For the Sake of the Children: Court Consideration of Religion in Child Custody Cases

Date
1998
Language
American English
Embargo Lift Date
Department
Committee Members
Degree
Degree Year
Department
Grantor
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Found At
Abstract

Concerned that many courts routinely examine parents' religious beliefs and practices in child custody cases-despite First Amendment protections- Jennifer Drobac reviews pertinent federal constitutional law and recently published state custody cases. She finds that nearly sixty percent of the cases employ standards that violate the Establishment, Free Exercise, Supremacy, and Equal Protection Clauses. To protect religious freedoms while preserving the best interests of children, Drobac proposes the application of a procedure she terms "NOAH, " the New Osier Actual Harm test, under which courts could not consider religion during the initial custody determination. Only later, in a bifurcated proceeding, could the court modify its original determination using the least restrictive means available, if it first found that a parent's religious beliefs or practices actually had harmed or would harm a child. Drobac concludes that NOAH would minimize constitutional violations, prevent religious bias from corrupting custody determinations, and serve the best interests of children by ensuring that the most qualified caregiver receives custody, regardless of religion.

Description
item.page.description.tableofcontents
item.page.relation.haspart
Cite As
50 Stanford Law Review 1609
ISSN
Publisher
Series/Report
Sponsorship
Major
Extent
Identifier
Relation
Journal
Source
Alternative Title
Type
Article
Number
Volume
Conference Dates
Conference Host
Conference Location
Conference Name
Conference Panel
Conference Secretariat Location
Version
Full Text Available at
This item is under embargo {{howLong}}