.webp)
.png)
Child custody issues can easily be among the most contentious issues in divorce. When parents squabble over custody issues in divorce, it’s not uncommon to find a “race to the bottom” in terms of the behavior of the parties. When we hear stories about parties “sinking low” in divorce, very frequently the sinking low occurs when the parties are seeking to gain an edge with respect to child custody. There are many reasons as to why this is the case, but clearly much of it just simply relates to the fact that children hold such an immensely important place in our lives. Children are part of our intergenerational legacy, and consequently they can inspire all sorts of powerful emotions and responses.
When one parent plays the role of the “stay-at-home” parent during marriage, that parent commonly seeks to obtain primary physical custody in divorce. In many cases, the former stay-at-home parent actually presumes that he or she will be granted primary physical custody, almost as a rule. The truth, however, is that being a stay-at-home parent doesn’t necessarily mean that someone will automatically be granted primary physical custody. The case of Pentecost v. Pentecost (2017) is a relatively recent example of when a stay-at-home parent didn’t attain primary physical custody. Let’s examine this case in detail.
Fact Pattern of Pentecost v. Pentecost (2017)
The couple in this case divorced in 2017. The husband was an active member of the U.S. Navy throughout the marriage, and the mother was a stay-at-home parent, although she did work outside the home for a brief period of time. When divorce proceedings began, the mother sought primary physical custody, as would be expected given her status throughout the marriage. But, the husband contested this request, and sought primary custody for himself.
To contest the wife’s request, the husband argued that the wife’s affair should be seen as evidence of potential unfitness as a parent. He also argued that there was other evidence that the wife had failed to adequately perform as a parent during the marriage. For instance, he cited evidence such as frequent unexcused absences from school, late or incomplete homework assignments, and other facts to indicate that the wife hadn’t been an exemplary parent. Ultimately, the trial court was persuaded by the husband and granted him primary physical custody, and also tie breaking authority when he and the wife were unable to agree on specific issues. The wife brought the case to the appellate division for review.
Ruling & Discussion
The main thrust of the wife’s argument was that her status as a stay-at-home parent should be used as evidence that granting her primary custody would be in the children’s best interest. She argued that, since she had always been the main caregiver, granting the husband primary custody couldn’t possibly be in the children’s best interest. In some cases, being a stay-at-home parent may in fact be used to support this type of argument. But, this isn’t always the case, and the husband in this situation successfully neutralized this argument by the wife by citing other counter-evidence. By highlighting the wife’s infidelity, and evidence that she hadn’t performed well in certain other areas, the husband was able to overcome whatever presumption may have existed in favor of the wife. Readers should know that Maryland courts can use extramarital affairs in custody determinations, and so an unfaithful spouse may end up losing custody as a result of being unfaithful.
Contact the Murphy Law Firm for Additional Resources
If you would like more information on custody issues involving stay-at-home parents, child support, or other related topics, contact one of the family law attorneys at the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-219-8825.
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
