From a Florida Court of Appeals opinion released today:
[T]he father [petitioned] for modification of the final [custody] judgment, requesting primary residential custody of their [15-year-old] son…. [T]he trial court based its ruling on evidence that the father was more likely to ensure the child was engaged in productive, normal, and healthy extracurricular activities, and the child would benefit from a greater male influence in his life. The trial court concluded that the child’s development was “disturbingly retarded.” It went on to find that the child possessed unreasonable fears for his age, and had “unmanlike” toilet
behavior.[Footnote: The child would sit to urinate and was self-conscious about urinating in the
woods during excursions with the father.]
The court of appeals reversed, concluding that “the father failed to satisfy the extraordinary burden of showing a substantial and material change [in circumstances since the initial custody decision].” And the court seemed to dismiss the “toilet behavior” matter by saying, “The child simply did not conform to either the father’s or trial court’s perception of manliness.”