Although the infamous Michael Jackson died nearly three years ago on June 25, 2009, the custody battle for his children has raged on. Jackson left three minor children, Prince, 15; Paris, 14; and Prince Michael II, 10. Katherine Jackson was appointed guardian of the children after Jackson’s death in 2009. However, the judge suspended her guardianship after she was recently reported missing. According to Jermaine Jackson, Katherine was not in any danger but rather was resting in Arizona. Two family members have been fiercely battling for custody of the children, Jackson’s mother, Katherine, and the son of his brother, Tito. Apparently the two have reached an agreement to share guardianship. At the age of 82, Katherine will be relieved of daily responsibilities such as management of household personnel and the security team.

According to her attorney, Perry Sanders, “Mrs. Jackson is extremely pleased with the prospect of enjoying the pleasure of raising Michael’s children without the day-to-day tedium of items such as managing the large staff that goes with such a high profile family and focus her attention on being a grandmother and raising Michael’s children.” As her co-guardian, Tito has enjoyed a close relationship with the children for the majority of their lives and has been solely responsible for their care in Katherine’s absence. Margaret Lodise, the court-appointed guardian ad litem for the children, has confirmed that the custody agreement is agreeable to all the Jackson children.

ABC’s Modern Family depicts a different type of family in an attempt to emulate a more accurate picture of the average American household. Modernly, many families are not simply made up of a heterosexual couple raising a few children in a suburban neighborhood. Modern Family illustrates the struggle same-sex couples have adopting children, the difficulties of living in a blended family, and coping with divorce. Because of the new changes emerging in American households, parenting of children has become more complicated. Children do not necessarily only have two parental figures in their lives anymore. California family legislators have begun to recognize the changes occurring and have proposed a new law that could expand the view of traditional families.

Senator Mark Leno of San Francisco has proposed new legislation that has the potential to give San Diego residents more parenting options. Under current laws, a child may only have two legal parents. The proposal will create the possibility for a child to have a parent-child relationship with more than two parents. Although the number of permitted parents may change, the same standard of awarding custody and visitation would apply. The court will award custody and visitation of the child amongst all the parents in accordance with the best interest of the child.

The proposal’s controversial nature has garnered significant criticism from conservative groups founded on the belief that two parents, one mother and one father, should raise a child. Opponents of the proposal argue that it is merely a means to further the same-sex marriage movement. This argument is fiercely contested by the bill’s proponents who claim it has nothing to do with “culture wars” and is solely based on the best interest of the children involved in custody disputes. Additionally, opponents claim that the bill would lead to more instability for children as a result of increased conflict.

Nadya Suleman, otherwise known as “Octomom,” is famous for giving birth to octuplets in 2009. In addition to her octuplets, Octomom has six other children. Recently Octomom has been criticized in the news for poor parenting. The controversy surrounded a complaint filed by her hair stylist who claimed that the fourteen children were living in substandard conditions. TMZ has reported that only one toilet is operating in the home, which is supplemented with portable toilets located outside in the backyard. According to Suleman, she could not afford to repair the other toilet in the home because the quote of $150 was too expensive. In addition to living in an unsanitary environment, the hair stylist provided photos that suggest the children were locked in a room while Suleman had her hair done.

These images have allegedly sparked an investigation by Child Protective Services (CPS), which will determine whether the children are at risk of any substantial harm. The photos depict a messy house with writing on the walls. The hair stylist has also provided photographs of the outdoor toilets. CPS has responded by saying that a messy house does not violate any law and methods of potty training are within the parent’s discretion.

If CPS determines that the children should be permitted to remain in the home up to 12 months of services may be provided to the family in order to improve conditions for the children. If CPS determines that the children are in danger, it will file a petition in Juvenile Court and ask that the children be removed from Suleman’s home. If the children are removed, they may be placed with a relative or in foster care depending on the particular circumstances. Further, Suleman will need to take parenting classes and counseling if she wished to reunify with her children. Up to 18 months of services will be provided if a parent is making efforts toward reunification. If she does not satisfy the court’s concerns, the children could be placed with a legal guardian or even adopted by another person(s).

We have previously blogged about the impact military orders can have on a San Diego parent in a child custody case. Recently, the House Armed Services Committee is considering ways to enhance the provisions in place that protect the parental rights of service members. The Servicemember Family Protection Act is designed to preclude family court judges from ruling against servicemembers based solely on a history of or future deployment in child custody cases. Originally introduced in 2008, the bill has passed the House of Representatives with support from both the Democratic and Republican parties but has repeatedly failed in the Senate. The Defense Department has rejected this bill in favor of passing similar legislation at the state court level.

Often in California child custody cases the family court judge will scrutinize a parent’s absence from the child’s life. However, servicemembers may be deployed for extended periods of time and have little to no contact with their children. The Servicemember Family Protection Act is intended to excuse a parental absence due to military orders. It is important to note that the bill will not give servicemembers any advantage in child custody cases or hearings, it will only function to remove the disadvantages servicemembers are facing in these proceedings.

Traditionally, deployment has been understood as the movement of military forces from one area to another or sending military personnel into a combat zone. The Servicemember Family Protection Act defines deployment much more broadly for the purposes of child custody proceedings. For the purposes of the bill, deployment would include humanitarian operations and unaccompanied oversee tours as well. The bill has been proposed as an amendment to the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act. The Servicemembers Civil Relief Act was passed as a federal law, which granted special rights to servicemembers who were part of a civil proceeding. In 2008, Congress extended these privileges of the Civil Relief Act to child custody cases. The bill now prevents family courts from making permanent changes to custody orders while a servicemember parent is deployed.