In Re the Marriage of Angela Marie Harris and Patric David Harris, Upon the Petition of Angela Marie Harris
2016 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 39
| Iowa | 2016Background
- Angela and Patrie Harris divorced after a 2012 decree that awarded joint legal custody and joint physical care under a rotating 2-2-3 schedule; the court found the children were thriving under that arrangement.
- After the decree, parental communications remained highly acrimonious; a custody evaluator found "hostile aggressive parenting," concluded joint physical care had not worked, and recommended primary care (or sole legal custody) with Angela as primary physical caregiver.
- The parties dispute the daughter’s diagnosis and treatment: Angela procured psychiatric evaluation and off‑label medication (Namenda) which the treating psychiatrist said improved the child; Patrie opposed the diagnosis/treatment and refused to administer the medication while the child was in his care.
- The parents also disagreed about the son’s behavior and about extracurricular activities; disagreements and Patrie’s failure to transport the children led to cessation of activities.
- The district court denied Angela’s petition to modify custody, finding no substantial change since 2012 and giving little weight to the evaluator; this court reviews de novo and reverses, awarding Angela primary physical care and remanding for visitation and child support determinations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a substantial change in circumstances occurred after the 2012 decree to justify modifying physical custody | Angela: ongoing hostile, dysfunctional communication and the failure of the rotating joint‑care arrangement (including disputes over children’s medical care and extracurriculars) are substantial, permanent changes harming the children | Patrie: no substantial change; disputes existed earlier and were contemplated by the court; joint custody should be maintained | Held: Yes. The court found the joint physical care arrangement has failed, communication is destructive and unlikely to improve, and the change is more or less permanent, justifying modification. |
| Whether Angela proved superior ability to minister to the children’s needs (necessity for awarding primary physical care) | Angela: she identified developmental/behavioral issues, sought evaluations and treatment, and promoted extracurriculars — showing superior engagement | Patrie: contends Angela’s unilateral actions and litigiousness undermine her claim; he argues he can provide primary care | Held: Angela proved she is better suited to meet the children’s needs (evaluations, treatment follow‑through, extracurricular focus), so primary physical care is allocated to her. |
| Whether the daughter’s medical treatment/disagreement over off‑label medication justified custody change | Angela: daughter benefited from treatment and medication; Patrie’s refusal to administer medicine causes inconsistent care | Patrie: medication is off‑label, University of Iowa second opinion did not confirm PDD; disputes over medical care should be resolved under joint legal custody, not by modifying physical care | Held: The disagreement over diagnosis/treatment and Patrie’s refusal to comply contributed substantially to the failure of joint physical care and weighed in favor of modification (while retaining joint legal custody). |
| Whether joint legal custody should be severed | Angela: seeks sole legal custody and primary physical care | Patrie: opposes severing legal custody; wants primary physical care if modification granted | Held: Court awarded primary physical care to Angela but retained joint legal custody; warned that sole legal custody remains an option if cooperation does not improve. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of Hoffman, 867 N.W.2d 26 (Iowa 2016) (standard for equitable review of custody modification)
- In re Marriage of Sisson, 843 N.W.2d 866 (Iowa 2014) (de novo review in modification actions)
- In re Marriage of McDermott, 827 N.W.2d 671 (Iowa 2013) (weight given to district court credibility findings)
- In re Marriage of Jacobo, 626 N.W.2d 859 (Iowa 2001) (party seeking modification must prove substantial change by preponderance)
- In re Marriage of Frederick, 338 N.W.2d 156 (Iowa 1983) (custody should be disturbed only for most cogent reasons; burden to show superior ability to minister to children)
- In re Marriage of Walton, 577 N.W.2d 869 (Iowa Ct. App. 1998) (modification appropriate when parents cannot cooperate or shared custody fails)
- In re Marriage of Hansen, 733 N.W.2d 683 (Iowa 2007) (ability to communicate and mutual respect important in joint physical care)
- Melchiori v. Kooi, 644 N.W.2d 365 (Iowa Ct. App. 2002) (parental discord disrupting children can be substantial change warranting designation of primary caregiver)