1. Communicate — It is important that both parents communicate with each other about issues affecting your child. When the school sends home information concerning a parent-teacher conference, grades, a book drive, etc., notify the other parent and give them a copy so that they can participate. If you schedule an appointment for the child like a doctor’s appointment, notify the other parent so they can participate. The more information that flows from one parent to the other (and vice versa), the better. Many custody orders require the “free flow of information” between parents about the child. When you do communicate, use the telephone! You can’t believe how negative it is to go into a custody trial and have a parent testify that they try to call the other parent to discuss their child but all they get is voicemail with no return calls or worse that both communicate exclusively by text or email. An exhibit showing the texts and emails exchanged can be disastrous especially if they include barbs and jabs at the other parent that have nothing to do with raising a child. The judge simply does not want to see comments about the father’s “whore girlfriend” and will hold that type of bad conduct against the parent who can’t get past her hard feelings to focus on what is best for the child. Also, communication is not just talking but also listening. Ask the other parent for his or her opinion about issues and listen to what he or she actually says. One tool that helps some parents communicate (and third parties like mental health therapists or attorneys police the communication) is Family Wizard.
2. Don’t put the child in the middle – The child is a child and should not be burdened with the parents’ problems nor empowered to make decisions as if they are an adult. While children can have a say in where they want to live, it is ultimately the judge’s decision and the judge will usually tell the child it is his or her decision and the child’s input will only be a factor and not the final say. Simply put, you are putting too much pressure on a child of any age to ask them to choose. Moreover, if you empower the child to decide this issue now when things don’t work out with the parent they chose, they may think they can change their mind and move to the other parent’s house causing disciplinary problems in both homes and playing one parent against the other. Parents should refrain from discussing the litigation with the child. Also, never say anything negative about the other parent in the presence of the child. Neither party should do anything that diminishes the bond that the child has with the other parent. And don’t use the child to send messages to the other parent (don’t even send the child support check in the child’s backpack).
3. Be accountable – Children are smart. Don’t pretend to be something you are not. If you are fighting for custody because your lawyer told you that you will not have to pay as much child support or because you are concerned about what your mom or some other family member might think, your child will know that you truly do not want to have them with you 24×7. If you are living a lie under any circumstances, you may be alienating yourself from your own child.
4. Make transitions easy – Remind your child they will be spending time with their mom or dad in advance and help them look forward to the time with their mom or dad. Help get them packed and ready for pickup on time. Allow the child to take toys, cell phones, clothing and other items back and forth between the houses so that they will be comfortable having their stuff. When your child returns, don’t question them about the other parent, their house, what they did, etc. If they want to share, they will.
5. Have faith in the other parent — you picked him or her to have a child. Have faith that this person you choose will not put your child at risk. If you have genuine concerns that he or she will put your child at risk, that is something you need to address with the other parent and/or with your attorney.

You should speak with your attorney because every situation is different.  For example, if there is domestic violence, these tips may not be practicable.  However, generally following these tips will improve circumstances for your child whether you are in a battle for custody or not.

Assigning one judge to the matter is the cornerstone of any family court system. Having one judge assigned to all of a family’s matter allows that judge to familiarize themselves with the specific needs of that family and better address the issues specific to that family. There can be many issues facing a family going through dissolution of the marriage – child support, divorce from bed and board, child custody, alimony, equitable distribution, and absolute divorce are several such claims that may be prompted by a separation of the parties. Pursuant to these claims, there are numerous motions and/or interim solutions which could become relevant based upon the circumstance. For instance, ex-parte child custody, temporary child custody and child support, interim distribution, temporary restraining orders, post-separation support, motions and orders to show cause in contempt, and/or motions to compel may become necessary. Many of the facts in each motion or claim may overlap, such as: Post-separation support and alimony, or temporary child custody and child custody. In order to prevent disparate outcomes, long recounts of a family’s history, and uneven applications of the law between claims and so as to provide the opportunity for tailored rulings specific to the details of a particular family, the family court system requires that one judge hear all the issues of one family whenever possible. Having one judge assigned to all of a family’s matter allows that judge to familiarize themselves with the specific needs of that family and better address the issues specific to that family.

