Tuesday, September 21, 2010

My Hubby Wear A Girdle

in child welfare relocation of one parent after divorce

If both parents after a divorce, joint custody of a child and wants the parent with whom the child lives (usually the mother), move far is, for the other parent, the question whether he has simply to accept this or whether he can do anything. Is the spatial distance between the parents in size, is also the visiting rights of children, the parent is not affected significantly. In addition, high costs incurred for the visits of the child.

The Supreme Court (decision of 28.04.2010 - XII ZB 81/09) had arisen in the appeal proceedings to deal with a case where the mother wanted to go with the child to Mexico. She wanted to join her boyfriend, who was situated very well economically. The child's father was against the move to Mexico because he substantial cuts in the relationship with his child and feared was the emigration of a risky design life of the mother. Both parents submitted applications for the transfer of the residence determination for the child. The mother needs the sole residence determination, so that they may transfer the child legally in foreign countries.

The court emphasized that the present standard for the decision residence determination is primarily the child's welfare. Then all other interests thereto, shall be measured. Factors in assessing the suitability of education of parents, the ties of the child to each parent, the principles of promotion and continuity as well as the child's will. All these criteria are weighted and evaluated. The mutual parental rights, as the emigration will be also included in the assessment. The motives for emigration are in principle decided not to review by the court. It can not prohibit the emigration, but has to examine how the migration affects the child's welfare. However, it is taken into account when considering, is whether a parent with the emigration (also) aims to prevent contact with the other parent. This is - as the Supreme Court -.'s Education into question the fitness motives of emigration are thus examined in relation to the child's well already, but not isolated from it. The need of the child after intensive contact with both parents should be included as an element of the child in the balance. It also had the scope to include the migration related harm and the consequences for the child and the parent.

The crucial question in weighing is after the Supreme Court whether to emigrate to the parent or the whereabouts of the child at further domestic resident parent is the child's welfare better solution. In decisions of great consequence, the Court can also request a psychological expert opinion, which could add to the quality of the bonds of the child with both parents and the eligible family court actions more narrow.

It is therefore a in many individual decision-oriented criteria necessary to bring out the child's welfare and protect them. The Supreme Court had finally also point out that for the case of transfer of residence provisions of the law to the mother of a binding contact arrangements must be made. Whether this can then be effectively implemented but if the child abroad is likely to be difficult. (Copyright ago)

0 comments:

Post a Comment