## Facts

- William T. Carney and Ellen J. Carney married as teenagers and had two sons (born 1969 and 1971).
- After separation, Ellen relinquished custody to William by written agreement (1972).
- William moved to the West Coast, lived with Lori Rivera (who acted as a stepmother), and maintained a stable household for the children for about five years.
- In 1976, William became a quadriplegic after a military reserve accident; he spent about a year hospitalized but remained in frequent contact with the children through regular visits and weekend home stays.
- Ellen had virtually no contact with, and provided no support for, the children for nearly five years.
- William made adjustments to continue parenting despite his disability, including acquiring a modified van for transportation.

## Issues

1. Whether a trial court abuses its discretion by transferring custody from a long-time custodial parent to the other parent primarily due to the custodial parent’s physical disability, without evidence-based findings of detriment to the children.
2. Whether, given an established custodial arrangement, a custody change requires a persuasive showing of changed circumstances materially affecting the children’s welfare.

## Decision

- The California Supreme Court unanimously held the trial court abused its discretion in transferring custody from William to Ellen.
- The Court reversed the custody portion of the interlocutory dissolution decree and remanded for further proceedings.
- The Court found the trial court relied on stereotyped assumptions about disability and “normal” parent-child relationships rather than an individualized assessment of William’s actual caregiving and the children’s welfare.

## Legal Principles

- A parent’s physical disability may not be treated as prima facie evidence of parental unfitness or probable detriment to the child; custody determinations must rest on evidence, not stereotypes.
- Courts must make an individualized, realistic appraisal of the parent’s functional parenting capacity, including accommodations, assistive technology, and support from other adults.
- When a child has been in a stable custodial placement, a custody modification requires a persuasive showing of changed circumstances substantially affecting the child’s welfare.
- “Best interests of the child” analysis must be grounded in actual conditions and effects on the child; conjecture about future harm is insufficient.

## Conclusion

The court set aside a custody transfer driven largely by assumptions about physical disability, holding that custody decisions must be evidence-based and individualized, and that an established custody arrangement may be changed only upon a persuasive showing of changed circumstances and actual detriment to the child.


In re Marriage of Carney, 24 Cal. 3d 725 (Cal. 1979)