ILNews

Ringlespaugh: Custody issues for parents of special-needs children

January 13, 2016
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Focus
ringlespaugh-cassie-mug Ringlespaugh

Each year, millions of married couples with children file for divorce. While divorce can be trying on everyone involved, there are particular challenges for parents who have children with disabilities. Overall, most researchers have found that parents of children with disabilities are much likelier to divorce. A child with a disability has multiple needs that often require parents to learn about and deal with multiple third-party providers, including but not limited to schools, specialists, doctors and therapists. These parents are often faced with significant expenses that parents of typical children never have to consider. Therefore, when deciding child custody in a situation involving a child with special needs, it is important for the courts, parents and attorneys to consider how these situations differ from families that do not have children with disabilities. 

Child custody issues for parents of special-needs children require careful consideration. Indiana law bestows different legal rights to parents depending on whether they have physical or legal custody of their child.

In Indiana, the parent with legal custody has the authority to make decisions in three main categories: major medical decisions, educational decisions and decisions regarding the child’s religion. Parents can have joint legal custody, or one parent can have sole legal custody. Legal custody becomes even more significant when a child has a disability, as there are a multitude of medical and educational decisions that will need to be made by the child’s legal custodian, sometimes on short notice.

When determining legal custody for a child with special needs, it is important to consider the frequency in the selection of doctors, specialists or evaluators as well as the frequency of required medical care and expenses – and each parent’s availability to facilitate the same. Additional considerations for the legal custodian include the potential placement of the child into specialized programs or the need for special education services in the child’s school.

The legal custodian also has the authority to decide a child’s school district. However, this becomes more complex in cases where parents share legal custody. If the parents live in different school districts, Indiana law allows parents to choose which school district the child will attend by filing an election (see Indiana Code 20-26-11). This is important for parents of children who qualify for special education because a child’s school of legal settlement has certain responsibilities and obligations to a child with special needs under state and federal law. Schools that receive federal funding (all public schools and some charter schools) are required to provide a free and appropriate public education and are responsible for identifying a child who may have special education needs, evaluating that child, and providing research-based accommodations to support the child to succeed academically.

Joint legal custody can pose problems for parents of special-needs children when disputes arise. Courts are often used to settle disputes. However, the number of decisions to be made and the speed of response that is often necessary for children with disabilities can make this remedy ineffective in meeting the best interest of the child. This reinforces the importance of parents, lawyers and judges to consider more than just the typical factors in deciding legal custody of special-needs children.

Physical custody also can pose challenges for parents of children with special needs. When there is a dispute of which parent should have physical custody of a child, Indiana utilizes the “best interest of the child standard” to decide which parent should have primary physical custody. However, these factors tend to be generalized to accommodate the “typical” child. For example, the number of transitions required for an equal parenting time order can pose a large issue for children whose disabilities substantially affect the child’s ability to cope with frequent transition and changes in schedules. These types of plans may be impractical or detrimental for a child with a disability. As a former teacher, I can personally attest to the turmoil that can result when a child with autism is subject to the even the smallest changes in schedule. For children with autism, rigidity and predictability should be favored over equal parenting time and frequent transitions.

There are several other factors that should be considered in deciding physical custody of a child with special needs. While it is impossible to list them all, other factors to consider that may be overlooked are potential issues with transition of specialized equipment for a child with disabilities; transportation factors for the child considering each parent’s availability and work schedule; the parent or caregiver’s training in medical equipment or specialized therapies for the child; the parents’ familiarity with third-party providers; or even the other individuals residing with the parents in their homes. In custody matters, it is important to discuss the unique needs for children with disabilities and ensure each parent is fully equipped to care for that child. Parents and legal representatives need to consider how the child will be affected when determining physical custody, including how that child’s disability may exacerbate different stresses resulting from different parenting time schedules.

Legal and physical custody issues involving special-needs children can best be resolved when the divorcing parties work together. If parents cannot agree and the court needs to make the decision, it’s important for parents and lawyers to work together to educate the court on the child’s unique needs. This may mean the two parties work together on the submission into evidence of Individualized Education Programs or Behavioral Intervention Plans, school records, and progress reports. Regardless of the dispute and the complexities in custody issues of special-needs children, the importance of meeting the best interests of the child is always the priority in family law matters.•

