Sa mother or sa father?

When it comes to parents who are separated, such as in your case, Article 213 of the law states that parental authority shall be exercised by the parent designated by the court after taking into account all relevant considerations. The same provision states: No child under seven years of age shall be separated from the mother unless the court finds compelling reason to order otherwise (Art. 213, Id.). EADLINES NATION REGIONS OPINION BUSINESS WORLD SPORTS LIFESTYLE ENTERTAINMENT THE SUNDAY TIMES 122ND ANNIVERSARY PUBLIC SQUARE SPECIAL SECTIONS THE MANILA TIMES 500 The Manila Times Online | Home logo Mothers given priority in taking custody of children below 7 years old Persida Acosta By PERSIDA ACOSTA October 10, 2016 Persida Acosta Persida Acosta Dear PAO, I have a four-year-old son with my ex-girlfriend. We used to live togethe but we are now separated. Our son has been living with her since then. I recently found out that she is now pregnant but the identity of the father is uncertain since she is allegedly dating three guys at the same time. Considering my ex-girlfriend’s promiscuous activities and penchant for engaging in polygamous relationships, I now want to have full custody over my son. Can I remove my ex-girlfriend’s custodial rights because of this? I fear that her activities may badly influence our child’s development. Please advise me. Jeremy Dear Jeremy, Considering your desire to claim custody and exercise parental authority over your son, it is important that we refer to what the Family Code of the Philippines provides in this regard. According to the law, the “father and the mother shall jointly exercise parental authority over the persons of their common children. xxx” (Article 211, Ibid.). When it comes to parents who are separated, such as in your case, Article 213 of the law states that parental authority shall be exercised by the parent designated by the court after taking into account all relevant considerations. Tthe same provision states: No child under seven years of age shall be separated from the mother unless the court finds compelling reason to order otherwise (Art. 213, Id.). From this provision alone, it is clear that the law gives priority to the mothers when it comes to the custody of their children who are under seven years old. The only exception is when the court finds compelling reason to take away the custodial rights of the mother. “Only the most compelling of reasons shall justify the court’s awarding the custody of such a child to someone other than his mother, such as her unfitness to exercise sole parental authority. In the past the following grounds have been considered ample justification to deprive a mother of custody and parental authority: neglect, abandonment, unemployment and immorality, habitual drunkenness, drug addiction, maltreatment of the child, insanity and being sick with a communicable disease” (Perez vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 118870, March 29, 1996, penned by former Associate Justice Flerida Ruth Pineda-Romero) Emphasis supplied. This then begs the question as to what constitutes as compelling reasons that may result in the removal of the custodial rights from the mother. According to the Supreme Court: