Mom Loses Custody After Failing to Cooperate in Parenting
Tennessee child custody modification case summary.
The child in this Davidson County, Tennessee, was born of a short-term relationship, and after the child was born, the parents entered into a parenting agreement. The mother was named the primary residential parent, with the father having 180 days per year of parenting time. Even though the agreement was not scrupulously followed, both parents spent substantially equal time with the child.
In 2014, the father was back in court alleging a material change of circumstances. He alleged that the mother’s mental health was unstable, that she had problems with her physical health, and that the condition of the home was poor. He also alleged that the mother’s plan to homeschool the child was not in the child’s best interest. He asked to be named primary residential parent. He also asked for an injunction to prohibit the mother from homeschooling.
In 2014, a magistrate issued an order enjoining the mother from homeschooling, and gave the father permission to apply to a private school. After they were unable to agree, the magistrate ordered the child to attend the public school where the mother’s home was zoned.
In 2015, the father filed a new petition to change the parenting plan. He asked to be named primary residential parent with sole decision-making authority for education.
Trial was held before Judge Sheila Calloway, who appointed a guardian ad litem. An evaluation was done of the mother’s home, which found it to be inappropriate for raising a child.
After hearing numerous witnesses, Judge Calloway issued a ruling granting the father’s petition. The court imposed a number of restrictions on the mother’s visitation such as having initial supervised visitation with a certified moderator. Judge Calloway also ordered the mother not to reference the father on social media.
The mother, acting without an attorney, then appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals. The appeals court first noted that for custody to be modified, there must be a material change of circumstances. It then listed the factors to be considered, and carefully reviewed the lower court’s findings as to each one. The mother argued that the court had given too much weight to those factors that favored the father. But the appeals court noted that there was strong evidence of the mother’s failure to cooperate, and that the lower court had correctly given more weight to this factor. After reviewing all of the evidence, the appeals court agreed that the lower court had acted properly in modifying the custody arrangement.
The mother then argued that the restrictions on visitation were not proper. But after reviewing the evidence, the appeals court agreed that they were the least restrictive possible, and affirmed them.
The mother did fare a bit better when it came to the portion of the order limiting her communication on social media. The appeals court noted that this implicated her First Amendment right to free speech, and held that the restriction was too broad. Therefore, it modified this portion of the lower court’s order.
For these reasons, the appeals court affirmed the lower court’s judgment, as modified.
No. M2016-00032-COA-R3-JV (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 29, 2017).
To learn more, see Modifying Custody & Parenting Plans.
See also Tennessee Parenting Plans and Child Support Worksheets: Building a Constructive Future for Your Family featuring examples of parenting plans and child support worksheets from real cases available on Amazon.com.
