Opinion ID: 2626169
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The District Court's Consideration of Father's Relationships with His Other Children and Grandchildren

Text: [¶ 28] Mother refers to a recent opinion where a district court's consideration of a parent's past mistakes made during a child's five and a half year lifetime in determining the best interests of the child in a custody modification proceeding was upheld on appeal. JT v. KD, 2008 WY 104, ¶ 19, 192 P.3d 969, 973 (Wyo.2008). Relying upon this precedent, Mother argues that the district court in this case should have taken more fully into account the evidence in the record indicating that Father has been unable to maintain good relationships with his older children or his grandchildren to more accurately assess the best interests of NEZ and CJMZ. Mother reasons that had the trial court properly considered this evidence, it could not have concluded that Father possesses the parenting skills qualifying him as a fit and competent parent for NEZ and CJMZ, with the ability to strengthen the parent-child relationship. In this regard, Mother points to the evidence of Father's past aggressiveness with his daughter from a prior relationship and his overall inability to deal with teenage children as was historically the case with his other children. [¶ 29] Father initially responds that Mother's contentions are factually unsupported. Father refers to the conflicting evidence in the record concerning the reasons for the problems in the relationships he has had with his older children. Father's eldest daughter, now well into her 30's, testified that she has a really good relationship with her father and that they love each other. The daughter attributed much of the breakdown in the relationships that Father may have had with her and her siblings to Father's former spouse who caused them to move out of Father's home when they were teenagers. Father distinguishes the egregious nature of the parent's past mistakes in JT as being much different than any past mistakes that Mother claims Father made in his relationships with his older children or grandchildren. Father cautions that a parent's entire life, especially events occurring before the birth of the children sub judice, should not be open to scrutiny by a trial court. He suggests that a better approach would be to limit an inquiry into past mistakes to the lifetimes of children who are the focus of the trial court's determinations as to their best interests. [¶ 30] The district court is statutorily required to determine the best interests of the children in fashioning a custody and visitation order. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201(a). To comply with this mandate, the trial court shall consider, but is not limited to, the ten factors enumerated in the statute. Id. Among the factors required to be considered are, [a]ny other factors the court deems necessary and relevant. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-201(a)(x). Hence, the only limitation upon what a district court may consider in determining the best interests of a child is such other factors the court deems necessary and relevant. Id. See Selvey v. Selvey, 2004 WY 166, ¶ 18, 102 P.3d 210, 215 (Wyo. 2004). [¶ 31] Although the district court did not make any specific findings concerning Father's relationships with his other children and grandchildren in this case, the record shows that the trial court accepted the testimony on this issue presented by both parties. Further, the district court's findings, in toto, lead to the conclusion that this evidence was obviously considered and given appropriate weight. The district court did not commit any procedural error and it did not abuse its discretion as to the consideration and weight given to Father's relationships with his older children and grandchildren.