This post is about a real courtroom experience. Not caselaw, but real courtroom experience. Take my word for it. Do not be controlling. Do not try to prevent our ex-spouse or the child’s father or mother from obtaining custody simply to maintain control. It does not and will not work. I was representing a client who had a child out of wedlock. It was a sad story of almost marriage and betrayal. Yes, a bit sordid, but frankly most of the stories I encounter are similar. One currency that runs through each story is two people who both think that they are right when in reality the truth and circumstance lies in between.
In this case the mother, perhaps well meaning, tried to prevent the father from obtaining some level of custody of their ten month old son. She attempted to present evidence that breast feeding was imperative to the child. She cried. Caterwaul really. Frankly, I could not determine whether the crying was real, partially real or simply manipulative. Her counsel argued that it was in the best interests of the boy to remain in the complete physical custody of the mother with partial visits to the father. Frankly, the implication was that a man with little actual child rearing experience could not perform the duties of the mother as well as the mother. It was a bit insulting that the argument was basically that a mother is a more capable parent than a father.
My argument was simple. There was nothing about my client, the boy’s father that would prevent him from being a good father. A boy should have some time with his father. It was nothing more complicated than that. It won.
The take away here is that if you think you are the only good parent, the best parent, the Court will not uphold that belief unless the other party has a substance abuse problem, abuser or criminal. Even given that situation, the Court will still look to provide supervised custody. You will not be able to prevent a mother or father from obtaining some level of custody and frankly, attempts to do so, will fail.
Know this.