Discussion 1
During the ruling in the Painter versus Bannister case, the court granted the Bannisters custody of Mark, Painter’s son. The decision focused on the view that the child would have a stable and better education under the grandparents’ care. The case, however, did not adequately address; what the child wanted, and which party was the best caregiver. Court decisions on child custody should focus on the child’s best interests; this occurs through a consideration of various factors relating to the; parents’ circumstances, child’s circumstances and child’s ultimate wellbeing and safety. Though Mark spent a year at his grandparents’, he had spent his whole life with his parents and sibling. The probability is high that he would have chosen to live with the father due to the strong love and affection; built through the years. Decisions based on the child’s wishes can only be made once the child is mature and of age to make a reasonable decision. In the consideration of the caregiver’s fitness, the UMD advocates for the parent’s custody even if he may not provide life as good as the Bannisters’. Besides, Mr. Painter wanted his son back once he became stable (American Bar Association, 2008).
Discussion 2
The court’s decision to grant the Bannister’s custody over Mr. Painter’s son was not the best choice according to today’s law provision. In the best case scenario; the child’s place should be with his/her immediate family; in this case, the son Mark should have lived with the father. First and foremost, the Bannisters made an agreement to let him stay with his father after he became stable; they went back on this promise. The Family Law in various states supports the family’s custody of the child. Over 28 states across America support the importance of family integrity; they prefer avoiding the child’s removal from his home. It is only countered if the removal guarantees the child’s; treatment, care and guidance in developing into a self-sufficient adult. Over 15 states support the maintenance of emotional ties and relationships between children and their parents; it is the highest supported factor (Children’s Bureau, 2012). Since Mark’s father is stable, he is able to provide for the son’s financial needs; the love, affection and other emotional ties between a parent and child are crucial in Mark’s holistic development.
Reference
American Bar Association (2008). A Judge’s Guide: Making child-centered decisions in custody cases (2nd ed.), Retrieved December 6, 2013 from http://www.apps.americanbar.org/legalservices/probono/childcustody/judges_guide.pdf
Children’s Bureau (2012). Determining the Best Interests of the Child. Child Welfare Information Gateway, Retrieved December 6, 2013 from http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/best_interest.pdf
