|
State of South Dakota
|
|
SEVENTY-SEVENTH
SESSION
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY, 2002 |
| 391H0028 |
HOUSE ENGROSSED
NO.
HB 1220
-
02/06/2002
|
|
Introduced by:
Representatives Murschel, Bartling, Brown (Jarvis), Davis, Derby, Hennies
(Thomas), Jensen, Juhnke, Kooistra, Madsen, and Slaughter and Senators
Everist and Daugaard
|
FOR AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to
allow certain third parties to intervene in a custody
dispute of a child.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:
Section 1. Upon motion, a court may allow a person other than a parent to intervene in an action involving child custody. In any matter involving child custody, the court may, in its discretion, appoint a guardian ad litem or legal counsel to represent the child. The court may award full or partial custody, care, education, and visitation rights of the child to a person other than a parent.
Section 2. In determining any issue regarding custody of a child, the court shall be guided by the best interests of the child. The court may consider any preference expressed by the child if the court finds the child is of sufficient age and intelligence to express a knowing and voluntary preference. In any dispute involving child custody, a presumption favoring a parent may be rebutted by showing serious detriment to the child as evidenced by one or more of the following extraordinary circumstances:
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:
Section 1. Upon motion, a court may allow a person other than a parent to intervene in an action involving child custody. In any matter involving child custody, the court may, in its discretion, appoint a guardian ad litem or legal counsel to represent the child. The court may award full or partial custody, care, education, and visitation rights of the child to a person other than a parent.
Section 2. In determining any issue regarding custody of a child, the court shall be guided by the best interests of the child. The court may consider any preference expressed by the child if the court finds the child is of sufficient age and intelligence to express a knowing and voluntary preference. In any dispute involving child custody, a presumption favoring a parent may be rebutted by showing serious detriment to the child as evidenced by one or more of the following extraordinary circumstances:
(1) The abandonment or persistent neglect of the child by the parent;
(2) The likelihood of serious physical or emotional harm to the child if placed in the
parent's custody;
(3) The extended, unjustifiable absence of parental custody;
(4) The abdication of parental responsibilities;
(5) The provision of the child's physical, emotional, and other needs by persons other than
the parent over a significant period of time;
(6) The existence of a bonded relationship between the child and the person other than
the parent sufficient to cause significant emotional harm to the child in the event of
a change in custody;
(7) The substantial enhancement of the child's well-being while under the care of the
person other than the parent;
(8) The extent of the parent's delay in seeking to reacquire custody of the child;
(9) The demonstrated quality of the parent's commitment to raising the child;
(10) The likely degree of stability and security in the child's future with the parent;
(11) The extent to which the child's right to an education would be impaired while in the
custody of the parent; or
(12) Any other circumstances that would substantially and adversely impact the welfare of
the child.
