§5303(a)(1).CaseLaw:Itispolicythatsiblings,includinghalf‐siblings,aretoberaisedtogetherabsentcompellingreasons.SeeSaintzv.Rinker,902A.2d509,513(Pa.Super.Ct.2006).

“(5)Theavailabilityofextendedfamily.”§5328(a)(5).“(6)Thechild’ssiblingrelationships.”§5328(a)(6).

Factors(5)&(6)werenotexplicitfactorsintheformerlaw.Butundertheformerlaw,courtsconsideredtheavailabilityoffamily&siblingrelationshipsunderthecatchalllanguageoftheformerlawaswellasbroadpublicpolicyconsiderations.(Saintz,902A.2dat513).

Factors

(7)–ChildPreference

Thecourtshallconsiderchildpreference§5303(a)(1).“Evenifthehouseholdsarenotequivalentlysuitableforrearingthechild,thechild’spreferenceisafactorthatmustbecarefullyconsidered…,keepinginmindthechild’smaturity&intelligence,aswellasthereasonsforchild’spreference.Wearemindfulthatthechild’spreferenceisnotcontrolling&thatthetrialjudgeisinthebestpositiontodeterminetheweighttobegiventhechild’spreference.”Johnsv.Cioci,865A.2d931(Pa.Super.Ct.1993).

“(7)Thewell‐reasonedpreferenceofthechild,basedonthechild’smaturityandjudgment.”§5328(a)(7).

Boththeformerandthenewcustodylawincludeconsiderationofthechild’spreference.Factor(7)makestheaddedrequirementthatchildpreferencesbeconsideredonlywhen“well‐reasoned.”Previously,appellatecourtsheldthatachild’spreferencewasconsideredinthecontextoftheirmaturityandintelligenceandweightedaccordingly.




Difference

Factors

(8)–Con

tinuingCon

tact

“Inmakinganorderforcustody,partialcustodyorvisitationtoeitherparent,thecourtshallconsider,amongotherfactors,whichparentismorelikelytoencourage,permitandallowfrequentandcontinuingcontactandphysicalaccessbetweenthenon‐custodialparentandthechild.”§5303(a)(1).Thisisoneofthreemainarticulatedfactors.

“(8)Theattemptsofaparenttoturnthechildagainsttheotherparent,exceptincasesofdomesticviolencewherereasonablesafetymeasuresarenecessarytoprotectthechildfromharm.”§5328(a)(8).

Factor(8)explicitlypreventsthecourtfromconsideringattemptstoturnachildagainstanotherparentwheresafetymeasuresarenecessarytocareforthechild.Theformerlawconsideredattemptstoturnachildagainstanotherparentaspartoftheirdeterminationofwhichparentwasmorelikelytoencouragefrequentandcontinuingcontact.

Factors

(9)R

elationshipw/Parent


“(9)Whichpartyismorelikelytomaintainaloving,stable,consistentandnurturingrelationshipwiththechildadequateforthechild’semotionalneeds.”§5328(a)(9).

Factor(9)wasnotanexplicitfactorintheformerlaw,butcourtshaveconsideredstability/consistencyunderthecatchalllanguageoftheformerlaw,whichallowedthecourtstoconsider“anyfactorwhichlegitimatelyimpactschild’sphysical,intellectualandemotionalwellbeing.”




Difference

Factors

(10)–DailyNeeds

“Inmakinganorderforcustodyorpartialcustody,thecourtshallconsider…anyotherfactorwhichlegitimatelyimpactschild’sphysical,intellectualandemotionalwellbeing.”§5303(a)(1).*Caselawexpandedrelevantfactorstoincludearangeofconsiderationsbeyondthosespecificallyarticulatedinthestatute.

“(10)Whichpartyismorelikelytoattendtothedailyphysical,emotional,developmental,educationalandspecialneedsofthechild.”§5328(a)(10).

Factor(10)wasnotanexplicitfactorintheformerlaw,butcourtshaveconsideredthefactorinthepastunderthecatchalllanguageoftheformerlaw,whichallowedthecourtstoconsider“anyfactorwhichlegitimatelyimpactschild’sphysical,intellectualandemotionalwellbeing.”

Factors

(11)‐Proxim

ity


“(11)Theproximityoftheresidencesoftheparties.”§5328(a)(11).

Factor(11)wasnotanexplicitfactorintheformerlaw.Inthepast,courtsconsideredthefactorunderthecatchalllanguageoftheformerlaw,whichallowedthecourtstoconsider“anyfactorwhichlegitimatelyimpactschild’sphysical,intellectualandemotionalwellbeing.”




Difference

Factors

(12)–AvailabilityofCare


“(12)Eachparty’savailabilitytocareforthechildorabilitytomakeappropriatechild‐carearrangements.”§5328(a)(12).


Factors

(13)–Con

tinuingCon

tact

“Inmakinganorderforcustody,partialcustodyorvisitationtoeitherparent,thecourtshallconsider,amongotherfactors,whichparentismorelikelytoencourage,permitandallowfrequentandcontinuingcontactandphysicalaccessbetweenthenoncustodialparentandthechild.”§5303(a)(1).Thisisoneofthreemainarticulatedfactors.

“(13)Thelevelofconflictbetweenthepartiesandthewillingnessandabilityofthepartiestocooperatewithoneanother.Aparty’sefforttoprotectachildfromabusebyanotherpartyisnotevidenceofunwillingnessorinabilitytocooperatewiththatparty.”§5328(a)(13).

Factor(13)directlyacknowledgesthatcourtsmaynotconsiderlackofcooperationagainstapartywhentheallegedlackofcooperationisaresultofeffortstoprotectthechildfromabuse.Theformerlawconsideredwhichparentwasmorelikelytoencouragefrequentandcontinuingcontact,butdidnotspecificallyidentifyconflictaspartofthatconsideration.




Difference

Factors

(14)–Drug/Alcoh

olUse

“Inmakinganorderforcustodyorpartialcustody,thecourtshallconsiderchildpreference,aswellasanyotherfactorwhichlegitimatelyimpactschild’sphysical,intellectualandemotionalwellbeing.”§5303(a)(1).*Caselawexpandedrelevantfactorstoincludearangeofconsiderationsbeyondthosearticulatedinthestatute.

“(14)Thehistoryofdrugoralcoholabuseofapartyormemberofaparty’shousehold.”§5328(a)(14).


Factors

(15)–M

ental/PhysicalH

ealth

“Inmakinganorderforcustodyorpartialcustody,thecourtshallconsiderchildpreference,aswellasanyotherfactorwhichlegitimatelyimpactschild’sphysical,intellectualandemotionalwellbeing.”§5303(a)(1).*Caselawexpandedrelevantfactorstoincludearangeofconsiderationsbeyondthethreearticulatedinthestatute.

“(15)Thementalandphysicalconditionofapartyormemberofaparty’shousehold.”§5328(a)(15).

Factor(15)wasnotanexplicitfactorintheoldlaw.Inthepast,courtsconsideredthefactorunderthecatchalllanguageoftheformerlaw,whichallowedthecourtstoconsider“anyfactorwhichlegitimatelyimpactschild’sphysical,intellectualandemotionalwellbeing.”




Difference

Factors

(16)–Catchall

“Inmakinganorderforcustodyorpartialcustody,thecourtshallconsiderchildpreference,aswellasanyotherfactorwhichlegitimatelyimpactschild’sphysical,intellectualandemotionalwellbeing.”§5303(a)(1).*Caselawexpandedrelevantfactorstoincludearangeofconsiderationsbeyondthethreearticulatedinthestatute.

“(16)Anyotherrelevantfactor.”§5328(a)(16).

Factor(16)providesthesamecatchallconsiderationasprovidedintheformerlaw.

Gen

derNeu

trality

Noprovisionincludedinstatute. “(b)GenderNeutral.Thecourtshallbegenderneutralinmakingadeterminationundersubsection(a).Nopartyshallreceivepreferencebasedsolelyupongenderinanyawardgranted.”§5328(b).

Thenewlawincludesanewgenderneutralityprovision.Thisisacodificationofconstitutionalcaselawprohibitinggenderbiasanddiscrimination.




Difference

Presum

ptions

Noprovisionincludedinstatute. BetweenParents:

“Inanyactionregardingthecustodyofthechildbetweentheparentsofthechild,thereshallbenopresumptionthatcustodyshouldbeawardedtoaparticularparent.”§5327(a).BetweenParents&ThirdParty:“Inanyactionregardingthecustodyofthechildbetweenaparentofthechildandanonparent,thereshallbeapresumptionthatcustodyshallbeawardedtotheparent.Thepresumptioninfavoroftheparentmayberebuttedbyclearandconvincingevidence.”§5327(b).

Thenewlaw’spresumptionfortheparentsoveranythirdparty(includinggrandparents)wasnotintheformercustodystatute.ThepresumptioninfavorofparentsovergrandparentsisconsistentwithTroxelv.Granville,530U.S.914(2000),theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtcasethatpreventedcourtsfrominterferingwithafitparent’sfundamentalrighttomakedecisionsregardingtheirchildren,andacodificationofPennsylvaniaappellatejurisprudence.SeeJordanv.Jackson,876A.2d443(Pa.Super.Ct.2005).Seebelow–FactorsforGrandparentsSeeabove–Standing




Difference

Factors

Grand

parents

GrandparentPartialCustody/Visitation:Whenaparentisdeceasedorparentsaredivorced,…thecourtmaygrantsuchpartialcustodyorvisitationifitisinBIOCandwillnotinterferewiththeparent‐childrelationship.Courtistoconsidertimespentwiththegrandorgreat‐grandparents.§§5311,5312.Ifthechildhasresidedwiththegrandparentsfor12monthsormoreandisremovedbytheparents,grandparentsmayseekreasonablepartialcustodyorvisitation.CourtshallgrantifitisintheBIOCandwillnotinterferewithparentchildrelationship.§5313(a).(cont.)

GrandparentPartialCustody/Visitation:Step1–Standing(seechartabove)Step2–16FactorBIOCAnalysis(seeabove)Step3–AdditionalFactors:Grandparentsandgreat‐grandparents“(1)Inorderingpartialphysicalcustodyorsupervisedphysicalcustody[whereaparent(s)isdeceasedorseparated/divorced]thecourtshallconsiderthefollowing:(i)theamountofpersonalcontactbetweenthechildandthepartypriortothefilingoftheaction;(ii)whethertheawardinterfereswithanyparent‐childrelationship;and(iii)whethertheawardisinthebestinterestofthechild.(2)Inorderingpartialphysicalcustodyorsupervisedphysicalcustodytoaparent’sparentorgrandparent[whenthechildresidedwiththegrandparentfor12ormoremonths]thecourtshallconsiderwhethertheaward:(i)interfereswithparent/childrelationship;and(ii)isinthebestinterestofthechild.”§5328(c).(cont.)

GrandparentPartialCustody/Visitation:Thenewlawrequiresthecourttoconsiderthesamefactorsastheformerlaw(BIOC&nointerferencewithparent/childrelationship,andtimespentwiththegrandparent),butaddsthatthesefactorsarealsoconsideredwhenthechild’sparentshavebeenseparatedfor6monthsormore.Whenawardingpartialcustodyorvisitationtoagrandparentwherethechildlivedwiththegrandparentfor12months,theconsiderationsintheformerlawmirrortheconsiderationsinthenewlaw(BIOC&nointerferencewithparent/childrelationship).Thenewlawrequiresthegrandparenttofileforcustodywithin6monthsofthechildleavingtheirresidence.(cont.)




Difference

Factors(con

t.)

Grand

parents(con

t.)

GrandparentPhysical/LegalCustody:IfitisintheBIOCnottobeincustodyofeitherparent&itisintheBIOCtobeincustodyofthegrandparent,thecourtmayawardphysicalandlegalcustodytothegrandparent.Thisappliestoagrandparent:(1)whohasgenuinecare/concernforchild;(2)relationshipbeganw/parent’sconsent;(3)assumedparentalrole/responsibilities(12mo).§5313.

GrandparentPhysical/LegalCustody:Step1–Standing(seechartabove)Step2–16FactorBIOCAnalysis(seeabove)*MustovercomepresumptionforParent.

GrandparentPhysical/LegalCustody:Providedagrandparenthasstanding&canovercomeparentalpresumption,thenewlawrequiresthecourttoreviewbasedonthe(16)bestinterestfactors.Tohavestanding,thegrandparentisrequiredtomeetthefactorsfromtheformerlaw((1)relationshipbeganw/consentofparents,(2)grandparenthasgenuinecare/concern,and(3)eitherchildisdependent(42Pa.C.S.Ch63),thereisasubstantialriskofharmtothechild,orthechildresidedw/grandparentfor12mo).




Difference

Crim

inalCONVICTIONS

ConsiderationofCriminalCon

victions:Initia

lEvaluation&Cou

nseling

“Ifaparenthasbeenconvictedoforhaspleadedguiltyornocontesttoanoffensesetforthbelow,thecourtshallconsidersuchcriminalconductandshalldeterminethatsuchparentdoesnotposeathreatofharmtothechildbeforemakinganorderofcustody,partialcustody,orvisitationtothatparent.…Inmakingadetermination,partialcustodyorvisitation…thecourtshallappointaqualifiedprofessionaltoprovidecounselingtoanoffendingparentandshalltaketestimonyfromthatprofessional…Counseling…shallincludeaprogramoftreatmentorindividualtherapydesignedtorehabilitateaparentwhichaddresses,butisnotlimitedto,issuesregardingphysicalandsexualabuse,domesticviolence,thepsychologyoftheoffenderandtheeffectsofabuseonthevictim.”§5303(b).(cont.)

“Whereapartyseeksanyformofcustody,thecourtshallconsiderwhetherthatpartyormemberofthatparty’shouseholdhasbeenconvictedoforhaspleadedguiltyornocontesttoanyoftheoffensesinthissectionoranoffenseinanotherjurisdictionsubstantiallyequivalenttooffensesinthissection.Thecourtshallconsidersuchconductanddeterminethatthepartydoesnotposeathreatofharmtothechildbeforemakinganyorderofcustodytothatparent.”§5329(a).(cont.)

Evaluation:Liketheformerlaw,thenewlawrequiresthecourttoprovideforanevaluationofanycustodypetitionerconvictedofcertaincrimes(seechartbelow–enumeratedconvictions)priortoawardinganyformofcustodytoensurethattheoffendingpartydoesnotposeathreattothechild.Unliketheformerlaw,thenewlawdoesnotspecifyevaluatorqualificationsanddoesnotprovideforhowtheevaluator’srecommendationswillbeprovidedtothecourt.Theformerlawrequiredthecourttotaketestimonyfromtheevaluatorandtherulesprohibitedanyreportsfrombeingconsideredunlessproperlyadmittedintoevidence.(cont.)




Difference

Crim

inalCONVICTIONS(con

t.)

ConsiderationofCriminalCon

victions:Initia

lEvaluation&Cou

nseling(con

t.) SeeRamerv.Ramer,914A.2d894

(Pa.Super.Ct.2006)(Courthasanaffirmativedutytodetermineparentdoesnotposeathreatofharm).Pa.R.Civ.P.1915.8–Thecourtmayorderthechild(ren)/partytosubmitto&fullyparticipateinanevaluationbyanappropriateexpert.…Noreportsshallbe…consideredunless&untiladmittedbythecourt.Evaluatorsubjecttocross‐examination.

“Thecourtshallprovideforanevaluationtodeterminewhether:(1)thepartyorhouseholdmemberwho

committedanoffense…posesathreattothechildand

(2)counselingisnecessaryforthatpartyorhouseholdmember.”

§5329(c)(emphasisadded).“(1)Wherethecourtdetermines...that

counselingisnecessary,itshallappointaqualifiedprofessionalspecializingintreatmentrelatingtotheparticularoffensetoprovidecounselingtotheoffendingindividual.

(2)Counselingmayincludeaprogramoftreatmentorindividualtherapydesignedtorehabilitatetheoffendingindividualwhichaddresses,butisnotlimitedto,issuesregardingphysicalandsexualabuse,thepsychologyoftheoffenderandtheeffectsonthevictim.”

§5329(d).

Counseling:Unliketheformerlaw,whichrequiredconvictedoffenderstoundergocounseling,thenewlawprovidesthatcounselingisdiscretionarywiththecourt,afteranevaluationismade.Also,thenewlawnolongerrequirescounselingpriortoanyawardofcustody.Afteranevaluation,anoffendermaybegrantedaccesstoachildbeforereceivinganyrelevantcounseling.Liketheformerlaw,thenewlawrequiresthecourttoappointa“qualifiedprofessionalspecializingintreatmentrelatingtotheparticularoffense.”Butunliketheformerlaw,thenewlawprovidesdiscretionforwhatthecounselingwilladdress,including,butnotlimitedto,physicalandsexualabuse,domesticviolence,thepsychologyoftheoffender,anditseffectonthevictim.HouseholdMembers:Thenewlawaddshouseholdmembersaspersonswhosecriminalconvictionhistorymustbeconsidered.




Difference

Crim

inalCONVICTIONS

Subseq

uentCou

nseling

Noprovisionincustodystatute. “(1)Atanytime...thecourtmayrequireanotherevaluationtodeterminewhetherfurthercounselingisnecessary.

(2)Ifthecourtawardscustodytoapartywhocommittedanoffense...orwhosharesahouseholdwithanindividualwhocommittedanoffense...thecourtmayrequiresubsequentevaluationsontherehabilitationoftheoffendingindividualandthewell‐beingofthechildsubsequenttotheorder.”

§5329(e).

Thenewlawgivesthecourtspecificauthoritytorequiresubsequentevaluationsorongoingcounseling.

Crim

inalCONVICTIONS

Costs

Noprovisionincustodystatute.“Apartywhoiswithoutfinancialresourcestopaythecostsoflitigationisentitledtoproceedinformapauperis.”Pa.R.Civ.P.240.

“Thecourtmayorderapartytopayallorpartofthecostsofthecounselingandevaluations.”§5329(f).

Thenewlawallowsthecourttoplacethecostofcounseling&evaluationontheparties.However,Rule240ofthePennsylvaniaRulesofCivilProcedure(InFormaPauperis)isstillvalidandmaywaivethecostsassociatedwithcivillitigationforindigentlitigants.Pa.R.Civ.P.240;Cramerv.Zgela,969A.2d621(Pa.Super.Ct.2009).




Difference

Crim

inalCONVICTIONS

Enum

erated

Offen

ses

18Pa.C.S.Ch.25(criminalhomicide).18Pa.C.S.§2910(kidnapping).18Pa.C.S.§2902(unlawfulrestraint).18Pa.C.S.§3121(rape).18Pa.C.S.§3122.1(statutorysexualassault).18Pa.C.S.§3123(involuntarydeviatesexualintercourse).18Pa.C.S.§3124.1(sexualassault).18Pa.C.S.§3125(aggravatedindecentassault).18Pa.C.S.§3126(indecentassault).18Pa.C.S.§3127(indecentexposure).18Pa.C.S.§4302(incest).18Pa.C.S.§4304(endangeringwelfareofchildren).18Pa.C.S.§5902(b)(prostitutionandrelatedoffenses).18Pa.C.S.§6312(sexualabuseofchildren).

18Pa.C.S.Ch.25(criminalhomicide).*18Pa.C.S.§2702(aggravatedassault).*18Pa.C.S.§2706(terroristicthreats).*18Pa.C.S.§2709.1(stalking).18Pa.C.S.§2901(kidnapping).18Pa.C.S.§2902(unlawfulrestraint).*18Pa.C.S.§2903(falseimprisonment).*18Pa.C.S.§2910(luringachildintoamotorvehicleorstructure).18Pa.C.S.§3121(rape).18Pa.C.S.§3122.1(statutorysexualassault).18Pa.C.S.§3123(involuntarydeviatesexualintercourse).18Pa.C.S.§3124.1(sexualassault).18Pa.C.S.§3125(aggravatedindecentassault).18Pa.C.S.§3126(indecentassault).18Pa.C.S.§3127(indecentexposure).*18Pa.C.S.§3129(sexualintercoursewithanimal).*18Pa.C.S.§3130(conductrelatingtosexoffenders).*18Pa.C.S.§3301(arsonandrelatedoffenses).18Pa.C.S.§4302(incest).(cont.)

Thelistofconvictionsconsideredundertheoldlawwasexpanded.Newconvictionsareitalicizedandmarkedwithan*asterisk.Itisimportanttonotethatformercustodylawconsideredaseparatelistofchargesandconvictions.Thenewlawallowsthefulllistofcrimestobeconsideredregardlessofwhethertheparentwasultimatelyconvicted.(seebelow).Keepinmindthatconvictionsandchargesaretreateddifferently.TheonlynoncriminalconvictionincludedinthenewlawisPFAviolations(23Pa.C.S.§6114–contemptforviolationofaPFAorderoragreement).




