In the Case of Biology v. Psychology: Where Did My 'Parent' Go?

Abstract

For the first time since the United States Supreme Court decision in Obergefel, a Louisiana appellate court addressed a child custody dispute between unmarried same-sex partners. In Ferrand v. Ferrand, the lower court denied custody to the nonparent, same-sex partner, who was not biologically related to the children. Raised by the nonparent since their birth, these children have always viewed the nonparent as their “daddy.” The appellate court questioned whether, under Louisiana law, a nonparent’s burden in a child-custody dispute with the child’s biological parent should require an examination of the psychological parent-child relationship as well as the child’s attachment with the nonparent, before such a permanent and legal severance of the relationship is adjudged. If not, how can the outcome possibly result in the best interest of the child? Notably, the appellate court suggested, in its thorough state-by-state analysis, that Louisiana’s adoption of a psychological parent doctrine would be instrumental in certifying that the best interest of the child is actually paramount in all child custody disputes. Furthering the appellate court’s agenda, the author discusses the disconnect between current child custody laws in Louisiana, the ever-changing demands of society, and the evolving definition of family. This author recommends more consistent court requirements that will better protect the rights and welfare of children in Louisiana by obligating the court to weigh each of the best interest of the child factors, consider the psychological bond between a nonparent and child who has essentially become the child’s parent, and order a psychological evaluation on all parties involved.