By Rossville “Aeron” B. Violanta
Effect of Parental Authority upon the persons of the children
Art. 220. The parents and those exercising parental authority shall have with the respect to their unemancipated children on wards the following rights and duties:
(1) To keep them in their company, to support, educate and instruct them by right precept and good example, and to provide for their upbringing in keeping with their means;
(2) To give them love and affection, advice and counsel, companionship and understanding;
(3) To provide them with moral and spiritual guidance, inculcate in them honesty, integrity, self-discipline, self-reliance, industry and thrift, stimulate their interest in civic affairs, and inspire in them compliance with the duties of citizenship;
(4) To enhance, protect, preserve and maintain their physical and mental health at all times;
(5) To furnish them with good and wholesome educational materials, supervise their activities, recreation and association with others, protect them from bad company, and prevent them from acquiring habits detrimental to their health, studies and morals;
(6) To represent them in all matters affecting their interests;
(7) To demand from them respect and obedience;
(8) To impose discipline on them as may be required under the circumstances; and
(9) To perform such other duties as are imposed by law upon parents and guardians. (316a)
PARENTAL RIGHTS AND DUTIES. The law’s concept of the family rests on a presumption that parents possess what a child lacks in maturity, experience and capacity for judgement required for making life’s difficult decisions.
DUTIES OF PARENTS UNDER PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 603. Article 46 of the Child and Youth Welfare Code (P.D. No. 603) also provides that parents shall have the following duties following their children: 1) to give them attention, companionship and understanding; 2) to extend to them the benefits of moral guidance, self-discipline and religious instruction; 3) to supervise their activities, including recreation; 4) to inculcate in them the value of industry, thrift and self-reliance; 5) to stimulate their interest in civic affairs, teach them the duties of citizenship, and develop their commitment to their country; 6) to advise the properly in any matter affecting their development and well-being; 7) to always set a good example; 8) to provide them with the adequate support as defined in the law particularly the Family Code; and 9) to administer their property, if any, according to their best interest subject to the provisions of the Family Code particularly Article 225.
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CHILDREN. Parents shall also have the duty to represent the unemancipated children in all matters affecting interest.
The cited Article 311 of the Civil Code is now Article 211 of the Family Code which provides that “the father and the mother shall jointly exercise parental authority over the persons of their common children. In case of disagreement, the father’s decision shall prevail, unless there is a judicial order to the contrary”.
DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS. Under the second paragraph of Article 211 of the Family Code, children shall always observe respect and reverence toward their parents and are obliged to obey them as long as the children are under their parental authority Under Article 220(7) and (8), parents have the right to demand from the children respect and obedience and to impose discipline on them as may be required under the circumstances. They may inflict a reasonable measure of corporal punishment.
RIGHTS OF THE CHILDREN. With respect to the duties of the parents, they must likewise know that there are certain rights of the children which they are duty-bound to accord. Thus, Article 356 of the Civil Code of 1950 still effectively that every child:
- Is entitled to parental care;
- Shall receive at least elementary education;
- Shall be given moral and civic training by the parents or guardian; and
- Has a right to live in an atmosphere conducive to his physical, moral and intellectual development.
Under P.D No. 603, otherwise known as the Child and Youth Welfare Code, the right of the child are likewise enumerated in Article 3 thereof, thus:
Article 3. Rights of the Child. – All children shall be entitled to the rights herein set forth without distinction as to legitimacy or illegitimacy, sex, social status, religion, political antecedents, and other factors.
(1) Every child is endowed with the dignity and worth of a human being from the moment of his conception, as generally accepted in medical parlance, and has, therefore, the right to be born well.
(2) Every child has the right to a wholesome family life that will provide him with love, care and understanding, guidance and counseling, and moral and material security.
The dependent or abandoned child shall be provided with the nearest substitute for a home.
(3) Every child has the right to a well-rounded development of his personality to the end that he may become a happy, useful and active member of society.
The gifted child shall be given opportunity and encouragement to develop his special talents.
The emotionally disturbed or socially maladjusted child shall be treated with sympathy and understanding, and shall be entitled to treatment and competent care.
The physically or mentally handicapped child shall be given the treatment, education and care required by his particular condition.
(4) Every child has the right to a balanced diet, adequate clothing, sufficient shelter, proper medical attention, and all the basic physical requirements of a healthy and vigorous life.
(5) Every child has the right to be brought up in an atmosphere of morality and rectitude for the enrichment and the strengthening of his character.
(6) Every child has the right to an education commensurate with his abilities and to the development of his skills for the improvement of his capacity for service to himself and to his fellowmen.
(7) Every child has the right to full opportunities for safe and wholesome recreation and activities, individual as well as social, for the wholesome use of his leisure hours.
(8) Every child has the right to protection against exploitation, improper influences, hazards, and other conditions or circumstances prejudicial to his physical, mental, emotional, social and moral development.
(9) Every child has the right to live in a community and a society that can offer him an environment free from pernicious influences and conducive to the promotion of his health and the cultivation of his desirable traits and attributes.
(10) Every child has the right to the care, assistance, and protection of the State, particularly when his parents or guardians fail or are unable to provide him with his fundamental needs for growth, development, and improvement.
(11) Every child has the right to an efficient and honest government that will deepen his faith in democracy and inspire him with the morality of the constituted authorities both in their public and private lives.
(12) Every child has the right to grow up as a free individual, in an atmosphere of peace, understanding, tolerance, and universal brotherhood, and with the determination to contribute his share in the building of a better world.
LACSON V. SAN JOSE-LACSON 24 Scra 847
Facts:
Alfonso and Carmen were married in 1953. They had four children. In 1963 Carmen left the conjugal home in Bacolod and resided in Manila. On March 12, 1963 she filed a complaint in the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court (JDRC) for custody of all their children as well as support for them and herself. But with the help of their cousel the spouses reached an amicable settlement as to custody of the kids, support, and separation of property. On April 27, 1963, they filed a joint petition with the CFI of Negros Occidental, submitting that they had mutually agreed upon the dissolution of their conjugal partnership., Carmen was allowed custody of all four children until June of 1963, when she was supposed to return the two older children to Alfonso in custody.
Finding the foregoing joint petition as conformable to the law, the CFI issued an order approving their compromise agreement on the very same day. On May 7, however, Carmen filed a motion with the JDRC alleging that the compromise agreement was the only way she could get custody of all the children and praying that she be relieved of the agreement pertaining to the custody and visitation of the children and that she now be awarded full custody. Alfonso opposed the motion and the JDRC ruled in his favour. Carmen went to the CFI and filed a motion for reconsideration, basically claiming the same thing. Alfonso opposed. The CFI favored Alfonso and ordered Carmen to return the two older children by June, on pain of contempt. Carmen instituted certiorari proceedings with the CA against the CFI. The CA declared void the portion of the agreement pertaining to the custody of children.
Issue:
Whether or not the assailed compromise agreement and the judgment of the CFI grounded on said agreement conformable to law?
Held:
YES but only as far as the separation of property of spouses and the dissolution of the conjugal partnership, in accordance with Article 191 of the Civil Code. The spouses did not appear to have any creditors who would have been prejudiced by their arrangement. At the time of the decision the spouses had been separated five years and so the propriety of severing their financial and proprietary interests was manifest.As to the custody of the children, they were all below 7 years of age at the time of the agreement and so the CA was correct in awarding the custody to the mother. The Court was also uphold the couple’s agreement regarding the custody of the children, citing rights of the children to proper care.
PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS 