Divorced parents typically lose sight of the very fact that child custody rights were put into place in order to safeguard the rights of the children. They protect the best interests of the child, not the parents and step-parents or any other extended family members. The courts are required to consider the kids first and make choices on their behalf during divorce proceedings. And usually this is all well and good, both parents accept those decisions and life goes on. Until, that is, the custodial parent wants to make a move out of state and take the child with them. That is when most individuals forget the main reason those child custody rights were established.

Blended families are becoming the norm these days. Most people know at least one family that falls into the Yours-Mine-And-Ours category. And because blended families are becoming more and more common, child custody rights are at the root of a lot more problems. Particularly when it comes to moving.

As an example, consider the case of a family from Ohio. The parents of an 8 year old girl had divorced, the mother had custody, and she remarried a man who had two children. Everything was going along fine till the new husband received word that he was being promoted to a high level position but would need to transfer to California. When the mother notified the small girl’s father that this move was about to take place, he immediately consulted his attorney and the case went to court.

This is often where individuals forget that child custody rights are put into place to guard the best interests of the child. When the girl’s natural father argued that he had every right to see his daughter on a regular and frequent basis and could not afford to travel back and forth to California every weekend the step-father argued back that he had every right to move his family to a different state espcecially because it was for a higher paying job.
In this case each person has rights and these rights overlap. It is the court’s duty to weigh each of those rights and determine what is best for the child, and only the child. Yes, it can be argued that the step-father would be able to provide a higher standard of living and yes the natural father has the right to be able to see his daughter whenever he wants to. But what’s the best interest of the child?

In this case the court looked at things like uprooting the child from her school and friends, pulling her out of activities like soccer and scouting, and taking her away from her father, and determined that to serve the child’s best interests she should stay in Ohio. And it is not a case of whether the step father or the natural father won or lost their argument. Child custody rights are there to serve the best interest of the child.

Want to find out more about child custody rights, then visit Vladymir Rys’s site on how to choose the best child custody agreements for your needs.