Child Custody

Child Abandonment: How Does It Affect Custody Determinations?

Child Abandonment: How Does It Affect Custody Determinations?
By law, both parents have rights and responsibilities relating to their children.  Parents are required to support their children, including providing adequate food, shelter, and medical services.  Parents also have the right to parent their children.  This is an important right that courts take very seriously.  While child abandonment may affect custody determinations, courts are very proactive in protecting parental rights.


Under the California Family Code, three circumstances may result in a finding of child abandonment, if they are proven by clear and convincing evidence:

  • Both parents left the child without any provision for identification;
  • One or both parents left the child with another person for at least six months without providing any support and without communication; or
  • One parent left the child with the other parent for at least one year without providing any support and without communication.

In the second and third circumstances, the court must find that the parent acted with the intent to abandon the child.  Failing to provide identification of the child, to support the child, or to communicate with the child is considered presumptive evidence of a parent’s intent to abandon the child.  Token efforts of support and communication may be disregarded by the court in making its abandonment determination.


Abandonment may be considered as a factor in determining custody and visitation except in very limited circumstances.  The first exception is for a short absence or relocation during which the parent demonstrates no intent to abandon the child and during which the parent makes reasonable efforts toward regular contact with the child.  The second exception is when a parent is absent or relocates because the other parent actually committed or threatened to commit domestic or family violence.


It should be noted that the effect of abandonment on child custody is separate from the criminal offense of child abandonment under California law.  Before a parent may be found guilty of child neglect or abandonment, criminal charges must be brought and very specific findings must be made in a court of law.


Custody and visitation issues are at the heart of many relationship endings. If child abandonment is a potential issue in your divorce or separation, you need an attorney to advocate for you and your child. The attorneys at the Law Offices of Judy L. Burger have extensive experience in child custody and child support matters. Call today to learn how our attorneys can protect you and your children: (415) 293-8314.

Child Custody

What Is an Independent Child Custody Evaluation?

What Is an Independent Child Custody Evaluation?
California judges have the right to order child custody evaluations any time they believe doing so would be in the “best interest of the child.” Often, judges order evaluations when the parties cannot agree about child custody.  This blog will discuss why evaluations are ordered, who conducts evaluations, and what evaluators do.


Why Are Child Custody Evaluations Ordered?


Whenever children are involved in a divorce or separation, emotions run incredibly high.  Sometimes, the parents are able to set their emotions aside and make custody and visitation decisions in the best interest of their children.  However, it can be very stressful to deal with child-related decisions during this difficult time.


Child custody evaluations are always ordered if the judge finds that there are serious allegations of child abuse.  They may also be ordered when any of the following concerns are present:

  • Mental health;
  • Substance abuse;
  • Parenting in a way that may negatively affect the parties’ child; and
  • A possible parent move or relocation.

Who Conducts Child Custody Evaluations?


By law, only a qualified evaluator may conduct court-ordered custody investigations.  People licensed in the following professions may serve as child custody evaluators:

  • Clinical social workers;
  • Psychologists;
  • Psychiatrists; and
  • Marriage and family therapists.

Evaluators are not eligible unless they are included on an approved panel or approved by the judge as meeting the requisite qualifications.

What Does the Evaluator Do?

The evaluator’s job is to pull together evidence the judge will use to make custody and visitation decisions and to make recommendations based on that evidence.  To do this, the evaluator considers the following:

  • Written documents, including medical records, as necessary, and any from social services or law enforcement agencies;
  • His or her observations of family members;
  • The results of his or her interviews with the parents, children, and other witnesses, as necessary; and
  • Psychological assessments.

The evaluator packages this information into a detailed written report for the judge.  The judge then uses the information to determine what custody and visitation arrangements are in the best interest of the child.


Child custody evaluations can be very stressful in a time that is already laden with emotions.  As you might imagine, having an experienced family lawyer by your side can help ease that stress and make a difference in the outcome of custody and visitation proceedings.  For something this important, you want an attorney with substantial experience in Northern California who will represent you aggressively. Please contact The Law Offices of Judy L. Burger at (415) 259-6636 to learn more.

Annulment, California Divorce, Child Custody, Domestic Violence

Best Interest of the Children: What Does It Mean for California Families?

Best Interest of the Children: What Does It Mean for California Families?
California courts often cite to the “best interest of the children” standard when making rulings and issuing decisions on family law matters.  Where does this language come from, and what does it mean for you?


