Court Opinion

ID: 9652120
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 17:18:19.260296+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:02:55.068008
License: Public Domain

KUHN, J.,
dissenting.
lilt is undisputed that August has “special needs.” At argument, the parties conceded that neither one could advise the court definitively what August’s “special needs” are. For the trial court to have made a determination of the best interest of the child in this vacuum was impossible. Neither parent established the “special needs” of the child, and neither has shown that he or she can satisfy those needs. I would remand to have the trial court determine August’s special needs and which parent could best satisfy them. To do otherwise is to ignore the paramount question in this litigation — i.e., what is in the best interest of August — which should first be addressed by the parents and then the court.
Moreover, given August’s history of physical change in domicile at the age of three, I cannot envision how changing custody from the mother with whom he has lived the majority of his five years in the United States to every other weekend, major holidays, and one month during the summer can be in his best interest.
Accordingly, I dissent.