Divorced parenting rights versus your child’s eternal salvation

This is one of those instances where I feel it necessary to point out from the get-go that I am not a lawyer, and I don’t play one on TV. It should also be noted that there’s a great deal of evidence where history tells of outcomes that weren’t at all what initiators anticipated when they demanded state intervention. See Matthew 27:1-2.

That said, how often and in what way is religion addressed for child custody matters? Michigan Supreme Court and Michigan Court of Appeals opinions are available online. Published opinions for both date back to January 2001; unpublished opinions issued by the Michigan Court of Appeals are available there, starting with July 1996. So that’s where I’ll start.

In following these over the years as a layman in this arena, it seems to me that the main concern in their reviews of lower-court rulings with regard to religion is parental sacrifice. In other words, does the parent put the child’s interests here before his or her own? Is one parent preferred over the other in terms of effort and consistency in raising the child according to values that he or she has claimed as important for that child to internalize?

Let’s look at an example of language from a Wayne County Circuit Court case that was addressed by the Michigan Court of Appeals on February 3 of this year. Dr. Timothy Pierron is the father, Ms. Kelly Pierron the mother. They have 2 children: Andrew, born in 1994, and Madeline, born 5 years later.

“Both parties are equally capable and generally disposed to give the children love, affection, and guidance. The testimony established, however, that Dr. Pierron has the better capacity and disposition to educate and raise the children in their religious creed. The children, [D]r. Pierron, and his parents all attend the Grosse Pointe United Methodist Church and have done so throughout their lives. They are active members. Madeline is involved in choir or has expressed an interest to be involved in choir.

“Ms. Pierron, on the other hand, does not attend church nor does she take the children to church. This factor favors Dr. Pierron.”

Based on the “throughout their lives” characterization of Dad’s walk, it sounds like Mom changed the status quo following their divorce. Prefers to sleep-in on Sunday mornings, as opposed to pro-actively endorsing a directed journey other than Gross Pointe United Methodist.

I haven’t seen anything where a divorce court has supported some claim by a dad or a mom that one particular religion, or where any religion at all, for that matter, enjoys preference in terms of deciding legal custody or parenting time. And if it’s happened in some local jurisdiction, I can’t find where either the Michigan Supreme Court or Michigan Court of Appeals has upheld any such ruling. In its very helpful discussion of MCL 722.23, our own Washtenaw County Trial Court does not directly speak to nor provide precedent regarding religious instruction considerations.

Lack of ready-made references aside, I am more concerned as a pastoral counselor about what can come across as mere technicalities for which Best Interests factor (b) is relied upon to argue. In addition to how this application appears to have played out between the Pierron parents, above, it also struck me as a grafted-onto a response made on behalf of Holly V. Mazurek to issues raised by Gregory G. Sinicropi in their paternity dispute.

“Mazurek attacks each of the trial court’s findings on the factors, raising various points…. Mazurek first contends that the trial court did not consider the fact that she was a stay-at-home mother or address the issue of religion under factor b…. The trial court, however, did address religion and found that the parties had an equal capacity and disposition to raise the child as a Catholic, but found that this factor slightly favored Powers because of his sacrifices and efforts to put the child first. Although the trial court did not specifically mention that Mazurek was a stay-at-home mother, it did not need to comment on every matter in evidence.”

Did I forget to mention Martin A. Powers when first citing this case? He was the second of “two legally recognized fathers” of the then-seven-year-old boy born to Holly Mazurek, and upon whom this December 2006 Michigan Court of Appeals opinion centers.

Does this mean I believe that divorce courts “should” be more involved in examining contests between parents vis-à-vis religious upbringing? I do not. One or both of the cases discussed earlier in this column easily back my thought process. Look up either, and you’ll very likely end up with a whole new respect for Paul and his counsel in 1 Corinthians 6:1-3 about avoiding courtrooms as a place of first resort for dispute resolution à la dirty laundry airings.

Notwithstanding, never toss in the towel on advocating your faith in Jesus Christ as personal Lord and Savior. Nor should you expect your former spouse to do so in pressing forward doing otherwise.

This is yet another of many challenges to your faith. You must present your convictions with the reality of credible (by definition, how your child will see his or her other parent) opposition. Additionally, you will no doubt need to wrestle with how you will do this: I’ve got to imagine that Satan would be pretty pleased to have one parent say that the evil one was behind what the other parent was endorsing here. That’s not a judgment you want to be making or owning.

Resist potential temptation.

Instead, look to the loving reassurance we have from God in James 5:13-15. “Are any of you suffering hardships? You should pray. Are any of you happy? You should sing praises. Are any of you sick? You should call for the elders of the church to come and pray over you, anointing you with oil in the name of the Lord. Such a prayer offered in faith will heal the sick, and the Lord will make you well. And if you have committed any sins, you will be forgiven.”

Think about the irony of this discussion. Of all things to be considered under the best interests of your minor child, wouldn’t you think that the issue of religion would be first, best, and finally brought by you to Jesus? And that all trust in this be vested in Him?

The court may not be the answer. But it provides a good model for how to approach the problem: What do you see evidenced of the value you claim for faith when considering factor (b) in your own case? Act accordingly.

Dell Deaton is a divorce pastoral counselor, independently practicing since 1983. He can be reached through www.divorcepastor.wordpress.com or on (734) 668-2001 in Saline. Also check out /divorcepastor to Follow me on Twitter.