Difference

18Pa.C.S.§4304(endangeringwelfareofchildren).*18Pa.C.S.§4305(dealingininfantchildren).18Pa.C.S.§5902(b)(prostitutionandrelatedoffenses).*18Pa.C.S.§5903(c)or(d)(obsceneandothersexualmaterials&performances).*18Pa.C.S.§6301(corruptionofminors).18Pa.C.S.§6312(relatingtosexualabuseofchildren).*18Pa.C.S.§6318(relatingtounlawfulcontactwithminor).*18Pa.C.S.§6320(relatingtosexualexploitationofchildren).*Section6114(contemptforviolationoforderoragreement).(23Pa.C.S.§6114)*Former75Pa.C.S.§3731(drivingunderinfluenceofalcoholorcontrolledsubstance).*75Pa.C.S.Ch.38(drivingafterimbibingalcoholorutilizingdrugs).*Section13(a)(1)oftheControlledSubstance,Drug,DeviceandCosmeticAct–totheextentthatitprohibitsmanuf.,sale,delivery,holding,offeringforsaleorpossessionofanycontrolledsubstanceordrugordevice.




Difference

Crim

inalCHARG

ES

ConsiderationofCrim

inalCha

rges

Aparentwhohasobtainedinformationrelatingtoacriminalchargeforanoffenseonthelistfiledagainsttheotherparentmaymoveforatemporarycustodyordertomodifyanexistingcustody,partialcustodyorvisitationorder.Thetemporarycustodyormodificationhearingshallbescheduledexpeditiously.Inevaluatinganyrequestfortemporarycustodyormodificationofacustody,partialcustodyorvisitationorder,thecourtshallconsiderwhethertheparentwhoisorhasbeenchargedwithanoffenselistedbelowposesariskofharmtothechild.§5303(b.1).

“Apartywhohasobtainedinformation[relatingtoavailabilityofcriminalchargeinfoinchildcustodyproceeding]orotherwiseaboutachargefiledagainsttheotherpartyforanoffenselistedundersection5329(a)[considerationofconvictions]maymoveforatemporarycustodyorderormodificationofanexistingcustodyorder.Thecourtshallholdthehearing…inanexpeditiousmanner.”§5330(a).“[T]hecourtshallconsiderwhetherthepartywhoisorhasbeenchargedwithanoffense…posesariskofphysical,emotionalorpsychologicalharmtothechild.§5330(b).“Failuretoeitherapplyforinformationunder42Pa.C.S.§1904oractunderthissectionshallnotprejudiceanypartyinacustodyproceeding.”§5330(c).

Thenewlawdoesnotspecificallydefinetheparametersofcontactbetweentheoffenderandthechildpriortotheevaluation.Nosubstantivechangesweremadeto42Pa.C.S.§1904.Thenewlanguagespecificallyprovidesthatthecourtmustconsiderphysical,emotionalorpsychologicalharmtothechild.Thisvariesfromtheexistinglanguage,whichrequiresthecourttoconsiderwhethertheparentposesariskofharmtothechild.




Difference

Crim

inalCHARG

ES

Enum

erationofCriminalCharges

18Pa.C.S.Ch.25(criminalhomicide).18Pa.C.S.§2702(aggravatedassault).18Pa.C.S.§2706(terroristicthreats).18Pa.C.S.§2709.1(stalking).18Pa.C.S.§2901(kidnapping).18Pa.C.S.§2902(unlawfulrestraint).18Pa.C.S.§2903(falseimprisonment).18Pa.C.S.§3121(rape).18Pa.C.S.§3122.1(statutorysexualassault).18Pa.C.S.§3123(involuntarydeviatesexualintercourse.18Pa.C.S.§3124.1(sexualassault).18Pa.C.S.§3125(aggravatedindecentassault).18Pa.C.S.§3126(indecentassault).18Pa.C.S.§3127(indecentexposure).18Pa.C.S.§3301(arsonandrelatedoffenses).18Pa.C.S.§4302(incest).18Pa.C.S.§4304(endangeringwelfareofchildren).18Pa.C.S.§6312(sexualabuseofchildren.23Pa.C.S.§6114(contemptforviolationoforderoragreement).

18Pa.C.S.Ch.25(criminalhomicide).18Pa.C.S.§2702(aggravatedassault).18Pa.C.S.§2706(terroristicthreats).18Pa.C.S.§2709.1(stalking).18Pa.C.S.§2901(kidnapping).18Pa.C.S.§2902(unlawfulrestraint).18Pa.C.S.§2903(falseimprisonment).*18Pa.C.S.§2910(luringachildintoamotorvehicleorstructure).18Pa.C.S.§3121(rape).18Pa.C.S.§3122.1(statutorysexualassault).18Pa.C.S.§3123(involuntarydeviatesexualintercourse).18Pa.C.S.§3124.1(sexualassault).18Pa.C.S.§3125(aggravatedindecentassault).18Pa.C.S.§3126(indecentassault).18Pa.C.S.§3127(indecentexposure).*18Pa.C.S.§3129(sexualintercoursewithanimal).*18Pa.C.S.§3130(conductrelatingtosexoffenders).18Pa.C.S.§3301(arsonandrelatedoffenses).18Pa.C.S.§4302(incest).*18Pa.C.S.§4303(concealingdeathofchild).(cont.)

Thelistofchargesconsideredbythecourtwasexpandedandmirrorstheenumeratedconvictions.(Seeabove).Newchargesconsideredunderthisprovisionareitalicizedandmarkedwithan*asterisk.




Difference

Crim

inalCHARG

ES(con

t.)

Enum

erationofCriminalCharges(con

t.)

18Pa.C.S.§4304(endangeringwelfareofchildren).*18Pa.C.S.§4305(dealingininfantchildren).*18Pa.C.S.§5902(b)(prostitutionandrelatedoffenses).*18Pa.C.S.§5903(c)or(d)(obsceneandothersexualmaterials&performances).*18Pa.C.S.§6301(corruptionofminors).18Pa.C.S.§6312(relatingtosexualabuseofchildren).*18Pa.C.S.§6318(relatingtounlawfulcontactwithminor).*18Pa.C.S.§6320(relatingtosexualexploitationofchildren).23Pa.C.S.§6114(contemptforviolationoforderoragreement).*Former75Pa.C.S.§3731(drivingunderinfluenceofalcoholorcontrolledsubstance).*75Pa.C.S.Ch.38(drivingafterimbibingalcoholorutilizingdrugs).*Section13(a)(1)oftheControlledSubstance,Drug,DeviceandCosmeticAct–totheextentthatitprohibitsmanuf.,sale,delivery,holding,offeringforsaleorpossessionofanycontrolledsubstanceordrugordevice.




Difference

Pa

rentingPlan

s

Subm

ission

toth

eCo

urt

“Thecourt,initsdiscretion,mayrequiretheparentstosubmittothecourtaplanfortheimplementationofanycustodyordermadeunderthissubchapter.Upontherequestofeitherparentorthecourt,thedomesticrelationssectionofthecourtorotherpartyoragencyapprovedbythecourtshallassistintheformulationandimplementationoftheplan.”§5306.Proposedconsentordersmustbesubmittedtocourt.Pa.R.Civ.P.1915.7.

“Inacontestedcustodyproceeding,thecourtmayrequirethepartiestosubmitparentingplansforthecareandcustodyofthechildtoaidthecourtinresolvingthecustodydispute.Aparentingplanandthepositionofapartyassetforthinthatparentingplanshallnotbeadmissibleasevidencebyanotherparty.”§5331.

Liketheformerlaw,thenewlawdoesnotrequireaparentingplan.Thenewlawgivesthecourtdiscretiontoorderaparentingplanincontestedcustodyproceedings.Thenewlawdoesnotprovideforassistancefromthecourtinformulatingtheplanbeyondofferingaformforpartiestouse.Theformerlawpreviouslyrequiredthat,uponrequest,assistancewithformulatingtheplanwouldbeprovided.




Difference

Pa

rentingPlan

s

Conten

tsofP

lan

Noprovisioninformercustodystatute.

“(b)Contents.‐‐Aparentingplanshallincludethefollowing:(1)Thescheduleforpersonalcareand

controlofthechild,includingparentingtime,holidaysandvacations.

(2)Theeducationandreligiousinvolvement,ifany,ofthechild.

(3)Thehealthcareofthechild.(4)Child‐carearrangements.(5)Transportationarrangements.(6)Aprocedurebywhichproposedchanges,

disputes&allegedbreachesofthecustodyordermaybeadjudicatedorotherwiseresolvedthroughmediation,arbitration,orothermeans.

(7)Anymatterspecifiedbythecourt.(8)Anyothermatterthatservesthebest

interestofthechild.”§5331(b).Aparentingplanformisprovidedinthestatuteandmustbeused(insubstantiallythesameform)byanypartyrequiredtosubmitaplan.§5331(c).

Therequiredcontentsofaparentingplanwerenotenumeratedintheformerlaw.




Difference

Inform

ationa

lProgram

s

Theformercustodylawhadnoprovisionsregardinginformationalprograms.Pa.R.C.P.1915.3allowsthateducationalprogramscanbeusedtomeetthecourt’s45days“initialcontact”rule.

“(a)Thecourtmaydirectthepartiestoattendinformationalprogramsconcerningparentalduties.

(b)…Subsequentproceedingsandtheentryofanyorderordecreeshallnotbedelayedbecauseofthelackofparticipationinanyinformationalprogrambyoneoftheparties.

(c)Thecourtmayordercoststoparties.”§5332.

ThenewlawreflectscurrentpracticeinmanyPennsylvaniacounties.

Coun

selin

g

“Thecourtmayrequireparentstoattendcounselingsessionsandmayconsidertherecommendationofcounselorspriortoawardingsoleorsharedcustody….”§5305.

“(a)Thecourtmay,aspartofcustodyorder,requirepartiestoattendcounselingsessions.(b)…Insituationsinvolvingabuse,thecourtmayorderindividualcounselingfortheabuserbutmaynotorderthepartiestoattendjointcounseling.(c)…Eachparty’sparticipation…shallbeverifiedbythecounselor.(d)Thecourtmayorderpartytopayallorpartofcounselingcosts.”§5333.(emphasisadded)

Unliketheexistinglaw,thenewlawspecificallyprohibitsthecourtfromorderingavictimofabusetoparticipateinjointcounseling.




Difference

Gua

rdianAdLitem

App

ointmen

t&CostA

llocatio

nAppointmentofGALisgenerallyreservedforthosecaseswhereachild’sinterestmaybeadverselyaffected,likeadoption.TheSuperiorCourthassaidthatdespitebitternessbetweenparents,bothparentsarefocusedonwhat’sbestforthechildincustodydisputes.Itisuptothecourttodiscernchild’sbestinterestbecausebothpartiesandthecourtarefocusedonchild’sbestinterests.ThusappointmentofGALisnotproper,absentextraordinarycircumstances.Bitternessbetweenparentsisnotenough.C.W.v.K.A.W.,774A.2d745(Pa.Super.Ct.2001).Independencycases,thecourtappointsaGALwhenachildistakenintoprotectivecustodyorwhenadependencypetitionisfiled.Pa.R.J.P.1151(A),(D).

Appointment:“Thecourtmayonitsownmotionorthemotionofapartyappointaguardianadlitemtorepresentthechildintheaction.Thecourtmayassessthecostuponthepartiesoranyofthemorasotherwiseprovidedbylaw.Theguardianadlitemmustbeanattorneyatlaw.”§5334(a).Abuse:“Ifsubstantialallegationsofabuseofthechildaremade,thecourtshallappointaguardianadlitemforthechildif:(1)counselforthechildisnotappointed;or(2)thecourtissatisfiedthattherelevantinformationwillbepresentedtothecourtonlywithsuchappointment.”§5334(c).Cost:“Thecourtmayorderapartytopayallorpartofthecostsofappointingcounselforthechild.”§5335(d).

Appointment:Incontrasttocaselaw,whichreservesGALappointmentforextraordinarycircumstances,thenewlawgivesthecourtdiscretiontoappointaGAL–eithersuasponteoronthemotionofeitherparty.Qualifications:ThenewlawrequirestheGALtobealicensedattorney.Abuse:ThenewlawalsorequiresthecourttoappointaGALwhensubstantialallegationsofchildabusearemadeandwherethecourtfindsthattheassistanceofaGALisnecessarytomakeitsfinalorder.




Difference

Gua

rdianAdLitem

Powers&Duties/Presen

tatio

nofFindingstoth

eCo

urt

AppointmentofGALisgenerallyreservedforthosecaseswhereachild’sinterestmaybeadverselyaffected,likeadoption.SuperiorCourthassaidthatdespitebitternessbetweenparents,incustodycases,bothparentsarefocusedonwhat’sbestforthechild.Courthastodiscernchild’sbestinterestsincebothpartiesandthecourtarefocusedonchild’sbestinterests,appointmentofGALisnotproper,absentextraordinarycircumstances;bitternessbetweenparentsisnotenough.C.W.v.K.A.W.,774A.2d745(Pa.Super.Ct.2001)(emphasisadded).Independencycases,thecourtappointsaGALwhenachildistakenintoprotectivecustodyorwhenadependencypetitionisfiled.Pa.R.J.P.1151A&D.

PowersandDuties:“Theguardianadlitemshallbechargedwithrepresentationofthelegalinterestsandthebestinterestsofthechildduringtheproceedingsandshalldoallofthefollowing:(1)…meetwiththechild…(2)begivenaccesstorelevantcourt

records,reportsofexamination…,psychologicalandschoolrecords

(3)Participateinallproceedings.(4)Conductsuchfurtherinvestigation

necessarytoprotectthebestinterestsofthechild.

(5)Interviewpotentialwitnesses,includingthechild’sparentsandcaretakers…The[GAL]may[examine,cross‐examine&presentevidence]…

(6)Makerecommendationsinawrittenreporttothecourt…includinganyservicesnecessarytoaddressthechild’sneeds&safety.Thecourtshallmakethewrittenreportpartoftherecordsoitcanbereviewedbytheparties.Thepartiesmayfilewrittencommentsregardingthecontentsofthereport.

(cont.)

PowersandDuties‐GALReport/CrossExamination:ThenewlawallowstheGALtosubmitawrittenreporttothecourt.ItstatesthataGALmaynottestify,butmaymakelegalargumentbasedonrelevantevidencethatshallbesubjecttoexamination.Aswritten,thenewlawallowsaGALtosubmitareporttothecourtthat,withoutcross‐examinationbytheparties,canbereliedonbythecourtinitsfinaldetermination.ThenewlawonlyrequiresexaminationwheretheGALmakeslegalargumentbasedonrelevantevidenceincourt,notonthecontentsofawrittenreport.BasedonCyranv.Cyran,566A.2d878(Pa.Super.Ct.1989),theprovisionprohibitingtestimonybytheGALmayunconstitutionallyinfringeontheparent’srighttodueprocess.InCyran,thecourtadoptedfacts,recommendations,andconclusionsfromanevaluator’sreport,butdidnotallowtheparentstocross‐examinewithregardtothecontentsofthereport.Onappeal,thecourtheldthat“[a]childcustodylitiganthasa(cont.)




Difference

Gua

rdianAdLitem(con

t.)

Powers&Duties/Presen

tatio

nofFindingstoth

eCo

urt(cont.)

(7)Explaintheproceedingstothechild…(8)Advisethecourtofthechild’swishes[totheextentappropriate]…[differencesbetweentherecommendationsandchild’swishesdonotcreateaconflictofinterest.]”

§5334(b).(emphasisadded).GALTestimony:“A[GAL]maynottestifyexceptasauthorizedby[theProf’lRulesofConduct3.7],butmaymakelegalargumentbasedonrelevantevidencethatshallbesubjecttoexaminationbytheparties.”§5334(d).Pa.R.Prof’lConduct3.7(a)–“Alawyershallnotactasadvocateatatrialinwhichthelawyerislikelytobeanecessarywitnessunless:(1)Thetestimonyrelatestoanuncontested

issue;(2)testimonyrelatestothenatureand

valueoflegalservices…(3)disqualification…wouldworksubstantial

hardshipontheclient.”

Dueprocessrighttoin‐courtexaminationoftheauthorofreportsadversetolitigants.”Cyran,566A.2dat879(citingRobinsonv.Robinson,478A.2d800(Pa.Super.Ct.1984));seealsoOttoliniv.Barrett,954A.2d610(Pa.Super.Ct.2008).




Difference

Co

unselforth

eCh

ild

SeeGALdiscussionabove–ThereisnoexistingcustodystatuteauthorizingGALorattorneyforthechild.TheRulesofCivilProcedureallowthecourttoappointanattorneyforthechild“onitsownmotionorthemotionofaparty.”TheRulesalsoallowthecourttoassignthecostofchild’scounselontheparties.Pa.R.Civ.P.1915.11.

Appointment:“Thecourtmayappointcounseltorepresentthechildifthecourtdeterminesthattheappointmentwillassistinresolvingissuesinthecustodyproceeding.Ifachildhaslegalcounselandaguardianadlitem,counselshallrepresentthelegalinterestsofthechildandtheguardianadlitemshallrepresentthebestinterestsofthechild.”§5335(a).Abuse:“Substantialallegationsofabuseofthechildconstituteareasonablebasisforappointingcounselforthechild.”§5335(b).CrossExamination:“Counsel…shallnotbesubjecttoexaminationunlesssuchcounseltestifiesinthematter.”§5335(c).Costs:“Thecourtmayorderapartytopayallorpartofthecostsofappointingcounselforthechild.”§5335(d).

Thenewlawcreatesauthorityforcourttoappointanattorneyforthechildwhoisthesubjectofacustodycaseandallowsthecourttoassesscostsforchild’sattorneyoneitheroneorbothparties.Theformerlawdoesnotcontainthesameauthority;however,theRules(1915.11)doprovidethatappointmentmaybeallowedifnecessarytoascertainthechild’sinterests.ThenewlawissimilartothecurrentRulesofCivilProcedure(1915.11)becauseeachallowsthecourttoappointcounselsuasponteoronmotionofaparty.ButaswithGALappointment,thenewlawspecificallystatesthat“substantialallegations”ofchildabuseprovidesasufficientlyreasonablebasisformakingsuchanappointment.




Difference

AccesstoRecords/In

fo.

Gen

erally

Generally,“eachparentshallbeprovidedaccesstoallthemedical,dental,religiousorschoolrecordsofthechild,theresidenceaddressofthechildandoftheotherparent,andanyotherinformationthecourtdeemsnecessary.”§5309(a).

“Apartygrantedsoleorsharedlegalcustody…shallbeprovidedaccessto(i)medical,dental,religiousandschoolrecordsofthechild;(ii)theaddressofthechildandanyotherparty;(iii)andanyotherinformationthecourtdeemsnecessaryorproper.”§5336(a)(1).“Accesstoanyrecordsorinformationpertainingtothechildmaynotbedeniedsolelybasedupontheparent’sphysicalcustodyschedule.”§5336(a)(2).“Uponrequest,aparent,partyorentitypossessinganyinformation[re:medical,religiousorschoolrecords]shallprovideittoanypartygrantedsoleorsharedlegalcustody.”§5336(a)(3).

Existinglawdidnotsaywheretheinformationwastobeobtainedorwhowastoprovideinformation.However,thelanguageinthenewlawindicatesthataparentorentityshallprovideinformationuponrequest.Thenewlawalsoprovidesthataccesstoanyrecordsorinformationpertainingtothechildmaynotbedeniedsolelybasedupontheparent’sphysicalcustodyschedule.




Difference

AccesstoRecords/In

fo.

Exceptions

CourtOrder:“Thecourt,initsdiscretion,maydeterminenottoreleaseanypartorpartsoftheinformation….butindoingsomuststateitsreasonfordenialontherecord.”§5309(b).ConfidentialInformation:“Thecourtshallnotorderthattheaddressofashelterforbatteredspousesandtheirdependentchildrenorotherwiseconfidentialinformationofadomesticviolencecounselorbedisclosedtothedefendantorhiscounseloranypartytotheproceedings.”§5309(c).

ConfidentialInformation:“Thecourtshallnotorderthedisclosureofanyofthefollowinginformationtoanyparentorpartygrantedcustody:(1)Theaddressofavictimofabuse.(2)Confidentialinformationfromanabuse

counselororshelter.(3)Informationprotected[bytheaddress

confidentialityprogram].(4)Informationindependentlyprotected

fromdisclosurebythechild’srighttoconfidentiality[undertheMentalHealthProceduresAct]…oranyotherstatute.”

§5336(b).OtherInformation:“Thecourtmaydeterminenottoreleaseinformation…,inwhichcaseitshallstatethereasonforitsdenialontherecord.”§5336(c).

Thenewlawaddstotheinformationprotectedfromdisclosure.Thenewlawincludesmedicalrecordprotection(asprovidedinotherstatutes)andAddressConfidentialityProgram(ACP)information.TheseadditionalprotectionsareindeferencetotheprotectionsprovidedinHIPPA,theMentalHealthProceduresAct,andACP,23Pa.C.S.§6701etseq.




Difference

Re

location

App

licability/Scope

Existingcustodylawdoesnotaddressrelocation.Rather,relocationlawandprocedureisderivedfromGruberanditsprogeny.Gruberv.Gruber,583A.2d434(Pa.Super.Ct.1990).(Seebelow–RelocationFactors).

RelocationDefined:“Relocation–Achangeinaresidenceofthechildwhichsignificantlyimpairstheabilityofanonrelocatingpartytoexercisecustodialrights.”§5322.Generally:“Norelocationshalloccurunless:(1)everyotherpersonwithcustodyrights…consents;or(2)thecourtapprovestheproposedrelocation.”§5337(b).

Unliketheformerlaw,thenewlawdefinesrelocationandprohibitsanyrelocationunlessallinterestedparties’consentorthecourtapprovestherelocationinaccordancewiththerestoftherelocationprovisions.




Difference

Re

location

Factors

Existingcustodylawdoesnotaddressrelocation.Rather,relocationlawandprocedureisderivedfromGruberanditsprogeny.Gruberprovidesthattherelocatingparentmustshowthefollowing:(1)Themovewill“substantiallyimprovethequalityoflifeforthecustodialparentandthechildrenandisnottheresultofmomentarywhim;”(2)Therelocatingparent’smotivesaregood;and(3)Reasonablealternativeopportunitiesexistforvisitation.Thecourtpresumesthatbenefitsofthemovetothecustodialparentwillflowtothechildren.Gruberv.Gruber,583A.2d434(Pa.Super.Ct.1990).

Factors:“Thecourtshallconsiderthefollowingfactors,givingweightedconsiderationtothosefactorswhichaffectthesafetyofthechild:(1)Thenature,quality,extentof

involvementanddurationofthechild’srelationshipswiththepartyproposingtorelocateandwiththenonrelocatingparty,siblingsandothersignificantpersonsinchild’slife.

(2)Theage,development,needsofthechildandthelikelyimpactrelocationwillhaveonthechild’sphysical,educationalandemotionaldevelopment,takingintoconsiderationanyspecialneedsofthechild.

(3)Thefeasibilityofpreservingtherelationshipbetweenthenonrelocatingpartyandchildthroughsuitablecustodyarrangements,consideringthelogisticsandfinancialcircumstancesoftheparties.

(4)Thechild’spreference….(5)Whetherthereisanestablishedpattern

ofconductofeitherpartytopromoteorthwarttherelationshipofthechildandtheotherparty.

(cont.)

Thenewrelocationfactorsaresignificantlydifferentfromtheexistingrelocationjurisprudence.ItaddsmanyfactorstothosearticulatedinGruber.Safety:Thenewlawrequiresthecourttogive“weightedconsideration”tofactorsaffectingthechild’ssafety.




Difference

Re

location

(con

t.)

Factors(con

t.)

(6)Whethertherelocationwillenhancethegeneralqualityoflifeforthepartyseekingrelocation,including,butnotlimitedto,financialoremotionalbenefitoreducationalopportunity.

(7)Whethertherelocationwillenhancethegeneralqualityoflifeforthechild,including,butnotlimitedto,financialoremotionalbenefitoreducationalopportunity.

(8)Thereasonsandmotivationofeachpartyforseekingoropposingrelocation.

(9)Thepresentandpastabusecommittedbyapartyormemberoftheparty’shouseholdandwhetherthereisacontinuedriskofharmtothechildoranabusedparty.

(10)Anyotherbestinterestfactor.”§5337(h)(emphasisadded).




Difference

Re

location

Notice‐Gen

erally

Theexistinglawhasnostatutorynoticerequirementforrelocation.

Thepartyproposingtherelocationmustnotifyeveryotherindividualwhohascustodyrightstothechild.§5337(b). Anycustodyordershallincludenotice

ofaparty’sobligationsundersection5337(relatingtorelocation).§5323(c).

“Thissectionappliestoanyproposedrelocation.”§5337(a).

Time/MethodofService:Notice,bycertifiedmailwithreturnreceiptrequested,mustbegiveneither60daysbeforerelocationorwithin10daysofthedatethepartyknowsoftherelocation.§5337(c).ContentsofNotice:Exceptasprovidedbysection5336(relatingtoaccesstorecordsandinformation),thefollowingmustbeincludedwiththenotice…:

(i)addressofthe…newresidence(ii)mailingaddress…(iii)namesandagesoftheindividualsinthenewresidence…(iv)hometelephonenumberofthe

…newresidence(cont.)

Thenewlawcontainsadvancenoticeprovisionsthatwerenotrequiredundertheformercustodylaw.Thenewcustodylawrequiresthatanyorderforcustodyincludenoticeofeachparty’srelocationobligations–includingtheobligationtogivenoticetoanypartywithrightstocustodyofthechildinadvanceofanyrelocation.Thenewlawrequiresthenoticetocontaininformationpertinenttothemove,unlessprotectedbyconfidentialityornecessaryforthesafetyofthechildortheparties.(Seeabove‐§5336,RecordsandInformation/Exceptions).Thepetitionermustnotifyallpartiesoftheirobligationtofileacounter‐affidavitwithin30daystopreservetheirrighttoobjecttotherelocation.




Difference

Re

location

(con

t.)

Notice‐G

enerally(con

t.)

(v)nameofthenewschooldistrictandschool

(vi)dateoftheproposedrelocation(vii)reasonsfortheproposedrelocation,

(viii)proposalforarevisedcustodyschedule

(ix)otherinformationwhichthepartyproposingtherelocationdeemsappropriate

(x)counter‐affidavit…whichcanbeusedtoobjecttotheproposedrelocationandthemodificationofacustodyorder.

(xi)Awarningtothenonrelocatingpartythatifthenonrelocatingpartydoesnotfileanobjectionwiththecourtwithin30afterreceiptofthenotice,thepartyshallbeforeclosedfromobjectingtotherelocation.Thestatutealsoliststheinformationthatmustbepartofthenotice.

§5337(c)(3)(emphasisadded).“If…information…isnotknownwhenthenoticeissentbutislaterknowntothepartyproposingtherelocation,thenthatpartyshallpromptlyinformeveryindividualwhoreceivednotice.”§5337(c)(4)(emphasisadded).




Difference

Re

location

Notice‐Failureto

Provide

Notice

Theexistinglawhasnostatutorynoticerequirementforrelocationanddoesnotpenalizepartiesforfailuretoprovideadvancenotice.

