T.B. v. .S.R.

Page 2 of 58

Procedural History and Factual Background

The Court previously detailed the procedural history of this case in an Interim Custody Order on August 19, 2025, and a Reargument Order on October 3, 2025.¹At the outset of this final hearing, the parties stipulated that they understood it as "a continuation of the interim hearing" and that evidence presented at the interim hearing "shall be incorporated by reference."²Therefore, for the sake of judicial economy, the Court will only briefly outline the factual and procedural background here before summarizing the new testimony. Relevant evidence from the interim hearing will be introduced as appropriate in the Court's discussion of the statutory factors.

On December 31, 2024, A---- allegedly told Mother that Father sexually abused her the day before. Mother then took both children for forensic nurse evaluations at the emergency department at Nemours Children's Hospital. Nemours staff reported the incident to the Division of Family Services ("DFS") and the New Castle County Police Department ("NCCPD") and, on January 1, 2025, DFS implemented a safety plan prohibiting Father from contacting the children for thirty days.³Mother also sought and secured an emergency ex parte Protection From Abuse ("PFA") order on the theory that A----'s allegation was part of a larger pattern of abuse of both children, but she dismissed her petition before a final hearing.⁴

Father and Mother filed their respective cross-petitions for custody on January 24 and February 18, 2025.⁵On February 28, based on a purported safety plan violation, the Court issued an Emergency Ex Parte Order barring Father from any contact with the children.⁶At an emergency hearing on March 4, 2025, however, the Court learned that

Page 3 of 58

there was no DFS safety plan in effect but the DFS and NCCPD investigations remained pending. The Court therefore issued a new interim custody order granting Father phone contact and supervised daytime visitation and admonishing Mother not to interfere.⁷In April, another interim custody order increased Father's supervised family time from two to three days per week.⁸By May, DFS and NCCPD had closed their investigations without substantiating the allegations against Father. Father also agreed to complete a psychosexual evaluation with Dr. Alexander Gould.

The Court then held a two-day interim custody hearing and heard testimony from Mother, Father, and P------- L----, an unlicensed former mental health therapist who had been supervising Father's time with the children. On August 19, 2025, the Court issued an order maintaining the status quo for custody and visitation pending resolution at a final hearing. The Court also appointed Alfred Cave, III, Esq., as the children's guardian ad litem ("Child Attorney").⁹After the interim hearing, the parties agreed to submit to polygraph testing. On September 3, 2025, relying in part on the polygraph results, Father filed a Motion for Reargument,¹⁰which the Court denied after careful consideration.¹¹ The Court then held a custody trial on December 8 and 9, 2025, and January 9, 2026. Father presented testimony from Blythe D'Amico (a polygraph examiner), Dr. Gould, T----

- B----- ("Paternal Aunt"), P---- B----- ("Paternal Grandmother"), Emma Stockwin (a DFS investigator), and Father. Mother's case in chief included testimony from P------- M------

(her best friend) and Mother. The Child Attorney did not call any witnesses but questioned those called by Mother and Father.

Page 4 of 58

Trial Testimony

Blythe D'Amico, Polygraph Examiner Father first called Ms. D'Amico, the polygraph examiner who interviewed Mother and Father on August 21, 2025. Mother objected to the admission of Ms. D'Amico's testimony and report. The Child Attorney supported Father's position. Having previously admonished the parties that polygraph results are generally considered inadmissible for any purpose in Delaware,¹²the Court nevertheless reserved decision on whether they might be admissible in this context and conditionally permitted Ms. D'Amico to testify about her process, her conversations with the parties, and her results.

Ms. D'Amico is a retired parole officer who has been administering polygraph exams for approximately 15 years. In that time, she has conducted perhaps 2,500 or 3,000 polygraph tests in a variety of contexts, including criminal, post-conviction, and family matters. She has a bachelor's degree and is a member of various professional associations for polygraph examiners, and she considers herself an expert on polygraph exams. Notably, though Ms. D'Amico has been qualified as an expert "numerous . . . times" for polygraph results in other jurisdictions,¹³she has only been qualified as an expert in Delaware one time in 2022, and the results of her tests have never been relied on even to support a probable- cause affidavit.

Ms. D'Amico explained that she always uses the Lafayette 4000 computerized polygraph. Like all polygraphs, the Lafayette 4000 does not directly detect lies. Instead, it is designed to measure physiological responses correlated with deception and truth, compare them to baseline reactions to innocent questions, and produce a score indicating whether a person is probably lying. Despite the reliance on physiological responses like blood pressure and breathing, Ms. D'Amico testified that a test-taker's nervousness is "not

Page 5 of 58

a concern."¹⁴By asking control questions during a pre-exam interview, she ensures that each person's baseline accounts for any nervousness. But she also conceded that the machine is right only about 85% of the time. Additionally, if the system identifies likely deception in any of a person's answers, they are deemed to have failed the entire exam and to have been lying in all their answers, regardless of the individual polygraph results. The polygraph examinations in this case took place on August 21, 2025. Ms. D'Amico spent between sixty and ninety minutes with each party. She testified that neither seemed particularly nervous or anxious, though she also acknowledged that she had to remind Mother to breathe normally. After a pre-examination interview, each parent was asked three pointed questions relevant to the alleged sexual abuse. Father's denials all produced

"no significant reactions," meaning that "his physiological outputs d[id] not produce any reactions that were significant enough to measure as an indication of deception."¹⁵But when Mother denied falsely accusing Father, threatening to falsely accuse him, or training the children to falsely accuse him, the polygraph measured "significant reactions"

consistent with lying.

Dr. Alexander Gould, Psychosexual Evaluator

The Court next heard from Dr. Gould, a Staff Clinical Psychologist at the Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center and a Forensic Evaluator with Forensic Associates of Delaware. He holds a doctorate in psychology and is licensed and in good standing in Delaware. In addition, Dr. Gould is a member of the American Psychological Association and the Delaware Sex Offender Management Board. He has conducted roughly 100 psychosexual evaluations over the previous ten years, most often in criminal cases. Consequently, the Court qualified him without objection as an expert in psychological and psychosexual evaluations.

Page 6 of 58

At Mother's request, Dr. Gould met with Father on May 30, 2025, and examined him for almost four hours. He also obtained other records and interviewed Mother and Paternal Grandmother to inform his evaluation. His questions and report applied three established psychological approaches: the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-3 ("MMPI-3"), the Sexual Violence Risk-20, version 2 ("SVR-20-V2"), and the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors ("SAPROF"). The MMPI-3 relies on self-reported data to broadly evaluate a person's personality and emotional functioning. Then, the SVR-20 and SAPROF more specifically assess sexual abuse risk and protective factors, respectively. They are scored by the examiner based on the MMPI-3 results, conversations with the subject, interviews with others (here, Mother and Paternal Grandmother), and other sources of information. Based on his forensic examination, Dr. Gould concluded that Father "pretty clearly"

presents a low risk of future sexual offending.¹⁶Though Father had a "domineering interpersonal style"¹⁷that could lead to "potential interpersonal difficulties,"¹⁸he displayed good coping skills, insignificant risk factors, strong protective factors, and "no notable dysfunction."¹⁹He also had no apparent concerns for hallucinations, impulsivity, or paraphilic behaviors, and there was no evidence that Father had been abused as a child.²⁰ Dr. Gould identified Father's primary stressor as the dissolution of his marriage, compounded by restrictions on contact with his daughters and the impact of the allegations on his military career.²¹But despite the stress of this proceeding, Dr. Gould found that Father had displayed resilience and saw no apparent disorder or vulnerability for which he might need mental health treatment.

Page 7 of 58

Reviewing polygraph results is not a standard part of Dr. Gould's evaluations. At Mother's request, however, he advised Ms. D'Amico on clinically useful questions to ask Father and considered Father's polygraph results as "one data point . . . among many."²²But he also testified that, although Father's polygraph results were "consistent with the compilation of factors . . . that are already indicative of a low risk," the evaluation result would have been the same had he never seen the polygraph report.²³ Importantly, Dr. Gould made clear that his evaluation examines the risk of future offending and is not "detective work" intended to determine whether or not past sexual abuse occurred.²⁴He did, however, find it "notable" that both the NCCPD and DFS investigations found no evidence to substantiate Mother's allegations of sexual abuse.²⁵Dr. Gould also remarked that Father appeared open to treatment if that would improve his situation even if treatment were not warranted. Consequently, Dr. Gould concluded that Father is not a danger to his children or other children.

T----- B-----, Paternal Aunt

Father's sister, T----- B----- ("Paternal Aunt"), lives in Alexandria, Virginia, but she is very close with Father and sees the children once or twice per month. The girls call her

"auntie." During her family visits, they all go out together to eat or to visit museums, festivals, and other outdoor events. She has no concerns with Father's ability to appropriately house or care for the children, but she observed that the children—A---- in particular—have expressed confusion and unhappiness about their inability to see Father more or go to his home. She also believes that Father's limited presence is depriving A----

and F---- of a meaningful relationship with a healthy father figure. Paternal Aunt was once similarly close with Mother. Early in Mother's and Father's relationship, Paternal Aunt spoke frequently with Mother, and Mother disclosed to her that

Page 8 of 58

her own childhood experiences had made her fearful that her own children would be sexually violated by an adult. Around 2023 or 2024, however, Paternal Aunt's relationship with Mother began to grow distant. During this time, Paternal Aunt was aware that Mother took the lead on childcare while Father stepped back from caregiving tasks like changing diapers or taking the children to daycare. Paternal Aunt believed that Mother imposed these role changes and that Father "just went with it to keep the peace" because he loved Mother.²⁶

Tensions boiled over on a disastrous trip to the Poconos in January 2023, after which Mother and Father asked for a "family meeting" to discuss the situation with Paternal Grandmother and Paternal Aunt.²⁷Mother accused Father of sexual abusing F---- and revealed that she had placed cameras in the marital home. Father denied the incident she referenced and said he was asleep. Paternal Aunt was concerned by Mother's behavior because planting cameras in the home was "not typically normal."²⁸It appeared to her that Mother was anxious and eager to prove that something had really happened. But Paternal Aunt believed Father and was surprised by the allegations because she had worked with Mother just weeks earlier to plan a surprise party for Father. Over the weeks and months after the meeting, Paternal Aunt withdrew from independent contact with the children outside of visits with Father because she did not want Mother to accuse her of wrongdoing. P---- B-----, Paternal Grandmother

P---- B----- ("Paternal Grandmother") testified that she has a good relationship with Father, that Father was not sexually abused as a child, and that she believes him to be a good father. Although she divorced from Paternal Grandfather in 1995 after an incident in which he pushed Father, they maintained a good relationship so that he could remain

Page 9 of 58

involved with Father and the other children. Sadly, Paternal Grandfather died by suicide in July 2020 after he jumped off the ---------- ------ Bridge.

