“joint custodians[‘] . . . failure to agree ultimately resulted in their abdication of such a -7- decision to the trial court” (quoted in Lewis v. Lewis, No. 2015-CA-001243-ME, 2016 WL 1273433, at (Ky. App. Apr. 1, 2016)
How later courts described this case
- “joint custodians[‘] . . . failure to agree ultimately resulted in their abdication of such a -7- decision to the trial court” (quoted in Lewis v. Lewis, No. 2015-CA-001243-ME, 2016 WL 1273433, at (Ky. App. Apr. 1, 2016)
- “If, as in the instant case, the parties to a joint custody agreement are unable to agree on a major issue concerning their child’s upbringing, the trial court, with its continuing jurisdiction over custody matters, must conduct a hearing to evaluate the circumstances and resolve the issue according to the child’s best interest.” (quoting Burchell v. Burchell, 684 S.W.2d 296 , 299–300 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984))
- “As to what constitutes the best interest of the child, any factual findings are reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard; any decisions based upon said facts are reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WINE, Judge,
concurring in result.
I concur with the well-reasoned opinions not only of the majority of this panel, but of the trial court as well. However, there are some issues raised by Ms. Young I feel compelled to address.
It is unfortunate that the parents’ inability to compromise has resulted in a civil court making a decision in a matter which clearly falls within the core of parental responsibility — where a child is to be educated. The conduct of these parties is a harbinger of future court intervention in many matters which are personal and unique to a family.
It is not uncommon for parents of different religious denomination to marry. The decision as to what faith to raise a child or children is usually made after much discussion, both within the family and with respective church counselors.
Ms. Young has confused attending a parochial school with what faith beliefs their son will practice. Every other Sunday, *148 their son will have the opportunity to worship at the church she attends. Likewise, their son will have the opportunity to worship at the Catholic church Mr. Holmes attends. Both parents will have the opportunity to teach their son about the richness of their particular faith tradition.
Ultimately, the child will make a decision as to where he prefers to worship. Hopefully both parents will respect that decision. Based upon his parents’ “walk” and “talk”, he may choose where his mother or father worship, or he may reject both.
The trial court was responsible only for deciding where the child will attend school. Ms. Young and Mr. Holmes are still responsible for the moral compass which will direct their son’s life.