Monday, July 7, 2014

The Presumption that a Parent Acts in the Child's Best Interest



We recently did a little research for one of our members on the parental presumption.  We thought we would share the case law here.

Hutchinson v. Hutchinson, 649 P.2d 38 (1982)

The parental presumption in favor of custody been placed in the biological parents can be rebutted only by evidence establishing that a particular parent at a particular time generally lacks all three of the characteristics that gave rise to the presumption: (1) that no strong mutual bond exists, (2) that the parent has not demonstrated a willingness to sacrifice his or her own interest in welfare for the child's, and (3) that the parent lacks sympathy for an understanding of the child that is characteristic of parents generally.  If a nonparent can establish these elements, the nonparent is placed on equal ground with a natural parent and custody decisions will be based on the best interests of the child. The presumption does not apply to a parent who would be subject to the termination of all parental rights due to unfitness, abandonment, or substantial neglect.

In re K.P., 2009 UT App 244

Hutchinson factors generally inapplicable in juvenile court where the parent has been adjudicated as to abuse or neglect, because adjudication itself rebuts parental presumption, rendering Hutchinson factors unnecessary.

In re J.L.V., 958 P.2d 943 (1998)

Once the Juvenile Court has adjudicated dependency, neglect, or abuse, the Hutchison factors do not apply and custody decisions are made on a best interests basis.  “The law does not presume that it is in a child's best interest to be in the custody of the child's parent when the parent has been found by clear and convincing evidence to have neglected or abuse the child when the child is dependent.”

Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 66 (2000).

Parents presumed to act in child’s best interests.

Parham v. J.R., 442 U.S. 584, 602 (1979)

Parents’ decisions presumed to be in child’s best interest.

Meyer v. Nebraska; Pierce v. Society of Sisters; Prince v. Massachusetts

Parents have a fundamental liberty interest in directing the upbringing of their children.

1 comment:

  1. So how can the Court appoint a Guardian ad litem to represent the best interest of the children before determining that the parent's presumption has been rebutted?

    ReplyDelete