Paternal Grandmother plays a significant role in the lives of the children and Father. The girls call her "Nana." Before the parents' separation, Paternal Grandmother took the children to daycare two times per week and to church on Sundays, and Father was a playful, involved parent who helped with changing diapers and other caregiving tasks for the young children. During Father's deployments to -------- --- ------, Paternal Grandmother would take care of the children whenever Mother needed a break. Mother had a limited support system in Delaware, so the two became close; Mother often called Paternal Grandmother

"mom." Since the custody litigation commenced, however, Paternal Grandmother has not been able to take the girls for such activities, and she and Mother no longer talk. In January 2023, a heated argument on a failed trip to the Poconos—with A---- and F---- in the car—culminated in Mother's accusation that Father was sexually abusing F----

. Two days after that trip, Mother shared her allegations with Paternal Grandmother at the family meeting with Father and Paternal Aunt, and Paternal Grandmother's relationship with Mother began to grow distant. For a time, Paternal Grandmother continued helping with the children, hoping that her involvement would reduce the parties' stress and enable them to rebuild their mutual trust through counseling. Father moved back into the marital home, but Mother began strictly controlling his access to the children. Father complied with her rules because he loved Mother and did not want to divorce. No counseling ever happened, however, and Paternal Grandmother believes that Mother accused Father of misconduct because she secretly did not want any man to care for her children. Since the Court ordered supervised visitation for Father in May 2025, Paternal Grandmother has often acted as the supervisor. She sees Father as a loving parent with a close relationship to his children. During his time with the children, he has taken them to parks, libraries, museums, aquariums, and more. The children run to Father at the beginning of every visit, and they do not want to leave when Father's parenting time is over. They have also expressed some sadness and discomfort at their inability to visit his home,

Page 10 of 58

and A---- has anxiety and has started telling lies and talking about "grown folks' business"

since the custody case began.²⁹

When the supervised visits first started, Mother would hover nearby and watch Father even in public settings because "she want[ed] to control everything."³⁰Her presence made it difficult for Father to enjoy his time with the children. Once, when Father and Paternal Grandmother took the children to an indoor playground, Mother lingered just ten feet away and loudly called Father a pedophile two or three times. The exchange led to a court order requiring Mother to stay away from the children, and the parties have since managed their hand-offs and separate family time somewhat better. Paternal Grandmother is committed to doing whatever it takes for Father to have time with the children, even if that means continuing to supervise visits or host them in her home overnight. She lives just seven blocks away from Father (and 2.3 miles from Mother) with her own 85-year-old mother ("Paternal Great-Grandmother"). There is ample space in her home, the children routinely see Paternal Great-Grandmother during their Sunday visits, and the children could share the spare bedroom in the home if they were to stay overnight.³¹Paternal Grandmother also has a flexible schedule as a "lunch lady,"

leaving her able to help care for A---- and F---- as needed. With respect to Mother's care for the children, Paternal Grandmother indicated that she has no concerns for their well-being. She also acknowledged that Mother has permitted extensive supervised time with Father on the weekends. But she nevertheless believes that the children would benefit from more time with Father and supports shared residential placement.

Page 11 of 58

Father Since the interim hearing, Father moved into his own home on ---- Avenue. He lives alone in this three-bedroom home, which has a designated bedroom exclusively for the children to share.³²His home is located in the same zip code as Mother's home, Paternal Grandmother's home, and the children's school, and he can drive to any of those locations within ten minutes.³³He currently sees the children every weekend and for a couple of dinner visits per week. The visitation remains supervised by Paternal Grandmother and in public locations.

Father believes his once-happy relationship with Mother began to fall apart due to the combined stress—after just a few years of marriage—of the births of two children, the beginning of Mother's full-time job, and the death of his father. There was no physical violence in their relationship, but he found Mother extremely controlling. She constantly

"stalk[ed]" him, going through his phone and social media accounts, and accused him of cheating.³⁴She showed no empathy for his father's death by suicide. Once, she confronted him and sought to limit his pornography use, which he testified was not out of the ordinary. Beginning in January 2023, she used her allegations of sexual abuse to restrict his role as a parent. And, more recently, she has abused him through the court system. He feels that, if he "were to try to [as]sert [his] parental rights, violence would ensue."³⁵ Father testified that, between January 2023 and December 2024, before the relationship ended, he acceded to Mother's demands for control in order to keep the peace. Mother wanted to "live the lie" that he could not help care for the children.³⁶He compromised himself and "gave her grace on the F---- lie" so that he could still be an active presence in his children's lives.³⁷As a result, he stopped changing diapers and he effectively permitted Mother to do most of the parenting.

Page 12 of 58

Although Father lacked control over childcare, he took responsibility for organizing and running the couple's finances. They had two primary joint accounts: one with ----- ---

- and one with USAA. Each account held different sources of income and paid for different types of expenses because, as Father testified, Mother is "not good with numbers,"

"struggles to keep up with the bills," and does not understand the difference between credit and debit cards.³⁸

Father was deployed to -------- --- ------ between July 10 and December 22, 2024, as a --------- ------- ------- for ------ ------ -------- ------- through the -------- ---- -------- -----. The plan was for Mother, A----, and F---- to eventually follow him and move to -------- --- ------

as a family. While he was gone, he had no problem with Mother handling all the parenting and controlling the children's day-to-day lives. However, the breakdown of the relationship derailed their plans. Mother informed him in September 2024 that she no longer wished to move. After his visit to Delaware at the end of 2024, Father planned to return to -------- ---

------ in January, but only until his assignment was complete in September 2025. During that time, he understood that Mother would continue living in Delaware with A---- and F- ---.

Father's world was turned upside down when Mother accused him of sexually

abusing the children. On December 31, 2024, shortly before Mother left with the children, A---- told her that Father had touched her and that "Daddy did it fast, fast, fast."³⁹She also mentioned "snow drips."⁴⁰Mother interpreted those statements as disclosures of inappropriate sexual touching, but Father believes that A---- was simply describing how he had prevented her from going outside during a hailstorm that evening.⁴¹He denies that he ever touched or harmed the children.

In any event, shortly after Mother heard A----'s comments, she stormed down the stairs and said she was going to her friend N----'s house and taking the girls to Paternal

Page 13 of 58

Grandmother's house. When Father said he wanted to come, too, Mother said, "You've done enough," and charged at him.⁴²Father quickly turned off the alarm as Mother peeled out of the driveway. After Mother left with the children, Father found cameras in the house with some recordings on them. Soon after, he believes Mother called the -------- ----- to inform them of her allegations, because, on February 28, 2025, Father was suspended from full-time service and terminated from his --------- ------- position. Father acknowledged his relationship with Mother was not very strong before the separation, but it has since become even more difficult. Father enjoys his family time with the children, but he expressed frustration he cannot have more—including overnights. Since the interim hearing, Father has taken the children on numerous outings, including to Dutch Wonderland, Sesame Place, Great Wolf Lodge, and Killens Pond. Videos taken on some of those outings demonstrate the close relationship he has with A---- and F----.⁴³The children also enjoy when he picks them up from school or attends school functions.⁴⁴ Father has routinely requested more than the minimum three hours on Saturday and Sunday he is allotted, and he conceded that Mother has consistently gone above and beyond to afford him more time with the children. He admitted that, on some occasions, his requests in fact took the form of "demand[s]."⁴⁵However, he finds that Mother demonstrates animosity over his requests and unreasonably refuses to explain when she turns him down or limits his time.

The difficulty in communication extends also to decisions over the children's school and extracurricular activities. In the spring of 2025, the children were enrolled in dance classes through ---------- -------- ----. One night when Father planned to watch them, Mother notified him one hour beforehand that they were in fact scheduled for a pizza night event at the ------- ------ (their prior daycare) and would not attend dance that night. Father

Page 14 of 58

was left struggling to explain why he had broken a promise to spend time with the children. Similarly, Mother enrolled both children at --- ------- -- ----- ----- School, even though Father wanted A---- to go to public school and Farrah to remain at -------. While Father now accepts that the children are at --- --------- for this school year, he would like the children to attend public school and wants to have a say in their education. On another occasion, Mother unilaterally withdrew the children from their dance classes on the ground that she could no longer afford the cost. But Father found that the costs she was reporting to him were higher than the ones listed online, and he believed Mother's objection was unreasonable since she earned three times his salary. He felt that the real problem was that she "spends a lot of money trying to make me not be [his children's] dad"⁴⁶and preferred to have them in drama classes. He offered to help pay for dance classes (in addition to his existing child-support payments), but the parents could never agree even on the actual cost, let alone how to share it.

From Father's perspective, since the separation, Mother has also continued to exercise control over his time with the children. She has consistently reminded Father that he may not change the children's clothing.⁴⁷She has asked for verification that Paternal Grandmother would be present at all times.⁴⁸Father explained that he is frustrated because

"you would think at some point you would gain some trust."⁴⁹Father also felt that Mother

"sabotage[d]" his family time.⁵⁰In response, he stopped telling Mother where he planned to take the children during that time.

Father's frustration has often led him to vent his feelings at Mother. He testified that he would "never" disparage a difficult person in any other area of his life,⁵¹but he admitted that he has told her he "will never respect any of [her] boundaries against [his] children"

Page 15 of 58

and "will only do what the court demands."⁵²He feels that Mother lost touch with reality in a way that harshly impacted him and his family, and he has routinely said so to Mother. He believes Mother needs mental health counseling, and he has told her that, too. In one exchange, he told her "[y]our mental state should be examined" and "[n]ow you are worse than ever."⁵³On cross-examination, Father argued that his responses were helpful because, if Mother were to seek mental health treatment, it would be the "solution to all of our problems."⁵⁴

For example, on November 1, 2025, Father messaged Mother at 8:37 a.m., requesting to have the children beginning at 11 a.m. even though Mother had previously told him they would not be available until 3 p.m.⁵⁵Mother had not responded by 11 a.m., so Father messaged her, "Where are my children."⁵⁶When Mother did not immediately explain why A---- and F---- were unavailable, he drove to Mother's home after learning she was at a parenting class and the children were there with a babysitter. Father was upset that Mother would not permit him to care for the girls in lieu of a babysitter. And he was upset that she had "changed the hours to minimum hours that day" for "no reason."⁵⁷ Father conceded that he would not show up to anyone else's home uninvited and unannounced. He conceded that it was not appropriate, "it was a risk" and he was "wrong for going."⁵⁸However, Father expressed frustration that Mother provided no reason to refuse his request to have the children that day. And even though it was not during his scheduled family time, he felt he deserved an explanation for her declining his request for extra contact. The girls were excited to see Father, but he was prevented from taking them from Mother's home.

Page 16 of 58

As communication has grown more strained over the life of the case, Father has become more concerned about the children's behavior. They often ask why Father cannot return home to Mother and why Paternal Grandmother is always with them. Exchanges have also become challenging because the children want their parents to make amends. He noticed that A---- lies for no reason, even about whether she ate before his family time started. When Father told Mother he wanted to enroll the children in therapy, he learned they were already receiving counseling. Curiously, Mother refused to disclose any further details, and Father only obtained them after his attorney received a delayed response from Mother's counsel nearly two months later.⁵⁹

In addition to his in-person family time, Father has frequent contact with the children through video calls, which generally last for approximately thirty minutes. Most of these calls have gone well. Father believes, however, that Mother has limited and sabotaged his time by encouraging the children to call while riding in the car or doing homework, or while distracted by an in-person guest. Although he understands that Mother cannot force the children to stay on the phone, Father feels that he is reasonably entitled a bare minimum of ten minutes on these calls and that there should be no maximum length—even eight hours would be reasonable if the children were engaged. He acknowledged that Mother has frequently called back to try to get him more time if the children have lost interest after less than ten minutes.

