Child Custody and the Primary Caretaker Preference
The concept of the primary caretaker preference became very popular in the law of a number of the states of the United States during the 1980s.
It has since been the subject of a great deal of academic debate.
The way that it plays out in the court rooms across the country has also led to the formation of some fathers groups who feel that this element of the family law in America is unfair on fathers.
Usually the primary care taker is the person that looked after the children during the marriage and monitored the day to day activities of the children including meeting the daily needs of the children for things such as feeding, clothing, bathing and protection of health as well as education.
The principle was based on the assumption that the continuity of care was the best basis for the ongoing care of the children subsequent to the breakdown of the marriage.
Some influential judges and scholars believe that it is in fact true that in general mothers are more likely to feel close to their children and therefore be more likely to put themselves in a better position to care for their children.
The scholars that rely on this principle also believe that the establishment of the presumption aids in reducing the likelihood of long and drawn out child custody litigation with the litigation itself being used as a bargaining chip.
Increasingly in the modern world, it appears that the primary caretaker principle is becoming less applicable.
With changed economic conditions, it is no longer correct to automatically assume that the primary caretaker during a marriage will be the mother of the children.
These days, it could just as easily be the father.
Also, the test overlooks the need to be specific about the quality of care rather than the quantity of care concerned.
The prevalence of day care centres in modern parenting is also something that is overlooked by this legal presumption.
An alternative basis that has been suggested is to examine the relationship between each of the parents and the children rather than attempt to identify the primary giver.
The reason that this alternative has been suggested is that there has arisen much controversy over the presumption that one party automatically has an advantage at the beginning of the court case and the presumption also fails to place the focus of the solution on the child and instead places the child in a subservient custodial relationship with the parents.
It has since been the subject of a great deal of academic debate.
The way that it plays out in the court rooms across the country has also led to the formation of some fathers groups who feel that this element of the family law in America is unfair on fathers.
Usually the primary care taker is the person that looked after the children during the marriage and monitored the day to day activities of the children including meeting the daily needs of the children for things such as feeding, clothing, bathing and protection of health as well as education.
The principle was based on the assumption that the continuity of care was the best basis for the ongoing care of the children subsequent to the breakdown of the marriage.
Some influential judges and scholars believe that it is in fact true that in general mothers are more likely to feel close to their children and therefore be more likely to put themselves in a better position to care for their children.
The scholars that rely on this principle also believe that the establishment of the presumption aids in reducing the likelihood of long and drawn out child custody litigation with the litigation itself being used as a bargaining chip.
Increasingly in the modern world, it appears that the primary caretaker principle is becoming less applicable.
With changed economic conditions, it is no longer correct to automatically assume that the primary caretaker during a marriage will be the mother of the children.
These days, it could just as easily be the father.
Also, the test overlooks the need to be specific about the quality of care rather than the quantity of care concerned.
The prevalence of day care centres in modern parenting is also something that is overlooked by this legal presumption.
An alternative basis that has been suggested is to examine the relationship between each of the parents and the children rather than attempt to identify the primary giver.
The reason that this alternative has been suggested is that there has arisen much controversy over the presumption that one party automatically has an advantage at the beginning of the court case and the presumption also fails to place the focus of the solution on the child and instead places the child in a subservient custodial relationship with the parents.
Source...