California laws, in many places, refer to the “best interest of the children” or “best interest of the child.” The core statute on what this means is California Family Code § 3011, which is a general provision of law relating to custody.


Section 3011 lists several factors that courts must consider when determining what is in the best interest of children:

  • The child’s “health, safety, and welfare”;
  • Any history of abuse against a child, the other parent, or a parent’s significant other;
  • The nature and amount of the child’s contact with both parents; and
  • Either parent’s use of illegal, controlled substances, or habitual use of alcohol or prescribed controlled substances.

The “best interest of the child” standard applies to many types of proceedings:

  • Divorce;
  • Annulment;
  • Legal separation;
  • Actions for exclusive custody;
  • Custody or visitation actions under the Domestic Violence Prevention Act;
  • Custody or visitation actions under the Uniform Parentage Act; and
  • Custody or visitation actions under brought by a California district attorney.

The “best interest of the child” standard is also at play in related proceedings, such as child custody evaluations and parenting plans.


The California Legislature’s widespread application of the “the best interest of the child” standard shows its commitment to the health and well-being of children. In hotly contested child support matters, you need an attorney to fight for you and your child. The attorneys at the Law Offices of Judy L. Burger have extensive experience in divorce, child custody, and child support matters. Make the call today to learn how our attorneys can protect you and your children: (415) 293-8314.

California Divorce, Domestic Violence

How Do California Courts Decide Mutual Restraining Orders?

How Do California Courts Decide Mutual Restraining Orders
Troubled marriages or domestic relationships are sometimes plagued with violence. Accordingly, California’s Domestic Violence Protection Act provides authority for courts to issue restraining orders in such situations. Normally, one party to the relationship has been threatened or attacked and petitions a court to issue an order instructing the aggressor not to have contact with her. In rare cases, mutual restraining orders—those that direct both parties to stay away from the other—are issued.


Under the DVPA, a judge may issue a restraining order based on a written request from a party, but only after notice and an opportunity to respond has been given to the party to be restrained. In the case of a mutual restraining order, it is necessary that both parties make a written request for the other to be restrained. This point was recently emphasized by the Second District Court of Appeal in a divorce proceeding.


In the case, the wife filed a request for a restraining order. The husband submitted documentation in his response showing that the wife was currently restrained from contact with him by a criminal restraining order and that the wife had pleaded guilty to a charge of assault against him.


The court, of its own volition, issued a mutual restraining order prohibiting each party from having contact with the other. As its basis for restraining the wife as well as the husband, the court pointed to the criminal restraining order and found that the wife had already been restrained. As such, the court noted that the wife had already been deemed guilty of domestic violence beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, the court felt it had no need to make any findings regarding the need for an order restraining her.


The appeal court reversed the lower court’s order, however, holding that a restraining order could not be issued without a written request by the party to be protected. In this case, the husband had not made such a request. Rather, he had included documentation in his response to his wife’s request showing that she was currently under restraint.


The appeal court found that the regulatory scheme of the DVPA and its legislative history were clear that a party had to make an actual request for protection. The court also pointed out that the issuance of an order without proper notice to the party to be restrained, as well as an opportunity to respond, violated constitutional standards.


As you can see, the manner in which legal matters are handled can materially affect the outcome.  If you’re involved in a divorce or separation, you should work with an attorney with substantial experience in the area, who knows the mechanics of how family law matters are handled. To obtain experienced legal help, contact the Law Offices of Judy L. Burger at (415) 259-6636 to discuss your case.

California Divorce

Who Gets to Keep Pets in a California Divorce or Separation?

Who Gets to Keep Pets in a California Divorce or Separation
In some divorces or legal separations, one of the foremost concerns is what will happen to family pets. Many of us treat pets like family.  We may even ask for “custody” of them.  But the California courts treat pets as personal property, not like children.  Therefore, no one can obtain “custody” of a family pet.


Perhaps the clearest way to deal with pet “custody” issues is to avoid them in the first place.  Before you are married, include post-marital pet issues in a valid prenuptial agreement.  In such an agreement, you can deal with how you want your personal property to be split; this can include the treatment of pets.


If you didn’t have the foresight to include pets in a prenuptial agreement, all is not lost.  In most circumstances, it is best to cooperate with your soon-to-be-ex.  If your pet is important to you, you may wish to compromise on other issues in order to obtain possession of your animal.  The two of you may even agree to an informal arrangement for where the pet will live, or even for visitation.


