Tag Archive for: custody

Health Insurance as part of Support

One frequent question in the context of divorce is what will happen to health insurance coverage in the context of a divorce. Generally, a spouse cannot drop the other spouse during the context of the divorce. Health insurance is often considered in the context of support and spouses are obligated to provide support for each other during the marriage. Once divorced, however, you cannot remain on your ex-spouse’s health insurance plan. If you are unable to obtain alternate health insurance on your own right away you can look into COBRA coverage.

The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) gives the employee providing the health insurance and their ex-spouse who has lost their health benefits the right to choose to continue health benefits for a limited period of time and under certain circumstances. A spouse who elects COBRA coverage following a divorce may be required to pay the entire premium for coverage, up to 102 percent of the cost to the plan. Additionally, COBRA coverage is only temporary and generally only lasts for 36 months. Only employers with 20 or more employees in the prior year who provide group health insurance are required to abide by COBRA and provide the opportunity for a temporary extension of health coverage.

If there are children between the parties, the children may remain under the health insurance coverage presently provided. There may be an adjustment to any child support award based on who is paying the premiums on the health insurance for the children. There is a 60 day window following the termination of coverage in which to notify the health insurance provider whether or not you are pursuing COBRA coverage.

Support

by

Military Deployment as Custody Factor?

The US House of Representatives just passed a bill that would prohibit family courts from considering military deployment as a factor when awarding custody. The bill was introduced by Representative Michael Turner, R-Ohio, and will now be headed to the US Senate for a vote. The rationale behind the bill is that individuals who are ordered into deployment by one branch of government should not be punished in the form of adverse custody decisions by another branch of government. Presently, family court judges can cite deployment as a factor in determining a custody order. The bill would only prohibit deployment as a factor if the individual being deployed cannot bring family members with them on their assignment. Further, the assignment must be between 60 days and 18 months in length.

There is already a law in place protecting military members in the context of divorce. Persons in the military service of the United States are specifically protected by the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Civil Relief Act of 1940 (SCRA), which, by making provision for the temporary suspension of legal proceedings and transactions relating to them, is designed to ensure that their civil rights are not prejudiced during their terms of service. The SCRA is not, however, a blanket moratorium on all divorce actions against servicepersons. Its protections only come into play when the defendant is prevented or hindered by his or her military service in defending the divorce action. An affidavit of non-military service is a commonplace requirement in a divorce action wherein the plaintiff must submit a signed affidavit indicating the defendant is not in military service in order to move the divorce forward. The defendant can waive the protections of the SCRA and proceed with a divorce while in military service if they so choose.

Military Divorce

by

Role of Gender in Custody

Many parents who are considering custody litigation still assume or inquire as to a gender preference in custody. It is true that moms used to be the preferred custodians for minor children over dads. During the early twentieth century the custody laws of nearly all the states endorsed this view as well. There was a shared misconception that moms would be the better parents based on their natural nurturing instincts. This was especially true of young children or children of “tender years.” In fact, a legal principle termed the “tender years doctrine” called for mothers to have custody of children until they were at least approaching their teenage years.

However, at this point, there are no remaining custody laws that include a presumption in favor of one parent over the other based solely on gender. The Supreme Court of the United States found that the tender years doctrine was a violation of the Fourteenth amendment of the Constitution, providing for equal protection for all, since it impermissibly discriminated against men based on their gender. The tender years doctrine was replaced in most states with an analysis based on the best interests of the child. Pennsylvania is among the states that uses a best interest analysis and the statute discussing the factors to be considered under a best interests analysis is 23 Pa. C.S. 5328. So whether you are a mom or dad, your opportunity to receive custody is the same. It is important to become familiar with the relevant factors in a custody decision and determine which factors weigh in your favor in order to present a winning argument for custody.

by