Gross McGinley LLP

gross-headerimg-3
Blog Disclaimer

Blog Disclaimer

This Blog is intended for educational and informational purposes and intended to only provide you with a general understanding of the law, not to provide any legal advice, including on the subject of the Blog. Laws that may pertain to this Blog will vary by jurisdiction, and the information on this blog may not apply to you. The content within this Blog is not intended, and should not be construed, in any way to be legal advice and thus you should not rely on any information provided in the Blog as legal advice. You should consult with appropriate legal counsel concerning any issues for which legal advice may be needed. Your review or use of the Blog and the content therein is not intended to create, and does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Please contact us if you have any questions about a Blog or would like more information, but, by contacting us, no attorney-client relationship is formed between you and Gross McGinley, LLP, including the Blog author. Do not send any confidential information to Gross McGinley, LLP or the authors of the Blog without first speaking to one of our lawyers and receiving our permission to provide confidential information. Unsolicited confidential information sent to us may not be subject to an attorney-client privilege and may not be treated as confidential. This Blog is not published for advertising or solicitation purposes. Gross McGinley, LLP disclaims all liability to all persons for any claim, loss, liability or any damages that may arise in connection with the Blog and any content or information contained in the Blog. Even though we strive to create our Blog content based on our current understanding of the law, we cannot and do not guarantee that the content and information in the Blog is current, accurate, or complete. Gross McGinley, LLP owns the copyright in the Blog, which is protected by federal and state laws, including copyright laws. The Blog cannot be altered or modified in any way. A copy of the Blog may be used and printed only for personal, educational, informational and noncommercial purposes. The Blog cannot be used for any other purpose without the express permission of Gross McGinley, LLP.

Parent Conflict in Child Custody Cases

Written by: Kellie L. Rahl-Heffner on August 27, 2018 | Category: Blog | Tags: ,

I was scrolling through my social media feed when I saw an article titled “Angelina Jolie required to give Brad Pitt more access to their kids”, detailing the latest celebrity child custody battle.

While Jolie was given primary custody of the children, she and Pitt have a shared arrangement during the summer. While I do not know what standard practice is for California Courts, in Pennsylvania it is common for the non-custodial parent to have additional time in the summer months when the children are not in school.

Apparently, Jolie has been making claims that the children do not want to go with their father and, based on what the Judge said in his most recent Order, she may have been actively fanning those flames. The Court directed that Jolie tell the children, “The Court has determined that not having a relationship with their father is harmful to them” and that “they are safe with their father.”

Upon reading that, I was immediately struck by the similarity to Pennsylvania Custody Law. All family law practitioners have explained to their clients, more times than they can count, that when in a battle for custody you cannot win by pitting the children against the other parent. In fact, that is a surefire way to lose.

In 2011, the Pennsylvania legislature moved away from the basic best interest of the children standard, and put into place 16 specific factors the Court must consider when making a child custody determination. A few of those factors including the following:

  • Which party is more likely to encourage and permit frequent and continuing contact with the other parent?
  • Are there attempts of parent to turn the child against the other parent?
  • What is the level of conflict between the parties and willingness of the parties to cooperate with each other?

As you can, see the legislature is making a point to focus on the ability of the parents to work together when raising a child. If your child custody case makes it to a trial before a Judge, that Judge will look at all 16 factors and see which parent “wins” each one. If you are the parent that is consistently refusing to let the other parent have contact with the children, or are denigrating the other parent in front of the children, the Judge will likely find those factors in favor of the other parent.

In fact, if a parent continues to behave in the above manner, that parent can lose periods of custodial time. It appears that the Judge hearing the Jolie-Pitt matter told Jolie just that. He is reported to have said that if this behavior continues, it may result in a reduction of time for Jolie and the Court could order that Pitt exercise primary physical custody.

It is important to remember that the children in a divorce never chose that. Accordingly, sometimes the Court must step in to make sure that that the parents who did choose the divorce do not poison the children against either parent.


Attorney Kellie Rahl-Heffner provides counseling to families facing domestic issues including separation, divorce, child custody, and child support.

Next Previous
View All Attorneys
View All Practice Areas
View Blog