Revisiting the legal standards that govern requests to sterilize profoundly incompetent children: in light of the "Ashley Treatment," is a new standard appropriate?

This Note discusses the recent controversy surrounding a six-year-old girl named Ashley, whose parents chose to purposefully stunt her growth and remove her reproductive organs for nonmedical reasons. A federal investigation determined that Ashley's rights had been violated because doctors performed the procedure, now referred to as the "Ashley Treatment," without first obtaining a court order. However, the investigation did not make any conclusions regarding whether the "Ashley Treatment" could present a legally permissible treatment option in the future. After discussing the constitutional rights that the "Ashley Treatment" implicates and the current legal standards in place, this Note examines how courts have applied these legal standards to cases involving extreme requests. Drawing upon legal commentators, this Note concludes that a court could approve a request for the "Ashley Treatment" in appropriate and limited cases where the parents have presented clear and convincing evidence before a court that the benefits that the "Ashley Treatment" would provide to the child and her family outweigh the risks associated with the procedure. This Note argues that those benefits may include extrinsic considerations, but courts should remain cautious when considering such evidence and be sure that the evidence as a whole supports their conclusions.     

Forgotten Children of Immigration and Family Law: How The Absence of Legal Aid Affects Children in the United States

The absence of government‐appointed legal counsel in immigration proceedings adversely affects large numbers of children in the United States. Children born in the United States to parents without citizenship status (U.S.‐born children of noncitizen parents or UCNP) are harmed by a parent's detention and removal. Unaccompanied alien children (UAC) who have entered the country without legal status are adversely affected by their own detention and removal. The possibility of obtaining relief from removal is drastically diminished by the lack of legal representation. Currently UAC and immigrant parents are not entitled to court‐appointed attorneys. Any meaningful change in immigration law, such as a federal statutory amendment to provide UAC and immigrant parents with government‐appointed counsel is unlikely due to the present political dissension in Congress regarding this issue. Because UAC and immigrant parents are not entitled to government‐funded legal representation, a pro bono legal service system has developed, but is unable to meet the present need adequately. For immigrant parents, this Note proposes the adoption of a statute to allow the appointment of court liaisons in family court proceedings. The court liaison is a nonattorney who is familiar with the processes of the family court and ensures that immigrant parents are fully informed regarding all pertinent family court proceedings. For UAC, this Note proposes an amendment to the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act to mandate the appointment of a child advocate to all UAC. The child advocate is not a lawyer, but works with the UAC's attorney to provide the child with legal representation and advocacy.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• UCNP confront the loss of parents to detention and removal. Children are condemned to limbo, torn between absent biological parents and placement in foster care.
• The recent surge in the number of UAC who enter the United States by crossing the border from Mexico has been described as a humanitarian crisis. These children often remain alone without legal protection, vulnerable to detention and removal.
• Ideally, UAC and the immigrant parents would be provided with government‐funded legal representation in immigration proceedings. In the absence of the federal statutory reform necessary to make that a reality, state statutory reform to allow for the provision of court liaison programs for immigrant parents and federal statutory reform to allow the appointment of child advocates for UAC can begin to offer children and families needed legal support and advocacy.

     

LISTEN TO ME! EMPOWERING YOUTH AND COURTS THROUGH INCREASED YOUTH PARTICIPATION IN DEPENDENCY HEARINGS

Currently, there are more than half a million youth in foster care. Often, these youth are unaware of when, or if, legal hearings about their lives are taking place. This Note advocates for states to pass laws ensuring that youth receive notice of their hearings and for courts to conduct review hearings when youth are not present. Through the course of this Note, the benefits of youth participation are outlined, as are the reasons most often given for denying youth the opportunity to meaningfully participate. The Note concludes with suggestions to help courts more effectively engage youth and the benefits of doing so.     

Play by the Rules: why States Should Adopt Uniform Court Rules for Forensic Psychologists in Child Custody Evaluations

It is not uncommon for children to fall victim to the stress and tension of a contentious custody dispute. If a party seeks a mental health evaluation and the opposing party challenges the results, the child then endures a series of evaluations until a valid report is produced. The court will often remedy this situation by appointing a neutral forensic psychologist to perform the evaluation independent from a previous party‐hired forensic psychologist. 1 This Note proposes that the court instead appoint the forensic psychologist first to conduct an evaluation and draft a report. Only at the judge's discretion may the parties hire a private forensic psychologist to challenge the report. Additionally, states should codify court rules that enumerate standards for forensic psychologists in child custody evaluations. These rules should set forth criteria that shall be required and highlighted throughout each mental health evaluator's report, allowing judges to compare and contrast each evaluation more effectively. This legislation will not only reduce the child's exposure to excessive testing, but will also provide a more efficient way of arriving at a just result.     

RELYING ON THE UNRELIABLE: HOW A COURT RULE COULD ALLEVIATE THE PROBLEMS INHERENT IN THE NEUTRAL MENTAL HEALTH EVALUATION PROCESS IN CHILD CUSTODY CASES

Many states lack standards as to who should be conducting neutral mental health evaluations in child custody proceedings and what these evaluations should be comprised of. This will occasionally result in an unqualified evaluator giving a recommendation to the court as to which parent should receive custody of their child[ren]. This Note advocates for courts to adopt a court rule which specifically enumerates the qualifications of neutral mental health evaluators in the hopes of regularizing the evaluation process. The first part of the proposal addresses who should conduct evaluations by establishing the required credentials of the evaluator and minimizing the amount of evaluator bias by screening the process. The second part of the proposal focuses on the training needed before an evaluator may conduct an examination, as well as the amount of experience required.     

