I am going through divorce and my ex is asking a joint guardianship. Can you explain to me whether there is any difference between joint guardianship and joint custody and whether they do exist? Thank you.
|
I am going through divorce and my ex is asking a joint guardianship. Can you explain to me whether there is any difference between joint guardianship and joint custody and whether they do exist? Thank you.
There is no such thing as a guardianship over one's own child, not if one is legally the child's parent. There is such a thing as "joint custody" although I don't think the term is particularly meaningful when it refers to physical custody.
It would be helpful to know where you live.
I would think they would be the same. He is just using the wrong term.
It would mean that he gets the kids *visitation
Something like on weekends or every other weekend and rotating holidays and a summer vacation which could be broken down in a variety of ways.
You would also have to inform him in all decisions like doctors appts, surgery, braces, school events and so forth.
Joint custody is suppose to mean something close to an equal time share, not an alternating weekend arrangement; however, it is extremely common to see people with mere visitation rights amounting to 5 or 10% timeshare on paper being designated as having joint custody. That's why I oppose use of the term as it pertains to physical custody. It's a worthless and meaningless expression that serves no purpose other than to make people better.Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
I have never known anybody with joint custody getting equal time shares.
Joint may not be an appropriate word I suppose but it is what the family courts use at least in my city.
I don't make the legal terms or I would use quite a few different ones.
Well if joint physical custody doesn't mean equal, or roughly equal timeshare, what does it mean? What does "joint physical custody" mean for someone who never, or rarely, sees his kid?Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
I don't know about joint physical custody.
I know they use the term joint custody to mean that they have equal say in decisions for the kid(s) and the primary care giver has to inform the other of everything.
If it is joint physical custody why do they also say primary physical custody with joint custody to the father?
You're the one saying the term isn't practical, so maybe that is why it isn't practical?
Legal custody is decision-making authority. Hence, joint legal custody is what you are talking about. And I'm fine with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
It's the notion of joint physical custody that I contend is nonsensical. Washington State did away with the word "custody" in its family code many years ago which I applaud, replacing it it "decision-making authority" and "parenting plans".
When I hear judges say they are awarding joint physical custody I usually just yawn and think, "yeah, whatever."
When I was typing custody papers for family court Judges we never typed joint physical or joint legal... it was ALWAYS simply joint custody.
Even when it was the way I have explained to the OP
It varies from place to place I suppose. In California, "joint custody" means joint legal and joint physical custody combined.Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
Actually its really depends on where the OP is from. I found out recently when doing research that in other countries like Ireland it is called and applied as guardianship when they have never been married. So again it depends on where they are.Quote:
Originally Posted by cadillac59
If they are in the U.S. then yes this answer stands correct.
When people come here they often don't know the legal terms and ask with words they know. I am sure you got your point across and they now know not to go into family court asking about guardianship unless that is the term their country uses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
If there are sides to this I agree that people who come here often don't understand the legal terms and/or how to use them - sometimes "we" get so busy picking at each for using the wrong language that the thread gets hijacked and the OP drifts off.
It appears everyone is saying the same thing, just using different words.
Unfortunately, the Board is not read only by Attorneys.
Oh, I totally agree. Texas, for example, has some really weird nomenclature when it comes to custody of kids-- I think they refer to some parents or maybe guardians as "primary managing conservators" or something odd like that. But most US jurisdiction use the old "joint custody" term, which I dislike.Quote:
Originally Posted by califdadof3
Good point, Judy.Quote:
Originally Posted by JudyKayTee
I try to hold back when it pops up, but it's just like nails on a chalkboard when I hear people say, "I want FULL custody"... And when you ask them, "What does that mean, you never want the other parent to see the kid?", they say, "Oh no. I just want full custody, you know.' No we don't know, that's the problem!
I live in Ontario, Canada
Usually when they say they want full custody they means usually they want the support, but no visitation or rights given to the father.
I'm a irish father of 2 kids and I'm on benefits but we have joint garddnship of the kids would that mean that I'm benefits will be cut or what,
No one will see this here - you need a new thread.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:12 PM. |