The guidelines established in the standard possession order

[jacklocke]

I am reading a sentence and there seems to be several interpretations of this sentence found in the Texas Family Code.
My goal is to figure out the correct interpretation.

"The guidelines established in the standard possession order are intended to guide the courts in ordering the terms and conditions for possession of a child by a parent named as a possessory conservator or as the minimum possession for a joint managing conservator"

My focus is going to be on the "Joint Managing Conservator" portion of the sentence.

The way I understand this sentence to read is like this.
The guidelines established in the standard possession order are intended:
1) to guide the courts in ordering the terms and conditions for possession of a child by a parent named as a possessory conservator
OR
2) as the minimum possession for a joint managing conservator

Focusing on the Joint Managing Conservator part, I read it this way:

The guidelines established in the standard possession order are intended as the minimum possession for a joint managing conservator.

Another interpretation of this sentence reads this way.
The guidelines established in the standard possession order are intended to guide the courts:
1) in ordering the terms and conditions for possession of a child by a parent named as a possessory conservator
OR
2) as the minimum possession for a joint managing conservator

For the relevant portion for the Joint Managing Conservator:
The guidelines established in the standard possession order are intended to guide the courts as the minimum possession for a joint managing conservator

To me that reading, seems wrong and there are a multitude of reasons why.
It may be too much to put them all in this one question but I will express a few thoughts.

Since it is "THE" (indicating to me that there is only 1) minimum possession as opposed to "A" (or one of many) minimum possession, I do not see how the term "GUIDE" can be applicable to "THE" minimum possession.
It should also be noted that the sentences are supposed to be read as exactly as they are written, with the understanding that the legislature intended for only those words to be included.
This sentence is found under the heading "SUBCHAPTER E. GUIDELINES FOR THE POSSESSION OF A CHILD BY A PARENT NAMED AS POSSESSORY CONSERVATOR", noting that even though the heading does not give any weight to the sentence, it does note the legislatures intent or intent to group certain items.
Lastly, it should be noted that else where in the statutes, it gives direct expressions/permissions for the court which will allow it to "...deny, restrict, or limit the possession of a child by a parent who is appointed as a possessory conservator" or "...times and conditions for possession of or access to the child..." with regard to possessory conservator.

There are no expressed indications of limiting the possession of a Joint Managing Conservator.

I hope this question makes sense the way I presented it.

Thank you for your help.

 

[Tdol]

I guess that a Joint Managing Conservator cannot have the possession of a full parent.

 

[emsr2d2]

Jacklocke, please note that I have changed your thread title. Titles should be unique, relevant to the thread and should contain some/all of the words/phrases/sentences you are asking us about.

 

[jacklocke]

Thank you for your reply.

Oddly, the Joint Managing Conservator (JMC) is the preferred choice for parents when they divorce.
Both parents (assuming that they have not harmed the child(ren), will be appointed JMC's, while on the other hand, if a parent has been deemed to have harmed the child(ren) in any manner, would be appointed as Possessory Conservator.
Seems mildly counter intuitive but that is the way the legislature wrote the law.

Would you be able to comment on what you believe would be the correct (or better) interpretation of the sentence at hand?

"The guidelines established in the standard possession order are intended to guide the courts in ordering the terms and conditions for possession of a child by a parent named as a possessory conservator or as the minimum possession for a joint managing conservator"

As stated above, there are seems to be more than one way people have broken down this sentence and depending on how you break it down, will depend on how it is interpreted.

I have seen it broken down this way (I will focus only on the JMC portion):

"The guidelines established in the standard possession order are intended to guide the courts...as the minimum possession for a joint managing conservator"


I happen to be of the opinion that it should read this way (once again only focusing on the JMC portion):

"The guidelines established in the standard possession order are intended...as the minimum possession for a joint managing conservator"

I may be over analyzing this but I assume that the sentence focuses on the "Standard Possession Order" (SPO) and what they are "intended" to do.
I personally do not see how the "guide the courts" could apply to term "the minimum possession", which I read as there being only 1 minimum possession (which is expressed in the SPO.

I am curious to hear other opinions or thoughts into this matter.

Thank you for your time.