Att avgöra tvisten, men inte lösa konflikten. Om domstolens bedömning i mål om vårdnad vid föräldrarnas samarbetssvårigheter.
Sammanfattning: Despite great efforts by society to persuade parents to reach consensus solutions, the number of custody disputes is not decreasing. On the contrary, the number of custody cases leading to litigation in court has increased considerably. The 2006 custody reform identified parents' ability to cooperate as a particularly important factor in deciding custody issues. The aim was to make the Court more cautious in ordering joint custody in disputes where parents have difficulties in cooperating. Instead, that regulation may have come to be conflict-driving. The purpose of the essay is to investigate the consequences, under current law, of the custody assessment in court in the event of difficulties in cooperation. The essay examines the court's position on whether joint or sole custody should be appointed; if joint custody is not in the best interest of the child, which of the parents should get sole custody. The court's assessment should take into account in its position the suitability of parents, the ability of parents to cooperate, the child's needs of his parents and the child's need for an ingrained environment and the child's will. The best interests of the child are also a criterion superior to everything in the assessment. When assessing which of the parents is to be granted custody, the child's needs of both parents are usually weighed against the child's need for a known environment and the child's will. The results show, among other things, that there is a certain advantage for the parent who already exercises custody, that is to say that the principle of continuity tends to weigh most heavily.
HÄR KAN DU HÄMTA UPPSATSEN I FULLTEXT. (följ länken till nästa sida)