Child custody is the most emotional and difficult issue in divorce cases. Custody may take many forms, including sole custody, joint custody, shared custody, etc. Custody has two prongs: physical and legal. Legal custody deals with the “big ticket” decisions regarding health, education, welfare, and maintenance of the child. As a general rule, legal custody is awarded jointly to both parents. Physical custody addresses the physical location of the child and the day-to-day decisions. The basis for determining custody is the best interests of the child. There is no law that says a 12-year-old or older child can choose where he or she lives. The following factors are those considered by the court when deciding what is in the child’s best interests:

  1. The love, affection, and other emotional ties existing between the parties involved and the child;
  2. The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to give the child love, affection, and guidance and to continue the education and raising of the child in his or her religion or creed, if any;
  3. The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to provide the child with food, clothing, medical care or other remedial care recognized and permitted under the laws of this state in place of medical care, and other material needs;
  4. The length of time the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment, and the desirability of maintaining continuity;
  5. The permanence, as a family unit, of the existing or proposed custodial home or homes;
  6. The moral fitness of the parties involved;
  7. The mental and physical health of the parties involved;
  8. The home, school, and community record of the child;
  9. The reasonable preference of the child, if the court considers the child to be of sufficient age to express preference;
  10. The willingness and ability of each of the parents to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing parent-child relationship between the child and the other parent or the child and the parents;
  11. Domestic violence, regardless of whether the violence was directed against or witnessed by the child; and
  12. Any other factor considered by the court to be relevant to a particular child custody dispute.

These factors are the law and can be found at MCL 722.23.

Child custody orders may be modified only if there is a change in circumstances sufficient to justify a change in custody. It is very difficult to modify custody once it has been established in a court order. Before agreeing to a custody arrangement, even temporarily, make sure that you understand what you are agreeing to and ask all of your questions before the agreement is reduced to a court order.

You may want to review the Model Friend of the Court Handbook for more information on custody.

Parenting Time:

The judgment may order reasonable parenting time, leaving it to the parents to decide the dates, or it may provide specific parenting time, hours, and dates.

Parenting time orders may be modified on a showing of a change in circumstances. The law also allows parenting time that has been wrongfully denied to be made up, and the parent that denied the parenting time may be held in contempt of court. Failure to pay child support is not an acceptable reason to deny parenting time.

Attorney to Contact:

Rachel L. Terpstra

Additional Resources

Recent News

Nicolas M. Morano, Accomplished Real Estate Attorney, Joins GGTM Law
Posted on February 11, 2019
Gielow Groom Terpstra & McEvoy (“GGTM”) welcomes Nicolas M. Morano, who recently joined the growing ranks of experienced attorneys at GGTM. Nic has more than a decade of experience in counseling businesses and entrepreneurs in complex real estate and corporate matters. As a Mona Shores High School graduate, Nic is excited to transition his practice back home to the Muskegon area after spending the first ten years of his career with a large law firm in Grand Rapids.  Nic’s breadth of experience in a wide variety of real estate and corporate matters is a valuable asset to GGTM and... MORE
Legacy Release Program Funding Completely Allocated
Posted on April 2, 2018
On March 16, 2018, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) announced that the $36 million in funding earmarked for the Legacy Release Program (LRP) barely 6 months ago (via the passage of Public Act 130 of 2017) has been completely allocated to approved or pending claim submittals. As a result, the MDEQ is not reviewing any additional claims made under the LRP. However, a waiting list of up to 100 more claim applications will be maintained, in the event that current claims do not expend the full approved amount or are otherwise denied. The waiting list information can... MORE
New MUSTA Legislation Enacted
Posted on October 27, 2017
House Bill 4583 was recently signed into law by Governor Snyder.  This Bill creates the “Legacy Release Program”, establishes new options to demonstrate financial responsibility for cleanup fund deductibles, and provides for reimbursement of local units of government (LUG) for certain corrective action costs. The highlights of HB 4583 (now referred to as Public Act 134 of 2017) are outlined below: The Legacy Release Program is created and will be administered by the Michigan Underground Storage Tank Authority (MUSTA). The intent is to provide a mechanism to aid in the completion of corrective actions and to close out “old”... MORE
See More Posts