Opinion
No. 2-930 / 02-0756
Filed January 29, 2003
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Michael J. Moon, Judge.
Petitioner appeals from the physical care provisions of the parties' dissolution decree. AFFIRMED.
Barry S. Kaplan of Fairall, Fairall, Kaplan, Condon Frese, Marshalltown, for appellant.
John J. Haney of Hinshaw, Danielson, Kloberdanz Haney, P.C., Marshalltown, for appellee.
Heard by Sackett, C.J., and Zimmer and Vaitheswaran, JJ.
Wesley Vanlaw appeals from the physical care provisions of the parties' dissolution decree. He contends the district court erred in granting physical care of the parties' son, Jaiden, to his former spouse, Sara Vanlaw. We affirm.
I. BACKGROUND FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS.
Wesley and Sara met at a party in 1992. They began living together a short time later. The parties lived together from 1992 until June 15, 1998 when they married. Their only child, Jaiden W. Vanlaw, was born in December 2000.
Wesley filed a petition for dissolution of the parties' marriage on August 28, 2001. Sara was awarded temporary physical care of Jaiden. Following trial, the district court awarded joint legal custody with physical care of the couples' minor child with Sara. Wesley appeals.
II. SCOPE OF REVIEW.
In this equity case our review is de novo. Iowa R.App.P. 6.4. We examine the entire record and adjudicate rights anew on the issues properly presented. In re Marriage of Smith, 573 N.W.2d 924, 926 (Iowa 1998). We give weight to the fact-findings of the trial court, especially when considering the credibility of witnesses, but we are not bound by them. Iowa R.App.P. 6.14(6)( g). This is because the trial court has a first-hand opportunity to hear the evidence and view the witnesses. In re Marriage of Will, 489 N.W.2d 394, 397 (Iowa 1992).
III. PHYSICAL CARE.
Wesley contends he should be awarded physical care of Jaiden. He argues that his son should not be exposed to Sara's aggressive behavior and immoral conduct on a daily basis. Wesley also contends Sara is unstable and that her past behavior suggests she will fail to maximize his relationship with Jaiden if she is his primary physical caretaker.
In any custody determination, the primary consideration is the best interests of the child. Iowa R.App.P. 6.14(6)( o); In re Marriage of Murphy, 592 N.W.2d 681, 683 (Iowa 1999). The court's objective is to place the child in the environment most likely to bring him to healthy physical, mental, and social maturity. Murphy, 592 N.W.2d at 683. In considering what custody arrangement is in the best interests of the child, the court is required to consider statutory factors. See Iowa Code § 598.41(3) (2001). All factors bear upon the "first and governing consideration" as to what will be in the best long-term interest of the child. In re Marriage of Vrban, 359 N.W.2d 420, 424 (Iowa 1984). These statutory factors and the factors identified in In re Marriage of Winter, 223 N.W.2d 165, 166-67 (Iowa 1974), are appropriately considered in determining the award of physical care. Will, 489 N.W.2d at 398.
The record reveals the parties' relationship and marriage were marred by domestic disputes, drug usage, and illicit affairs. Wesley and Sara each have criminal records. The record is replete with examples of immature behavior on the part of both parties which need not be repeated here. Fortunately, despite their personal shortcomings, Wesley and Sara have both done a good job of parenting Jaiden. Both love Jaiden and either appears capable of serving as his primary physical caretaker.
The evidence presented at trial was thorough and provided the court with a detailed look at both parents including their strengths and weaknesses. After carefully considering the evidence and assessing the parties' credibility, the trial court reached the following conclusions:
Jaiden is doing well in his present physical placement with his mother. He is healthy, happy and well adjusted. He has the support of his mother in continuing maximum involvement with his father. Sara has demonstrated an understanding of the importance of Jaiden maintaining a close relationship with his father. She appears flexible in her dealings with Wesley in his visitation with his son. She has taken it upon herself to keep Wesley informed as to important milestones in Jaiden's development. She has invited Wesley to participate in events important in Jaiden's life, even though the marital relationship between her and Wesley has broken down. She seems genuinely aware of the fact that Wesley will be a part of her life, and more importantly Jaiden's life, even though the marital relationship will not endure.
Wesley takes issue with some of the court's conclusions; however, upon de novo review of the record, we find no reason to disagree with the trial court's findings and conclusions. We therefore affirm the district court's grant of joint custody with primary physical care vested in Sara.
AFFIRMED.