EP #15: Understanding Custody in Maryland with Guest Michael Mastracci, Esq.

Custody cases are some of the most emotionally charged parts of any divorce—and one of the most misunderstood. In this episode, attorney and mediator Cary Jacobson sits down with Maryland family law attorney Michael Mastracci, Esq., who has been practicing since 1989 and has represented hundreds of clients in custody disputes.

What makes Michael's perspective especially valuable: he's served as a court-appointed Best Interest Attorney, meaning he's been appointed to represent children directly in custody proceedings. That behind-the-scenes view of what courts are actually looking for is something most parents never get to see.

In this conversation, they cover:

• The difference between legal and physical custody in Maryland—and why it matters
• The "best interest of the child" standard and which factors carry the most weight
• What a Best Interest Attorney actually does and how it differs from representing a parent
• Common mistakes parents make in custody cases that hurt their position
• What judges genuinely want to see from both parents
• Practical steps you can take right now if you're in a custody dispute—or want to avoid one
• How understanding custody factors can help you resolve things outside of court

Whether you're navigating a custody case now or just want to understand how the process works, this episode gives you a clearer picture—and a more grounded path forward.

🔗 Learn more about Jacobson Family Law: www.jacobsonfamilylaw.com 

📍 Serving Maryland families through divorce, custody, and mediation.

Visit jacobsonfamilylaw.com to learn more.

Visit jacobsonworkshop.com to learn more.

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:00

If you look at how much time, effort, and money and wear and tear and grief that either parent or both parents will spend in litigating a custody case, okay? If you look at that, do it this way. If you mediate it, okay, one mediation session, here's what I like to see: a commitment that says, you know what, we're gonna mediate this thing until we settle it. And I don't care if it's 25 mediation sessions, it's a heck of a lot cheaper than going to court, you know.

SPEAKER_00 0:24

Welcome to the drama-free divorce podcast. I'm your host, attorney and mediator Carrie Jacobson. Each week, we bring you practical guidance, real conversations, and expert insights to help you navigate divorce with clarity, confidence, and less conflict. If you're ready for a calmer, more empowered path forward, you're in the right place. Welcome back to the Drama Free Divorce Podcast, where we talk about how to approach divorce and custody with clarity, confidence, and less conflict. I'm your host, Carrie Jacobson, attorney and mediator at Jacobson Family Law. Today's topic is one of the most emotional and often misunderstood parts of divorce involving children, and that's custody. Joining me today is Michael Mistrassi, a Maryland attorney with decades of experience handling divorce and child custody cases. He's been practicing since 1989 and has represented hundreds of clients in custody disputes. He also serves as a court-appointed best entertainment attorney, which means when there's a custody dispute between parents, the Maryland court can appoint him to represent the children, which gives him a unique lens into what courts are actually looking for. Michael, thank you so much for being here.

SPEAKER_01 1:34

Thank you, Carrie. Before we begin, I just want to say for people watching, if they haven't done this, they really need to look at your website and your podcast. You've got some awesome, very professionally done pieces there. And more importantly, they're full of good information.

SPEAKER_00 1:47

So thank you so much. So as I mentioned, you've been doing this a long time. And I know your experience with custody litigation and settlement negotiations is what has led you to focus heavily in this area. From your perspective, what do people not understand about custody cases when they first walk into your office or talk to you about a case?