Under normal circumstances, it is best to agree on the arrangement for the family pet.  However, if the parties cannot agree, the judge will decide who receives the pet.  Here are some likely considerations:

  • The connections of the pet with the parties and the children;
  • The pet’s primary caretaker; and
  • Acts or threats of violence against the pet, the other party, or a minor child.

This last factor can be particularly important because California has a statute designed to protect pets. California Family Code § 6320, which became effective in 2014, allows courts to take actions to protect personal property from destruction.  If a party can show “good cause,” a court can do two things: (1) grant the exclusive “care, possession, or control” of a pet to the appropriate party; and (2) order a party “to stay away from the animal and forbid” the taking or disposal of the animal.


At the Law Offices of Judy L. Burger, we understand how important family pets are not only to a couple but to their children.  Pets can provide stability and love in a time of instability. Make the call today to learn how our attorneys can advocate for you: (415) 293-8314.

Visitation

Different Types of Child Visitation in California

Different Types of Child Visitation in CaliforniaDivorces and separations are replete with hot-button issues. Perhaps no issues are more frequently contested, however, than child custody and child visitation. In a prior blog, I discussed the different types and aspects of child custody. This blog will focus on visitation, which is typically granted to the parent who has the children less than half of the time.


A visitation order spells out how the child’s time will be managed. For example, a visitation order might address where a child would spend birthdays, Mother’s Day, Father’s Day, major holidays, and summer break.


The California Legislature has declared that the primary concern of courts in making custody and visitation decisions is the “health, safety, and welfare of children.” However, an additional public policy of the state is “assur[ing] that children have frequent and continuing contact with both parents.” The law specifically “encourage[s] parents to share the rights and responsibilities of child rearing” to meet this second goal, unless regular contact is not in the best interest of the children. Custody decisions are not made on the basis of a parent’s marital status, lifestyle, religious beliefs, or sexual orientation.


There are four types of visitation orders in California: (1) reasonable visitation; (2) scheduled visitation; (3) supervised visitation; and (4) no visitation.


A reasonable visitation order leaves decisions about how the parents will share the children’s time largely to the parents. These orders provide the parents with the ultimate flexibility; however, if the parents do not get along or if future disagreements may occur, these are not a good choice for the family.


Scheduled visitation provides clear direction to the parents about how the children’s time will be spent. These orders are ideal for parents who may not get along or communicate well because they provide clear expectations. If you’ve ever heard someone say that it was “their weekend” with their children, the court probably ordered scheduled visitation in their divorce. These orders dictate everything from birthdays and major holidays down to evenings and weekends.


Courts use supervised visitation orders when necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of children. In supervised visitation, the parent still gets to spend time with the children but only under the supervision and presence of another adult or, sometimes, a professional agency. Supervised visitation may be used in situations like the following:

  • Allegations or a history of abuse, neglect, or domestic violence;
  • A nonexistent or weakened parent-child relationship;
  • Parental mental illness or substance abuse.


In rare cases, a court will order no visitation for a parent. This is only done when visits would not be in the best interest of the children, such as when a parent refuses to refrain from alcohol or drugs while visiting with the child.


Remember that child support is a matter separate from child visitation. That means that a parent cannot deny visitation to another for nonpayment of support; likewise, a parent cannot deny payment because the other refused visitation.


An experienced family lawyer can ensure that you understand the issues that might impact child visitation and help you present them in the best light possible to a judge. The attorneys at The Law Offices of Judy L. Burger have substantial experience in Northern California and will represent you aggressively. Please contact us today at (415) 259-6636 to learn more.

 

Uncategorized

California’s New Law Allows Petitions to Seize a Family Member’s Guns

California’s New Law Allows Petitions to Seize a Family Member’s GunsEffective January 1, 2016, a new law went into effect that allows family members to ask a court to seize their family member’s guns temporarily. The bill was introduced in the California Legislature in 2014 after the Isla Vista massacre near Santa Barbara. Before six people tragically lost their lives, the shooter’s mother had noticed that he was increasingly agitated, and she had heard him make threats of violence.


The law places strict limits on judges who are presented with petitions to seize guns.


