Summary
The Alaska Supreme Court reviewed a superior court order modifying custody of three children, awarding the father sole legal and physical custody and limiting the mother to supervised visitation. The court held that the mother’s continued interference with the children’s therapy constituted a substantial change in circumstances and that the custody modification and visitation restrictions served the children’s best interests. The court affirmed the superior court’s order.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the superior court abused its discretion by finding that the mother's continued interference with the children's therapy constituted a substantial change in circumstances justifying custody modification.
- Whether the superior court abused its discretion in determining that the children's best interests required awarding the father sole legal and physical custody.
- Whether the superior court abused its discretion by limiting the mother's visitation to supervised contact pending the children's engagement in therapy.
Holdings
- A parent's continuous, repetitious, or egregious interference with court-ordered therapeutic services may constitute a substantial change in circumstances justifying custody modification. The superior court did not abuse its discretion in finding that Georgette's continued resistance to the children's therapy constituted such a change.
- The superior court did not abuse its discretion by determining that the children's best interests required awarding Scott sole legal and physical custody, because the children's special need for psychotherapy predominated and Georgette was not then capable of supporting that need.
- The superior court did not abuse its discretion by temporarily requiring supervised visitation when it adequately explained how unsupervised contact could undermine the children's therapeutic needs and specified a path toward restoring unsupervised visitation.
Key quotations
“We affirm the superior court’s conclusion that Georgette’s continued resistance to the children’s therapy constituted a change in circumstances that justified a modification of custody.” (at 10)
“We AFFIRM the superior court’s order modifying custody.” (at 15)
Factual background
Georgette S.B. and Scott B. divorced in 2015 and have three children. Their original custody order provided joint legal and physical custody, gave Scott final authority over educational and therapeutic needs, and required both parents to cooperate with the children's therapy. The superior court found that Georgette repeatedly interfered with or failed to support the children's therapy, causing counseling providers to terminate services or deem therapy counterproductive. The court awarded Scott sole legal and physical custody and temporarily limited Georgette to supervised visitation so the children could engage fully in therapy.
Procedural history
The parties divorced after marrying in 2002 and initially received joint legal and physical custody, with the father having final decision-making authority concerning the children's educational and therapeutic needs. After repeated disputes concerning the mother's support for the children's therapy, the father sought modification. Following a three-day trial, the superior court found a substantial change in circumstances and awarded the father sole legal and physical custody while temporarily limiting the mother to supervised visitation. The Alaska Supreme Court affirmed.