In addition, when one judge is assigned to a matter, that matter stays on the judge’s calendar until resolved. Parties are unable to continue a matter so as to get a “favorable” judge or to delay a matter simply to cause the other party hardship. Furthermore, one of the penultimate goals of family courts are to resolve the issues of a family within one year. This one-year goal coupled with the restrictions on continuances cuts down the amount of continuances which will be allowed or tolerated by the Court. According to the 2011 Annual Report on NC’s Unified Family Court Programs which looked at the duration and length of cases over a seven year period, in counties with a family court system, only 22 percent of domestic cases were not resolved within a year as compared to 47 percent in non-family court counties. The seven year average age for cases in family court is 108 days whereas, in non-family court jurisdictions, the average age over the last seven years was 332 days.

Many family courts employ a simple and predictable calendaring system. For instance in New Hanover County, North Carolina, judges typically have a two-week session in each month dedicated to family issues. Each judge’s session is published in advance and the cases on the calendar are organized at an advanced (generally) calendar call. If a matter is not able to be heard during that session, the family court administrators move it to the next session and it remains on the calendar from session to session until it is heard by the Court. For smaller or quicker matters, some judge’s will schedule shorter sessions when time allows.

Since 1999, Family Courts in North Carolina have been providing parents with tailored and efficient resolution of their family law issues. Despite the numerous advantages of a family court system, as of late the family court has been under attack in the North Carolina legislature. Recent moves by the legislature to cut funding to the family court system in North Carolina only means an increase in inefficiency, time, and hardship for the family’s of North Carolina. Rice Law, PLLC, encourages all parents and spouses in North Carolina to write your state representative and let them know that funding for family courts in North Carolina (as well as other specialized courts in North Carolina) should not be cut when there are proven advantages to them being retained.

If you and your child(ren)’s parent(s) are no longer together consider doing some of the following on Mother’s Day:

And now it is nearly always included in child custody orders honoring mom as a day that mom gets to enjoy with her child(ren) regardless of where the child(ren) normally lives.   Many child custody court orders will include language such as the following:

Mother’s Day (2nd Sunday in May)

Even if a period of Secondary Custody falls on or includes Mother’s Day, the children shall be returned by their father to the custody of their mother at 5:00 p.m., on the Saturday before Mother’s Day and the children shall remain in mother’s physical custody until they return to school on the Monday following Mother’s Day.

 So it is critical that child(ren) spend time with their mother on mother’s day unless prohibited by a court order.

There are very rare instances when a mother does not enjoy mother’s day with her child(ren).  Woe unto a father who prevents a mother from spending time with her children in violation of a court order which grants her Mother’s Day.  Most judges are likely to punish the father under these circumstances with contempt of court unless they have a compelling  justifiable reason for failing to comply with the custody order.

The law on relocation differs depending on whether a child’s custody has been litigated, and whether a child’s custody is addressed in a Separation Agreement. If the parties have not litigated issues related to their child and do not have a Separation Agreement, it is possible to relocate immediately inside or outside of North Carolina prior to litigating custody and/or child support. If the new location is in another state, consult an attorney in that state for advice on how much time you must reside there before filing a custody action. Generally, a person is also allowed to take their child and move immediately to a new location if domestic violence is involved.

If parents have litigated custody or have a Separation Agreement, and relocation is not agreed to by both parents, an attorney will likely file a Motion to Modify Visitation or Custody. There are several recent North Carolina cases involving these motions, essentially requesting the court’s permission to relocate. The parties in these North Carolina cases had different reasons for requesting that the court grant their motions, but a similar test was applied by the courts in the cases. The courts considered the child’s best interests to determine whether to modify custody or visitation. A court might also refuse to modify a prior Order unless a substantial change of circumstances has occurred; however, a move for employment reasons is likely a substantial change of circumstances. Based upon these cases, a court will likely use several factors to determine the child’s best interests. These factors include:

…the advantages of the relocation in terms of its capacity to improve the life of the child; the motives of the custodial parent in seeking the move; the likelihood that the custodial parent will comply with visitation orders when he or she is no longer subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of North Carolina; the integrity of the noncustodial parent in resisting the relocation; and the likelihood that a realistic visitation schedule can be arranged which will preserve and foster the parental relationship with the noncustodial parent.

