One year ago, I wrote a series of articles for Wisconsin Opinions that discussed the massive revisions in custody and placement laws enacted by the Legislature as part of the state budget bill. In those articles, I discussed how the genesis of the legislation was a desire by gender-based advocacy groups to mandate equal placement of children in virtually all circumstances. The final legislation significantly watered down this initial intent and certainly eliminated all mandatory equal placement provisions. If the courts treat this legislation as a move towards gender equity, it is examining the rights of the parties, not the child. If the courts treat this legislation as continuing Wisconsin's historical focus on the best interests of the child, without regard to the gender of the parents, then the many hours of hard work put in by all groups who arrived at this compromise will have been well spent.
Anecdotal evidence indicates the answer is somewhere in between the two extremes.
Certainly, the law has been a source for some confusion. In May, I addressed the Wisconsin Family Court Commissioner Association on this very issue. Several questions and comments made it evident that certain family court commissioners felt that the law was an impetus toward splitting placement equally in more cases, if not in every case. On the other hand, anecdotal evidence from lawyers indicates that this belief is not universal. Indeed, one of the factors added to sec.