At the end of 2011, the custody laws in Pennsylvania were changed. The courts still look at the best interest of the child above all. Interestingly, however, Section 5328 of the new legislation sets forth 15 factors that a court must consider when awarding custody.
We practice in Western PA. Out in Eastern PA, the law firm of Karen Ann Ulmer, PC (“Eastern PA”) was among the first to blog about this and set forth the 15 factors as follows:
(1) Which party is more likely to encourage and permit frequent and continuing contact between the child and another party.
(2) The present and past abuse committed by a party or member of the party’s household, whether there is a continued risk of harm to the child or an abused party and which party can better provide adequate physical safeguards and supervision of the child.
(3) The parental duties performed by each party on behalf of the child.
(4) The need for stability and continuity in the child’s education, family life and community life.
(5) The availability of extended family.
(6) The child’s sibling relationships.
(7) The well-reasoned preference of the child, based on the child’s maturity and judgment.
(8) The attempts of a parent to turn the child against the other parent, except in cases of domestic violence where reasonable safety measures are necessary to protect the child from harm.
(9) Which party is more likely to maintain a loving, stable, consistent and nurturing relationship with the child adequate for the child’s emotional needs.
(10) Which party is more likely to attend to the daily physical, emotional, developmental, educational and special needs of the child.
(11) The proximity of the residences of the parties.
(12) Each party’s availability to care for the child or ability to make appropriate child-care arrangements.
(13) The level of conflict between the parties and the willingness and ability of the parties to cooperate with one another. A party’s effort to protect a child from abuse by another party is not evidence of unwillingness or inability to cooperate with that party.
(14) The history of drug or alcohol abuse of a party or member of a party’s household.
(15) The mental and physical condition of a party or member of a party’s household.
Section 5323 provides that the court must detail the reasons for its decision either on the record in open court or in a written opinion. Therefore, the court must go through each factor that it considered and explain why it decided as it did. So far, the Superior Court has been strict in upholding this requirement. In J.R.M. v. J.E.A., the court awarded primary custody to the mother and father appealed on the basis that the trial court did not consider the 16 factors listed in Section 5328. 2011 Pa Super 263 (2011). The Superior Court granted the appeal, finding that the trial court did not properly consider the factors listed in the statute. Accordingly, all parties in a custody action should be prepared to argue on all of the relevant factors and also ensure that the court addresses all relevant factors in their decision.
Eastern PA aptly noted:
“Section 5323 provides that the court must detail the reasons for its decision either on the record in open court or in a written opinion. Therefore, the court must go through each factor that it considered and explain why it decided as it did. So far, the Superior Court has been strict in upholding this requirement.”
Great post, Eastern PA!
With questions, call us any time.
PFA Defense Attorneys 
Did the courts not consider the 15 factors above before 2012.?
Yes and no. Prior to the new Amendments, the court needed to consider the “best interst of the child,” which implicitly included various factors. However, the Amendments require that a judge expressly take into account the 15 factors and note the same in his or her opinion, which makes for a more rigid (and appealable) framework for analysis.
I see, thank you for the clarification. Hopefully amendments will make the process and the judges decision a little more transparent.
When a parent is deamed to be serious mentally ill such as narsastic, Sociopath, Anti-social bipolar etc. The child needs to be taken away. No child should have to live in fear. Who is more important the child or the crazy parent. Judges need to let children testify in court and listen. The mental anguish children go through is unjust. Children should have rights and be heard in court. No child should have to go through Court Ordered abuse and judges should be held responsible for their actions.