When he does not get the time or attention he believes he deserves, Father's feelings sometimes boil over. During one recent video call, Mother's friend N---- visited the home. A---- asked Father to say hello to N----, but he refused. He said he "c[ould]n't fake it" and did not like Aunt N----.⁶⁰He admitted that he "had a bad moment," and he later apologized to A----.⁶¹In another instance, Father became upset because Mother promised A---- ice cream after she finished up the call with Father. He complained to A---- that Mother was

Page 17 of 58

"leveraging" ice cream to speed up the end of the call.⁶²When A---- told Father she would get ice cream once the call ended, Father said to her, "I'm not the one doing this to you, baby girl."⁶³He resented that A---- had to choose between ice cream and talking to him, and he denied that his comments tended to alienate the children from Mother. Since the beginning of the case, Father has completed a high-conflict co-parenting class, where he learned that "less is more" in talking with a co-parent.⁶⁴He indicated the class had helped a little, but he conceded that he has not practiced many of the skills taught in the class. He feels that his co-parenting might improve if he had shared custody of the children because then he "could pick his battles" with Mother.⁶⁵Until that occurs, Father believes battling for time is "worth it" even though he acknowledged it goes against everything he learned in the co-parenting course.⁶⁶

In addition, Father was adamant that he has acted appropriately when communicating with the children regarding the custody litigation. He claimed he has never talked about the case directly with them. Rather, he has told the children, when they ask why they cannot visit his home, that he has to wait for a "piece of paper that says [they] can."⁶⁷He saw no problem in sharing that information. He also assured the children there is nothing Mother can do to keep him away from them and that he is doing everything he possibly can to spend more time with them.

In terms of financial resources, Father acknowledged that Mother began paying many of the bills, including the mortgage on --- -------- Road, in March 2025, after he was fired from his job in -------- --- ------.⁶⁸He then became a traditional, part-time ---------

without the same security clearance. During the -------- ----- investigation into the sexual abuse allegation, no determination was made. As a result, Father lost significant benefits,

Page 18 of 58

including coverage for some college expenses for the children and a daycare subsidy. However, Father never appealed his termination as it would have been "expensive" and a

"career killer."⁶⁹ After losing his job, Father maxed out his credit cards and began using his savings account to cover his expenses. Mother took over payments for water and other utilities in summer 2025, even though the bills were in Father's name. Around the same time, Father unilaterally stopped paying the electric bill. Father explained that he gave Mother notice but could not work out a time to have the account switched into her name, since both parties would have to be on the same call to do so. Father also assisted with daycare expenses through February 2025 with his reimbursement benefit provided by the ----------

-- -------. After he was removed from active duty, however, Father stopped receiving those reimbursements.⁷⁰

Father worked as a ---- driver for a few months to make extra money and sent Mother informal child support.⁷¹In June 2025, he began working at ---- -- -------, where he makes $50,000 per year—about a third of Mother's income. Using the increased pay and benefits from that job, he continues to make childcare payments each month in lieu of paying household bills and utilities (such as the mortgage and electric bill). Father also makes car payments on Mother's car since his name remains on the loan.⁷² As a result of the fractured relationship, Father believes Mother has heavily coached the children. Ultimately, he would like to be exonerated of Mother's sexual abuse accusations and awarded joint legal custody and shared residential placement on a 2-2-5-5 schedule. In-person exchanges without reconciliation have been difficult for the children to process, so he suggests that the children should be picked up from and dropped off at school. In addition, he requests make-up time with the children in the form of consecutive weekends. Although he has no intention of re-kindling his relationship with Mother, he is

Page 19 of 58

open to co-parent counseling or a co-parent coordinator, depending on the cost associated with such services. Lastly, Father seeks attorney's fees for Mother's actions during the litigation.

Emma Stockwin, DFS Investigator

Emma Stockwin, a DFS Senior Family Service Specialist in the serious injury and sexual abuse unit, testified that DFS received an initial report of sexual abuse on December 31, 2024, after the children were seen at Nemours. She took over the case on January 2, 2025. On January 7, 2025, she was present (along with Mother) for A----'s forensic interview at a Child's Advocacy Center ("CAC"). She also met independently with A---- at her daycare. During the CAC interview, A----, four years old at the time, did not make a clear disclosure and was unable to sit still during the interview. She expressed vaguely that Father had a

"hammer" and had hit her with it without leaving marks or bruises. The interviewer asked follow-up questions using drawings of male and female figures, but A---- could not clarify what she meant by a hammer.

No safety plan was ever implemented in the case because both parents must agree, and Father declined to participate. There was no DNA evidence, no confession, and no physical medical evidence. Consequently, after Ms. Stockwin's extensive investigation, which included reviewing the CAC interview, interviewing the parents, evaluating videos from the parents, reviewing Nemours medical records, and consulting with the police detectives assigned to the case, DFS determined that it could not find by a preponderance of the evidence that abuse had occurred. Although Mother showed her the recordings in which she believed A---- had disclosed sexual abuse, those videos in fact influenced Ms. Stockwin not to substantiate because she found Mother's questions leading. In sum, as Ms. Stockwin testified, "None of these cases are really cut and dr[ied], [but] . . . it wasn't close."⁷³

Page 20 of 58

Therefore, at the conclusion of the sex abuse investigation, DFS was left with no concerns with placing the children in either parent's home.

P------- M------, Mother's best friend

Ms. M------ has been Mother's closest friend since they attended law school in ------

-- --- ------ in 2010, and she first met Father in 2018. Early in the relationship, she was supportive of Father and appreciated that he was "such a hands-on dad."⁷⁴She now lives in Chicago and works as a paralegal, but she is a licensed attorney in -------- --- ------. Mother called Ms. M------ on January 7, 2023, to share her suspicion that Father was sexually abusing the children. Based on the conversation and the perceived risks of reporting and separating from Father without a significant support system in Delaware, Ms. M------

helped convince Mother to remain in the home with Father but never leave the children unattended in his care. She also supported Mother's decision to take A---- to the hospital in December 2024. Ms. M------ believed Mother in January 2023 and again in December 2024 because Mother is "very cautious."⁷⁵She also has had the chance to observe Mother with the children on periodic video calls and occasional in-person visits, and she believes that Mother is a patient, attentive, "amazing" parent with a strong relationship with her children.⁷⁶She believes Father should have time with the children, but only if it is supervised and in public.

Mother

Mother has lived with the children at the marital home on -------- Road in Wilmington since 2022. She is an attorney and trust officer at ----- ----. Each child has a bedroom, but they choose to sleep together in the same room every night. Mother is very close with the children and has been their primary caregiver since birth. She handles school

Page 21 of 58

transportation and medical care (including a pending order for reading glasses for A----), and she helps them fall asleep at night. Although she does not have much close family in the area, the children's maternal grandmother calls every day, and Mother has made a village by finding friends she can depend on, including her friend N----. In addition, her aunt is considering moving to Delaware from Baltimore.

The parties married in December 2018, and A---- was born May 2020. Mother was home full-time when A---- was a baby. Although she initially had a loving relationship with Father, she grew suspicious of him as early as August 2021, during a trip to New York. Then, in September 2022, Mother took A---- to a pediatrician for redness in her diaper area, which was leading her to complain and refuse baths. And in January 2023, she saw Father's hand in F----'s diaper. Based on her niggling fears, Mother purchased sets of hidden video cameras in 2021, 2022, and 2023.⁷⁷However, she never captured any incriminating footage because she could not bring herself to put the children at risk in order to gather evidence. Instead, she began limiting Father's role in changing diapers and otherwise caring for the children. Although she lacked conclusive proof of sexual abuse, Mother confronted Father two weeks after the diaper incident in January 2023. She recorded the conversation, and Father never clearly denied what happened. But rather than report him at that time, she decided "the easier thing to do would [be to] just keep [her] mouth closed and watch the girls, keep them safe."⁷⁸

Although she was "repulsed" by Father, Mother decided to remain in the home with him to personally ensure he was never alone with the children.⁷⁹She began sleeping in the guest bedroom with the children and placing a cushion in front of the door so Father could not enter at night. Thus, for an extended period before Father's 2024 deployment to -------

- --- ------, he had little solo parenting time—he never changed the girls' diapers, and Mother handled most of the direct caregiving. His deployment eased her burden because

Page 22 of 58

Father's presence had trapped her in a "self-imposed prison."⁸⁰With him gone, she could relax her vigilance. Father made regular FaceTime calls, but due to the children's young ages he mostly spoke with Mother. He was supposed to remain on that assignment for one year.

During Father's holiday visit in December 2024, Mother's vigilance escalated. For years, she had made a habit of discreetly recording the girls whenever they told her anything curious or noteworthy—as when their statements seemed suggestive of abuse. On December 31, 2024, she recorded A---- telling her that "Daddy touched me . . . zip zip, fast." Mother responded by repeatedly asking, "where was Mommy," to which A----

answered no fewer than six times that Mother was "next to me." Then, Mother asked several times where it hurt and what Mother was doing at the time. Mother testified that the recorded statement was not as clear as the "very clear disclosure" A---- made right before the recording started.⁸¹Later the same night, A---- told Mother that "the butt was hurting all over, all over the world, the Earth. But are we at the Earth?"⁸²Putting the statements together, Mother believed that she was describing an incident the previous day, shortly before a family trip to Chuck E Cheese's. Mother had fallen asleep with both children during a daytime nap, then slipped out of the room. She concluded that Father crept into the room after she left and touched A----'s "butt," and that the person A---- felt next to her at the time was really F----, not Mother. Then, Father's footsteps made the stairs creak and he quickly ran out of the room—an event that A---- later described by saying a "man" had run out of the "house."⁸³

Based on her interpretation of A----'s words, Mother abruptly left with the children and had them evaluated at Nemours. A few days later, Mother filed a petition for Protection From Abuse ("PFA"). She contacted the -------- -------- ----- to find out how to have Father served after both Father and Paternal Grandmother had blocked her communication.

Page 23 of 58

Though Mother did not formally report her allegations to the -------- -----, she thinks perhaps a police detective did. The -------- ----- soon placed Father on administrative leave pending an investigation.

In addition to her sexual abuse allegations, Mother described a significant power imbalance in the relationship. Though Mother's income exceeded Father's, he controlled most of their accounts, and she had no access to some of them. He believed that Mother did not understand money and should not control it. In June 2024, after Mother learned that she would earn less than expected in -------- --- ------ and decided not to go, Father was upset and asked to be added as an authorized user on Mother's separate ---- -- ------- credit card. Mother agreed but indicated it would take a few days. Father did not wait. He promptly removed Mother from all the couple's joint credit cards, telling her that "since the houses were bought on his credit . . . [she] should start fresh."⁸⁴Mother then for the first time opened a separate checking account, but her paychecks continued to be deposited in the joint USAA account.

