Search
Close this search box.

In an opinion that at once awarded homosexual parents equal custody rights and criticized a Dauphin County Common Pleas judge for potential gender bias, the state Superior Court overturned a 25-year-old precedent.

The previous precedent, the court wrote in a 7-1 opinion, set a presumption “based upon unsupported preconceptions and prejudices — including that the sexual orientation of a parent will have an adverse effect on the child.”

“Such preconceptions and prejudices have no proper place in child custody cases, where the decision should be based exclusively upon a determination of the best interests of the child.”

Experts say that the opinion issued last month, though not unexpected, represents the continuing evolution of child custody law in Pennsylvania.

The case decided by the Superior Court involved a married couple who adopted an infant daughter in 2004.

The woman, a lieutenant with the Pennsylvania State Police, filed for divorce in October 2006, after she revealed that she had been having an ongoing relationship with another woman. She and her husband, a sergeant in a Dauphin County police department, each filed for custody of their daughter.

As part of the court case, both parents agreed to allow a neutral social worker to perform a custody evaluation. The results showed that the girl would benefit from shared custody, in which the parents would alternate three days with the child, and two days without.

Dauphin County Senior Judge Joseph F. Kleinfelter put that plan in place for an 18-month transition period.

However, before that time expired, the judge awarded primary physical custody to the husband, allowing the mother to have the girl only on alternate weekends, some holidays and for six weeks in the summer.

He based his decision on a 1985 opinion, which found that the burden is placed on the parent involved in a gay relationship to prove that it will have no adverse effect on the child.

In that case, the Superior Court said that homosexual relationships were not the same as heterosexual relationships. The new ruling described the 1985 opinion, saying that the majority found as a ” ‘fallacy’ the notion that a homosexual relationship could ever be the equal of the traditional family as a suitable family arrangement, and indicated that it was ‘inconceivable’ that a child could be exposed to a homosexual relationship ‘and not suffer some emotional disturbance, perhaps severe.’ ”

In citing that 1985 decision, Judge Kleinfelter said the mother in his case never showed there would be no adverse effect.

Read the full Post-Gazette article here

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Continue to Browser

PoliticsPA

To install tap and choose
Add to Home Screen