SPEAKER_01 2:07

Excellent question. Because I actually say a lot of times when it comes to custody litigation and custody cases, you really don't know what you don't know. And I think that parents slash litigants come into the attorney's office and/or prepare for court by saying everything I say the judge is going to believe, and the other side's lying. So the judge isn't going to believe that. And they just have this concept of what they say goes. And I think the other thing is that what they do a lot is they focus on all the negative things about the other parent. So it's like you know, they think they're going to win by trashing the other parent. And ironically, it's often the opposite that works. So if you say, I'll use he, for example, it's basically if you say instead of he's this, he's that, he does all these things bad, he's not a not a fit parent. If you say, Oh, he's a good dad, I know he loves our child, he tries the best that he can, but I think that you know, I am a better suited person to have soul custody, legal custody, whatever, because I do this, I do that, I do this. You know, so it's kind of like you've got to obviously build yourself up, but strictly tearing down the other parent is not gonna gain you favor in the long run. Unless it's self-evident. For example, if a dad is just got out of a heroin rehab or something, then that that might be a different animal. You gotta point out obvious things, but you don't want to embellish on things that are somewhat inconsequential and may not even be believed.

SPEAKER_00 3:26

Yeah, I've seen that often where people nitpick on things about the other person and they try to make that person, you know, that other parent seem like they are doing this terrible job instead of letting the court know why they are better and better suited to do those things or have been doing those things. And oftentimes, you know, the court sees right through that. And you throwing mud is getting more mud actually on your hands. Right.

SPEAKER_01 3:53

It comes right back at you.

SPEAKER_00 3:54

Absolutely. So you mentioned in your comment about legal custody and about physical custody. And I want you to kind of explain what those two things are because here in Maryland, where we are, there is a distinction between legal custody and physical custody. So could you please explain that for our landers?

SPEAKER_01 4:12

Sure. Let's start with physical custody. Physical custody basically means time with the child. So who has how much time with the child? Physical custody is important for the parent-child relationship, obviously. The you know, the generally speaking, the more time, the better for each parent. And there have been some real trends, I think, that go to shared physical custody schedules. And there's a couple of different schedules that the courts will adopt or we as lawyers will suggest and things like that. But the physical custody also is important because it plays into child support calculations. And I think this is a terrible thing all the way around from the beginning. So what happens is let's suppose that it's not a 50-50 schedule. And I'm again, I'll use dad stereotypically. So let's say dad would be the one paying child support. And if both parents make the same amount of money, then if it's 50-50, nobody would pay anybody child support. However, let's just assume that dad makes significantly more than mom. If it's 50-50 physical custody, he would still be paying an amount of child support. But if he only had, for example, every other weekend, his child support would be greatly increased. So what happens is time equates to money. Right. I know you've had to see this before, and I've seen on many occasions. I'll digress for a minute. I had a client that sticks out in my mind who came in and was complaining about his child support being so high. And I said, Well, what's your schedule? So I have like every other weekend. That's one of the big reasons why your schedule was that way it is. Had never asked for more time. It had been that way for years. And when I explained the child support guidelines, he immediately said, Well, I want 50-50. So that's clearly a monetary decision. So that I think that's really sad the way they set it up in the law now, as you know. And I don't recall the case name, but there's a relatively new case on child support, which makes it almost impossible to deviate from those guidelines. The court has said child support belongs to the child. It's not for mom and dad to bargain in the way in a custody battle or divorce proceedings. That makes life difficult for lawyers, I think.

SPEAKER_00 6:01

Yeah, I would say, you know, that's something that I see regularly, especially in my mediation practice where parents are getting along and they don't necessarily want to request child support to be paid by the other pair. And so it is something that we are having to figure out along the way, because you know, what we don't want to have happen is them get to court and basically the judge say you have to pay child support or you have to receive child support. So we have to be mindful of that in figuring out how to address that issue, whether that's them splitting expenses that are outside the guidelines, like extracurricular activities, travel, you know, various things or you know, other ways. But to your point, physical custody does often get wrapped up in the negotiation of child support because they do, they are tied to one another. Can you go back and explain what legal custody is?