On January 2, 2025, two days after Mother took the children to the hospital, Father withdrew $5,000 from that account and transferred it to pay his separate credit card. Six days later, he withdrew a further $1,600 in cash.⁸⁵Father then cancelled Mother's cell phone plan and reported her phone as stolen, leaving Mother without a working phone for two days until she could buy a new one. She became solely responsible for the children's daycare payments starting in March because Father no longer received a childcare subsidy, and he asked her to take over the mortgage around the same time. In the fall, Mother enrolled both children at --- ---------, and Father refused to contribute because he claimed Mother had unilaterally refused to send A---- to public school. But Mother and Father had previously discussed sending the children to school at --- ---------, which was Father's childhood school, once A---- started Kindergarten. F---- could have remained in daycare at the ------- ------, but doing so would have collectively cost more and complicated Mother's

Page 24 of 58

pick-up and drop-off routine. Additionally, the girls are very close, and Mother did not want to split them up. Thus, although the children are highly social and active, Mother reluctantly had to cancel their dance, swim, and drama activities because she could not afford the extra expenses once she became responsible for so many other household costs. However, over the past several months, Father has consistently been paying child support. After the parties separated, Mother continued to live in the marital home, but Father retained control over their ADT security system. On March 9, 2025, Father changed the PIN for the account. Mother was unable to disarm the system, and it went off. With the alarm ringing, Mother messaged Father to ask for help; he informed her she needed to make her own account. He did not provide her with the new PIN until the morning of March 15, 2025.⁸⁶During that time, the alarm system repeatedly went off, leading the police to respond to the home five times. At least once, Father's call with A---- was cut short as a result.

Despite the problems in her relationship with Father, Mother continues to support his involvement with the children, so long as it happens in a way she deems safe. As a parent, he is "exemplary": funny, fun, gentle, engaged, and active.⁸⁷Mother recognizes that the children love him. She has ensured that he nearly always has significantly more than his court-ordered minimum three hours of family time. In fact, she testified that Father is spending more time with the children now than ever before. During his deployment to ---

----- --- ------, he would call only briefly, and he would nearly always speak only with Mother. Now, on his video calls, he speaks with the children at length—sometimes trying to hold them longer than their limited attention spans will allow. But the contact has also been problematic at times: on September 8, 2025, when A---- asked him to say hello to

"Auntie N----," Father upset her by answering that he did not like N---- and would not talk to her.

Page 25 of 58

Since the start of litigation, A---- has become increasingly dysregulated at home and at school, and Mother believes that it is (in part) because Father is disparaging her and inappropriately discussing the case. A---- "breaks down" into tears or "explosive anger" after many of her visits with Father.⁸⁸Much of her anger is directed at Mother, and Mother struggles to respond when A---- says that "you need to apologize to Daddy," tells her not to "lie" or "cheat," or asks why she married Father only to be "mean" to him.⁸⁹F----, too, told Mother to "say sorry [to] Dad's heart."⁹⁰A---- has also expressed sadness and confusion about why she cannot yet see her new bed at Father's house.⁹¹She has struggled with "bad dreams" keeping her awake, and she has wet the bed.⁹²The children also explained to Mother that at Christmas "the paper is going to come" allowing them to finally sleep at Father's house and play with a Barbie house he has for them.⁹³Father has told the children that they cannot come to his home because Mother will not let them, leading them to fault Mother for the situation. After one exchange, A---- remarked that "you're fighting over

Page 26 of 58

me."⁹⁴After another, F---- started incoherently screaming that "you used my sentences, my talking."⁹⁵To Mother, many of these statements suggest suspicious levels of awareness of the marital breakdown and custody case. Although Mother acknowledged that both children have displayed authentic emotions and distress over the separation and Father's absence, she thinks Father has placed them in the middle of this dispute and "made [her] out to be a villain."⁹⁶In contrast, Mother testified that she does not disparage Father despite ample opportunity to do so in her extensive solo time with the children. To address the problematic behaviors, Mother enrolled A---- in play therapy at -----

---- -- ----- -- -------- ("----") in late summer 2025. Although ---- specializes in working with survivors of sexual abuse, Mother did not enlist them to prove her allegations. Rather, she wanted A---- to have a safe, neutral space to process her emotions. In the intake for A----, Mother explained her behavioral concerns and suspicions of abuse, but she also informed the therapist that DFS, NCCPD, and the -------- ----- all closed their investigations without making any findings against Father. She also admits that she neither consulted Father in advance nor initially shared the therapist's information with him. She had been advised of ----'s policy that they would not ordinarily contact an alleged abuser, so she initially declined to identify the therapist to Father before getting legal advice. She also feared that Father might interfere. Father learned of the children's therapy nearly two months later after his lawyer contacted Mother's. A---- now attends play therapy about three times per month, and F---- sometimes informally joins her. Based on the ongoing behavioral concerns, Mother is also seeking a psychological evaluation for A----—a plan she had not mentioned to Father before trial. In addition, Mother has been receiving individual therapy about once per week since August.

Co-parenting has not gotten easier for Mother and Father over the course of litigation. On November 1, 2025, Father wanted to pick the children up early for a visit.

Page 27 of 58

Mother declined because the children were tired from Halloween the night before, and she instead arranged for a morning babysitter while she was at a parenting class. Although she offered Father just three hours that Saturday, she agreed to nine on Sunday. She was very concerned when Father went to the home that morning anyway to try to take the children. She saw it as an attempt to intimidate her and the babysitter. During another visit, Father took the children swimming and to the movies, which frustrated Mother because she did not want the children with him in low-visibility areas. She continues to fear the prospect of unsupervised contact. Sometimes, A---- asks her for a kiss on the lips "like [she] kissed Daddy."⁹⁷After a visit on December 3, 2025, F---- indicated that her "butt hurt" while pointing to her genital area.⁹⁸Father and Paternal Grandmother indicated that F---- had not been alone with him, and Mother did not follow up medically. Then, after a visit with Father on Christmas Day 2025, A---- told Mother she had a bath at Father's home. Although Mother admitted she had no idea whether the bath was supervised, she felt it was odd for Father to bathe the children given that he had not done so in years and that she had bathed them earlier that morning. When she confronted Father over the parenting app, he responded, "You don't dictate what happens during their dad time. . . . You're thirsting for conflict, grow up."⁹⁹He further explained that A---- had simply wanted to try out the new bath in the new house.

Father was also supposed to have family time on New Year's Day, but Mother was ill with COVID-19, and both children had fevers. She admitted that she did not provide Father with proof of her positive test result before or after canceling the visit. Father offered to pick up and care for the children while Mother was sick, but she declined in favor of having her aunt—a nurse—come to her home to help care for them. Father was only able to briefly video call the children later that evening once their fevers broke. Mother then offered make-up family time every evening the following week from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m., but Paternal

Page 28 of 58

Grandmother was unavailable to supervise. Father did, however, see the children on January 7, 2026, and Mother agreed that they could spend the time at his home with Paternal Grandmother's supervision.

Mother now seeks sole legal custody or, alternatively, joint legal custody with final decision-making authority. She has been the children's sole decision-maker for the past year, and the same was effectively true well before the parties formally separated. Shared decision-making has always been a challenge. After taking her parenting class, Mother realized she "absolutely was in a domestic violence relationship."¹⁰⁰She was "trained to agree with what [Father] said or else there will be consequences."¹⁰¹Father controlled the credit cards, he accused Mother of stealing money from their joint accounts, he isolated her from her family, and he often accused (and accuses) her of being mentally ill. Although she remains willing to participate in a co-parenting class or co-parent counseling, she is concerned that Father will never be satisfied unless she accedes to his decisions. She requests supervised visits continue indefinitely based on her suspicions of sexual abuse. She testified that, if the Court were to order unsupervised family time, she would have no choice but to fake "an aneurysm in [her] brain and . . . go back and live with [Father]" as a supervisor because the children "would be in grave danger."¹⁰²She later revised that answer, explaining that, while she understood the need to comply with a court order, ordering unsupervised visitation would be "a really, really big mistake" and would mean her two years of protecting the children while waiting to come forward "would have been in vain."¹⁰³However, she no longer trusts Paternal Grandmother to adequately supervise, and she also does not believe the visitation center is appropriate because it "looks like a jail."¹⁰⁴Instead, Mother would like to pursue a neutral, third-party supervisor until

Page 29 of 58

the children are old enough to reduce the risk of being alone with Father. She also opposes visitation at Father's home because the layout will not allow for adequate supervision.

DISCUSSION

Before weighing the best-interest factors and crafting an appropriate custody order for this difficult case, the Court will address a preliminary question: whether and for what purpose Ms. D'Amico's testimony and report about the polygraph testing and results may be admitted into evidence.

A. Admissibility of Polygraph Evidence

At trial, the Court reserved decision on the admissibility of Ms. D'Amico's report, results, and testimony. Mother objected that it was not "the product of reliable principles and methods."¹⁰⁵Father responded that the parties had agreed—at Mother's suggestion— to undergo polygraph testing as part of the psychosexual evaluation process, and that polygraph evidence has been accepted in some circumstances outside of the criminal trial context. He also argued that he should be permitted to use the polygraph results to impeach the credibility of Mother's testimony even if he could not use it to show the truth of his own. The Child Attorney joined Father's position, adding that expert witnesses (such as psychosexual evaluators) may, under Rule 703, rely on and sometimes share otherwise inadmissible evidence.

