The South Carolina Court of Appeals’ unpublished decision in Gay v. Gay (2026-UP-167) affirms a family court’s award of week-to-week joint custody, emphasizing that such an arrangement is proper when supported by the child’s best interests and specific exceptional circumstances.

At its core, the court held that the family court did not err in awarding joint custody because it adequately considered the statutory factors outlined in S.C. Code § 63-15-240 and made sufficient findings to justify the arrangement. Although the mother argued the trial court failed to properly apply the seventeen statutory custody factors, the appellate court found otherwise. It concluded the family court meaningfully evaluated the evidence, including each parent’s strengths, weaknesses, and overall ability to meet the children’s needs. The court highlighted that both parents were loving, involved, and capable, and that the children were thriving—doing well in school, participating in activities, and maintaining strong relationships with both parents.

Importantly, the Court of Appeals reaffirmed that the “best interests of the child” remain the paramount consideration in custody determinations. The appellate court deferred to the family court’s factual findings, noting its superior position to assess witness credibility and weigh testimony, particularly in a highly fact-specific inquiry like custody.

The court also addressed the longstanding principle that joint custody is generally disfavored in South Carolina absent “exceptional circumstances.” Here, however, the court found such circumstances existed. Both parents had served as primary custodians during the litigation, allowing the court to observe their parenting firsthand. The evidence showed that the children benefited from significant time with both parents and struggled when limited to one. Additionally, the court expressed concern that awarding sole custody to either parent could foster alienation and reduce the children’s meaningful relationship with the other parent.

Ultimately, the decision underscores that joint custody is appropriate when both parents are fit, actively involved, and when shared parenting maximizes the children’s well-being—even in the presence of parental conflict.

Guy Vitetta, Charleston SC