Ex Parte JMF
730 So. 2d 1190, 1998 Ala. LEXIS 161, 1998 WL 321964 (1998)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
When a non-custodial parent creates a stable, heterosexual marital home while the custodial parent enters into an open, homosexual relationship, these constitute sufficient changes in circumstances to warrant a custody modification under the 'materially promote the child's best interests' standard, without requiring proof of a 'detrimental effect' from the homosexual conduct itself.
Facts:
- J.M.F. (father) and J.B.F. (mother) divorced in 1993, and the trial court awarded custody of their minor daughter to the mother.
- Shortly after the divorce, the mother began a homosexual relationship with a woman, G.S., and they moved into an apartment together with the child.
- Initially, the mother told the father that her relationship with G.S. would be discreet and they would present themselves as roommates.
- Subsequently, the mother and G.S. began an open relationship as 'life partners', sharing a bedroom (sometimes with the child), exchanging rings, and showing romantic affection in the child's presence.
- The father remarried, establishing a stable, two-parent heterosexual home with a stepmother who was committed to the child's upbringing.
- During visits, the father learned of the mother's open relationship and observed that the child remarked 'girls could marry girls' and grabbed her stepmother's breast in a manner he deemed inappropriate.
- The mother and G.S. presented their relationship to the child as the social and moral equivalent of a heterosexual marriage and would not discourage the child from adopting a homosexual lifestyle.
- The mother stated that if the child faced prejudice due to her lifestyle, it would be 'up to the child' to deal with it.
Procedural Posture:
- J.M.F. (the father) filed a motion in the trial court to modify the divorce judgment and obtain custody of the minor child from J.B.F. (the mother).
- The trial court, after an ore tenus proceeding, granted the father's motion and transferred custody to him.
- The mother (as appellant) appealed the trial court's judgment to the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals.
- The Court of Civil Appeals reversed the trial court's decision, holding that the father failed to show that the mother's homosexual relationship had a detrimental effect on the child.
- The father (as petitioner) petitioned for, and was granted, a writ of certiorari by the Supreme Court of Alabama to review the decision of the Court of Civil Appeals.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Do a custodial parent's entry into an open homosexual relationship and a non-custodial parent's entry into a stable heterosexual marriage constitute a sufficient change of circumstances to justify a change of custody under the standard that the change must materially promote the child's best interests?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Lyons
Yes. A change in custody is justified because the analysis is not based solely on the mother's sexual conduct, but on two distinct changes in circumstances: the father's creation of a stable, two-parent heterosexual home and the mother's creation of an openly homosexual home environment. Therefore, the controlling standard is whether the change materially promotes the child's best interests, not the higher standard of proving a 'substantial detrimental effect' from parental misconduct. The court reasoned that while studies on homosexual parenting are conflicting, the 'inestimable developmental benefit of a loving home environment that is anchored by a successful marriage is undisputed.' Given the state's public policy favoring heterosexual marriage and deeming homosexual conduct immoral and criminal, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that placing the child in the father's home would materially promote her best interests and outweigh the disruption of the move.
Analysis:
This decision establishes that a parent's open homosexual relationship can be a pivotal factor in a custody modification in Alabama. By framing the issue as a comparison between two changed home environments rather than as a matter of parental misconduct, the court sidestepped the need for the non-custodial parent to prove direct harm to the child. The ruling creates a strong judicial preference for a 'traditional' heterosexual marital home, deeming it inherently superior for a child's development based on societal norms and state public policy at the time. This precedent significantly disadvantages a homosexual parent in a custody dispute against a heterosexual parent who has remarried.
Unlock the full brief for Ex Parte JMF