Family Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Family - Case Study ExampleFrom the facts presented, it may be safe to assume that cargo hold of the two common children shall remain with Susan. There is nothing in the facts which belie any intention on James part to contest the award of such detainment and even granting that he attempts to contest it, the demands of his career and Susans track record as the primary caretaker of the two children would make such contention largely untenable. As such, we may thus safely assume that custody of the children would in fact be awarded to Susan upon their divorce. Susans expected custody of the two common children is an important factor that will ferment the resolution of the more controversial issues in their case.The issues that must be resolved upon the radioactive decay of James and Susans marriage revolve primarily upon two areas support and property allocation. In regards to the first area of contention, we further subdivide it into two sections support for their common children and support for the other(a) spouse.In regards to the question of child support, James may be ordered to provide pecuniary support for the two common children in accordance with Section 23 of the married Causes Act of 1973, which allows the court to order a party to the marriage to provide financial support to the benefit of a child of the family. ... As such, it is the duty of the courts to ensure that Susan receives financial support from James so as to meet her own financial needs. Pursuant to 2.53 of The Family Proceeding Rules of 1991, an order for maintenance pending suit may be imposed upon James to compel him to provide financial support while the divorce proceedings are ongoing so as to meet Susans immediate financial needs. The amount of financial support to be provided for Susan shall be determined by several factors. The amount must not be based solely on her financial needs, scarcely rather on what may be perceived as reasonable and fair, taking into consideration the lifestyle which characterized their marriage as well as other considerations directed towards making the two parties as equal to each other as possible, financially and otherwise. James, as the financially advantaged party may thus be ordered to provided specific payments of financial support to Susan, to be provided in regular periods, and subject to Susans remarriage, change in employment status, and other conditions that the court may cast significant in determining whether such maintenance is still necessary.As has been held in White v White (2000 UKHL 54), the overall purpose of the standards set in the Marital Causes Act of 1973 is to promote fairness between the two parties involved. This purpose places upon the court the duty to ensure that neither party is left disadvantaged by the dissolution of their marriage, a scenario that is bound to occur should the non-earning spouse be left to his or her own defenses without recourse to the protection of the court. The goal of fairness is further elaborated in the recent case of Miller v Miller