BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD TO HAVE A LOVING GRANDPARENT INVOLVED IN THE CHILD'S LIFE, OTHERWISE, THE CHILD WOULD BE DEPRIVED OF THE EMOTIONAL BENEFITS PROVIDED BY THIS FAMILIAL RELATIONSHIP.
FACTORS UNDER 23 PA.C.S.A. SECTION 5328
(l) WHICH PARTY IS MORE LIKELY TO ENCOURAGE AND PERMIT FREQUENT AND CONTINUING CONTACT BETWEEN THE CHILD AND ANOTHER PARTY.
GRANDFATHER HAS VERBALIZED AND DEMONSTRATED THAT THE CUSTODY TIME HE IS REQUESTING WITH THE CHILD SHOULD NOT TAKE AWAY FROM MOTHER'S TIME WITH THE CHILD OR SHOULD 00 SO AT A MINIMUM. ON THE OTHER HAND, MOTHER HAS OPPOSED CUSTODY TIME FOR GRANDFATHER AND IS LIKELY TO CONTINUE TO DO SO IN THE FUTURE.
(2) THE PRESENT AND PAST ABUSE COMMITTED BY A PARTY OR MEMBER OF THE PARTY'S HOUSEHOLD, AND WHETHER THERE IS A CONTINUED RISK OF HARMTO THE CHILD OR AN ABUSED PARTY AND WHICH PARTY CAN BETTER PROVIDE ADEQUATE PHYSICAL SAFEGUARDS AND SUPERVISION OF THE CHILD.
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OR ALLEGATION OF ABUSE. OR622 I\ REV 9/05 JN482073 CASE ID. OC1701579 ORDER DATE: 4TH FEBRUARY, 2019
(2,1) THE INFORMATION SET FORTH IN SECTION 5329.l(A) (RELATING TO CONSIDERATION OF CHILD ABUSE AND INVOLVEMENT WITH PROTECTIVE SERVICES).
THERE HAS BEEN NO INVOLVEMENT OF CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES.
(3) THE PARENTAL DUTIES PERFORMED BY EACH PARTY ON BEHALF OF THE CHILD.
THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT MOTHER IS THE SOLE P�.RENT OF THE CHILD AND HAS SINGULARLY PERFORMED THE PARENTAL DUTIES PROVIDED TO THIS CHILD. GRANDFATHER PROVIDED THE NECESSARY CHILDCARE WHEN NEEDED BY MOTHER ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS PRIOR TO JULY 4, 2017.
(4) THE NEED FOR STABILITY AND CONTINUITY IN THE CHILD'S EDUCATION, FAMILY LIFE AND COMMUNITY LIFE.
NOTHING ABOUT THE PARTIAL CUSTODY SCHEDULE FOR GRANDFATHER INTERFERES WITH THE CHILD1S STABILITY OR CONTINUITY WITH EDUCATION OR COMMUNITY LIFE SINCE THE CHILD IS ONLY TWO YEARS OLD AND HIS EDUCATION/COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IS ATTENDANCE AT CHILDCARE WHILE MOTHER IS AT WORK.
(5) THE AVAILABILITY OF EXTENDED FAMILY.
PATERNAL GRANDFATHER IS ONE OF ONLY A VERY FEW EXTENDED FAMILY MEMBERS.
(6) THE CHILD1S SIBLING RELATIONSHIPS.
THIS FACTOR DOES NOT APPLY AS THERE ARE NO SIBLINGS.
(7) THE WELL-REASONED PREFERENCE OF THE CHILD, BASED ON THE CHILD'S MATURITY AND JUDGMENT.
THIS FACTOR DOES NOT APPLY SINCE THE CHILD IS ONLY TWO YEARS OLD.
(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.
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT EITHER PARTY HAS ATTEMPTED TO INFLUENCE THE CHILD AGAINST THE OTHER PARTY.
(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.
NO CHALLENGE HAS BEEN RAISED TO MOTHER'S ABILITY TO MAINTAIN A LOVING, STABLE, CONSISTENT AND NURTURING RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CHILD. GRANDFATHER SEEKS ONLY TO ADD TO A LOVING, NURTURING ENVIRONMENT FOR THE CHILD AS A GRANDPARENT AND NOT A SUBSTITUTE PARENT. OR622 \\ REV 9/05 Page 5 of 6 JN482073 CASE ID.