As this Court previously advised the parties, polygraph test results are generally considered unreliable and inadmissible at trial not only for the purpose of "establish[ing] that a witness'[s] version of the events is true" but for "any purpose."¹⁰⁶There is no exception for impeachment. Courts regard polygraph testing with such "strong suspicion"¹⁰⁷that—

Page 30 of 58

whatever its legitimate uses outside of the trial context¹⁰⁸—the rule has been applied even to criminally exculpatory results intended to show that a defendant's prior confession was false.¹⁰⁹And it applies in civil and criminal cases alike,¹¹⁰whether or not they are tried before a jury.¹¹¹As Father suggests, there is "[a] limited exception to this prohibition" when both parties "stipulate to the admissibility of polygraph evidence."¹¹²But the parties here agreed only to take a polygraph exam, not to admit the results at trial. Even if there were no general rule against admissibility, hearing Ms. D'Amico's testimony provided the Court with ample reason to find it inadmissible in this case. Expert testimony is admissible, among other things, only if it "is the product of reliable principles and methods" and "help[s] the trier of fact . . . determine a fact in issue."¹¹³Ms. D'Amico's testimony was both unreliable and unhelpful. She acknowledged that polygraph testing has a 15% error rate, and she did not identify whether those errors were false positives (incorrectly reporting that an honest person was lying) or false negatives (incorrectly reporting that a dishonest person was telling the truth). She testified that a person is deemed to have failed the entire exam—to have been lying in every answer—if the machine identifies signs of deception in any of them. The ancient legal maxim "false in one, false in all" is simply not good science. The Court is also not persuaded that asking a few control questions is enough to immunize polygraph results from the risk of manipulation by those trained to control physiological responses like blood pressure and breathing. Consequently, this Court finds that Ms. D'Amico's testimony about the polygraph results is unreliable and

Page 31 of 58

lacks any legitimate probative value in determining any fact relevant to this custody dispute. It must be deemed inadmissible.¹¹⁴

The Child Attorney's alternative Rule 703 theory does not work here, either. An expert witness is permitted to form an opinion based on otherwise inadmissible evidence so long as other experts in their field would reasonably rely on the same sort of evidence.¹¹⁵ The evidence on which they have so relied may then be disclosed "to the jury only if [its] probative value in helping the jury evaluate the opinion substantially outweighs [its] prejudicial effect."¹¹⁶In a Family Court bench trial, there is of course no jury to be aided or misled by such disclosure. There is reason to think that the limiting clause of Rule 703 may therefore not apply with the same force.¹¹⁷But the result is still at most that the otherwise- inadmissible evidence may be disclosed to the finder of fact by "the proponent of the opinion"—that is, the qualified expert witness that reasonably relied on it.¹¹⁸For the reasons given above, the Court declines to qualify Ms. D'Amico as an expert witness in this case. Rule 703 permitted only Dr. Gould to consider the polygraph examination, and it permitted him to do so only for the limited purpose of evaluating his opinion about sexual risk. Because Dr. Gould testified that his opinion would have been the same with or without the polygraph results, the Court does not assign them any probative value for that purpose.

B. Best Interests of the Children (§ 722(a) Factors)

Under 13 Del. C. § 722, the Court must determine custody and residential arrangements for A---- and F---- in accordance with their best interests, including eight factors identified by statute. The Court's findings regarding the factors carry great weight, with some factors given more weight than others.¹¹⁹

Page 32 of 58

1. The wishes of the child's parent or parents as to his or her custody and residential arrangements

Father seeks joint legal custody and shared residential placement on a 2-2-5-5 schedule with alternating weekends, and he opposes continued supervision. In contrast, Mother asks to maintain the status quo under the existing Interim Custody Order, which grants her sole legal custody and primary residential placement. She supports Father's continued involvement with the children but requests supervised weekly visitation (with a neutral, third-party supervisor to be determined) for Father every Wednesday evening, Saturday, and Sunday. The Child Attorney endorsed Father's position as more reasonable than Mother's. However, since the parties' wishes are in opposition, the Court finds this factor neutral.

2. The wishes of the child as to his or her custodian or custodians and residential arrangements

The children are too young for the Court to ascertain their wishes, leaving this factor inapplicable.

3. The interaction and interrelationship of the child with his or her parents, grandparents, siblings, persons cohabitating in the relationship of husband and wife with a parent of the child, any other residents of the household or persons who may significantly affect the child's best interests

Without dispute, both parents desire to have strong relationships with the children, and each supports the continued involvement of the other. Mother has been the primary caregiver to the children and plays a significant role in their lives. She falls asleep with them every night and is without doubt a loving, active, and protective parent. She had a limited support network when she first came to Delaware, but she has gradually built one for her and the children.

Father, in contrast, has taken a back seat in caregiving since 2023, when Mother accused him of sexual abuse and began limiting his role. After that point, Father did not bathe the children, change their diapers, or spend any time alone with them. Father

Page 33 of 58

conceded he did not have a problem with Mother doing all the parenting while he was deployed. But he testified that he went along with Mother's rules at home only because he felt he had no choice but to deescalate the situation and keep the family together. Since the custody case began, however, Father has availed himself of every opportunity to spend time with the children. He has taken them to Great Wolf Lodge, Sesame Place, Killens Pond, and the movies, among many other outings. Despite being supervised, the family time with Father has reportedly gone very well. The children run to Father at the beginning of visits and are sad to leave him at the end. Aside from her safety concerns, Mother calls him an "exemplary" parent.¹²⁰Equally, the children are very close with Father's extended family. Paternal Grandmother, whom the children call "Nana,"

accompanies Father for all visits. The girls have always been bonded with her, and, prior to the parties' separation, Paternal Grandmother frequently took the children to school, on family outings, and to church. She also helped provide care for them. Paternal Aunt, too, has strong relationships with A---- and F----. Although she lives in Virginia, she comes to Delaware roughly twice per month to visit with family and the children; she did so independently even when Father was deployed overseas. Both Paternal Grandmother and Paternal Aunt have observed the love that Father and the children have for each other. Both, however, noted that their previously solid relationships with Mother became strained after the breakdown of the marriage.

As the parties have continued living separately, their young children have become understandably anxious and confused. Paternal Grandmother described A---- as being in

"grown folks' business" too much.¹²¹Sometimes, A---- does not tell the truth. F---- told Mother to "say sorry [to] Dad's heart."¹²²Father, for his part, has added to this concern by discussing the custody case—and his frustrations with it—with his young daughters. On one call with A----, Father accused Mother of interfering by "leveraging" treats for the

Page 34 of 58

girls.¹²³During another call, when A---- asked Father to say hi to Mother's friend, Father refused and added that he didn't like Mother's friend.¹²⁴He then had to apologize to A----

and instruct her not to speak to people as he just had. When the children asked when they could see his new home, instead of simply stating he did not know, Father set the girls up for possible disappointment by saying that they could sleep at his house after Christmas, when the Court would give him "a piece of paper that says [they] can."¹²⁵Notably, Father did not see a problem in telling the girls his custody plan in those terms. Instead, he thought the children deserved answers.

No doubt, the entirety of the children's emotional turmoil is not traceable to inappropriate comments by Father. Children are often more perceptive than adults think.¹²⁶ The parties testified that they attempted to keep their marital difficulties from the children, but some of A----'s comments make clear that she recalls witnessing fights between Mother and Father before their separation. Other statements seem to reflect little more than the ordinary anguish of children whose world has been torn asunder without explanation. Seeing their parents meeting at exchanges without reconciling has obviously been traumatic. It is not unexpected for young children to wonder whether their own actions are somehow to blame for their parents' separation, or to push their parents to make amends and reunify. At times, however, Father has unfortunately exacerbated rather than contained these feelings.

Nevertheless, because the children have good relationships with Mother, Father, and their respective extended families, the Court finds this factor neutral.

Page 35 of 58

4. The child's adjustment to his or her home, school and community

The children are well adjusted to Mother's home and to their school and community. They have lived exclusively with Mother in the former marital home since December 31, 2024, and they have since adapted to their routines in Mother's care. They both attend --- --------- School—F---- in preschool and A---- in kindergarten. F---- is an excellent student, and there are no concerns with her behavior at school. A----, on the other hand, has begun to display behavioral issues over the past few months. She has been aggressive with students or often becomes dysregulated at home and at school. As a result, Mother has enrolled her in therapy and recently sought a psychological evaluation to determine if she needs any school accommodations.

The parties' custody battle has unfortunately interfered with the children's routines. They have clearly never adjusted to being handed off between their parents. A---- often becomes most upset after exchanges between Mother and Father. They also struggle to understand why they cannot visit Father's home and why Paternal Grandmother is always present. Additionally, in past years, the children attended a dance class. Once the parties separated, however, Mother could no longer afford the cost, and she withdrew them. Despite the challenges of co-parenting, the children also do well in Father's care. He recently moved to a three-bedroom townhouse on ---- Avenue. He lives alone, uses one bedroom as a home office, and has placed two beds in the other room to accommodate the children. He has only recently been able to have the children in his home under supervision of Paternal Grandmother. Although Father only moved to his home this past summer after his tenants moved out, there is no reason to suspect the children will not adjust once they have more time with him.

Fortunately, the parties live close to each other, the school, and Paternal Grandmother's home. Therefore, the children's routines and community will not be disrupted while in either parent's care, and this factor is also neutral.

Page 36 of 58

5. The mental and physical health of all individuals involved

The children appear to be in good health, notwithstanding A----'s emotional dysregulation and difficulty at school. She is currently receiving play therapy three times per month. Although Mother acknowledged she has not shared the details of A----'s emotional outbursts with the therapist, she plans to do so.

Neither Father nor Mother has evident physical health concerns. With respect to mental health, Mother is currently in therapy about three to four times per month. She enrolled in late summer 2025. Father, by contrast, is "not routinely" receiving any mental health care—notwithstanding his belief that treating Mother would be the "solution to all of our problems."¹²⁷He testified that, over the past year, he has periodically spoken to therapists at the -------- ----- and also attended prayer sessions. But he last had any sort of counseling with clergy at the -------- ----- in August 2025.

In late spring 2025, Father underwent his psychosexual evaluation with Dr. Gould. The goal was not to determine whether Father had abused his children in the past but rather whether he posed a meaningful risk of doing so in the future. Applying evidence- based tools and controlling for inconsistent or deceptive responses, Dr. Gould concluded that Father presents a low risk of future sexual offending.¹²⁸He also noted that Father was forthcoming in his responses and displayed neither distortion nor significant dysfunction. Equally important, Father was open to treatment even if his results did not suggest a need for it. Dr. Gould ultimately did not identify any particular disorder or vulnerability for which treatment might be necessary. However, he suggested that Father's "domineering interpersonal style" might lead to "interpersonal difficulties."¹²⁹Taken together with the limited evidence of past abuse (discussed below), Dr. Gould's uncontroverted results demonstrate that Father has no mental health concern impacting his ability to safely parent his children.

Page 37 of 58

Consequently, although Mother has done more overall to address her mental health and the children's, the psychosexual report that Father has no mental disorders and does not present sexual risk leaves this factor neutral.

6. Past and present compliance by both parties with their rights and responsibilities to their child under § 701 of this title¹³⁰

Both parents endeavor to be involved with all aspects of parenting. Mother is not only the primary caregiver; she also provides more financial support since she earns significantly more than Father. The bills were once predominantly in Father's name, but Mother has now taken over most household expenses. Father's income decreased dramatically after he was suspended from full-time service in the -------- ----- and terminated from his position in -------- --- ------. He also lost access to a number of benefits, including free healthcare, 50% reimbursements for childcare, and future assistance with higher education for the children. Yet he did not appeal the decision out of understandable fear that it could have made him "persona non grata" and ended his career permanently.¹³¹ Instead, he began driving for ---- until, in June 2025, he was hired to a full-time role at ----

-- -------. Father, however, has consistently and voluntarily sent child support, even before he found that job. Consequently, the Court finds that both parties have made reasonable efforts to provide and care for their children.

