Parental Custody Upon Death of Spouse

[mamabear2102003]

There is absolutely no reason in the world to submit a marriage license. If/when mom dies, dad has sole custody of his child.

The reason that I mentioned turning in the marriage certificate was to nullify any current orders with the court (such as ongoing child support while living together. Up here, until proof is turned into the court that you are indeed either married or living together, then you continue to be bound by the court order in regards to current support etc.) Yes, in most cases (I say most because there have been exceptions) the living bio parent gets custody upon the death of the other parent, but in cases like this where custody was granted before, it's always better to be safe than sorry (the death of a loved one can often bring disagreements that wouldn't normally exist). A call to the courthouse or a local atty will let her know what she should do.

[CourtClerk]

Let me explain:

I read a story about a couple (who were still married but lived in different states; pretty far from each other). The mom moved in with her sister who helped care for the child, while the mother was dealing with health issues (what caused her to move away in the first place, the doctors are better at sisters than dads).
When the mom died the sister filed for custody of the child because the sister (aunt) cared for the child and claimed to be the primary care giver to the child.
The father responded by saying that the only reason he was still in state 1 was because he was able to make money and keep insurance for his dying wife who's healthcare costs were enormous. He said that the child should be returned to him, the only surviving parent. Dad, I guess, helped support his child financially as well.
I don't know the outcome of that case, but the fact that it got some publicity along with a judge that would even hear it, got me thinking that not EVERY time will the surviving parent automatically get custody.

But in this case, where both parents are involved, there is no question about where the child will go.
And I also pointed out that even if the parents weren't married or living together, if both parents are involved then the surviving parent would receive sole custody.

I think that the only type of cases where a surviving parent wouldn't receive custody is if the parent had NOTHING to do with the child and there was soemone else to take guardianship of child and/or the parent had cases of drugs/neglect/jail, etc.

Does that make a bit more sense?

The two states involved were New Jersey and Texas and there were MANY underlying circumstances involved in that case.... a little more research is probably in order for you.

Neither of which... involve CA in the slightest.

The reason that I mentioned turning in the marriage certificate was to nullify any current orders with the court (such as ongoing child support while living together. Up here, until proof is turned into the court that you are indeed either married or living together, then you continue to be bound by the court order in regards to current support etc.) Yes, in most cases (I say most because there have been exceptions) the living bio parent gets custody upon the death of the other parent, but in cases like this where custody was granted before, it's always better to be safe than sorry (the death of a loved one can often bring disagreements that wouldn't normally exist). A call to the courthouse or a local atty will let her know what she should do.

There are so many things wrong with this dribble, I don't even know where to start.

*sigh*

[mrshiggins]

[QUOTE=CourtClerk;449756]The two states involved were New Jersey and Texas and there were MANY underlying circumstances involved in that case.... a little more research is probably in order for you.



I was just showing an example of when the other parent may have a difficult time of getting custody of their child once one parent dies.
I also said that I didn't know the outcome. I was mentioning this only for the fact that in all situations, sometimes it's not an open and shut case.

[CourtClerk]

And so I will reiterate that there were such extenuating circumstances in that case, that before you start showing examples of how things could be different you should (1) see if the states involved are at least closely related (they aren't) or (2) at least see if the circumstances in both cases are even remotely alike (hint: they aren't).

And I did study that case - and I do know what the eventual outcome was.