SPEAKER_01 6:57

Okay, so legal custody really is about decision making. So the significant decisions in a child's life that parents need to make, say, for example, school, private school, public school, which school, medical decisions, therapy decisions, privileges training, upbringing, things of that nature. It's not the day-to-day stuff. When a child is with mom makes the daily decisions, child's with dad makes the daily decisions, but it's basically the more important decisions. So basically, if one has sole legal custody, then that parent can make those decisions technically without input with the other parent at all, just make the decisions as he or she sees fit. When it's joint legal custody, the premise is that the parents get along well enough that they can make decisions together without devolving into arguments and disputes and things like that. Kind of if presumably if they had a marriage where they both work together in those kind of decisions, it just carries over into a post-divorce situation. So legal custody, again, is about decision making. What has developed in the last several years, and this is not a legal standard or legal definition as far as that the courts would necessarily mandate, but where I believe it came from years ago is again going back to the man-woman thing. Let's suppose that the father is insistent and he wants joint legal custody and may not even understand what that really means. And sadly, as long as that person sees the word joint legal custody, and the paragraph will typically say constrainted by our lawyer, the party shall have joint legal custody as defined herein. Joint legal custody means mom shall advise father in advance to all the decisions he's considering. She shall consult with him and take his input, consider everything, and then if they disagree, she makes the final decision. So it's basically a glorified way of uh sole legal custody. We see that more and more now as far as a definition of joint legal custody. And when it's really a kind of a misnomer, it's really not joint legal custody. But right. So people need to be careful of that. But again, quite frankly, is it really that important sometimes to have joint legal custody? If that's again, let's go back to mom. If mom has always historically made good decisions, dad just deferred to mom anyway, and no matter what he may think of her now as a person or whatever, but regardless of there's a reason for the breakup, the bottom line is if she can make good decisions, he should hopefully be able to just trust that. You know, obviously a duty that probably doesn't have to be spoken is keep me informed, let me know what's going on. But you know, I trust you, you're a good mom, and you know, keep making the good decisions you've always done. A little buttering up never hurts, right?

SPEAKER_00 9:27

Right. But that often is one of those negotiation things that we see where giving mom in that scenario that tiebreaker, that if something they are in an impasse, that she would make the final decision. The other thing that I see a lot of is if they come to an impasse, not that one parent would get to make tiebreaker, but that they would go back to mediation to try to resolve that particular issue before either party goes and files something in court to modify it.

SPEAKER_01 9:54

I'm glad you said that because that is like a very common paragraph, if you will, or a point in a separation agreement or child custody agreement. And I've seen sometimes where, I mean, ultimately it's great for you. If they come back to mediation, you can help straighten them out and put them on the right path again. But a lot of times they'll look at this and say, wait a minute, I gotta go to mediation. Is it gonna be in person? Is it gonna be Zoom? I gotta work, it costs money. Let's just work it out. So sometimes just having that mediation clause in an agreement will let's force them to re-evaluate what they really want to fight about.

SPEAKER_00 10:24

Absolutely. And the reason I often see it in there is because without it, and if they just have joint legal custody, right, then they can't come to an agreement. Then one of them has to go back to court to make a modification if there's a dispute and the court's gonna make them to go to mediation anyway. At least do that step first. That way you you can tell the court we've already tried to resolve this on our own. We can't, we've gone to mediation, so now let's move to the next step if it gets that far.

SPEAKER_01 10:52

I agree. Because if you don't have that cause and you want to change something, what's it gonna cost you to file for modification? Wait maybe a year to have it resolve. And then the other thing, too, is on a modification. If a lot of times you'll see people that if they got to modify something because of a joint legal situation, they may also want to try to modify the schedule. Right. And of course, to do that successfully in court, you've got to show material change in circumstances. It can't just be, oh, I want another bite at the apple or an update. It's gonna be something really worthy of the court considering. It's not something you think sometimes. Right.

SPEAKER_00 11:23

Now, I know that Maryland recently made a new law that judges have to basically consider certain factors if a custody dispute is before then. Can you please kind of go through what those factors are before a judge makes a decision? And I just want to point out that this is on an initial custody case. So there's not been a court order before, and we were been talking a little bit about modifications. This is really a brand new case that parents haven't been able to resolve on their own. And so now this case is coming to court and a judge has to make a decision based on custody. And really the standard is what is in this child or children's best interest. But now we have several factors that the court must consider when they're making that determination.

