In South Carolina, the family court can award custody or visitation to persons who meets the criteria of a “de facto custodian” as defined by S.C. Code § 63-15-60. This code defines a “de facto custodian” as:
a person who has been shown by clear and convincing evidence to have been the primary caregiver for and financial supporter of a child who:
(1) has resided with the person for a period of six months or more if the child is under three years of age; or
(2) has resided with the person for a period of one year or more if the child is three years of age or older.
Such de facto custodians can be awarded custody or visitation if the family court “finds by clear and convincing evidence that the child’s natural parents are unfit or that other compelling circumstances exist.”
This “de facto custodian” statute allows the family court to grant custody or visitation to persons who have spent significant time raising the child at issue. This code section can often be applied by relatives of family friends who have raised a child when the parents were absent. Thus a grandmother who raised her grandchild while her daughter was incarcerated, serving in the military, or otherwise too preoccupied to raise her own child, can seek court-ordered visitation, or even custody, without having to meet the requirements of the grandparent visitation statute, S.C. Code § 63-3-530 (A)(33).
The October 16, 2024, Court of Appeals opinion in SCDSS v.Caldwell, held that a juvenile cannot be ordered into confinement for an evaluation
Pet peeve: attorneys who value their time more than your time
A pet peeve of mine, for which I am getting increasingly peevish, is attorneys who set office procedures that value their time more
On September 25, 2024, the South Carolina Supreme Court issued a revised order on “Duties of Family Court Chief Judges for Administrative Purposes.”
