Domestic Violence & Child Custody in Maryland

Published on
February 9, 2022
Written by
Angel Murphy
Category
Custody and Child Support

Domestic violence is one of the most troubling issues in our society. Every year, thousands of these incidents occur throughout the country, and a lot of incidents go unreported. The causes of domestic violence are varied. Some causes spring from inappropriate gender attitudes, while others spring from a lack of attention to mental health problems. Whatever the causes, these issues have a special significance in the context of child custody determinations in Maryland. Those who have experienced domestic violence and are involved in a custody dispute need to understand this significance.

How Domestic Violence is Defined in MD

Maryland law defines domestic violence in a particular way. Maryland's definition includes abuse against another parent, spouse, or child within the household. This is important to know because many people assume that these incidents only encompass abuse against another parent or spouse. Furthermore, “violence” is defined broadly under Maryland law. The Maryland definition includes the following offenses: stalking, sexual crimes, assault, threats, battery (causing bodily harm), and causing false imprisonment. Any of these offenses fall under the category of domestic violence and will be relevant in child custody determinations.

How Domestic Violence Impacts Custody Determinations

If you’ve experienced domestic violence, how exactly does this impact custody determinations? First, when you begin your custody litigation, you need to notify the court that domestic violence has occurred. The court will then request all documentation that substantiates and clarifies the event(s) which have happened. Review of this documentation by the court will determine how the court will proceed. The custody litigation will pause until the court receives and reviews these documents.If the court reviews the documentation and determines that a parent has committed domestic violence, this will play a large role in the child custody arrangement. The precise arrangement developed by the court will depend on the details of the violence which occurred. Typically, the court will forbid a guilty parent from having legal custody nor unsupervised visitation with the child. Unsupervised visitation is still possible, but again it depends on the specifics of the offense. Ultimately, the court’s decision will be based on whether the arrangement is consistent with the child’s safety.

What Actions Can the Court Take?

Depending on the nature of the offenses, the court can take certain actions or implement certain protective orders. For instance, the court can expedite the child custody case if it believes it is in the child's best interest. Moreover, the court can order supervised visitation, and also require that the guilty parent pay the costs associated with supervision. The court can also forbid any visitation with the child at all. If the guilty parent has been convicted of murdering the other parent, the court will almost never allow unsupervised visitation. Unsupervised visitation will be granted in this situation only if the court is fully convinced visitation doesn’t pose a threat.Domestic violence can also lead to a termination of a parent’s existing rights. If the court believes the incident(s) of violence evinces a lack of parental fitness, the court can strip parental rights. The more severe this incident(s) is, the greater the likelihood that the court will deny parental rights.

Contact The Murphy Law Firm for More Information

For more information, contact The Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-493-9116.

Angel Murphy

Personable. Passionate. Persistent.

Causes of Domestic Violence|Court|Custody|custody determination|Domestic Violence|domestic violence & child custody|guilty parents|Maryland Law|parental rights|unsupervised visitation

Subscribe to our newsletter

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Articles & Resources

March 4, 2024

Rudnick v. Rudnick (2023) & Unconscionability in Maryland Prenuptial Agreements

In Rudnick v. Rudnick (2023), a prenuptial agreement signed in 1992 became the subject of dispute during the couple's divorce in 2019. The agreement, which prohibited the division of assets or alimony, was initially considered fair but was deemed unconscionable at the time of enforcement. Massachusetts law, where the case arose, applied an unconscionability analysis at the time of enforcement. The courts ruled in favor of the wife, highlighting the importance of skilled legal representation well-versed in relevant state laws.

April 1, 2024

Carrington v. Richards (2017) & the Role of Participation in Custody Modification

In Carrington v. Richards (2017), a custody battle turned tragic due to the mother's failure to participate in court proceedings. Initially seeking full custody of their son, the father was awarded sole custody when the mother failed to appear at the final hearing. Despite subsequent attempts to overturn the decision, the mother's non-compliance with court orders and absence from proceedings hindered her case. Ultimately, the father's custody was affirmed, but the case took a devastating turn when the mother shot and wounded the father. This case underscores the importance of active participation in custody proceedings and the serious consequences of non-compliance.

March 29, 2024

Wiles v. Wiles (2017) & Modifying Alimony to Obtain a Longer Payment Period

In Wiles v. Wiles (2017), a divorced couple faced a dispute over alimony modification. Initially granted alimony for a limited duration, the ex-wife sought to extend the payments indefinitely and increase the monthly amount. Despite the ex-husband's opposition, the trial court granted the modification based on the ex-wife's claim of a change in circumstances. On appeal, the appellate division upheld the decision, emphasizing the need for a "material" change in circumstances to justify altering the alimony award, which would otherwise result in a harsh or inequitable outcome.

March 22, 2024

Hernandez v. Matiendo (2017) & the Impact of Previous Litigation on Visitation Modification

In family law, while the concept of "double jeopardy" may not apply, courts generally avoid relitigating settled issues without a change in circumstances. This principle was highlighted in the case of Hernandez v. Matiendo (2017), where a mother sought to modify a visitation order established in a Puerto Rican court. Despite her claims of sexual abuse, the Maryland court upheld the original order, emphasizing that the issue had already been litigated in Puerto Rico.

March 25, 2024

Mullen v. Robbins (2017) & How Settlement Agreements Impact Alimony Modification

In the case of Mullen v. Robbins (2017), a high-earning physician learned the importance of careful contract language when dealing with private agreements during divorce. Despite reaching a private agreement on alimony, the ex-wife sought modification in court citing a change in circumstances due to health issues. The trial court ruled in her favor, emphasizing the need for a "material change in circumstances" to modify private agreements. The appellate division upheld the ruling, highlighting the importance of precise contract language in determining modifiability.