Where the parties have fallen short is in their responsibilities as co-parents. Mother, for her part, interfered with Father's parenting early on in the case, which led to sanctions and an admonition highlighted in the interim custody order. After the interim hearing, however, Mother's obstinate behavior diminished. Following the interim order, both parents independently concluded that A---- should be in therapy, but, when Mother first enrolled her, she refused to divulge the therapist's identity to Father. Father only learned that A---- was receiving play therapy at ---- nearly two months later, after his lawyer

Page 38 of 58

intervened. At the same time, Father has made clear time and again that he does not trust Mother and does not "respect any of [her] boundaries" as a parent.¹³²In fall 2025, before Mother withdrew the children from their dance class, Father planned to observe them. Mother had agreed even though it was not his court-ordered night for contact with the children. Then, shortly before the class started, Mother notified Father that the children could not attend dance because she forgot that they had a pizza night previously scheduled at their former daycare. Father became frustrated, assumed Mother was lying, and then showed up at the dance studio only to find that the children were not there. When Mother ultimately did withdraw the children from dance, it was because the parties could not even agree on how much the class would actually cost.

Although neither Mother nor Father is faultless in their co-parenting, Father's anger has often led him to make unreasonable demands and derail parenting conversations with Mother. Too often, Mother has attempted to be flexible and make time for him, only for him to respond with pettiness and vitriol. He has become irate when he gives snacks to the children at the end of his family time, only for Mother to eat some of them. He previously agreed for the children to follow in his footsteps at --- --------- when they reached school age—an agreement the parties cemented with a deposit prior to their separation—but he changed his mind after Mother continued forward with enrollment without consulting him, and he now wants A---- to attend public school even though it would separate the children and require two separate drop-offs and pick-ups. He routinely complains when he feels that Mother is unreasonably withholding the children. He believes that, when he makes video calls to the children, Mother should permit him to remain on the line for anywhere from a bare minimum of ten minutes to an upper limit of eight hours. He testified that Mother often has the children call while they are doing homework or otherwise distracted so that he will not be able to speak with them for long. Notably, however, he also conceded that Mother often calls him back to try to get him more time if the children lose

Page 39 of 58

interest after just a few minutes of a video call. Father's frustration with Mother has also led him to devalue the words of his children, whom he now believes Mother has coached. In sum, both parties continue to demonstrate varying degrees of hostility towards each other, which has compromised their abilities to comply with their parental rights and responsibilities. Both are willing to participate in co-parent counseling, although Mother expressed some reservations due to their current communication dynamics. After reviewing the evidence, the Court finds that each has to some extent interfered with the other's ability to parent. On balance, however, Father's continued harassing, harsh, and domineering communication style rises to the level of domestic violence under factor (7), which will be addressed in greater detail below, and has significantly undermined their ability to co-parent. Therefore, the Court finds this factor slightly favors Mother.

7. Evidence of domestic violence as provided for in Chapter 7A of this title¹³³

"[B]ecause domestic violence in the broader sense hurts children, it is incumbent on every judge in every custody or visitation decision based on the best interests of a child, regardless of particular statutory obligations, to have an accurate picture of any violence or abuse in the parents' relationship, and to consider its implications for the child after the parents separate."¹³⁴Here, the Court considered whether the evidence established that Father (a) sexually abused the children or (b) abused Mother in other ways. a. Insufficient Evidence to Find Sexual Abuse of the Children Notwithstanding Mother's apparently good-faith belief that Father sexually abused the children, there is simply not enough here to support a finding of sexual abuse by a preponderance of the evidence. There was no DNA evidence, Father never confessed, and the Nemours evaluation turned up no physical evidence of abuse. Despite purchasing

Page 40 of 58

several sets of cameras, closely supervising Father, and repeatedly recording her children, Mother never found the unambiguous evidence of abuse she was looking for. The children love Father and appear to be utterly at ease in his presence. Moreover, neither child ever straightforwardly disclosed abuse, and neither DFS, the -------- -----, nor NCCPD found evidence sufficient to warrant substantiation or a criminal charge. During A----'s CAC interview, she struggled to focus or sit still but denied any inappropriate touches and could not clarify what she meant when she said that Father hit her with a "hammer."

By contrast, Mother's questions to A---- (and F----) were consistently leading in nature. Before taking the children to Nemours, she repeatedly asked, "where Mommy was"

six (6) times and then specifically asked A----, "where does it hurt?" and "show me where it hurts."¹³⁵Her questions were so leading that they helped persuade DFS not to substantiate Father for abuse. Mother became suspicious based on statements by her children, but every statement she recorded was at best equivocal. Considering the children's young ages—even younger at the time of the alleged abuse—much of what they say requires some interpretation. With a little squinting, it is not hard to see how Mother became first worried, then suspicious, then convinced that her children were being abused. But with so many innocent and entirely ordinary explanations readily at hand, there is not enough to support her version of events. Ms. Stockwin concluded that, while "no case is cut and dr[ied]," this one "wasn't close."¹³⁶And Dr. Gould determined that Father "pretty clearly"

posed a low risk of future sexual abuse.¹³⁷Consequently, based on a preponderance of the evidence, the Court cannot find that Father sexually abused the children or is likely to do so in the future.

Page 41 of 58

b. Evidence of Domestic Violence Perpetrated Against Mother Although the evidence does not prove that Father sexually abused the children, Father unquestionably perpetrated domestic violence against Mother before and after these proceedings. While the parties were still an intact couple, Father controlled the parties' finances despite Mother earning three times as much. Mother previously filed a PFA petition in January 2025, but she voluntarily dismissed it before a final order could be entered. There have been no other PFA petitions filed in this case. Thus, the Court has not yet made a conclusive finding of "abuse" as defined by 10 Del. C. § 1041(1). However, the Court does so here based on the irrefutable evidence that Father has committed acts of domestic violence against Mother.

Father, for his part, claims that Mother abused him prior to their separation: she constantly "stalk[ed]" him, accused him of cheating on her, and sought control over all aspects of childcare.¹³⁸The evidence did reveal that Mother installed (but did not ultimately activate) hidden cameras in the house and was often hypervigilant when Father interacted with the children. Father testified that he did not challenge Mother's actions because he thought "violence would ensue" and he did not want to lose his family.¹³⁹However, despite the turbulence in the relationship and Father's threat to consult an attorney after Mother accused him in January 2023, he never took action to change his circumstances, and the possibility that Mother would have retaliated remains pure conjecture. Instead, Father acquiesced—albeit reluctantly—to Mother's caregiving demands for years before Mother left him on December 31, 2024. Mother's actions were concerning at times, but based on the evidence presented, they do not rise to the level of domestic violence in the context of Father's own behavior.

Page 42 of 58

Through his words and actions, however, Father displayed many of the hallmarks of domestic abuse by engaging in conduct which a reasonable person under the circumstances would find threatening or harmful.¹⁴⁰

Specific Instances of Threatening or Harmful Conduct

First, Father on several occasions created unnecessary and harmful obstacles for Mother's caregiving. Mere days after the parties separated, Father reported Mother's phone as stolen and cancelled her service, leaving her without accessible communication while caring for two young children for at least two days. After Father was placed on leave by the -------- -----, he had difficulty contributing to many of the household bills, and Mother began to cover the monthly expenses. However, in March 2025, Father unilaterally changed the PIN on the household ADT security system and did not provide Mother with the passcode to reset the alarm. Mother asked for the new PIN on March 9, but Father did not provide it for six (6) days.¹⁴¹In that time, the alarm activated five (5) times, resulting in a police response to the home each time. Mother and the children were repeatedly subjected to the noise of the blaring alarm and the intrusion of the police response. Father asserted he could not contact Mother with the PIN because he was "not allowed to talk to her,"¹⁴² but Mother's temporary PFA order against him had been dismissed on January 24, 2025. Even more striking, Mother had been consistently paying the ADT bill each month after Father could no longer cover the cost. Shortly after Father provided the new PIN, Mother set up her own account through ADT.

Second, in lieu of child support payments, Father initially agreed to pay the Delmarva utility bill, which was in both parties' names.¹⁴³In June 2025, however, Father stopped paying. Rather than pay an outstanding $200 bill, he affirmatively asked Delmarva to cut off service to the home where Mother resided with the children. Mother and the

Page 43 of 58

children were left without power and air conditioning for three (3) days during a heat spell, which also caused their refrigerated food to spoil. Mother confronted several obstacles due to the deactivation of the account, and she eventually had to pay an electrician $350 to resume services. Claiming falsely that the account was, at the time, in his name only, Father testified that he informed Mother that she should open her own account to restart service.¹⁴⁴But he later admitted that he intentionally allowed the electricity to be shut off without specifically notifying Mother of the shut-off date or facilitating a timely account transfer. Such deliberate, blatant action by Father can only be interpreted as an attempt to threaten Mother by harming her and the children for days during a heat wave. Father never offered a credible justification for cancelling the account rather than taking timely steps to transfer it.

Third, and most alarming, on November 1, 2025, Father demonstrated extremely poor judgment in his attempt to retrieve the children during Mother's custodial time. The evening before, Mother had invited Father to trick-or-treat with the children outside of his scheduled family time, an offer to which Father responded in hostile terms.¹⁴⁵Then, in the morning, Mother arranged for a babysitter to watch the children because she had to leave early for a parenting class. Because the Court ordered Father to have three hours of visitation on Saturdays, Mother planned for Father to have the children from 3 p.m. until 6 p.m. that day and for nine hours on Sunday. However, Father messaged Mother at 8:37 a.m. on Saturday, asking to pick the children up early. Mother declined his request for more time because the children were tired and needed to recuperate from their Halloween festivities. But Father would not take no for an answer and soon became threatening and insulting, as the following Talking Parents exchange reveals:¹⁴⁶

8:37 a.m. (Father): 11-6 today

8:37 a.m. (Father): See you there

Page 44 of 58

11:06 a.m. (Father): Where are my children

11:06 a.m. (Father): Are they with you?!

11:07 a.m. (Mother): Good morning I informed you they would not be available until

3

11:10 a.m. (Father): Where are they

11:10 a.m. (Father): Who are they with

11:11 a.m. (Mother): I will see you at 3, T----. Thank you

11:12 a.m. (Father): They are with the baby sitter at home

11:12 a.m. (Mother): I am taking my parenting class. I informed you the children will be available at 3.

11:12 a.m. (Father): Clearly not your parenting being done

11:13 a.m. (Father): I'll have the girls back with you at 6

11:13 a.m. (Father): My mom is with me

11:13 a.m. (Mother): This would be a serious infraction

11:13 a.m. (Father): You are at a class and refused hours for no reason

11:14 a.m. (Mother): I am in my class and I informed you they would be available at 3.

11:14 a.m. (Father): They already see me, see you at six and put the kids first!

11:15 a.m. (Father): Best interest of the kids is in favor of dad over a baby sitter

11:16 a.m. (Mother): S0 you are taking the children despite us not agreeing on this time

11:16 a.m. (Mother): I'm not going to cause conflict in front of the children but this is wrong.

Father then tried to call Mother while in her parenting class, and Mother declined the call. After another brief exchange, Father sent another message.

11:35 a.m. (Father): You did not communicate that you are working all day and that I could have the kids, this is horrible mother behavior

12:10 p.m. (Mother): I communicated clearly that the girls would be available at 3-6 pm today and for the full day tomorrow. You did not have permission to come to the home today or try to take the children before that time. Entering the house without invitation and having them put on shoes caused confusion for the children and was intimidating for the babysitter. . . . Please respect the boundaries moving forward.

