Question: What are the differences between physical custody, legal custody, and joint custody? I recently met with my lawyer about settling my divorce case, and he threw out these terms as if I was supposed to understand them.

Answer: The different types of custody arrangements are, for the most part, dependent upon the best interests of the children based upon state law as applied to the facts of each situation.

With that in mind, "physical custody" means that the children live with one parent who has the responsibility to make day-to-day decisions about their day-to-day welfare -- such as what they wear, whom they associate with, and the time of their curfew. The parent who does not have physical custody will generally have "visitation rights" or, as some prefer to call it, "secondary physical custody."

"Legal custody," on the other hand, brings with it the authority to make important long-term decisions such as education, religion, and routine medical care. Legal custody -- where parents share the right to make certain decisions for the children -- can be joint or divided in appropriate situations.

There can be joint legal custody (where both parents have input into long-term decisions) and sole physical custody, and vice versa. And there can be joint physical custody. For example, some parents alternate weeks or months with the children while others divide the children's time unequally, but in a manner that meets their needs. Joint custody, however, is not appropriate in every case, especially when parents are not able to communicate.

It is important to remember that no matter what the terminology, nothing is more important than how the arrangement works in practice. While the variations and labels attached to custodial arrangements are almost limitless, invariably, parents who can keep open the channels of communication and work out the terms themselves can usually be more creative and flexible than court decisions which are issued when parents can't agree. In fact, in most instances, joint custody will not be granted if the parents are feuding.

Question: When my wife and I divorced two years ago, the judge gave her custody of our two children and me visitation two weekends each month, six weeks during the summer, etc. The judge ordered that neither my wife nor I could have the children around a person other than a spouse after 8 PM. Since our divorce, my ex-wife has remarried. I cannot remarry -- because my partner is also a male. My ex-wife has now taken me back to court to terminate overnight and extended visitation. I believe this to be very unfair -- and unconstitutional, but my lawyer has lost at every turn. Now, I only see my children only on Saturday and Sunday afternoons, twice a month, in a supervised environment. Although my lawyer has appealed, he does not hold out much hope. Is there anything I can do?

Answer: The situation you describe, although difficult, is becoming more common. Different states use different standards to decide these cases. For example, some judges have found that homosexuality itself is a disqualifying factor while others tend to review all of the facts and decide the case on what is determined to be in the best interests of the children.

The fact that the judge limited your visitation to being supervised means that he or she is very concerned about something. As we were not privy to the evidence your attorney presented to the court, we believe that your lawyer is the best person to predict the result of your case.

If you lose and do not appeal, the judge's ruling becomes the law of the case and you are bound. If you plan to challenge the constitutionality of the ruling, be prepared for a long trek which will probably find your children grown before a final decision is rendered.