Trenton, NJ–The family courts are schizophrenic about letting you return to court after they have decided your case. On the one hand, they say that any factor that affects the best interests of the child can be brought before the court at any time. On the other hand, they don”t want everybody coming back, and coming back, and coming back. So they say there must be a “material change in circumstances’ before they will agree to hear the case. In an April 17, 2008 decision, the New Jersey Appellate Division decided that the aging of a child in and of itself was a sufficient change of circumstances to warrant a change in the father”s parenting time. (Swicinski v. Maul). The original parenting time decision was made in 2003, when the child was six weeks old. The father had the infant every week from Sunday morning until Monday at 6:00pm. The father came back for additional parenting time in 2007. Both the Trial Court and the Appellate Division agreed that parenting time for an infant should be different than parenting time for a four-year old, and gave Dad more time.
Non-custodial parents are often given very little time with infants. Often, there are no overnights. So this decision could be an important tool to help fathers get more time with their children, including overnights, once the children grow into toddlers. Although not addressed in this decision, additional parenting time presumably could be obtained once the child enters school, or reaches other developmental milestones. Researchers on child development have understood for quite some time that children”s parenting needs change as they age. Perhaps the courts are finally beginning to catch up. Let me know what your experience has been by leaving a comment below.
Categories