Opinion ID: 1878473
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Future Religious Example

Text: ¶ 32. Adam challenges statements made in the Chancellor's Memorandum Opinion about future religious example. The Chancellor commented: The Court slightly favors Dawn when considering Darby's future religious example. Although Adam does at times pray with Darby and has attended a non-denominational `house of prayer', Dawn seems much more committed and consistent in her Catholic upbringing. Adam complains that there is no evidence to support the conclusion of Dawn being committed to Catholicism. Adam relies on part of the record where it is shown that Dawn never took Darby to church while she lived in Mississippi and that Dawn never attended church while in Mississippi. Adam also refers to Dawn's committing adultery while being married as against the beliefs of Catholicism. ¶ 33. Dawn believes that the Chancellor's determination regarding future religious example was properly made in her favor. Dawn refers to Adam's testimony where he stated that he was a Roman Catholic but did not attend church. Adam also stated that he did not remember the last time he was inside a church and that he had never taken Darby. Adam did state that he and Darby had prayed together in a non-denominational house of prayer once or twice. Adam also testified that he thought religion was important and that if he received custody he would send her to a private Catholic school. ¶ 34. Future religious example is not a factor listed in Albright, although it could theoretically fall within other factors relevant to the parent-child relationship or under moral fitness of the parents as found in Albright. Albright, 437 So.2d at 1005. This Court, in McLemore v. McLemore, 762 So.2d 316, 320 (Miss. 2000), stated [b]oth the mother and father should be vitally interested in seeing that their children get regular and systematic spiritual training. Whether it be by attending Sunday School each Sunday or Church or both is for the parents alone to decide. The Chancellor did not abuse her discretion when considering future religious example in the custody determination of Darby.