Gorham v. Gorham
1984 OK 90, 1984 Okla. LEXIS 185, 692 P.2d 1375 (1984)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
In a child custody determination, a parent's moral transgressions are only relevant if there is a demonstrated nexus between the conduct and a detrimental effect on the child's best interests. A court may not deny custody based solely on a parent's perceived immoral behavior without evidence that such behavior harms the child.
Facts:
- After separating from her husband (appellant), the mother (appellee) and her three-year-old child moved into the home of another family.
- During the separation, the mother developed a close relationship with a man in the Army.
- The mother once flew to California for a week to visit this man, leaving her child in the care of the family she was living with after granting them authority to provide medical care.
- A child psychologist testified that the child was bright and developmentally normal and recommended custody be given to the mother.
- The mother admitted to having a brief affair prior to the separation and to relationships with two other men during the separation, one of whom was the husband of the family with whom she was living.
- Evidence indicated that the mother was discrete about her personal relationships and shielded the child from direct exposure to her activities.
- The evidence also established that both parents were loving and caring, and the child was well cared for when left with others.
Procedural Posture:
- The appellee (mother) filed a petition for divorce in the trial court on March 24, 1981.
- The trial court issued a temporary order granting custody of the child to the appellee.
- A trial was held on October 26-27, 1981.
- On February 5, 1982, the trial court issued a final order finding the appellee fit and awarding her custody of the child.
- The appellant (father) appealed the trial court's custody order.
- On March 24, 1982, the appellant filed a motion for a new trial in the trial court, based on newly discovered evidence of the appellee's moral conduct.
- On July 19, 1983, the trial court denied the appellant's motion for a new trial, stating the new evidence would not have changed its decision.
- The appellant appealed the denial of the motion for a new trial.
- The Oklahoma Supreme Court consolidated both appeals for consideration.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
In a child custody determination, does a parent's alleged moral transgression, without a showing of a direct detrimental effect on the child, require the court to deny that parent custody?
Opinions:
Majority - Lavender, J.
No. A court cannot deny custody based on a parent's moral conduct unless that conduct is shown to be detrimental to the child's best interests. The paramount concern in all custody determinations is the welfare of the child, not imposing judgment based on individualized conceptions of morality. To justify overturning a custody award, there must be a 'requisite nexus' connecting the parent's behavior to actual harm to the child. In this case, the appellant failed to provide any evidence that the mother's relationships negatively affected the child. To the contrary, the evidence showed the mother was a fit parent who was discrete and ensured her child was well cared for. Therefore, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding custody to the mother.
Dissenting - Barnes, C.J., Hargrave and Opala, JJ.
These justices dissented without a written opinion.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the legal principle that the 'best interest of the child' standard in custody cases must be based on evidence of actual harm, not on a parent's personal life choices or perceived moral failings. It establishes a 'nexus test,' requiring a party challenging custody to prove a direct, causal link between a parent's conduct and a negative impact on the child. This moves family law away from punishing parents for non-traditional lifestyles or private behavior and focuses the judicial inquiry squarely on the child's well-being. Consequently, future litigants must present concrete evidence of detriment rather than relying on moral judgments or assumptions of harm.