—Evans v. Evans, 138 N.C.App. 135, 142, 530 S.E.2d 576, 580 (2000).

If a North Carolina trial court uses these factors to determine the child’s best interests its decision is more likely to be upheld on appeal.

A court also has the discretion to reduce child support payments in a case involving relocation. If a court allows relocation of a parent and child, that court will have possibly held that a substantial change of circumstances occurred. As a result, that court may not only modify custody, the court may also modify child support. A court can increase or decrease child support, and a court can deviate from the North Carolina child support guidelines. For instance, a court might suspend a parent’s child support obligation so that the non custodial parent can visit the child in the new location.

Preparation is important when attempting to relocate. It is wise to first consult the other biological parent, and to memorialize any agreement in writing, at which time an attorney can draft a consent order or modification of a Separation Agreement as appropriate. If no agreement is reached, consult an attorney to prepare a Motion to Modify Visitation or similar action, and also consider child support. In all cases, your ability to relocate will depend on what is in the best interests of your child.

In child custody cases, judges are required to consider the best interests of minor children and their safety. Allegations of substance abuse — of any nature including but not limited to abuse of alcohol, illegal drugs, prescription drugs, etc. — must be taken seriously. When allegations of substance abuse appear to be supported by evidence, the Court will often order drug testing to verify whether substance abuse is a problem. In making the determination whether to order drug testing, the judge will consider the credibility of the testimony, whether the party admits to substance abuse, past history including criminal charges for drug use, other evidence and risk/danger to the child. Since inaccurate accusations are common, some judges are reluctant to order testing based upon a mere accusation of substance use/abuse. Outside corroboration is often best obtained through affidavits of eye-witnesses of through the use of a private investigator.  Private investigators like Cape Fear Investigative Services can perform trash pulls and look for evidence of drugs and even swipe door handles to test for drug residue.

Nationally, about 21.2% of adults age 18–25 use illicit drugs according to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.  Of adults 26 years of age or older, about 6.3% use illicit drugs but nearly 20% of adults age 26–34 report binge drinking. Rates of marijuana use in nearly every age group is on the rise. Statistically, males are more likely to be drug users than females and drug use is also higher among those unemployed. See the complete 2009 results.

A judge can order the cost of drug testing be paid by either party and is in the discretion of the Court. The type of drug testing is also in the discretion of the court. A urine screen is quick and relatively inexpensive but is easily subject to manipulation of results (e.g., drinking large amounts of water in advance of the test) and the look back period is very limited often to less than one week. A hair follicle test is more expensive but often provides much better results over a longer period of time. And a test of a fingernail is even better for some purposes.  We often use ARCpoint in Wilmington, NC for drug testing results.

When a party has a problem with drugs, the best approach is to get a substance abuse assessment and follow the treatment recommendations — even in-patient treatment if needed. By showing a pattern of recovery, the party is best able to convince the Court that the problem is admitted, is being addressed and that management of the problem is on-going.

Mental health experts can also perform a substance abuse assessment and often use the Substance Abuse Subtle Screening Inventory (SASSI) as one mechanism to help identify individuals with a high probability of having a substance dependence disorder.

When dealing with accusations of substance abuse in a child custody case, it is important to have legal counsel and a plan of action in place to refute false accusations or embrace true accusations and put a safety plan in place that allows the parties to have quality time with their children.

As one might have guessed Eunice H. Chapman did not have the same legal standing and property rights as women have in modern society.  When Eunice married James Chapman she lost her property rights and legal standing as an individual. As a result, when her husband attempted to reconcile only to be rebuffed by Eunice, her husband took the remaining property and their three children to the Shaker religious group. 

It is worth pointing out that Eunice did not want to reconcile for a couple of reasons. First, James was notorious for drinking and wasteful spending, leading to him selling much of the couple’s property before abandoning his family. Second, James claimed to have changed and wanted to live in Shaker society in which the couple would not live together alone as Husband and Wife. Eunice was not interested in the type of life offered by Shaker society, and this refusal set off the battle between Eunice and the Shaker religious leaders of James’ group.

