According to Florida law, the mere frustration of visitation rights alone does not justify a modification of custody. Custody cannot be changed purely as punishment for frustration of visitation rights in the absence of evidence of what is in the best interests of the child:
The father also challenges the provision requiring an automatic transfer of majority timesharing to the mother if he does not substantially comply with the parental responsibility and timesharing provisions of the order. “[C]ustody cannot be changed purely as punishment for frustration of visitation rights in the absence of evidence of what is in the best interests of the children.” Begens, 617 So.2d at 361. “Changing ... custody of a child is not a device to be used to obtain compliance with other court orders.” Id. (quoting Crippen v. Crippen, 508 So.2d 1339, 1340 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)). An automatic penalty provision “may, in the absence of a finding that such a change is in the best interest of the children, penalize the children for the parent's contumacious conduct.” Chapman v. Prevatt, 845 So.2d 976, 983 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (citation omitted). As such, the automatic timesharing transfer provision constituted an impermissible sanction.
See: Crittenden v. Davis, 89 So. 3d 1098
Related:
- Child Custody in Florida
- Advocating for Your Child’s Best Interest
- How to File for Child Relocation in Florida and Win Your Case
_______________
Do you have questions or comments? Then please feel free to send us an email or call him now at (954) 880-1302.
If you found this information helpful, please share this article and bookmark it for your future reference.
No comments:
Post a Comment