Indiana courts frequently advocate for a joint custody arrangement when both parents are able to cooperate and communicate. However, this is not always possible in all cases, especially when both parents are unable to cooperate. The following is a recent example. 

Background of the case

In this case, the parents had one minor child and had jointly shared custody after their relationship broke down. This was based on the belief that it would be in the best interests of their minor child to remain active in their life. 

However, their relationship as co-parents to their minor child deteriorated over time. There was evidence that showed that there was increasing hostility and animosity between the parties, as well as actions taken by the mother that hindered the father’s ability to exercise parenting time with their child.

As a result of this, the father requested a modification of their joint custody arrangement, citing that this type of arrangement was no longer working and was impacting the quality of life of their child. After reviewing the evidence, the court sided with the father, ruling that the joint custody arrangement was no longer in the best interests of the child.

The appeal

On appeal, the mother argued that the trial court abused its discretion in modifying the custody arrangement and that the evidence did not support the determination that joint custody was no longer workable. The mother also argued that the court focused too much on the conflict between the two parents and did not adequately consider the best interests of the child in the determination of joint custody.

The Indiana Court of Appeals found that the mother’s arguments were without merit and affirmed the ruling of the trial court. In doing so, the appeals court emphasized that the determination of custody and modifications is committed to the discretion of the trial court, which is in the best position to weigh the evidence.

In this case, the court found that joint custody is not possible when there is no meaningful ability to communicate and cooperate between the parents, and that the facts supported the determination of the trial court that the mother’s conduct was detrimental to the children. 

Key takeaways

This case enforces an important concept of Indiana custody law: joint custody is only possible if both parents cooperate. As seen in this case, if hostility, interference, and the inability to communicate make joint custody impossible, then the court can modify the custody arrangement.

This case is important for parents who are going through a contested custody case. Even if joint custody is granted, parents who are having problems might be characterized as not acting in the best interests of their child. Indiana courts will always do what’s best for the child, regardless of whether joint custody is possible.

Talk to a Danville, IN, Child Custody Attorney Today

Chris Arrington represents the interests of Indiana residents who need to create or modify a parenting agreement. Call our office today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your next steps right away.