What is Arizona Custody Public Policy?
A.R.S. § 25-103(A) requires judges to apply the custody provision in a way that promotes strong families and strong family values. A.R.S § 25-103(B) says that, absent evidence to the contrary, it is in the child’s best interest for both parents to participate in Legal Decision-MakingThis is the right to make decisions on behalf of the child when it comes to decisions involving the child’s health, education, religion, or personal care. It does not include the right to dictate the child’s parenting time schedule or place conditions on the other parent’s time.…Read more about Legal Decision-Making and for each parent to have substantial, frequent, meaningful, and continuing Parenting TimeThis is what it sounds like—this is when it’s the parent’s time with the child(ren). See A.R.S § 25-401(5). Prior to 2012, it was known as physical custody.Read more about Parenting Time with both parents. This policy is significant because best interests of the child is the standard Courts use to determine legal decision-making and parenting time. In Woyton v. Ward, the Arizona Court of AppealsThis is the Court that hears appeals and special actions from the decisions made by the superior court. A panel of three judges reviews each appeal and issues a ruling. The Arizona Supreme Court is the only state court higher than the Court of Appeals.Read more about Court of Appeals found this public policy means there is a Rebuttable PresumptionA legal assumption that stands until someone provides proof to the contrary. For example, any property acquired during the marriage is presumed to be community. A person who wants to show that property is actually their sole and separate property can "rebut" that presumption by…Read more about Rebuttable Presumption that Parenting TimeThis is what it sounds like—this is when it’s the parent’s time with the child(ren). See A.R.S § 25-401(5). Prior to 2012, it was known as physical custody.Read more about Parenting Time should be equal, but in Gonzalez-Gunter v. Gunter, the Court also found that courts are not required to order equal parenting time just because both parents can safely watch the child if equal parenting time is not in the child’s best interests.
