A Path to Shared Custody in Peru: Unfounded Impositions; [O caminho da guarda compartilhada no Peru: imposições sem fundamento]

Mendoza A.M.A. · Opinion Juridica (2025) · DOI: 10.22395/ojum.a4954

Resumen

The objective of this research was to analyze the foundations of an amendment and the background of Law 31590, which establishes shared custody as the general rule, as well as Law 29269, which first regulated shared custody in the Peruvian Code for Children and Adolescents, considering it as an alternative, not as the general rule. An exegetical method was applied through documentary review, focused on analyzing the bills, committee reports, and the final product (the laws under analysis), in contrast to the principle of the child’s best interests. The review is based on documentation from the Congress of the Republic of Peru, publications about Law 29269 and Law 31590, from the entities involved (the Ombudsman’s Office and the Ministry of Women and Vulnerable Populations), and the doctrine related to the subject of analysis. Among the main findings is that the drafting of both laws failed to consider the opinions of institutions familiar with the problems arising from custody proceedings; nor did it take into account research on custody proceedings within the framework of Law 29269 that would support the need for amendment. While the principle of the child’s best interest is invoked in the rationale of both laws, the context in which they were drafted reveals that custody is considered a parent’s right, disregarding minors’ rights.

Instituciones: Universidad Católica de Santa María