Custody is awarded based on the welfare and best interests of the children. Wheeler v. Gill, 413 S.E.2d 860 (S.C. App.1992). A brief review of the current South Carolina cases yields some factors for custody as follows:
1. Who showed responsibility;
2. Who was primary caretaker;
3. Who bathed children;
4. Who put children to bed;
5. Who fixed meals;
6. Who took children to school;
7. Who assisted with homework;
8. Who attended church;
9. Did a parent use profanity;
10. Has personal life above care for children;
11. Age of child, Woodall v. Woodall, 471 S.E.2d 154 (1996);
12. Sex of the child;
13. Health of the child;
14. Residence;
15. Surroundings and environment;
16. Conduct and suitability of parent;
17. Preference in favor of innocent party;
18. Financial conditions of parents;
19. Possession of child;
20. Flagrant promiscuity will inevitably affect the welfare of the child; parting with friends; smoking marijuana; sexual relations with five men in a year. Boykin v. Boykin, 370 S.E.2d 884, (Ct. App. 1988);
21. A parents’ morality is a proper factor for consideration in custody, but it is limited to what relevance it has, directly or indirectly, to the welfare of the child. Boykin v. Boykin, 370 S.E.2d 884, (Ct. App. 1988);
22. Failure to comply with visitation will not warrant change in custody. Pinckney v. Hudson. 364 S.E.2d 462, (1988);
23. A child’s school performance. Glanton v. Glanton, 443 S.E.2d 810, (Ct. App.1994);
24. Uncertain plans for children can hurt custody. Strout v. Strout, 327 S.E.2d 74 (1985);
25. Failure to ensure child attends therapy. Stanton v. Stanton, 484 S.E.2d 875 (Ct. App.1997);
26. Living in house with no running water can hurt custody. Strout v. Strout, 327 S.E.2d 74 (1985);
27. Living with various relatives can hurt custody. Strout v. Strout, 327 S.E.2d 74 (1985);
28. Use of Marijuana, Quaaludes and Cocaine can hurt custody. Jones v. Jones, 348 S.E.2d 178 (Ct. App.1986);
29. Inattentiveness to child hurt custody. Jones v. Jones, 348 S.E.2d 178 (Ct. App.1986);
30. Leaving child in care of 12 year old can hurt custody. Jones v. Jones, 348 S.E.2d 178 (Ct. App.1986);
31. Three adulterous affairs during marriage can hurt custody. Jones v. Jones, 348 S.E.2d 178 (Ct. App.1986);
32. No use of drugs for two years can help custody. Jones v. Jones, 348 S.E.2d 178 (Ct. App.1986);
33. Having a mother to care for the child can help custody. Jones v. Jones, 348 S.E.2d 178 (Ct. App.1986);
34. Bathing, clothing, shopping and playing with daughter can help custody. Jones v. Jones, 348 S.E.2d 178 (Ct. App.1986);
35. Having a homosexual for a parent may not hurt custody. Stroman v. Williams, 353 S.E.2d 704 (Ct. App.1987);
36. Tender year’s doctrine does not necessarily require that the child’s mother be granted custody in preference to the father. Alligood v. Hunt, 353 S.E.2d 699 (1987);
37. Remarriage itself is insufficient to change custody. Alligood v. Hunt, 353 S.E.2d 699 (1987);
38. When both are fit to have custody, the Trial Judge must make the decision. Alligood v. Hunt. 353 S.E.2d 699 (1987);
39. Being the primary caretaker of the children helps custody. West v. West, 363 S.E.2d 402 (Ct. App.1987);
40. Bathing the children, putting the children to bed, fixing meals, taking children to school, assisting with homework, taking to and attending church with children helps custody. West v. West, 363 S.E.2d 402 (Ct. App.1987);
41. Use of profane language around children hurts custody. West v. West, 363 S.E.2d 402 (Ct. App.1987);
42. Being with a parent prior to separation helps custody. Smith v. Smith, 363 S.E.2d 404 (Ct. App.1987);
43. Remarriage, which restores moral fitness, is helpful in custody. Sealy v. Sealy, 368 SE2d 85 (Ct. App.1988);
44. There is a presumption against removal of a child from the state. Sealy v. Sealy, 368 S.E.2d 85 (Ct. App.1988);
45. Providing a better home does not guarantee custody. Sealy v. Sealy, 368 S.E.2d 85 (1988);
46. Character, attitude, fitness and inclinations of each parent. Epperly v. Epperly. 440 S.E.2d 884 (1994);
47. The significance to be attached to the wishes of a child in custody dispute depends on the age of the child and the attendant circumstances and, while the wishes of a child of any age may be considered, the weight given those wishes must be dominated by what is best for the welfare of the child. Bolding v. Bolding, 293 S.E.2d 699 (1982);
48. Trusting a party to care for other children helps custody. Sealy v. Sealy. 368 S.E.2d 85 (Ct. App.1988);
49. An eleven-year-old child may speak to the Court. Bolding v. Bolding 293 S.E.2d 699 (1982), but is not sufficient to change custody.
50. A child’s desire alone is insufficient to change custody. Bolding v. Bolding, 293 S.E.2d 699 (1982).
51. The existence of a criminal record including time in prison does not automatically render a parent unfit to have custody of a child. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Family Court’s decision that a father was fit to have custody in Dodge v. Dodge, 505 S.E.2d 344 (Ct App.) 1998) although the father had plead guilty to conspiracy to commit bank robbery and served seventeen months in federal prison.
52. A child’s parent’s religious beliefs are a relevant factor in custody decisions. Pountain v. Pountain, 503 S.E.2d 757 (Ct App.1998).
53. The Family Court must apply the same standard in deciding whether to alter joint or shared custody arrangements as it does in deciding whether to change sole from one parent to the other: the moving party has the burden of establishing “a material change of circumstances substantially affecting the child’s welfare.” Allison v. Eudy, 499 S.E.2d 227 (Ct App. 1998).
54. A custodial parent’s persistent pursuit of false charges of misconduct against the non-custodial parent can serve as a basis for changing custody of the child. Watson v. Poole, 495 S.E.2d 236 (Ct App. 1997).
55. A refusal by the custodial parent to facilitate a positive relationship between the non-custodial parent and a child is a reason to change custody of the child. Watson v. Poole, 495 S.E.2d 236 (Ct App. 1997).
56. Irrefutably, the mother’s conduct in allowing the parties’ two daughters to sleep in the same bed as the mother and a man to whom she is not married demonstrates poor parental judgment. We admonish and strongly discourage the mother from exposing the children to her relationships in this manner. Shirley v. Shirley, 536 S.E.2d 427 (Ct. App. 2000)
