'THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD IS MEETING HIS/HER PHYSICAL, PSYCHOLOGICAL, MEDICAL, PRIMARY EDUCATION AND SPIRITUAL NEEDS.. PROVIDING EMOTIONAL STABILITY, PROTECTING HIS/HER LEGAL RIGHTS AS WELL AS ASSURING SAFE HOUSING, FOOD,AND CLOTHING TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY. SO THAT THE CHILD WILL ACHIEVE TO THE BEST OF THEIRS."
IT IS NOT THE INTEREST IN THE CHILD, BUT OF THE CHILD SYLLABUS BY THE U.S.SUPRME COURT
(a) The love, affection, and other emotional ties existing between the parties involved and the child.
(b) The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to give the child love, affection, and guidance and continuation of the educating and raising of the child in its religion or creed, if any.
(c) The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to provide the child with food, clothing, medical care or other remedial care recognized and permitted under the laws of this State in place of medical care, and other material needs.
(d) The length of time the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment, and the desirability of maintaining continuity.
(e) The permanence as a family unit, of the existing or proposed custodial home or homes.
(f) The moral fitness of the parties involved.
(g) The mental and physical health of the parties involved.
(h) The home, school, and community record of the child.
(i) The reasonable preference of the child, if the court deems the child to be of sufficient age to express preference.
(j) The willingness and ability of each of the parents to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing parent-child relationship between the child and the other parent.
(k) Domestic violence, regardless of whether the violence was directed against, or witnessed by the child.
Workman, C.J., concurring:
In the difficult balance which must be fashioned between the rights of the parent
and the welfare of the child, we have consistently emphasized that the paramount
and controlling factor must be the child's welfare. "[A]ll parental rights in child
custody matters," we have stressed, "ARE SUBORDINATE TO THE INTEREST OF THE INNOCENT CHILD." David M., 182 W. Va. [57,] at 60, 385 S.E.2d [912,]at 916 [(1989)].
No. 24754 -- Bobbie J. Spear v. Mark C. Spear
Workman, J., concurring:
Return to Main Page