“Can My Child Decide Who They Want to Live With?” It depends on the age and maturity of the child. Also, the court will determine if the parent can provide a suitable environment. In general, a child 15 years or older will go with the parent of their choice, but there are exceptions.
In a child custody case, the judge may consider your child’s preference, but how and when depends on the situation. Courts assess the child’s age, maturity, and whether their choice aligns with their best interests.
The Best Interests of the Child
In any custody dispute, the court’s main focus is the child’s best interests. This includes various factors ensuring the custody arrangement benefits the child. The court prioritizes the child’s emotional, mental, physical, and developmental well-being over the parents’ desires or conflicts.
Factors the court considers include:
- Stability and safety of the home.
- Each parent’s ability to provide emotional and intellectual support.
- Financial stability to meet the child’s needs.
- The child’s relationship with each parent.
- How the decision impacts the child’s relationship with the other parent.
- Maintaining continuity in the child’s living situation.
The court also evaluates the mental and physical health of both parents and their ability to meet the child’s needs. However, the child’s preference is often one of the most emotionally charged aspects of the case.
When Does the Child’s Preference Matter?
As children mature, their opinions carry more weight in custody decisions. The older and more aware a child is, the more the court may consider their preference. Still, this is just one factor.
For children under 10, their preference is often given little weight, as they may not fully understand the consequences of their choice. In contrast, teenagers’ preferences are typically taken more seriously, assuming the court finds them mature enough.
However, no matter the child’s age, their preference is never the sole deciding factor.
Why Doesn’t the Child’s Preference Decide Custody?
It might seem logical to let a child’s preference dictate custody. But courts recognize that children can be influenced by factors that aren’t in their long-term best interest.
A child might prefer one parent due to fewer rules or more freedom, focusing on short-term comfort rather than long-term stability. Courts must assess whether the preference is based on sound reasoning or a desire for leniency.
The court also watches for signs that one parent may have influenced the child’s choice. If one parent has negatively influenced the child against the other, the preference might reflect this, not the child’s true desire.
If the court believes the child’s wishes are influenced or impulsive, it may give little weight to the preference. The goal is always to ensure the child’s best interests, even if that conflicts with the child’s expressed desires.
When the Child’s Wishes Are Respected
If the child is mature and their preference appears thoughtful, the court may take it seriously. For instance, a 15- or 16-year-old may have their preference considered if it aligns with a desire for stability or a stronger emotional connection with one parent.
In such cases, a judge might speak with the child privately to understand their reasoning. If the child’s preference aligns with what the court sees as in their best interests, it may influence the custody arrangement.
However, the rule of thumb is that a teenage is the 800 pound gorilla. As the old joke goes, Where does an 800 pound gorilla sit? Any where he wants.
But, as discussed below, that is not always an absolute.
When the Child’s Preference Is Disregarded
Sometimes, the court will disregard a child’s preference if it believes it is not in their best interests. For example, if a child prefers one parent due to leniency, but that leniency harms the child’s development, the court may rule in favor of the other parent. Similarly, if one parent manipulates the child, the court may reject the child’s choice.
In one case, a mother’s drug addiction and criminal charges led to the child living with her father. In another, a father convinced his son to live with him to avoid paying child support, but the court ordered him to report on the child’s progress. The child eventually returned to his mother.
The Role of the Attorney for the Child
To help navigate this complex process, courts often appoint an Attorney for the Child (AFC). This attorney represents the child’s wishes, not their best interests.
I have a much longer article on the AFC at this link. It must be emphasized that the AFC is not a guardian. A guardian acts in the best interests of the child. New York got rid of that system 20 years ago. The AFC must advocate for what the child wants, even if that is not a good decision. The AFC is also governed by strict rules of ethics.
In the case of the drug-addict mother mentioned earlier, the AFC, despite knowing the mother was dangerous, argued for her custody because the child wanted it. The AFC explained that they were obligated to follow the child’s wishes, regardless of the danger.
Conclusion: A Balancing Act
The court’s goal is to create a custody arrangement that serves the child’s best interests. While a child’s preference can be important, it is just one of many factors the court weighs. The final decision aims to ensure the child’s overall well-being.
If you’re facing a custody battle, remember that your child’s opinion matters, but it won’t be the only factor. Courts aim to create the best outcome for the child in the long run. For more information, contact Port and Sava for a free 15-minute consultation at (516) 352-2999.