In any dispute as to the custody of a minor child involving a parent and a nonparent, there shall be a presumption that it is in the best interest of the child to be in the custody of the parent, which presumption may be rebutted by showing that it would be detrimental to the child to permit the parent to have custody.

(P.A. 85-244, S. 2, 3; P.A. 86-224; 86-403, S. 81, 132.)

History: P.A. 86-224 added provision re grounds for rebuttal of presumption; P.A. 86-403 made technical changes.

Cited. 236 C. 582; 237 C. 233; 241 C. 767. Statutory presumption rebutted; trial court required to determine issue of custody on basis of child's best interest without regard to presumption in favor of the parent. 244 C. 403. Court upheld constitutionality of statute but held that the statutory presumption in favor of parental custody may be rebutted only in exceptional circumstances and upon showing that it would be clearly damaging, injurious or harmful for the child to remain in the parent's custody; in order to uphold constitutionality of section, court imposed a standing requirement that a third party allege a parent-like relationship with the child for third party custody awards and third parties seeking intervention in existing custody proceedings. 285 C. 24.

Cited. 6 CA 707; 24 CA 402; Id., 426; 40 CA 675. Section is restricted to dissolution and custody matters brought under this chapter and is not applicable in cases that do not arise from dissolution of marriage, legal separation or annulment actions. 153 CA 599.

Cited. 44 CS 169.