## Facts

- Renee B. and Michael B. divorced in 1986 after five years of marriage, and Renee was awarded sole custody of their daughter, Rebecca.
- Michael received visitation, including overnight visitation.
- In 1992, Renee petitioned to end Michael’s unsupervised (including overnight) visitation and to require supervision after learning that Michael and eight-year-old Rebecca had been sleeping in the same bed during overnights.
- Michael cross-petitioned seeking a transfer of sole legal custody to him.
- Three court-involved professionals (the Clinical Director of the Family Court Mental Health Service, a psychiatrist, and a supervising social worker) interviewed Rebecca and both parents and recommended transferring custody to Michael.
- Rebecca’s law guardian also recommended transfer of custody to Michael.
- The record contained no evidence that the bed-sharing was sexual or otherwise improper; the arrangement was described as innocent and had lasted about one year before stopping.
- Evidence presented to the court indicated that Rebecca preferred to live with Michael and had a closer relationship with him.
- Evidence also indicated that Renee used severe discipline, including spanking, slapping, and locking Rebecca in her room.
- The psychiatrist retained by Renee recommended that Renee retain sole custody, but the opinion was based only on interviews with Renee and people referred by her and did not include interviews of Michael or Rebecca.
- Without giving a meaningful explanation, the Family Court rejected the testimony and recommendations of the three court-involved professionals as “flawed” and not credible, denied Michael’s request for custody, and left sole custody with Renee.
- Michael appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the Family Court’s refusal to transfer custody to the father lacked a sound and substantial basis in the record under New York’s best-interests-of-the-child standard.
2. Whether the Family Court could reject, without adequate record support, the aligned recommendations of the court-involved mental-health professionals and the child’s law guardian, where those recommendations followed interviews of both parents and the child.
3. What weight should be given to a custody recommendation from a psychiatrist who did not evaluate the child or the nonretaining parent.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division modified the Family Court’s order.
- The court granted Michael’s cross-petition and transferred sole legal custody of Rebecca to him.
- The court granted Renee liberal visitation.
- The order was otherwise affirmed to the extent consistent with the custody transfer.

## Legal Principles

- A custody determination is governed by the child’s best interests, including the quality of the home environment and parental guidance offered to the child.
- Although trial courts receive deference in custody matters, an order must have a sound and substantial basis in the record; an appellate court may modify where that standard is not met.
- In custody litigation, recommendations from mental-health professionals are more persuasive when the professional has evaluated both parents and the child.
- A court may give limited weight to a mental-health opinion based solely on interviews with one parent and that parent’s referrals, without interviewing the child or the other parent.
- A child’s stated preference may be considered, particularly when supported by other proof regarding the child’s relationships and well-being, but it is not controlling.
- A parent’s conduct aimed at cutting the other parent out of the child’s life is a relevant best-interests factor.
- Bed-sharing during visitation, without proof of sexual misconduct or harm to the child, is not treated as automatically disqualifying and must be assessed in context.

## Conclusion

The Appellate Division concluded that the Family Court’s refusal to transfer custody could not stand because it rejected the only thorough, court-involved evaluations—along with the law guardian’s recommendation—without a sound record basis, and the remaining proof (including the child’s stated preference, the mother’s harsh discipline, and evidence that she sought to exclude the father) supported awarding sole legal custody to the father with liberal visitation to the mother.


In re Rebecca B., 611 N.Y.S.2d 831 (1994)