[ . . . ]

12:29 p.m. (Father): Horrible horrible parenting by you causing enormous conflict

12:29 p.m. (Father): And I called you prior to coming you didn't answer

12:36 p.m. (Father): BTW, children were clearly available all morning, you liar, consistent with your polygraph

Page 45 of 58

During the rapid-fire exchanges while Mother was in her parenting class, Father drove to Mother's home, uninvited and unannounced. Mother testified that Father's actions were an attempt to intimidate her and the children. As Father conceded at trial, he was "wrong for going" to Mother's home to retrieve the children before his scheduled time, to interrupt the children's morning, and to confront the babysitter without Mother present.¹⁴⁷He justified his actions by testifying that he felt "stonewalled" and that he deserved an explanation for why Mother spent money to hire a babysitter rather than grant his request to have more time with the children that morning.¹⁴⁸He added that he was

"triggered" when Mother appeared to give a babysitter "more say" over the children than him.¹⁴⁹But Mother was under no obligation under the interim order to agree to more than Father's three hours of family time, and the record demonstrates that she made every effort to give him far more than that amount virtually every weekend. In any event, it was hardly unreasonable for her to explain that the children needed sleep or to conclude that having a babysitter handle an exchange in her absence was not in anyone's best interest. Although Father eventually acknowledged his egregious misstep, his aggressive intervention in Mother's home—in the context of his previous attempts to control her and the children there—constitutes threatening and harmful conduct defined by 10 Del. C. § 1041(1)(i). Ongoing Threatening and Harmful Conduct

In addition to the incidents highlighted above, Father engaged in persistent conduct that stretched far beyond disgruntled co-parenting. Whether communicating with Mother by parenting app or text message, Father routinely responded with unnecessary vitriol to often-benign inquiries about the logistics of custodial exchanges. He frequently berated her and shared his belief that she is mentally ill and needs treatment. The pattern surfaced even in exhibits that Father chose to submit to the Court in an effort to demonstrate

Page 46 of 58

Mother's unreasonableness. The parties' Talking Parents chat history is replete with examples of Father's harsh, degrading, and harmful communications:

October 11, 2025¹⁵⁰

10:12 a.m. (Mother): Hi T----, Please do not undress or change the girls' clothing, including their underwear, during visits. There is no reason for them to be stripped naked in parking lots at the start of every visit and before the completion and absolutely no reason for their underwear to be changed. The purpose of supervised visitation is to ensure appropriate boundaries and contact at all times. . . .

11:49 a.m. (Father): The girls are always welcomed in my home if you have trouble keeping the proper attire weather as you have displayed in the past. To remedy your lack of awareness, my mom changes them into clothes I purchase. I imagine you have stressed them out about this as you have with swimming. . . . You requested that I don't contact mediation and only have sole custody from your molestation lies so this is consistent with your thirst for conflict.

12:01 p.m. (Father): Your mental state should be examined

12:02 p.m. (Father): The polygraph should have brought you great comfort since you been asking for it for years

12:02 p.m. (Father): Now you are worse than ever

[ . . . ]

2:24 p.m. (Mother): Please confirm time

[ . . . ]

2:25 p.m. (Mother) My message last night stated that I needed to pick them up at 3, just making sure we are still on track

2:25 p.m. (Father): Why is 4 declined

2:27 p.m. (Father): Extra drama for nothing you should be ashamed

2:28 p.m. (Father): I'll bring them at 3 but you are being weird today beyond hypervigilant, seek help

2:29 p.m. (Mother): I'll be there at 3. . . .

2:29 p.m. (Father): Hyper vigilance stole an hour from me today

2:56 p.m. (Father): Gonna be a few minutes behind

3:07 p.m. (Mother): I will not engage in any additional banter with you. As I have stated numerous times. The boundary is simple and clear you are NOT to change the

Page 47 of 58

girls clothes especially their underwear as you have been doing. There is absolutely no reason for you to be doing it and the boundary is being set firmly on the record. Thank you.

3:16 p.m. (Father): Want to polygraph that allegation too?

3:17 p.m. (Father): Cuz it's a lie and you know it, and you are abusing the girls with your interrogations after every visit

October 14, 2025¹⁵¹

7:12 a.m. (Father): You are a disturbed woman

7:13 a.m. (Father): Seek help

October 19,2025¹⁵²

1:47 p.m. (Mother): Hello, can you pick up the girls at home as I left home about an hour ago and will not be back until 2:30. S---- [the babysitter] is with them and they will be ready, thanks!

2:02 p.m. (Father): A[s] mentioned before I like more hours with my children and you asked to have them longer this weekend and I was supposed to have drill so I honored it, now seeing you have a baby sitter you aren't using your weekend hours for parenting time. The children are without either parent today because of the evil in your heart

2:06 p.m. (Father): Just in case you forgot your lie, it's right here, no different than your poly graph, just lies

2:07 p.m. (Mother):They are waiting by the door thanks

2:10 p.m. (Father): They have been with a babysitter since 11:30, you prioritized the children getting baby sitter time over their father

3:24 p.m. (Mother): I left home close to 1. S---- came over to help me with the children. Kindly keep your unfettered need for control at bay. I'm allowed to hire help since I have no support here. If I changed times last minute you would have had an issue with that as you have demonstrated in the past. I have no interest in arguing with you.

4:04 p.m. (Father): Your lies got you running in circles, just let me get my full days so you don't have to come up with lies

4:05 p.m. (Father): They did not go with you anywhere to enjoy the warm weather like you asked you just lied like you always do

4:06 p.m. (Father): You need a psychological evaluation, you can't stop yourself from lying even when unnecessary, get help

Page 48 of 58

[ . . . ]

5:56 p.m. (Mother): T----, please refrain from sending aggressive or accusatory messages. I'm maintaining clear and respectful communication solely regarding the children and their schedules

[ . . . ]

6:18 p.m. (Father): You can't help but overstep your boundaries

6:19 p.m. (Father): Always pushing to dictate what happens on dad time

October 26, 2025¹⁵³

7:50 a.m. (Mother): Good morning. I hope all is well. This is a friendly reminder that the girls['] clothes should only be changed by P----. Or alternatively if you would like them to change into anything different I would be happy to assist if you bring the articles of clothing here before 9, I would be happy [to] change them for you. Thanks

7:52 a.m. (Father): Pass. I can handle my children at all times. Just waiting for the judge to agree

7:53 a.m. (Father): That's Ms. P---- to you, have some respect

7:58 a.m. (Father): One last piece of advice, get some mental help asap

7:58 a.m. (Father): Believing your own lies needs to be examined

8:05 a.m. (Mother): We both know the truth. I'm not interested in arguing with you. Just to be clear, are you confirming that you intend to continue changing the girls yourself despite my respectful request not to?

8:08 a.m. (Father): If you're not interest in arguing, stop trying to dictate my time with the children

8:09 a.m. (Mother): Kindly answer the question it's either yes you will respect the boundary or no you will not

8:13 a.m. (Father): I will never respect any of your boundaries against my children, I only will do what the court demands

8:14 a.m. (Father): You have done this all year long, get some mental help you pathetic liar.

At trial, Father reiterated his belief that Mother needs mental help though he does not. He explained that suggesting treatment was helpful because it would be "the solution

Page 49 of 58

to all of our problems," but he has been hurt when Mother rebuffs his requests.¹⁵⁴Even if he holds that belief in good faith, however, his constant badgering, belittling commentary is just another manifestation of his controlling behaviors.

December 25, 2025

After Father's Christmas visit, Mother again asked him to refrain from bathing the children. They were with Father from 12:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Christmas Day, and Mother had given them a bath shortly before the exchange. After Mother picked the children up from the visit, she was upset because it appeared A---- had taken a bath at Father's home, and Mother believed Paternal Grandmother might not have been present at the time. When Mother expressed her concern to Father, he indicated that Paternal Grandmother had been present and added, "You don't dictate what happens during their dad time. . . . You're thirsting for conflict, grow up."¹⁵⁵

In isolation, Mother's concern regarding the bath is trivial, and Mother conceded she was not present in Father's home to know exactly what transpired. However, compounded with Father's pattern of hostile behavior, his belief that Mother is hypervigilant, and the ubiquitous power-and-control dynamic in the relationship, the Court views the incident as Father's way of showing Mother that she cannot prevent him from subverting her express wishes and the parties' longstanding practice prior to their separation.

* * *

Father's behavior goes beyond classic maladaptive break-up behavior into the realm of overtly harmful and abusive conduct. Father acknowledged that even simple co- parenting communications have often escalated into animosity. Father describes Mother in overwhelmingly negative terms, claiming that she "spends a lot of money trying to make me not be [the children's] dad."¹⁵⁶He blames Mother for the parties' communication

Page 50 of 58

difficulties. As the exchanges above indicate, he believes she is hypervigilant, controlling, and mentally ill. He thinks battling with her is "worth it" even though it goes against everything he learned in his high-conflict co-parenting course, and he conceded he is yet to learn when to take no for an answer. As he testified at trial, he wants to "be in control"

of the children because he, unlike Mother, is "willing to share."¹⁵⁷ Although Father may view his actions as warranted and appropriate, the evidence suggested otherwise. Since June 2025, despite the Court ordering a minimum of three hours for Father's visits on both Saturdays and Sundays, Mother has gone above and beyond to expand Father's opportunities to see the children. In fact, Mother has sacrificed most of her weekend parenting time by ceding it to Father despite his consistently abusive communications. Consequently, the Court finds Father engaged in a pattern of domestic violence over the past year: cancelling Mother's phone plan after falsely reporting Mother's cell phone as stolen, prov0king unnecessary encounters with the police by changing the alarm system PIN, imposing discomfort on Mother and the children during a heat wave by needlessly deactivating the Delmarva account, intruding on Mother's home and parenting time to retrieve the children post-Halloween, and repeatedly berating, belittling, and blaming Mother in his communications.

Ultimately, although there is insufficient evidence to conclude that Father sexually abused the children, the record overflows with examples of his abusive behaviors seeking power and control over Mother and the children. As the Court indicated at the conclusion of the trial, if Father continues with this course of behavior, Mother would be well within her rights to file a PFA petition. Consequently, in accordance with 13 Del. C. § 706A, factor

(7) weighs overwhelmingly in favor of Mother and has a significant bearing on the children's custodial and residential arrangements.¹⁵⁸

Page 51 of 58

8. The criminal history of any party or any other resident of the household including whether the criminal history contains pleas of guilty or no contest or a conviction of a criminal offense

Neither parent has a criminal record. Therefore, the Court finds this factor is neutral.

