In Brett M. v. Amanda M.,[1] the supreme court upheld the superior court’s custody decision, finding that decision did not violate the law governing custody decisions. Amanda filed for divorce from her husband, Brett. During the marriage, Amanda was the primary caregiver while Brett provided financial support. Amanda wanted to move from Juneau to Oregon for work, and sought primary physical custody of the children. The superior court granted Amanda physical custody. On appeal, Brett argued that the court impermissibly based its decision on Amanda’s primary caregiver status, and failed to engage in proper symmetrical analysis regarding the effect of Amanda’s planned relocation on the children. The supreme court affirmed the lower court’s decision. The supreme court found that the lower court did engage in symmetrical analysis by considering the effect on the children of living with each parent and away from the other parent, and properly considered the impact of the move on both the geographic and emotional stability of the children. While status as primary caregiver is not determinative in a custody decision, a parent’s primary caregiver role is a relevant social and emotional factor that should be considered. Upholding the superior court’s custody decision, the supreme court held that the superior court properly applied the law governing custody decisions.
[1] 445 P.3d 1005 (Alaska 2019).
