Rule 1915.10.Decision. Order.

Comment. : See 23 Pa.C.S. § 5323(d) (requiring the court to delineate the reasons for its decision on the record in open court or in a written opinion or order). See Pa.R.Civ.P. 1930.1(a)(2) (permitting the court to order that the case caption contain the parties’ initials rather than their names in custody actions). See 23 Pa.C.S. § 5323(c) (requiring that an order include notice of a party’s obligations under § 5337, relating to relocation) and Pa.R.Civ.P. 1915.17 (outlining the requirements for the proposed relocation of a child’s residence). Subdivision (b) sets forth requirements of 23 Pa.C.S. § 5323(e)(1). Examples of safety provisions include, but are not limited to, professional supervised physical custody, a supervised or neutral cus- tody exchange location, a neutral third-party present at custody exchanges, telephone or computer- facilitated contact with the child, no direct contact between the parties, third-party contact for cancel- lations, third-party transportation, and designating a secure, neutral location as repository for a child’s passport. A party may seek review by petition of the risk of harm and need for continued supervision pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. § 5323(e)(2). For a presumption of supervised physical custody and safety provisions, see 23 Pa.C.S. § 5323(e.1). Additionally, subdivision (b) requires a court to enter a custody order as a separate written order or in a separate section of a written opinion. The subdivision also addresses the practice of orally entering a custody order on the record without formalizing the custody order in writing. In such cir- cumstances, the parties’ only documentation of the custody order is a transcription of the oral record. In R.L.P. v. R.F.M., 110 A.3d 201 (Pa. Super. 2015), the Superior Court held that ‘‘in order to be suf- ficiently specific to be enforced, an order of custody must be entered as a separate written order, or as a separate section of a written opinion.’’ Id. at 206. Despite the Superior Court’s decision, the prac- tice of placing custody orders on the record without subsequently entering a written order has contin- ued, which has been problematic for enforcement and understanding of the agreement’s or order’s terms. Pursuant to subdivision (b)(2), the court may initialize a custody action’s case caption if the child’s privacy may be compromised by the sensitive nature of the facts in the case record. If the court deter- mines that the case caption should be initialized, additional privacy safeguards are required under subdivision (b)(3). Subdivision (b)(3) recognizes that inadvertent disclosure of the child’s identity and privacy may occur if the written custody order or opinion provides specific details of the child’s life, i.e., school, extracurricular activities. Subdivision (b)(3) requires that the court refrain from using specific identi- fiers; instead, the court should use general terms, e.g., ‘‘high school,’’ not ‘‘John F. Kennedy High School.’’ In circumstances in which name specificity is required, such as school choice, the court should consider a separate order for that issue. Under no circumstance does a party’s filing of an updated Criminal Record/Abuse History Verifi- cation form impose a duty on the court to review, respond, or react to a newly revealed criminal record or abuse history unless a party petitions the court for relief. Historical Commentary The following commentary related to Pa.R.Civ.P. 1915.10 is historical in nature and represents statements of the Committee at the time of rulemaking: Explanatory Comment—2019 Subdivision (b) further defines and reinforces the requirements in 23 Pa.C.S. § 5323(e). Examples of safety provisions include, but are not limited to, supervised physical custody, a supervised or neu- tral custody exchange location, a neutral third-party present at custody exchanges, telephone or computer-facilitated contact with the child, no direct contact between the parties, third-party contact for cancellations, third-party transportation, and designating a secure, neutral location as repository for a child’s passport. Additionally, subdivision (b) requires a court to enter a custody order as a separate written order or in a separate section of a written opinion. The subdivision also addresses the practice of orally entering a custody order on the record without formalizing the custody order in writing. In such cir- cumstances, the parties’ only documentation of the custody order is a transcription of the oral record. In R.L.P. v. R.F.M., 110 A.3d 201 (Pa. Super. 2015), the Superior Court held that ‘‘in order to be suf- ficiently specific to be enforced, an order of custody must be entered as a separate written order, or as a separate section of a written opinion.’’ Id. at 206. Despite the Superior Court’s decision, the prac- tice of placing custody orders on the record without subsequently entering a written order has contin- ued, which has been problematic for enforcement and understanding of the agreement’s or order’s terms. Explanatory Comment—2021 Subdivision (b)(3) allows the court discretion to initialize a custody action’s case caption when the child’s privacy may be compromised by the sensitive nature of the facts in the case record. When the court determines that the case caption should be initialized, additional privacy safeguards are required under subdivision (b)(4). Subdivision (b)(4) recognizes that inadvertent disclosure of the child’s identity and privacy may occur if the written custody order or opinion provides specific details of the child’s life (i.e., school, extracurricular activities). Subdivision (b)(4) requires that the court refrain from using specific iden- tifiers; instead, the court should use general terms (i.e., high school, not John F. Kennedy High School). In circumstances in which name specificity is required, such as school choice, the court should consider a separate order for that issue.