FailuretoProvideNotice:“Thecourtmayconsiderafailuretoprovidereasonablenotice…as:(1)afactorinmakingadetermination…;(2)afactorindeterminingwhethercustody

rightsshouldbemodified;(3)abasisfororderingthereturnofthe

childtothenonrelocatingpartyiftherelocationhasoccurredwithoutreasonablenotice;

(4)Sufficientcausetoorderthepartyproposingtherelocationtopayreasonableexpensesandcounselfeesincurredbythepartyobjecting…;and

(5)Groundforcontemptandtheimpositionofsanctions…;”

§5337(j).“Anyconsiderationofafailuretoprovidereasonablenotice…shallbesubjecttomitigationifthecourtdeterminesthatsuchfailurewascausedinwhole,orinpart,byabuse.”§5337(k)(emphasisadded).

FailuretoProvideNotice:Thenewlawauthorizesthecourttodrawnegativeinferencesfromaparty’sfailuretoprovidenoticetoanonrelocatingparty.Wherethecourtfindsthattherelocationwas–inwholeorinpart–theresultofabuse,theconsequencesforfailuretoprovidenoticemustbediminished.




Difference

Re

location

Objectio

ns

Theexistinglawhasnoexplicitprocedureforobjectingtoproposedrelocation.

FailuretoObject:“Apartyentitledtoreceivenoticemayfile…anobjection…andseekatemporaryorpermanentordertopreventtherelocation.…Ifthepartyobjectstoeitherrelocationormodification…ahearingshallbeheld.Theobjectionshallbemadebycompletingandreturningacounter‐affidavit.…Anobjection…shallbefiledwiththecourtwithin30daysofreceiptoftheproposedrelocation.”§5337(d).“Ifapartywhohasbeengivenpropernoticedoesnotfile…anobjectiontotherelocationwithin30daysafterreceiptofthenoticebutlaterpetitionsthecourtforreviewofthecustodialarrangements,thecourtshallnotaccepttestimonychallengingtherelocation.”§5337(d)(4).“Ifnoobjectionsarefiled,therelocatingpartyshallfileanaffidavitconfirmingthatpropernoticewasgiven,apetitiontoconfirmtherelocationdetailsandmodifyanyexistingorder,andaproposedorder.”§5337(e).

FailuretoObject:Ifapartyfailstoobjectwithin30days,theyareprohibitedfromprovidingtestimonychallengingtherelocationatthehearing.Whereapartydoesnotobject,therelocatingpartymayfileanaffidavitconfirmingthatnoticewasprovidedandmaypetitionthecourttomodifytheexistingorderortoadoptaproposedorder.




Difference

Re

location

Hearing

Nostatutoryhearingrequirementforrelocation.InPlowmanv.Plowman,theSuperiorCourtexplainedthatthetrialcourtmustconductanevidentiaryhearingapplyingGruberfactorsbeforethemoveor,ifthereareexigentcircumstances,thecourtmustconductthehearingwithinareasonabletimeafterthemove.Plowmanv.Plowman,597A.2d701(Pa.Super.Ct.1991).

Hearing:Generally,“thecourtshallholdanexpeditedfullhearingontheproposedrelocationafteratimelyobjectionhasbeenfiledandbeforerelocationoccurs.”“Thecourtmay,onitsownmotion,holdanexpeditedfullhearingontheproposedrelocationbeforetherelocationoccurs.”“Ifthecourtfindsthatexigentcircumstancesexist,thecourtmayapprovetherelocationpendinganexpeditedfullhearing.”§5337(g).BurdenofProof:“Thepartyproposingtherelocationhastheburdenofestablishingthattherelocationwillservethebestinterestsofthechild…”§5337(i).

ThehearingrequirementsinthenewlawaregenerallyconsistentwiththerequirementssetforthinPlowman.LikePlowman,thenewprovisionsrequireanexpeditedhearingpriortorelocationbutallowthecourttoapproverelocationpendingtrialwhereexigentcircumstancesarepresent.Thenewlawprovidesforthecourttoholdahearingonitsownmotion.ThisisanexpansionofPlowman.




Difference

Mod

ification

SubjecttoUCCJEA,anorderenteredbyacourtinPennsylvaniamaymodifytheordertooneofsharedcustody.Alsoprovidesthatcustodyproceedingsduringmilitarydeploymentsareexemptedfromthisprovision.§5310.Caselawprovidesthatnosubstantialchangeincircumstancesisnecessarytoseekamodificationofcustodyorder.Thecourtshouldinquireintothechild’sbestinterestsregardlessofwhethercircumstanceschanged.Karisv.Karis,544A.2d1328(Pa.1988).

Uponpetition,acourtmaymodifyacustodyordertoservethebestinterestofthechild.ThisissubjecttoUCCJEAjurisdictionalrequirements.§5338.

Thenewlawdoesnotmentionanexceptionformilitarydeployment;however,custodyrestrictionsduringmilitarydeploymentsarecoveredinaseparatesectionofthePennsylvaniaConsolidatedStatutes,51Pa.C.S.§4109.ThenewlawcodifiescaselawpermittingmodificationwhenitservestheBIOC,withouttheneedforchangedcircumstances,providedthejurisdictionalrequirementsoftheUCCJEAaremet.




Difference

Co

unselFees/Co

sts/Expe

nses

Nothinginthecustodystatuteauthorizesthecourttoawardfeesorotherexpenses.However,otherstatutorylawauthorizesanawardofcounselfeestoonepartywheretheotherparticipant’sactionswere“dilatory,obdurateorvexatious,”42Pa.C.S.§2503(7),orwhereaparty’sconductincommencingthecasewas“arbitrary,vexatious,orinbadfaith.”42Pa.C.S.§2503(9).SeeHollerv.Smith,928A.2d330(Pa.Super.Ct2007)(upholdinganawardofcounselfeesduetovexatiousconduct).

“Acourtmayawardreasonableinterimorfinalcounselfees,costsandexpensestoapartyifthecourtfindsthattheconductofanotherpartywasobdurate,vexatious,repetitiveorinbadfaith.”§5339.

Thenewlawprovidesforspecificmonetaryreliefinthecustodystatuteandaddstheword“repetitive”tothestandard.




Difference

Co

urtA

ppointed

ChildCustodyHealthCa

reorBe

havioralHealthPractition

ers

“Nopartytoachildcustodymatterinwhichthecourthasappointedalicensedhealthcareorbehavioralhealthpractitionertoassistthecourtbyconductinganexaminationorevaluation…maybepermittedtofileacomplaintagainstthepractitionerwiththepractitioner’sStatelicensingboardpriortothefinalagreementororderbeingissuedandfor60daysthereafter.”§5315.

“Nopartytoachildcustodymatterinwhichthecourthasappointedalicensedhealthcareorbehavioralhealthpractitionertoassistthecourtbyconductinganexaminationorevaluation…maybepermittedtofileacomplaintagainstthepractitionerwiththepractitioner’sStatelicensingboardpriortothefinalagreementororderbeingissuedandfor60daysthereafter.”§5340.

Thelanguageinthenewlawisidenticaltotheformerlaw.Thenewsectionwasrenumberedforconsistency.

a user-friendly guide to… pennsylvania’s new child custody law · one individual to assume...

Documents