CONCLUSION

Unfortunately, the custody dispute between these parties has reached an intractable level that may not necessarily be fully resolved with time or specific court orders. But the focus must nevertheless remain on these two young, impressionable children and their best interests. In consideration of the best interest factors under 13 Del. C. § 722(a), the weight given to each factor will be different in any given proceeding, and "[i]t is quite possible that the weight of one factor will counterbalance the combined weight of all other factors and be outcome determinative."¹⁵⁹Additionally, the Court is required to consider all options for residential placement.¹⁶⁰The Court finds that factors (1), (3), (4), (5), and (8) are neutral. Factor (2) is inapplicable, although the Court notes the Child Attorney recommended joint legal custody and shared placement. Factor (6) slightly favors Mother. Based on the Court's finding that Father has persistently abused Mother, however, Factor (7) weighs heavily in favor of Mother's request for sole legal custody and primary residential placement. As this case has progressed, it has become clear that the parties are unable to effectively communicate and co-parent because of domestic violence. The default position is joint legal custody,¹⁶¹but if parents "cannot communicate in the best interests of the children, an award of joint legal custody does a disservice to the children's best interests."¹⁶² permanent order, and no criminal charges were ever brought. Finding abuse by a preponderance of the evidence is not enough to trigger the presumption. See Baker v. Long, 981 A.2d 1152, 1156-57 (Del. 2009).

Page 52 of 58

Even after taking a high-conflict co-parenting class and even while under judicial scrutiny during the pendency of these custody proceedings, Mother and Father have each made missteps and created challenges for the other's parenting. The issues go well beyond the temporary fallout of a bad breakup. At this time, the Court simply cannot conclude that these parties have the "potential for cooperation in matters of child rearing."¹⁶³ On balance, although Mother's actions at the beginning of the case were problematic, Father bears the lion's share of responsibility for that unfortunate reality. He has demonstrated a greater inability to co-parent and has engaged in a pattern of domestic violence toward Mother, which has compromised the children's well-being. He has often demanded time with the children during Mother's parenting time and raised adult issues with his young children during his phone calls and visits. Beyond Father's generally

"domineering style," it has been his animosity toward Mother that has clouded his judgment and led him to confuse and distress the children, as when he entered Mother's home uninvited or when he told A---- that Mother was "leveraging" ice cream to end a phone call early. Moreover, when Father does not get his way regarding parenting time, he barrages Mother with disparaging messages. Despite taking a high-conflict co-parenting course, Father has been unable to control his rancor or take no for an answer, and he still believes his repeated directives for Mother to get mental help are justified. By contrast, Mother—despite her misgivings about permitting contact with Father—has consistently encouraged his relationship with the children by affording him time with the children beyond the minimum amount the Court ordered. The Court has serious concerns with Mother's hypervigilance, leading questions to the children, and relentless recording of the children's conversations. However, she has been the children's primary caregiver and decision-maker since birth, and she is evidently a protective parent. Consequently, factor (7) is dispositive for the best interest of the children.

Page 53 of 58

Finally, the Court notes that, although it cannot find by a preponderance of the evidence that Father sexually abused the children, it appears Mother has held her contrary belief both sincerely and consistently. However, Mother's hypervigilance and her testimony that she would "fake an aneurysm" to rekindle a false relationship with Father to ensure continuous supervision of the children strikes the Court as damaging for any hope of a healthy co-parenting relationship. The Court cannot allay Mother's fear, but it cautions her that her efforts to keep her children safe, though well-intentioned, may instead, over time, distort the children's relationships with their parents and their overall well-being.

ACCORDINGLY, THE COURT ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:

1. Mother shall have SOLE LEGAL CUSTODY of A---- B----- (D.O.B. 05/28/2020) and F---- B----- (D.O.B. 06/28/2022) based on, first, the Court's finding that 13 Del. C. § 722(a)(7) is dispositive for the children's best interests and custodial arrangements and, second, Mother's consistent role as the children's primary caregiver throughout the majority of their lives. As the sole custodian, Mother shall have the exclusive right to make all decisions and give all consents for matters affecting the children, including but not limited to the children's care, nurture, and welfare; medical consents under 13 Del. C. § 707; and education decisions under Title 14 of the Delaware Code. Mother has a responsibility to provide upon request to Father all material information concerning the children's progress in school, medical treatment, significant developments in the children's lives, school activities and conferences, special religious events, and other activities in which Father may wish to participate, unless specifically restricted in this Order.

2. Mother shall have PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL PLACEMENT of the children.

3. Despite Dr. Gould's conclusion that Father is not a risk to the children, because of the Court's finding that Mother has consistently been the children's primary caregiver and Father has undermined the children's well-being in certain instances through domestic violence directed at Mother, Father shall have family time with the children according to the following progressive transition schedule to ensure the focus remains on the children's best interests:

Page 54 of 58

a. Effective immediately:

i. On the weekend of February 14, 2026, and every other weekend thereafter until May 1, 2026, Father shall have the children from 9 a.m. Saturday to 5 p.m. Sunday. The children may spend that time at Father's home, but Paternal Grandmother shall be present as a supervisor.

ii. Father shall be entitled to additional supervised time with the children every Wednesday evening from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. and every other Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. when he does not have the children for the entire weekend.

iii. Father shall also continue to be entitled to nightly video contact with the children, via parenting app, at 7:00 p.m. for up to thirty minutes, if the children's attention spans allow.

iv. The parties shall exchange the children at a mutually agreeable location. However, the Court recommends coordinating staggered exchanges at the Family Visitation Center, Paternal Grandmother's home, or another safe, neutral location to avoid direct interaction between the parties and limit trauma for the children. If neither party can identify a mutually agreeable location

by February 9, 2026, counsel for the visiting party shall send a motion to chambers and the Court will issue a referral to the Family Visitation Center. The parties will then be required to share such costs equally.

v. On Saturday nights when the children are in Father's care, Mother shall also be entitled to video contact with the children, via parenting app, at 7:00 p.m. for up to thirty minutes, if the children's attention spans allow.

b. Effective May 2, 2026:

i. The contact schedule shall remain the same, but Father shall no longer require supervision while with the children. c. Effective September 3, 2026:

i. On his alternating weekends with the children, Father's contact

Page 55 of 58

schedule shall be expanded, allowing him to pick them up from school on Thursday, have them over the weekend, and drop them off at school on Monday morning.

ii. Father shall continue to be entitled to additional time with the children every Wednesday evening from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m.

iii. When the children are not in school, the parties will mutually agree to an exchange location that limits their contact. If they cannot agree, then the visitation exchanges shall take place at the Family Visitation Center.

iv. Father shall continue to be entitled to nightly video contact with the children when they are in Mother's care, via parenting app, at 7:00 p.m. for up to thirty minutes, if the children's attention spans allow.

v. On Father's alternating weekends with the children, Mother shall be entitled to nightly video contact with them, via parenting app, at 7:00 p.m. for up to thirty minutes, if the children's attention spans allow.

d. The parties may mutually agree in writing to modify any part of this progressive contact schedule.

4. Unless the parties agree otherwise, the following additional guidelines shall govern contact with the children:

a. Holidays: Father shall have the children on the holidays in Column 1 in odd-numbered years and the holidays in Column 2 in the even-numbered years. Mother shall have the children on the holidays in Column 1 in the even-numbered years and the holidays in Column 2 in odd-numbered years:

Column 1 Column 2

Easter or other religious holiday Memorial Day Fourth of July Labor Day

Halloween Thanksgiving Day

Christmas Day Christmas Eve

Except for Christmas and Halloween contact, holiday contact shall be from 9 a.m. until 6 p.m. the day of the holiday. Halloween contact shall

Page 56 of 58

begin at 5 p.m. and end at 8 p.m. Christmas Eve contact shall begin at 6 p.m. on December 24th and end at noon on December 25th. Christmas Day contact shall begin at noon on December 25th and end at 6 p.m. on December 26th. When a holiday falls on a Monday immediately following a contact weekend, the parent that had contact for the weekend shall be entitled to keep the children continuously from 6 p.m. Friday until 6 p.m. Monday.

b. Mother's/Father's Day: On Mother's Day and Father's Day, no matter whose turn it would otherwise be for contact, the children shall be with the parent whose holiday is being celebrated from 9 a.m. until 6 p.m. c. Birthdays: If a child's birthday falls on a weekday, Father shall be entitled to a visit from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.

d. School Breaks (Winter and Spring): After September 3, 2026, when the visitation order is in full effect, Winter and Spring Breaks shall be shared equally between the parents by dividing the breaks equally or rotating the breaks. If the parties cannot agree, Mother shall have Spring Break and Winter Break in odd calendar years and Father shall have Spring Break and Winter Break in even calendar years.

e. Summer Vacation: For the Summer of 2027 and beyond, when the visitation order is in full effect, the parents shall alternate contact weeks in the summer with the schedule beginning the first Friday in June and concluding the last Friday in August. Mother shall select her weeks first in odd numbered years and Father shall select his weeks first in even numbered years. The parent whose choice it is that year shall give the other parent written notice of his/her summer week selection between March 1st and April 1st. The parent who has the children for the week shall be responsible for taking the children to their extracurricular activities and summer school and providing summer care for that week.

5. Parenting App: The parties shall continue to exclusively use a parenting app to communicate with each other and to make video calls to the children. The parents may wish to utilize a parenting app with a tone meter to help facilitate more productive and respectful communication.

6. Domestic violence: Father is required to complete a domestic violence course

Page 57 of 58

and submit his certificate of completion to the Court if he files any future petitions regarding custody or visitation.

7. Co-parent coordinator: To the extent available, the parties shall utilize a co- parent coordinator to help facilitate logistics for exchanges, communication, and other issues. The cost of a co-parent coordinator shall be shared equally.

8. Non-disparagement: Neither party shall disparage or communicate in a threatening manner with the other, and neither shall make disparaging remarks about the other in front of or within earshot of the children or allow third parties to do so. Neither party shall place the children in the middle of communications or conflict related to co-parenting or custody disputes.

9. Non-interference: The parties are required to practice parallel parenting, and neither party shall interfere with the other party's parenting time. However, if either party takes the children out of state overnight, they shall be required to notify the other parent of their itinerary at least 24-hours in advance.

10. Attorney responsiveness: If the parties remain represented by counsel, the Court expects each to answer appropriate inquiries from the other in a timely manner. Any future dilatory communication regarding custody-related inquiries by counsel may be met with sanctions by the Court.

11. Modification: This is a final custody order entered after a full hearing on the merits. The parties may mutually agree in writing to any modification. Any petition to modify custody the order, however, will be subject to the requirements of 13 Del. C. § 729(c).

12. Make-Up Time: Given Mother's extensive efforts to increase Father's family time beyond the minimum ordered by the Court—often to the point of entirely surrendering her own ability to have weekend time with the children—Father's request for make-up time is DENIED.

13. Attorney's Fees: Because the Court concludes that Mother's allegations of sexual abuse were not made in bad faith or with vexatious intent, Father's request for attorney's fees is DENIED.

14. Child Attorney: Child Attorney Alfred Cave, Esq., shall submit his attorney's fees to the Court and Counsel within thirty (30) days, and both parties shall split the cost equally. Once his fees are reimbursed, Mr. Cave's appointment is

Page 58 of 58

VACATED with much appreciation from the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________________ _________________________________ Date Written Order Issued ELIZA HIRST, JUDGE

cc: Petitioner via email and regular mail Respondent(s) via regular mail Date emailed/mailed: