Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

the best interests of the child require such action. Heistand v. Heistand, 267 Neb.
300, 673 N.W.2d 541 (2004).
A decree of divorce, insofar as minor children are concerned, is never final in the
sense that it cannot be changed, but is subject to review at any time in the light of
changing conditions. See Matson v. Matson, 175 Neb. 60, 120 N.W.2d 364 (1963).
Haynes v. Haynes, 205 Neb. 35, 286 N.W.2d 108 (1979)
While it is true that a parent has a natural right to the custody of his child, the court is
not bound as a matter of law to restore a child to a parent under any and all
circumstances. The welfare of a child of tender years is paramount to the wishes of
the parent where it has formed a natural attachment for persons who have long been
in the relation of parents with the parents’ approval and consent
Hibbard v. Hibbard, 230 Neb. 364, 366, 431 N.W.2d 637, 639 (1988).
Children have the right to be treated as interested and affected persons and not as
pawns or chattel of either or both parents.
Hickenbottom v. Hickenbottom; 239 Neb. 579; 477 N.W.2d 8 (1991)
[T]he parties in a proceeding to dissolve a marriage cannot control the disposition of
minor children by agreement. Hicks v. Hicks, 223 Neb. 189, 388 N.W.2d 510 (1986)
A stepfather is the husband of a child’s mother by virtue of a marriage subsequent
to that of which the child is the offspring; thus, a husband who divorces the mother of
such a child is no longer the child’s stepfather.
[U]nder appropriate circumstances, an ex-stepparent is entitled to visitation with a
former stepchild.
In re Interest of Brian B. et al., 268 Neb. 870, 689 N.W.2d 184 (2004)
The right of parents to maintain custody of their child is a natural right, subject only
to the paramount interest which the public has in the protection of the rights of the
child.
In re Interest of Karlie D., 283 Neb. 581, ____ N.W.2d ___ (March 2012)
The Nebraska Juvenile Code clearly expresses a preference for placement with
blood relatives.
In re Interest of Lakota Z. & Jacob H., 282 Neb. 584, 804 N.W.2d 174 (2011)
Under the parental preference principle, a parent’s natural right to the custody of his
or her child trumps the interests of strangers to the parent-child relationship and the
preferences of the child.
Absent circumstances which justify terminating a parent’s constitutionally protected
right to care for his or her child, due regard for the right requires that a biological or
adoptive parent be presumptively regarded as the proper guardian for his or her
child.
In guardianship termination proceedings involving a biological or adoptive parent,
the parental preference principle serves to establish a rebuttable presumption that
the best interests of a child are served by reuniting the child with his or her parent.
An individual who opposes the termination of a guardianship bears the burden of
proving by clear and convincing evidence that the biological or adoptive parent either
is unfit or has forfeited his or her right to custody. Absent such proof, the
- 48 -