SPEAKER_01 12:09

Right. And that was 2025. The Maryland legislature discussed that and ultimately was signed into law. It's in section 9201 of the family law article. And before it got to that, there were two cases way back when Gummer County versus Saunders in 1978. And that discussed basically the best interest of the child situation, but basically determining that the standard is the best interest of the child. Judge could more or less consider anything that he or she wanted or thought was remotely relevant, had come up with something, and really didn't have to put on the record how he or she arrived at that decision. They should, but they weren't mandated to. So another case that occurred in 1986 was Taylor versus Taylor. And that basically focused on still the best interest of the child standard, but also and zeroed down onto the joint custody situation, meaning the ability to get along, the ability to have productive conversations about children and things like that. And that was a very important factor in deciding cases. But ultimately, it still was part of the best interest of the child standard. And today the new law in Maryland is still about the best interest of the child standard. But these 16 factors that the court must consider are important because the judge is now required to list each and every factor on the record and give supporting information as to why he or she found in a certain way. So ultimately, that would make it easier if there was an appeal. But an appeal in a custody case, well, the term that comes in mind I won't say, but the appeal to the child custody case where the judge has the ultimate discretion is usually a waste of time and money. Barring, it's got to be an error of law. And there's really not much law in a custody case. It's all fact-driven and determination by a judge as to how to evaluate those facts. Again, it does put things on the record, and then a parent hearing the decision will at least maybe for the first time realize, oh, I should have considered this, or maybe I wasn't as perfect as I thought I was in this area. So those factors basically, one is the uh relationship with the child, with each each parent's relationship. Again, these are broad things open to interpretation. But uh, by example, like if one parent is never involved, the child never does anything, and one is always involved, one does all the homework, you know, every arrangement to play days, just does everything. Sometimes, you know, there can be a parent and child disconnect, if you will, you know, for whatever reason. So they factor in all those kind of things. And again, going back to the tailor-retailer situation, it's the ability to communicate. So that is a second factor. They look at how well do these people communicate? Should I award joint legal custody? And they, if you don't communicate well and it's all hostility, yeah, I can award to join legal custody, and you shouldn't, anyway. So they also look at number three, the stability of the home environment. Could yeah, it could be a multitude of things. If one person lives in a pig sty and the other one has a very nice, clean, orderly home, that's a factor. And sometimes if there's a best interest attorney appointed, and that's what I used to like in my role was doing that is I have access to each parent's house, I have access to the child, I have access to the school records, to mental health records, to medical records, and you can really get an in-depth snapshot of what's going on. Whereas the court, you know, you've got lawyers spinning things, you've got rules of evidence, you've got lies. Imagine that. So bottom line is you know, you in that role of best interest attorney or child counsel, they call it sometimes, you can really you know get into the nitty-gritty of it all. The other factor they look at is the child's preference. And this is really rarely done on a young child, basically. There's no set age that a child gets to testify in court, it's very much frowned upon, even as a teenager, they frown upon it. They just don't want to put children in that position. But the child's preference, I've always kind of kind of had an issue with that because as you know, if you've got a six-year-old saying, I want to be with this one or that one who really doesn't know why, you know. One example I've given before, which maybe I should find a better one, but suppose you have a 13-year-old girl, right? And she says, I want to live with daddy because he lets me have boys in the house when he's not who, and we get to drink beer and smoke pot. Well, that might be important to the child, but it's really not a factor to consider as far as her preference to the court. Geographic proximity is another one where how close do the parents live to each other. Now, I've had ones where they they live literally across the street from each other post-divorce, and it's like I think two or three children, they can pretty much go freely back and forth as they see fit, and the parents work together well. But if they live three hours apart, two hours apart, that makes it difficult to come up with a schedule that takes into consideration school activities and things of that nature. So the seventh factor that the courts look at now is the family relationships. And they've always looked at this these kind of things before in those cases that we discussed a minute ago. But basically, now that it's felt out family relationships, how well does the child interact or how often with siblings, with relatives, things of that nature. And if one parent will prohibit or severely limit the child from seeing the other side of the family, that does not go over well. Fitness of the parents, I guess that's kind of again, these are all open to subjective situations. But fitness, again, it could be a parent who is really on the ball, and it could be a parent who has on the other side severe mental health issues. I mean, we all have issues, but sometimes if the mental health issues interfere with your parenting and being an effective parent, that's something to be considered. I mean, I think that comes more or less. The courts will, I think, not legally presume that both parents are fit, but they tend to do that until their parent is proven otherwise. The character reputation of the parties that goes into the bashing game, someone. Well, I guess I just had one where the father was just incarcerated for a handgun charge while he's a convicted felon, facing five years, no parole, and has a long criminal record. I think the mother wins it on that that character reputation.

SPEAKER_00 17:59

And that's where we can also bring in other witnesses that are not just the parents to talk about what the you know that per person or parents' character is.

SPEAKER_01 18:09

And actually, I'm glad you said that. That that's an important thing for trial-wise. I mean, it's one thing for somebody to talk about myself, you know, talk about themselves in a positive light. But when you can bring in, for example, the school teacher that says, Oh, he or she comes on all the field trips and interacts wonderfully with the children. In fact, we broke into small groups, and he is so good with the kids, there's an extra child, and I gave the extra child to his group, you know? That says a lot. 10 factor 10 opportunities for the child. Basically, it shouldn't be a wealth contest. Who can provide material things necessarily? It's something they might look at as far as if there's a disparity in who can provide what for the child or children. I guess opportunities could also mean the ability to, based on maybe on location, to interact with other family members close by and things of that nature. And maybe it's one where one parent says, I want to put the child in a private school, which is an excellent school. The other parent doesn't want to do anything like that. So if the parent wanting private school were to have physical custody, then that would be an opportunity that the child could have that may not otherwise have. So they look at the age, health, and gender of the children. I don't know what that necessarily means, a lot of it. I mean, because okay, if the child's 10, the child's 12, the child's four, good health, bad health, male, female, whatever. I don't know who that goes to, quite frankly. I've never really understood that. Back years ago, when there was an unofficial maternal preference, it was kind of like, okay, young children go with mom primarily. And when they get older, they can be in a more shared physical relationship. Factor 12, they look at the length and the separation. That's separation between either the parents or the a parent and a child. More importantly, is the parent and the child. So if there has been a situation that the one parent hasn't seen the child often or regularly, that's a factor. But the flip side of that is if I want to see my child on a regular basis and you're prohibiting me from doing that just because you're mad at me, that doesn't cut it in the eyes of the court. Similarly, in paragraph or a factor number 13, prior abandonment, that's a big one. If there is evidence of, and that's easy to prove, that the prior abandonment of the child that hurts in a big way. I remember I was involved in one couple years ago where uh mother had didn't abandon the child, but they made it look like she did. She had a very bad drug problem, and she had her, it was a relative, said, Look, basically, take my daughter, it's the only child she's got. I gotta clean myself up, etc. And she actually signed over a consent order for custody. So it was officially done. So when she did get herself together, went to school, had a good job, off the drugs, proved she was off the drugs, the relative would not give the child back and was prohibiting her from having access. So ultimately, it was a modification of custody, and mom got the child back, and the relative got like nothing. But it's one of those times where the prior abandonment, if she hadn't got her act together and filed for custody or modification to custody, it would have never happened. You know, there's always a TAS to turn it around, and custody is never permanent. That's the other thing that we need to talk about. So, although she consented to the relative having custody, she was still able to come back and file for a modification of custody, and then they go back to the best interest of the child standard and basically do it over, but the facts are different now. So, on factor number 14, home stability, it's kind of basically it's a stable home versus an instable home. I think we all know what they look like. I mean, it could be issues with domestic violence and things like that in one household as well, would factor in there as well. Similarly, we would have abuse and neglect issues. Obviously, if a parent is abusing and neglecting a child, that's not good. And that's a factor that will have a lot of weight in the custody decision. At 16, they have like a catch all. The court is allowed to consider all other relevant factors, and relevant means what he or she is in the judge thinks is relevant. So it doesn't have to be on that list. It could be, well, one thing that's always important in a custody case is correct. Credibility. That one relevant fact could be, well, I saw the testimony, I heard it, I listened to it, I lost the parties on the stand. And man or sir, I don't believe a word you said other than your name. That's not a good thing. But that's a factor that certainly would get into a decision. So I think that's a pretty good summary of the new law, if you will. And again, that's family law 9201.

SPEAKER_00 22:19

There's a lot of them. And many of them, like you mentioned, are kind of common sense, you know. And so when you are considering bringing a custody action and this is being something that is going to be before a court, these are the things that you know we as attorneys are thinking about in putting together evidence. But you listeners as parents often have to be considering because these are the things that you're going to have to basically prove to a judge and let them make that decision. If you and your co-parent are unable to kind of come to an agreement on your own. Now I know you talked about this a little bit, and I just wanted to spend a little bit of time on this. As your role as a best interest attorney, that is something that I also do. Can you share briefly kind of how that role differs when you're representing a child versus when you're representing one of the parents in a custody issue?

SPEAKER_01 23:11

Sure. You have access to everything. And you also have access to the parents. Now, if they're represented by counsel and a lawyer could say, I don't want you speaking to my client without me present. That rarely, if ever happens, quite frankly, because it actually sends a signal to the best interest attorney that something isn't right here because the lawyer is trying to protect his or her client from shooting him or herself in the foot. I find that role, though, is I'm sure you do very, very rewarding. It's you can do a lot of good and you can force a lot of settlements. Because if you say, as you know, you're talking to the lawyer, say, look, I've seen all these things, all that, and I'm going to recommend that so and so have this, etc., etc. Well, your recommendation, especially if you have a good reputation, like I know you do, it's like if you recommend this is what I'm going to say to the court, chances are they're going to try to reach a settlement because you know what you say is going to carry a lot of weight. It's very rare, I think, that if a best interest attorney has done a thorough job and makes a recommendation, it's very rare that they disregard that recommendation. They may not take it, you know, in total, but certainly going to be a big part of what the court you know decides. And I I can't remember being in chambers before and with the other lawyer, and they say, Well, you know, Mr. Mostrosi, what is your recommendation? And I'll tell everybody, and the judge will look at the other lawyers, well, go settle the case.

SPEAKER_00 24:26

Right.

SPEAKER_01 24:27

You know, so it's a very effective tool for settlement. And what people don't realize on that whole settlement line, if you think you don't get along now before your court case, after a contested custody case, it's just going to be worse for a very, very long time and may not ever get better.

SPEAKER_00 24:42

So yeah, and it's very common that those cases that do go to a trial, just as you mentioned before, custody cases can be modified so they stay in the system for a long time because ultimately one parent is unhappy with the outcome. So, you know, the case continues to come back over and over again, and then you find yourself in a situation where five, 10, 15, sometimes 20 years go by and you've been in court nonstop that entire time.

SPEAKER_01 25:09

And a lot of times it comes back, maybe not as a modification, but if the aggrieved parent doesn't like what's going on, or if the custodial parent fails to do something to the letter of the court order, they want to file for contempt and go back into the court order, contempts and contempts as you want to argue something egregious, a simple contempt. You know, okay, he or she denied me access on a Friday night when I should have had the child overnight. I'll fall for contempt. If anything, you're gonna get a slap on the wrist saying please follow the court order, you know. It's just a lot of wasted time, effort, money to prove a point, and doesn't really matter.

SPEAKER_00 25:42

I'd like to leave our listeners with just you know a little bit of practical advice. So for anyone who may be listening who's at the beginning or in the middle of a custody dispute, or someone who's trying to avoid one altogether. What are two or three things that you would recommend that they focus on?

SPEAKER_01 26:00

Communication. There's a gentleman named Bill Eddie who's out of California. I know you've seen him speak before, so so have I. He's I think he's a lawyer, a psychologist, uh writer. I mean, he's everything. But he has a whole series of books on communication for people going through divorce. Like, if you send me an email, I should not be sending you three paragraphs back about how nasty you were when we were married and everything else. Basically, it's like just convey information, be kind or whatever, and communicate that way. That's a huge thing for people to learn as to how to better communicate. There's also those parenting apps that are effective, like App Family Wizard is one, and was it App Close is another. You can document all your interaction with the other parents. Some of them have calendars and schedules, so those are effective as well. But I think the uh biggest piece of advice, settle the case. And here's the thing: if you look at how much time, effort, and money and wear and tear and grief that either parent or both parents will spend in litigating a custody case. Okay, if you look at that, do it this way. If you mediate it, okay, one mediation session, here's what I like to see a commitment that says, you know what, we're gonna mediate this thing until we settle it. And I don't care if it's 25 mediation sessions, it's a heck of a lot cheaper than going to court, you know. I did something years ago called marathon mediation, where I would take folks and give them like a flat fee and then say, look, here's the deal, I'll wear you out before you wear me out. And you know, and we would have as much many conversations of mediation, some together, some independently. And yeah, it it would work when it happens, but I think people just or I didn't probably explain it well enough as to what it is and things like that, but it's a pretty good concept, I think, anyway.

SPEAKER_00 27:38

Well, the goal, and the court does a good job of this as well. The goal is to give parents as many opportunities to settle their case as possible. That's why the courts order parents to go to mediation. They have settlement conferences and they have those resources so that hopefully the parents can resolve it because the courts don't want to be making these decisions. I mean, they will if they have to, but they know that when parents are the ones to make the decisions, it ultimately is a better outcome for everyone in the end. But there are obviously some scenarios where it can't happen. And so we have the courts and the judges there to make decisions if they're needed to.

SPEAKER_01 28:17

And then one day we should have a conversation about the types of certain lawyers that stand in the way of settlement.

SPEAKER_00 28:22

There's that as well.

SPEAKER_01 28:23

And then that's that's for another day.

SPEAKER_00 28:26

Yes. How your case progresses is ultimately dependent on the attorney that you choose to represent you through that matter. So you it really does make a difference when you're choosing someone because it can have night and day differences and consequences.

SPEAKER_01 28:42

Yeah, we don't need people that say, I want a shark or a barracuda. Absolutely.

SPEAKER_00 28:46

Well, Michael, thank you so much for being here and sharing your insight. I think that today's conversation was really helpful and helped demystify some of the issues around custody and can hopefully give parents a clearer path forward that's focused on their children and not just conflict between them. Thank you to our listeners for joining the Drama Fruit Divorce podcast. And Michael, can you please share with our listeners how they can find out more about you and the services you provide?

SPEAKER_01 29:12

My website is mictheler.com. You can go there, that'll take you everywhere you need to go, frankly. Perfect.

SPEAKER_00 29:19

For our listeners, if this episode resonated with you, please consider sharing it with someone that may be navigating this custody or trying to better understand the process. To learn more about our work, go to our website at jacobsonfamilylaw.com. Until next time, I'm Carrie Jacobson reminding you that divorce doesn't have to be chaotic to the effective. Thanks for listening to the Drama Free Divorce Podcast. If you found today's episode helpful, be sure to follow, subscribe, and share it with someone who needs it. For more resources or to work with us, visit Jacobsonfamily Law.com. Until next time, stay grounded, stay informed, and stay drama free.