Temporary Emergency Gun Violence Restraining Orders


The new law authorizes a judge to issue a temporary order to prevent the possession of guns for 21 days when a petition is presented by an immediate family member or a law enforcement officer and the judge finds the following:

  • There is reasonable cause to believe that the person presents an “immediate and present danger” of personal injury to another person or himself;
  • By having, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm; and
  • The order is needed to prevent personal injury to a specified person.

If the dangerous person can reasonably be found, a law enforcement officer must serve a copy of the order on him.


Ex Parte Gun Violence Restraining Orders


Probably the most controversial aspect of the new law is the power of a judge, in very narrow circumstances, to issue an order restraining a person from possessing a gun or ammunition without providing the person advance notice. This is known as an “ex parte” order. Before an ex parte order may be issued, the following criteria must be met:

  • There is a “substantial likelihood” that the person poses a “significant danger of harm” to another person or himself;
  • In the near future;
  • By having, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm; and
  • The order is needed to prevent personal injury to a specified person.

When these criteria are met, the judge may issue an order preventing the dangerous person from having firearms or ammunition in his custody or control. Ex parte orders have a limited shelf life: They cannot last longer than 21 days, and the judge must order a hearing within that 21-day period. At the hearing, the judge determines whether a one-year restraining order is warranted. Again, the person must be served with a copy of the order if he may reasonably be found.


One-Year Gun Violence Restraining Order


A longer term restraining order, up to one year, may be issued after the person receives notice and an opportunity to attend a hearing. Before a one-year order may be entered, the following must be shown by clear and convincing evidence:

  • The person “poses a significant danger of personal injury to himself” or another;
  • By having a firearm or ammunition;
  • A restraining order is needed to prevent personal injury to the person or another; and
  • Either less restrictive alternatives have been ineffective or they would be inappropriate.


The health and well-being of you and your children are important to the State of California. If you are concerned about your safety, do not hesitate. Call the attorneys at The Law Offices of Judy L. Burger today at (415) 293-8314. We have extensive experience in family law matters, including those involving family member violence and threats of violence.

California Divorce

Ashley Madison Data Breach Could Impact Divorces

Ashley Madison Data Breach Could Impact DivorcesMedia stories on the Ashley Madison hack have spotlighted data security and privacy issues. But there is much more at stake: families. Some have speculated that the release of the Ashley Madison data will lead to increased marital problems and divorce rates.


Before last summer, many people would have had no idea that Ashley Madison was anything other than a person’s name. Now, people nationwide recognize Ashley Madison as a hook-up site for those who are married.


In case you missed it, the personal and private data of over 33 million of Ashley Madison’s customers was recently compromised. The hackers scored traditional personally identifiable information, such as names, street names, passwords, partial credit card debt, and telephone numbers. However, they also accessed private information of a very intimate nature, such as sexual fantasies and message history.


Much of this information was posted online for the world to see. Suddenly, friends, spouses, and others knew not only who was a customer of Ashley Madison but much, much more.


What are the implications of this giant data breach in family law?


Very early on, some divorce attorneys predicted a spike in the divorce rate. Certainly, the ability to confirm infidelity could cause spouses who previously weren’t sure about divorcing to file their papers.


But the implications of this data breach could be wider than originally thought.


Suddenly, one partner is armed with what would appear to be undeniable evidence of infidelity, and the other partner is likely to be riddled with guilt. This imbalance could cause the former to stake out a position and refuse to budge and the latter to simply fold. Is it possible that these feelings could affect the outcome of divorce proceedings?


Any issue that is wholly or partly in the parties’ control could be easily affected. For example, the parties have a great deal of influence on issues such as personal property division and visitation plans. The guilty partner might feel obligated to cave in, and often, the judge will approve the parties’ plan as long as it is reasonable. Likewise, the imbalance in perceived power could greatly affect settlement and, because feelings are hurt, drive up attorney fees in protracted litigation.


Some issues, however, will not be impacted. For example, California law explicitly spells out how property division will take place. Barring proof of money spent by the guilty partner on affairs, which might be considered marital waste, property division will not be affected. Custody of the parties’ children also will not be affected, as the core focus in custody determinations is the “best interest of the children” and the factors considered by courts are spelled out by law.


If you’re involved in a divorce and don’t know where to turn, you should work with an experienced, compassionate attorney who can help guide you through California law. Attorneys at The Law Offices of Judy L. Burger have substantial experience in Northern California family law, including cases involving infidelity. Please contact us today at (415) 259-6636 to learn more.