These events leading to Eunice’s extraordinary acheivement are very interesting. At first, Eunice maintained custody of her three children until her husband and the Shaker leaders lured Eunice away from her home and then removed her children and the remaining property from the home. For a couple of years Eunice attempted to settle custody with the Shaker leaders, without success.  Eunice was determined to get her divorce and custody so she sought the assistance of the New York legislature. Around 1817, after years of talking in person and writing to the NY assemblymen, Eunice was given a “legislative divorce” from her husband, and no actual trial occurred. Even Thomas Jefferson noticed and commented on Eunice’s case. 

Eunice may have received her divorce, but she did not have custody of her children yet. She reportedly resorted to gathering a mob to go to the Shaker group that had possession of her three children. Again, Eunice remarkably overcame the religious leaders by getting her three children back.

New York law later changed around 1966 so that a divorce was not solely dependent on proving adultery.  In the majority of states the law is either based on a “no fault divorce”, or the divorce law is dependant on a period of separation, as in North Carolina.  However, religion does still play a role in some custody disputes. (For more information see Richard Kern’s Article: Custody and Religion). 

The current news is full of interesting court cases about marital rights, multiple marriages, and interstate custody battles, but Eunice H. Chapman’s remarkable legal battle is truly noteworthy. Litigants in 2010 are understandably frustrated by the amount of time required to get a divorce, but their divorce and custody matters usually only last one to two years. In light of the many years spent in pursuit of Eunice H. Chapman’s legislative divorce the modern legal system has come a long way.

Generally, Joint legal custody means that the two parents consult and decide together what long-term decisions are in the best interest of their child. It is assumed in North Carolina that a fit parent makes decisions that are in their child’s best interest. In a sole custody situation, the parent enjoying sole custody has the authority to make such decisions. In North Carolina, a Court may delegate certain areas and topics regarding decision-making authority to a particular parent, even in the context of joint legal custody. However, according to some North Carolina case law, if a Court delegates all decision-making authority to a single parent, then North Carolina Courts will consider the parent with sole decision-making authority to be in sole custody of the child despite language in the child custody order purporting to convey joint legal custody. These concepts are important for parents to understand because in many joint custody arrangements disagreements arise as to what is in the child’s best interest with regard to their spiritual upbringing.

A North Carolina Court may inquire as to the religious practices of parents to determine the effect of certain religious practices with regard to the physical, mental, and spiritual health of a minor child and may use the information gained as a factor in determining which custody arrangement will best promote the best interests of a child so long as the inquiry is: a limited inquiry related to the impact that the practices of the religion have upon the child and/or the parents’ ability to promote attendance or instruction in a religion. This information may be used as one factor in determining the custody arrangement that serves the child’s best interest so long as the Court does not preference any particular faith or religious instruction in making their determination. Phelps v. Phelps, 337 N.C. 344, 446 S.E.2d 17 (1994).

In Dean, the Court of Appeals stated the “trial court properly considered wife’s failure to take five-year-old child to church and Sunday school, and consideration of such fact did not violate constitutional provisions concerning separation of church and state.” Dean, 32 N.C.App. at 483.

In MacLagan, the North Carolina Court of Appeals went further by declaring proper the decision of the trial court that the father of a child have exclusive decision-making authority over his child’s religious upbringing. The Court of Appeals overcame the mother’s argument that the trial court had shown religious preference in allowing the father (who was Jewish) to be the sole decision-maker as to the child’s religious upbringing as opposed to the mother (who was Christian) by citing the undisputed facts in the trial Court’s record that: 1) the parties had agreed to raise the child in the Jewish faith before they separated; 2) the child was raised in Judaism since the age of three; 3) the child had substantial involvement in her father’s Synagogue; and 4) the child had increased stress and anxiety due to her being raised in two conflicting religions “which have had a detrimental effect on [the child’s] emotional well-being.” MacLagan, 123 N.C.App. at 569-570.

It is noteworthy that the cases cited above, in large part, contain dicta and language to suggest that the inquiry into religious practices may not be the sole determinative factor in either custody or in delineating certain areas of the decision-making authority with regard to spiritual well-being, most of the cases above point out specifically that the trial court did not rely solely on the inquiry into religious practices to make their determination.

