Quote:
| Everything I know about the family court system tells me that the kid is far likelier to end up with the Mannings than with Duncan. As far as I am concerned, the burden of proof is always on the father. |
You are used to thinking of a custody dispute between mother and father. But in this case, there is only one living parent and it's Duncan (as far as we know). The law in CA (and every other state) overwhelmingly favors keeping a child with the biological parents. If there is only one living parent and that parent wants custody of the child, that's that. Once Duncan files a petition to establish paternity and the blood test proves he's the father, the child is his, end of story.
The only way the parent would not get custody is by "clear and convincing" evidence that the parent is unfit and that the child will be in imminent danger of harm or serious neglect. In that case, a court might give custody to grandparents, but the burden of proof is very high on the grandparents to prove that the child would be harmed with the father. It can't be just speculation or "we'd be better parents." That doesn't cut it.
In this case, there is no evidence at all that Duncan is an unfit parent -- he's a model student and citizen with no criminal record of any kind. The only issue is his "Type IV" epilepsy, but his condition is controlled by medication and he hasn't had any known "episodes" in a very long time. And even if evidence of his "episodes" were admitted (which would be doubtful - there aren't many witnesses and Logan and the Kanes aren't gonna talk), there is no evidence he ever harmed anyone. So his epilepsy wouldn't be enough for him to lose custody of his child. Because of Duncan's age, the court might set up a temporary custody situaton where he'd get visits from a social worker, etc. for six months or so before making it "permanent," but he would definitely get custody.
Read your local paper for plenty of stories where DCFS tried to take a child away from a bio-parent and the courts keep sending 'em back, even when there is evidence of serious neglect. It's *very* hard to remove a child from the custody of a parent to give to a non-parent. Usually by the time there is enough evidence to remove the child from a parent's custody, it's too late.
Even if Jake and Celeste cut him off financially, that would not be a reason to take his child away. Poverty alone doesn't do it. He'd have to be living on the street or something before he'd lose his kid and even then, there are shelters where people live with their kids.