Child Custody

False Allegations of Child Abuse in California Custody Battles

False Allegations of Child Abuse in California Custody BattlesThe California Legislature, by law, has said that the primary concern in child custody decisions is the “best interest of the children” It is the policy of the State of California that the “health, safety, and welfare of children” are of the utmost importance.

It is not surprising, then, that false allegations of child abuse may be punished in custody battles in California courts.

The law gives judges the authority to take temporary steps deemed necessary to protect a child who is the target of alleged child abuse, pending the outcome of an investigation and report to the court.

When the investigation is complete, the court must make a determination about whether the child abuse allegations were true or false. If the court finds that the allegations were true, the abusing party has an uphill battle to obtain custody of any kind. That is because California law creates a presumption that a party who meets the following criteria should not receive custody:

  • The parent committed domestic violence;
  • Against the other parent, the child, or the child’s siblings;
  • In the last five years.


But what if the allegations were false?


California law provides stiff penalties for parents who knowingly makes false child abuse allegations. First, the party may be required to pay sanctions. The sanctions can include all costs incurred by the party who had to defend the false allegations, including attorney’s fees.


Additionally, the court may limit custody or visitation of the parent who falsely made the allegations under limited circumstances:

  • The parent made a report of child sexual abuse;
  • That he knew was false when he made it;
  • With the intent to interfere with the other parent’s contact with the child; and
  • A limitation in custody is necessary to protect the child’s health, safety, and welfare.


All of this must be supported by substantial evidence, and the court must consider California’s policy of frequent and continuing contact of children with both of their parents.


Limiting custody may include reduced visitation or supervised visitation.


As the law regarding false child abuse allegations makes clear, the health and well-being of your children are important not only to you, but to the State of California. In hotly contested child support matters, you need an attorney to fight for you and your child. The attorneys at the Law Offices of Judy L. Burger have extensive experience in divorce, child custody, and child support matters. Make the call today to learn how our attorneys can protect you and your children: (415) 293-8314.

Types of California Custody Orders
Child Custody

Types of California Custody Orders

In California, as in most states, custody, visitation, and child support issues are intertwined. This blog will discuss the basics of custody law in California. You may read more about child support at our blog here, and visitation will be explained in more detail in a later blog.


California law recognizes two types of custody: physical and legal. Courts make decisions about these issues based on the best interests of the child. Custody is not granted based on the parents’ ages, lifestyles, religious beliefs, or sexual orientation. Also, in California, there is no presumption that custody of young child should be awarded to the mother. Indeed, by law, the sex of the parents may not be considered in making custody decisions. See Cal. Fam. Code § 3040(a)(1). California courts presume that the child’s best interest is supported by joint custody arrangements. See Cal. Fam. Code § 3080.


When most people hear the term “custody,” they usually think of where a child lives. This is called “physical custody.” Physical custody may be held jointly—by both parents—or by one parent, known as “sole” physical custody.


With joint custody, each parent has a “significant period of physical custody.” While a child’s time cannot usually be split in exact halves, the child in a joint custody arrangement has “frequent and continuing contact with both parents.” Cal. Fam. Code § 3004.


On the other hand, when one parent receives sole physical custody of a child, the child lives with and is under the supervision of that parent, and the other parent is given visitation rights.


The second type of custody is called “legal custody.” This term refers to the right and responsibility of parents to make important decisions for their children. Legal custody may be awarded jointly to both parents or to only one parent. 


If the parents have joint legal custody, usually both parents must agree on issues related to the health, education, and welfare of the child. This includes decisions about important aspects of the child’s life, such as the following:

  • Religious decisions, such as whether and where a child will go to church;
  • Medical and dental decisions, such as whether to get braces or undergo psychotherapy; and
  • What school the child(ren) will attend.


When legal custody is given to one parent, it is called “sole legal custody.” If a parent has sole legal custody, that parent has the exclusive right and responsibility to make these decisions for the child.


Often, parents can come to a mutually agreeable decision about child custody. When this occurs, it is certainly better for the child. However, if the parents cannot agree, a judge will make these decisions for them and memorialize them in an order that either parent can later enforce.


Custody issues can be among the most contested between parents. As you might imagine, how these matters are presented to a court can make a significant difference in the support order. You want an attorney with substantial experience in Northern California who will represent you aggressively. Please contact The Law Offices of Judy L. Burger at (415) 259-6636 to learn more.