Cassie Ringlespaugh is a family law attorney at Cohen & Malad LLP. She has a special interest in child issues including education law. She can be reached via email at CRinglespaugh@cohenandmalad.com. The opinions expressed are those of the author.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Disagreement if there is special needs
    As a parent of a special needs child, I have gotten more than my fair share of special needs divorce cases. The two issues that I did not see raised in this article are what to do when one parent agrees the child is special needs and the other does not. This usually comes up in the area of mental/emotional problems and not intellectual. The other is when one parent wants to use conventional approaches and the other wants to use non traditional methods, ranging from pro-biotic diets to homeopathy to faith healing. I would like to see peoples take on these issues.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Call it unauthorized law if you must, a regulatory wrong, but it was fraud and theft well beyond that, a seeming crime! "In three specific cases, the hearing officer found that Westerfield did little to no work for her clients but only issued a partial refund or no refund at all." That is theft by deception, folks. "In its decision to suspend Westerfield, the Supreme Court noted that she already had a long disciplinary history dating back to 1996 and had previously been suspended in 2004 and indefinitely suspended in 2005. She was reinstated in 2009 after finally giving the commission a response to the grievance for which she was suspended in 2004." WOW -- was the Indiana Supreme Court complicit in her fraud? Talk about being on notice of a real bad actor .... "Further, the justices noted that during her testimony, Westerfield was “disingenuous and evasive” about her relationship with Tope and attempted to distance herself from him. They also wrote that other aggravating factors existed in Westerfield’s case, such as her lack of remorse." WOW, and yet she only got 18 months on the bench, and if she shows up and cries for them in a year and a half, and pays money to JLAP for group therapy ... back in to ride roughshod over hapless clients (or are they "marks") once again! Aint Hoosier lawyering a great money making adventure!!! Just live for the bucks, even if filthy lucre, and come out a-ok. ME on the other hand??? Lifetime banishment for blowing the whistle on unconstitutional governance. Yes, had I ripped off clients or had ANY disciplinary history for doing that I would have fared better, most likely, as that it would have revealed me motivated by Mammon and not Faith. Check it out if you doubt my reading of this, compare and contrast the above 18 months with my lifetime banishment from court, see appendix for Bar Examiners report which the ISC adopted without substantive review: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS

  2. Wow, over a quarter million dollars? That is a a lot of commissary money! Over what time frame? Years I would guess. Anyone ever try to blow the whistle? Probably not, since most Hoosiers who take notice of such things realize that Hoosier whistleblowers are almost always pilloried. If someone did blow the whistle, they were likely fired. The persecution of whistleblowers is a sure sign of far too much government corruption. Details of my own personal experience at the top of Hoosier governance available upon request ... maybe a "fake news" media outlet will have the courage to tell the stories of Hoosier whistleblowers that the "real" Hoosier media (cough) will not deign to touch. (They are part of the problem.)

  3. So if I am reading it right, only if and when African American college students agree to receive checks labeling them as "Negroes" do they receive aid from the UNCF or the Quaker's Educational Fund? In other words, to borrow from the Indiana Appellate Court, "the [nonprofit] supposed to be [their] advocate, refers to [students] in a racially offensive manner. While there is no evidence that [the nonprofits] intended harm to [African American students], the harm was nonetheless inflicted. [Black students are] presented to [academia and future employers] in a racially offensive manner. For these reasons, [such] performance [is] deficient and also prejudice[ial]." Maybe even DEPLORABLE???

  4. I'm the poor soul who spent over 10 years in prison with many many other prisoners trying to kill me for being charged with a sex offense THAT I DID NOT COMMIT i was in jail for a battery charge for helping a friend leave a boyfriend who beat her I've been saying for over 28 years that i did not and would never hurt a child like that mine or anybody's child but NOBODY wants to believe that i might not be guilty of this horrible crime or think that when i say that ALL the paperwork concerning my conviction has strangely DISAPPEARED or even when the long beach judge re-sentenced me over 14 months on a already filed plea bargain out of another districts court then had it filed under a fake name so i could not find while trying to fight my conviction on appeal in a nut shell people are ALWAYS quick to believe the worst about some one well I DID NOT HURT ANY CHILD EVER IN MY LIFE AND HAVE SAID THIS FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS please if anybody can me get some kind of justice it would be greatly appreciated respectfully written wrongly accused Brian Valenti

  5. A high ranking Indiana supreme Court operative caught red handed leading a group using the uber offensive N word! She must denounce or be denounced! (Or not since she is an insider ... rules do not apply to them). Evidence here: http://m.indianacompanies.us/friends-educational-fund-for-negroes.364110.company.v2#top_info

ADVERTISEMENT