The result in Pugh seems a little outdated and excessively harsh, which may have been influenced in part by the specificity of the chosen remedy (habeas corpus); However, Pugh cannot be limited to its unique facts alone if the Court appears to have been based on the fundamental historical and legal standards for a fundamentally modified custody measure — if the performance and well-being of the child concerned would be materially encouraged. (61) Some states (not West Virginia) across the country have attempted to address the parent dilemma and relocation by law. (25) If no application of the law is in force, is the common law the only way to resolve the fundamental question: the continuing jurisdiction (26) of the courts after the first finding of custody, as well as the state`s obligatory interest in the best interests of the child, is it effective to violate the right of the head guard to travel? The moving parent has a duty to show that you have good faith, legitimate purpose and appropriate location. At least one court has advanced the idea that a child`s rights are “as constitutionally worthy” as those of his or her parents. (83) In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court has fully ruled that “minors” and adults are protected by the Constitution and enjoy constitutional rights. (84) However, despite an intelligent articulation and constitutional articulation, the geographical preference of an infant may be granted slightly less than weight control in relocation conflicts (85), particularly where a parent has exerted demonstrable or subtle influences. (86) The specific reasons why you are moving to this location; The file models suggest that the following factors or combinations are assigned only based on the interest of the mother`s manager: Whoops. NAC programs can be found just about anywhere in the country. There`s probably one in the county where you live now. The family court will probably say that moving to California is not a reasonable choice. You can achieve the same goal without disrupting the parents` plan by going to an NAC training program near you. Recalling the child`s annual east-west postponement, the adverse effects of different environments and the absence of a “reassured home” (58), the court stated at the withdrawal of the first instance that West Virginia judges have certain ways of granting custody of the parents during a divorce.
One option is to give both parents shared custody if they live with them in a timely manner – this is only an option if both parents show that they are able to provide for the child`s physical, mental and emotional needs. Another option is to grant one parent exclusive custody rights and the other parental access. This visiting plan is also defined by the judge and describes when visits are allowed on weekends, holidays and school holidays. The counterpoint is that West Virginia, in part in reference to legislative intent (77), also represents the right of the non-custodian parent to have a close relationship with his or her child. A clearer, clearer and more complete statement by the Supreme Court of Appeal cannot be imagined than that of White v. Williamson (79) on non-responsible visit: The family court can decide how to ensure that the children`s time with the other parent will not be affected.