In 2017, these parents who were never married, commenced a custody action and the courts had to step in to decide the fate of young Charity. Initially, Melanie and Ray were deemed fit parents by the district court, and an arrangement was made for joint custody, allowing Charity to spend equal time with each parent, rotating every week with alternating holidays.
However, the stability was short-lived. In 2018, Mom filed a motion to modify the custody arrangement, citing her planned relocation to Forsyth County. This motion was dismissed by the court, but later that year, she moved to Cabarrus County without prior approval. Clearly this move would change the custody schedule, especially as the child needs to get to school and the parties could not agree where she would go to school. Mom’s relocation and other behavior of the parents set off a chain of events that led to further legal action and suddenly, we see the Grandparents stepping into the fray with grave concerns for their granddaughter’s well-being.
It was January 2019 when the situation escalated to the point that the Grandparents, deeply concerned about their granddaughter’s well-being, filed a motion to intervene and a motion to modify the previous custody order. They brought serious allegations to the court’s attention: the parents’ “inability and/or unwillingness to properly care for their child arises to the level of abuse and neglect.” They painted a troubling picture of Charity’s life —frequent changes in residence and schools, inconsistent parenting, and signs of emotional distress such as nightmares and fears of violence. Mom had changed jobs five times and changed homes 4 times since the last custody order, clearly showing a total lack of stability and in addition to this she completely refused and failed to bring the child to school when the child was in her care. So, you see that Charity missed school every other week while in her mom’s care and custody. Dad was not blameless here as he was unemployed, had no valid driver’s license, his vehicle was uninsured, and he had four pending sexual abuse charges in Rowan County and was facing 25 years of incarceration in prison.
On 13 June 2019, the district court, swayed by the evidence presented, decided in favor of the Grandparents. The court’s decision dramatically shifted Charity’s living arrangements for the better, placing her into the legal and physical custody of the Grandparents at their home in Oak Island. This ruling significantly limited the biological parents’ access to their daughter, granting Dad only two weeks of visitation per year and Mom a mere two days of visitation per year.
Mom and Dad clearly remained oblivious to their own horrendous behavior, and stunned and aggrieved by the outcome, appealed the court’s decision. In 2022 for the first time, the appellate court was tasked with reviewing the intricate details of the case, focusing on whether the Grandparents had the standing to intervene and if the trial court’s findings sufficiently supported the drastic shift in custody and parental rights. The case went back up to appeal for a second time in 2023 after the trial court (on remand) issued additional findings of fact to show that the parents did in fact act outside of their constitutionally protected status and that custody to a third party (the Grandparents) was appropriate.
The Legal Standing of Grandparents
In recent years, the role of grandparents in custody disputes has gained significant attention in the legal world. In North Carolina specifically, grandparents have the right and in this author’s opinion always should intervene in an open child custody case as soon as it is filed by either parent. Intervention gives them a right to assert additional claims and requests for custody and visitation and does not automatically grant custody or visitation to the grandparents. However, if a grandparent waits too long and fails to request intervention, they may be precluded from filing in the future if they do not make the motion when the custody case is “open” prior to a final order being entered (barring emergency situations).
This author notes that the Court of Appeals did not review N.C.G.S. § 50-13.2 (b2) and only referenced N.C.G.S. § 501-13.1(a) and noted that as third parties wanting to ask for custody of the minor child against the parents constitutional rights, they had to allege sufficient facts that the parents acted in a manner inconsistent with their constitutionally protected status as parents to have primary custody of the minor children. The Grandparents did so and had standing to seek custody of the minor child.
Visitation for the Parents and their Constitutional Rights
It is good to remember for both attorneys and parties to litigation that the parents conduct must be “so egregious” that it forfeits their constitutional right as noted above for custody to be granted to a third party, including Grandparents. There is “no bright line” test or rule for when a parent has forfeited their rights; although neglect, abandonment, and abuse clearly meet this standard. In this case, in addition to the other facts alleged above, during the 2023 case it was shown that Mom failed to provide the child with pillowcases and sheets for her bed – the child did not even know what a sheet was during a visit with her Grandparents. Additionally, Mom took the child to a dark park often before bedtime, subjecting the child to possible danger and injury, and put bags on the child’s feet instead of the snow boots the Grandparents purchased and provided for the child. Another salient fact was that Mom would scream at the child instead of using other, more appropriate parenting measures. Despite the facts noted above, when visitation with a parent is severely restricted there must be competent evidence in the record which warrants the limitations, and the above facts were not sufficient without an additional finding that the Mom was an unfit person to visit the child or that the visitations would not be in the best interests of the minor child so the case was remanded again in 2023. Maybe we’ll see it again in 2024 or 2025?
These cases highlight the critical situations in which grandparents may need to step in and intervene in custody battles to safeguard the welfare of their grandchildren.
Why Grandparents Should Consider Intervening
Allegations of Neglect or Abuse: Grandparents who notice similar circumstances might feel a moral and legal obligation to intervene.
Instability in the Child’s Environment: Grandparents who can provide a stable environment might see this as a compelling reason to seek custody.
Legal Empowerment: This legal empowerment provides a means for grandparents to actively ensure their grandchild’s welfare when they believe the parents are unfit.
This custody battle, fraught with legal complexities and emotional upheaval, not only reshaped the structure of a family but also highlighted the critical role grandparents can play in correcting and safeguarding their grandchildren’s futures. It serves as a poignant reminder of the delicate balance courts must maintain in protecting a child’s welfare while respecting parental rights. For grandparents, intervening in custody battles is not just about legal rights but about stepping up in difficult family situations to provide care and stability when the child’s immediate parents are unable to do so effectively. We hope the parents in this matter get mental health treatment and mature in the years to come to be back in Charity’s life in a more significant and positive way.
Cases reviews:
Evans v. Myers v. Myers, 895 S.E. 2d 470, 2023 WL 8042667, NC Ct of App, November 2023.
Evans v. Myers v. Myers, 867 S.E. 2d 424, 281 N.C. APP 627, 2022-NCCOA-67, February 1, 2022 – Unpublished