Another interesting potential situation regarding this topic is what should a Court do when a child desires to make his/her own decisions regarding their own religious upbringing.

The Constitutional rights of children have been acknowledged by courts all over the United States in a growing number of cases over the last couple decades. Children have protected Constitutional rights with regard to: their religious beliefs, expression, privacy, procedural due process in criminal and civil matters, and even with respect to double jeopardy. However, most of the United States Supreme Court cases recognizing the Constitutional rights of children involves a conflict between a child and the State/government and does not relate to a child’s Constitutional rights in relation to the conflicting rights of a parent. It is likely that a child may not even have standing to contest their parent’s decisions with regard to religious upbringing in most foreseeable situations as the conflict would likely not have a basis in governmental action which would be a necessary element for any Constitutional challenge.

It is well-established that fit natural parents have a Constitutionally protected right to raise their child as they see proper, including but not limited to deciding with whom that child associates. Petersen v. Rogers, 337 N.C. 397, 445 S.E.2d 901 (1994). In Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), the United States Supreme Court specifically avoided the question as to conflicting Constitutional protections as between Amish parents and their children when the Court stated:

Contrary to the suggestion of the dissenting opinion of MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, our holding today in no degree depends on the assertion of the religious interest of the child as contrasted with that of the parents. It is the parents who are subject to prosecution here for failing to cause their children to attend school, and it [406 U.S. 205, 231] is their right of free exercise, not that of their children, that must determine Wisconsin’s power to impose criminal penalties on the parent. The dissent argues that a child who expresses a desire to attend public high school in conflict with the wishes of his parents should not be prevented from doing so. There is no reason for the Court to consider that point since it is not an issue in the case. The children are not parties to this litigation. The State has at no point tried this case on the theory that respondents were preventing their children from attending school against their expressed desires, and indeed the record is to the contrary. The State’s position from the outset has been that it is empowered to apply its compulsory-attendance law to Amish parents in the same manner as to other parents — that is, without regard to the wishes of the child. That is the claim we reject today.

Our holding in no way determines the proper resolution of possible competing interests of parents, children, and the State in an appropriate state court proceeding in which the power of the State is asserted on the theory that Amish parents are preventing their minor children from attending high school despite their expressed desires to the contrary. Recognition of the claim of the State in such a proceeding would, of course, call into question traditional concepts of parental control over the religious up-bringing and education of their minor children recognized in this Court’s past decisions. It is clear that such an intrusion by a State into family decisions in the area of religious training would give rise to grave questions of religious freedom comparable to those raised here [406 U.S. 205, 232] and those presented in Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925). On this record we neither reach nor decide those issues.

In Wisconsin, 406 U.S. 205, 230-231 (1972). However, Justice Douglas wrote in his dissent that that majority decision left the children under the yoke of the parents and that by not addressing the relationship between the constitutional rights of the parents and those of the children, the children’s constitutional rights were effectively abrogated by imposition of the parents religious views upon the children.

Under North Carolina law, the question of priority regarding a child’s Constitutional rights of free exercise of religion versus that of a parent seems unsettled as much as it is in the national context. The question is: at what point can a state enforce a child’s constitutional rights as against a parent’s right to raise their child?

In conclusion, North Carolina Courts may consider which parent is better suited to care for a child’s spiritual upbringing and may use this consideration as one factor in determining the custody arrangement that is in the best interests of the child. The Court may also order that one parent or the other have sole decision-making authority as to the child’s spiritual upbringing. However, it is unclear whether or to what degree courts may enforce a child’s wishes regarding their spiritual upbringing as against the decisions of their parents or parent.

Author’s Note: The above is presented as general information. It is not exhaustive coverage of this issue but only a general explanation from an attorney’s perspective. The purpose of this article is to inform the non-lawyer who may read current status of the issue in North Carolina. The reader interested in learning more should contact an attorney licensed to practice law in their jurisdiction.

The dependent spouse depends upon their supporting spouse to pay the bills for the food, home, etc., which can lead to a lack of control over their life. In the event the dependant spouse intends to separate from the supporting spouse, they should consult an attorney to learn about their many options. The options below are not exhaustive and will not apply to every situation.

