CA Family Law
California Family Law
Read it for yourself. California Family Code is clear: no child abusers, batterers or addicts should have custody, period! Clear Statutes from the Legislature & more proof of RICO corruption.
As it states "The Legislature finds and declares that it is the public policy of this state to assure that the health, safety, and welfare of children shall be the court’s primary concern in determining the best interest of children when making any orders regarding the custody or visitation of children. The Legislature further finds and declares that the perpetration of child abuse or domestic violence in a household where a child resides is detrimental to the child." This is a statute from the State Legislature. Regardless of the dubious § 3011(e) (see below), judges MUST comply as it is the State Legislature who dictates the "court's primary concern" and NOT dubious judges engaging in RICO.
CALIFORNIA FAMILY CODE
Family Code Section 3011, sets forth the considerations for determining the best interests of a minor child. It states as follows:
§ 3011. Best interest of child; considerations
In making a determination of the best interest of the child in a proceeding described in section 3021, the court shall, among any other factors it finds relevant, consider all of the following:
(a) The health, safety, and welfare of the child.
(b) Any history of abuse by one parent or any other person seeking custody against any of the following:
- Any child to whom he or she is related by blood or affinity or with whom he or she has had a caretaking relationship, no matter how temporary.
- The other parent.
- A parent, current spouse, or cohabitant, of the parent or person seeking custody, or a person with whom the parent or person seeking custody has a dating or engagement relationship.
As a prerequisite to the consideration of allegations of abuse, the court may require substantial independent corroboration, including, but not limited to, written reports by law enforcement agencies, child protective services or other social welfare agencies, courts, medical facilities, or other public agencies or private nonprofit organizations providing services to victims of sexual assault or domestic violence. As used in this subdivision, “abuse against a child” means “child abuse” as defined in Section 11165.6 of the Penal Code and abuse against any of the other persons described in paragraph (2) or (3) means “abuse” as defined in Section 6203 of this code.
(c) The nature and amount of contact with both parents.
(d) The habitual or continual illegal use of controlled substances or habitual or continual abuse of alcohol b y either parent. Before considering these allegations, the court may first require independent corroboration, including, but not limited to, written reports from law enforcement agencies, courts probation departments, social welfare agencies, medical facilities, rehabilitation facilities, or other public agencies or nonprofit organizations providing drug and alcohol abuse services. As used in this subdivision, “controlled substances” has the same meaning as defined in the California Uniform Controlled Substances Act, Division 10 (commencing with section 11000) of the Health and Safety Code.(e) (1) Where allegations about a parent pursuant to subdivision (b) or (d) have been brought to the attention of the court in the current proceeding, and the court makes an order for sole or joint custody to that parent, the court shall state its reasons in writing or on the record. In these circumstances, the court shall ensure tha any order regarding custody or visitation is specific as to time, day, place, and manner of transfer of the child as set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 6323.
(2) The provisions of this subdivision shall not apply if the parties stipulate in writing or on the record regarding custody or visitation.
The legislative policy in custody decisions is set forth in Family Code Section 3020, which states as follows:
§ 3020. Legislative findings and declarations; health, safety, and welfare of children; continuing contact with parents
(a) The Legislature finds and declares that it is the public policy of this state to assure that the health, safety, and welfare of children shall be the court’s primary concern in determining the best interest of children when making any orders regarding the custody or visitation of children. The Legislature further finds and declares that the perpetration of child abuse or domestic violence in a household where a child resides is detrimental to the child.
(b) The Legislature finds and declares that it is the public policy of this state to assure that children have frequent and continuing contact with both parents after the parents have separated or dissolved their marriage, or ended their relationship, and to encourage parents to share the rights and responsibilities of child rearing in order to effect this policy, except where the contact would not be in the best interest of the child, as provided in Section 3011.
(c) Where the policies set forth in subdivisions (a) and (b) of this section are in conflict, any court’s order regarding custody or visitation shall be made in a manner that ensures the health, safety, and welfare of the child and the safety of all family members.
Find California Code
Look up any of California's 29 Codes, including California Family Code, with this easy to use site from the Legislative Counsel of California: Find California Code Or just start at the Legislative Counsel's easy to use mainpage: Official California Legislative Information where you can find information on Bills, CA Law (its 29 codes, Statutes and State Constitution), your Legislature (including a zip-code search to find who represents your area) and more.
Read about the passage of the Miracle Bill from PROTECT and from California State Senator, Jim Battin (R) : author of, and the most aggressive legislature proponent for, the bill. Mr Battin and PROTECT lobbyist, Betsy Salkind, are the true Miracle workers who spearheaded the passage of the Miracle Bill (Circle of Trust Bill: SB 33). You can read the actual bill SB 33 here. You can also find out who originally voted against SB 33 here so you can write to them and let them know they may no longer have your vote.
California's Judicial Branch Website that clearly explains the structuring and hierarchy of the California Courts.