In the event the supporting spouse will not leave the marital residence, the dependant spouse and children should seek a temporary home so that a Complaint and Motions can be filed after the parties separate. The temporary home may be required for a couple of days or months. Before leaving the residence, the dependant spouse should make copies of important documents, refrain from arguments, and limit computer activity. It is necessary to shut down social networking pages on the day you leave the residence, and take your computer to a shop to ensure that spyware was not installed by your spouse. However, the dependant spouse should leave immediately in a case of domestic violence and, in this situation, a local legal aid office and shelters for victims will usually provide free assistance.

In an attempt to provide stability to the dependant spouse and children, an attorney can file a complaint, motion for interim distribution, and motion for sequestration. In these documents an attorney can request that the dependant spouse be supported financially, and the Court can order that the supporting spouse be removed from the former marital residence so that the dependant spouse can return to the residence. The Court can order an interim distribution of marital and separate property pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. §50-20(i)(1) (Distribution by Court of Marital and Divisible Property), which provides as follows:

(i)(1) Unless good cause is shown that there should not be an interim distribution, the Court may, at any time after an action for equitable distribution has been filed and prior to the final judgment of equitable distribution, enter orders declaring what is separate property and may also enter orders dividing part of the marital property, divisible property or debt, or marital debt between parties.

For more information about equitable distribution, see the property settlement page on our Website.

se·ques·tra·tion [see-kwes-trey-shun], legal definitions:

1. Seizure of property.
2. A writ authorizing seizure of property.

The order for sequestration is similar to a temporary restraining order. It is a common law remedy that is used on a regular basis in this type of situation. A Judge can order the property to be sequestered with or without the presence of the supporting spouse or opposing counsel. It is highly recommended that the dependant spouse change the locks on the home as soon as they return to the former marital residence. If the supporting spouse returns to the former marital residence, the dependant spouse can request that the police enforce the Court’s Order and eject the supporting spouse from the property. Another option is to file charges for domestic criminal trespass, in which case the accused might be taken to jail. For more information about protective orders, see the domestic violence page on our Website.

A dependant spouse may choose to have an attorney prepare a separation contract or Separation and Property Settlement Agreement (SAPS). These two documents can settle some important issues. The agreement should attempt to maintain the status quo of the current child custody arrangement. For instance, the dependant spouse would maintain primary custody of the children throughout the week, while the supporting spouse visitation on some nights and every other weekend. The amount of custody and/or visitation of the supporting spouse will vary according to their work schedule. This type of custody arrangement can provide a stable environment for the children. Of course, the agreement should provide for interim financial support for the dependant spouse in order to provide a safe home and necessities for the children. The agreement can even contain a clause providing for “Temporary Possession of the Marital Residence.” See the sample separation contract on our Website.

These are a few of the legal options provided for stay-at-home parents and dependant spouses in North Carolina. To learn about additional options, get the free eBook on Separation & Divorce. In all of these cases the children’s best interests and safety should be the primary concerns of the parents.

The above is presented as general information on separation and interim distribution and sequestration. It is not exhaustive coverage of these issues but only a general explanation from an attorney’s perspective. Seek help from a licensed attorney for more information.

Richard Gardner, a clinical professor of psychiatry at Columbia University, coined the term “parental alienation syndrome” (PAS) in the mid 1980s. Gardner described a condition wherein a child was brainwashed or programmed by one parent through a “campaign of denigration” against the other parent that sometimes included a false sex-abuse accusation and automatic parroting of the brainwashing parent’s views. PAS arises primarily in the context of high conflict child custody disputes. Few mental health professionals considered it to be a mental health disorder and it has been highly criticized for a lack of scientific validity and reliability.

Parental alienation

However, parent alienation (PA), as opposed to PAS, has been widely recognized as a grouping of behaviors that often accompanies high-conflict marriages, separation and/or divorce. These behaviors can result in alienated children, alienated parents, and targeted parents. A child who strongly attaches to one parent (the alienating parent) and rejects the other (the targeted parent) in the false belief the targeted parent is bad or dangerous is a recognized problem.

The alienated child & symptoms of parental alienation

An alienated child may display characteristics including: unreasonable anger, intense negative portrayal of the target parent, lack of conflicting feelings toward parent, use of adult language by the child, and the child says things which appear rehearsed.

Dr. Douglas Darnell identifies symptoms of parental alienation including:

• Giving child a choice when they have no choice about visitation.
• Telling the child “everything” about the marital relationship or reasons for the divorce.
• Refusing to acknowledge the child has property and may want to transport possessions between residences.
• Resisting or refusing to cooperate by not allowing the other parent access to school or medical records and schedules of extracurricular activities.
• One parent blaming the other parent for financial problems, breaking up the family, changes in lifestyle, or having a girlfriend or boyfriend.
• Refusing to be flexible with the visitation schedule in order to respond to the child’s needs, or scheduling the child in so many activities that the other parent is never given the time to visit.
• Assuming that if a parent has been physically abusive with the other parent, it follows that the parent will assault the child. This assumption is not always true.
• Asking the child to choose one parent over the other.
• The alienating parent encouraging natural anger the child has toward the other parent.
• A parent or stepparent suggesting changing the child’s name or having the stepparent adopt the child.
• When the child cannot give reasons for being angry towards a parent or gives reasons that are vague and without any details.
• Using a child to spy or covertly gather information for the parent’s own use.
• Arranging temptations that interfere with the other parent’s visitation.
• Reacting with hurt or sadness to a child having a good time with the other parent.
• Asking the child about the other parent’s personal life.
• Physically or psychologically rescuing a child when there is no threat to their safety.
• Making demands on the other parent that are contrary to court orders.
• Listening in on the child’s phone conversation with the other parent (this is generally illegal in North Carolina).

These behaviors, whether conscious or unconscious, may cause a child to be mentally manipulated into believing the targeted parent is the enemy.

North Carolina’s recognition of parental alienation

Under North Carolina law, only two appellate cases mention PAS or PA. In Kilian v. Kilian, 175 N.C.App. 420, 623 S.E.2d 367 (2006), the father introduced a child care application which did not list him as a parent, but rather listed mother’s new husband as the child’s father/guardian as evidence of parental alienation. In a criminal rape case involving the rape of his daughter, Donald Fuller attempted to use evidence of parental alienation syndrome unsuccessfully in his criminal defense. See State v. Fuller, 160 N.C.App. 250, 584 S.E.2d 109 (1993).

Even though NC appellate courts have not fully addressed the PA issue, our trial courts here such evidence frequently. One district court judge in North Carolina recently wrote an article in which she detailed dialogues with children involved in custody disputes such as this one:

Judge: “Did you and your mother talk about coming to court today?”

Minor: “No.”

Judge: “Has your mother ever told you what this case is about, and what happens when she comes to court?”

Minor: “Well your Honor, I don’t think it would be in my best interest to have dinner with my dad. I realize there is a court order in place and that I cannot unilaterally change the order, but my mom should not be held in willful contempt for not making me go to dinner.”

Judge: “Now you’re sure you and your mom haven’t discussed this case?”

Call to action

If you suspect parental alienation, you need to take appropriate action. Even if your spouse or ex-spouse is acting badly, don’t talk to your child about any pending litigation and don’t allow your child to see any of your court documents. Talk to your child custody attorney and a licensed mental health professional about how to best handle the issue. At Rice Law, we often work with Denise Scearce, MSW, LCSW and Bridge Builders Counseling and Psychotherapy in Wilmington.

Resources

• Parental Alienation Awareness Organization
• Parental Alienation: A Mental Diagnosis?
• Symptoms of Parental Alienation, by Dr. Douglas Darnell, Ph.D.
• Hartsfield, Judge Denise S., Family Jewels: “Kids are to be seen, not heard” — Somebody’s grandmother in the 1960s. NC Bar Association’s Family Forum, Vol 30, #3, (2010).

The above is presented as general information on parental alienation syndrome and parental alienation. It is not exhaustive coverage of the issue but only a general explanation from a child custody attorney’s perspective. Seek help from a licensed mental health professional and an attorney for more information.