STATE CHILD EMOTIONAL ABUSE LAWS: THEIR FAILURE TO PROTECT CHILDREN WITH GENDER IDENTITY DISORDER

Emotional abuse of children with Gender Identity Disorder by parents is very difficult to identify and prevent. State investigators of abuse and neglect often have a hard time determining if the reasons for mental illness and psychological harm in children are due to the actions of their parents, or if they stem from other sources. Once identified, it becomes even harder to prove in court for purposes of ordering services or removing the child from the home if the abuse is severe enough. With children who are gender non‐conforming, this task becomes exponentially more difficult due to the low prevalence rate, discrimination, stereotypes, and a parent's right to bring up their child as they choose. These youth face discrimination and violence in school, work, their communities, and also within their own families. Emotional abuse statutes are too vague to protect youth who are gender non‐conforming. The vague and unclear laws lead to inconsistency in the application of the law and lack of protection of the children because judges and investigators are not aware of how parent's actions harms youth with gender identity disorder. Therefore, states should adopt the model statute within this Note which defines specific actions by parents which would not qualify as abuse when involving gender conforming youth but qualifies as abuse for children with gender identity disorder. Many states already have statutes which define physical abuse, sexual abuse and abandonment by specific actions by parents towards their children. This proposal will enable both the state and the judges to properly identify victims with gender identity disorder of emotional abuse and provide for their protection.     

Parental Battlefield: Divorcing Parents and the Treatment of Children with ADHD

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) typically manifests as inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity among children, resulting in stimulant drug therapy. Children exposed to high‐stress situations, such as divorcing parents, are twice as likely to present with ADHD symptoms. Often these symptoms are a result of the stress and not truly ADHD. Additionally, parents in conflict frequently disagree about the appropriate diagnosis and treatment for their child, which leads to court disputes. Thus, this Note proposes a policy be implemented setting forth alternatives that must be exhausted for a period of time prior to administering stimulants to a child of divorce.     

LIFE AFTER DEATH: THE NEED TO ADDRESS THE LEGAL STATUS OF POSTHUMOUSLY CONCEIVED CHILDREN

The advance of reproductive technology, coupled with a legal system that cannot keep up, has had a detrimental effect on posthumously conceived children. There is controversy over whether a child conceived after the death of one parent, by way of reproductive technology, is considered a child of that parent for inheritance purposes. An overwhelming majority of state legislatures have not given consideration to the unique question that posthumously conceived children pose. Legislative inaction has forced state courts to apply antiquated laws in the midst of a technological revolution. The result: children are being denied inheritance rights to their deceased parent's estate solely because of the way they were conceived. This Note advocates that all children should be given the same rights and benefits regardless of how they are conceived. To accomplish that goal, this Note proposes a model state statute to be adopted in all states. The model statute deems a posthumously conceived child to be the child of his or her deceased parent, and thus entitled to inheritance rights, if 1) the posthumously conceived child was provided for by will, or 2) the deceased parent intended to be a parent; there is a genetic relationship between parent and child; the child is born within three years from the death of his or her deceased parent; and the child's best interest, balanced against the state's interests, exceeds the state's interest. The desired effect of the statute is to put posthumously conceived children on equal footing with naturally conceived children.     

The Best Interests of the Child and the Sentencing of Offenders with Parental Responsibilities

There is a growing body of empirical research demonstrating that sentencing and other criminal justice decisions often have a detrimental, even traumatic impact upon an offender’s dependent children. Judges must balance numerous factors when making sentencing decisions, generally encompassing the protection of the public, the seriousness of the offence, and the personal circumstances of the offender. Should the probable impact of a sentence on an offender’s dependents be a significant factor to be weighed with these other factors in the process of sentencing? More specifically, when a court is sentencing an offender with parental responsibilities, does it have a duty to inquire about the potential impact of the sanction on the offender’s dependent child or children? Must it consider the principle of the best interests of the child or a child’s right to family life as a separate legal consideration in constructing a sentence? International human rights standards suggest that it does. After reviewing existing evidence on the potential hardship of sentencing decisions for an offender’s dependent children, the authors examine the experience of six countries in interpreting and applying these standards in their domestic laws, policies, and practices. They discuss some options for sentencing reforms in the broader context of efforts to reduce high rates of imprisonment in many countries and the need to address the differential impacts of criminal sanctions for primary caregivers and their children.     

THE CALM AFTER THE STORM: USING MEDIATION TO RESOLVE PARENTING DISPUTES IN THE WAKE OF NATURAL DISASTERS

Hurricane Katrina not only tore apart communities along the Gulf Coast, it displaced hundreds of thousands of families throughout the country. Included in the massive numbers of displaced families were children from divorced, separated, or unmarried parents. As a result, many children have since relocated far away from one of their parents without court permission, causing an influx of parenting disputes among the unmarried parents. Litigation concerning parenting disputes that follow natural disasters is not only expensive, but is emotionally taxing on both parents and children and floods the already drained court system. This Note discusses alternative ways in which parenting disputes can be resolved following natural disasters. It explains how children are affected by relocating away from one of their parents and how those effects are comounded by natural disasters. Further, it explains how alternative dispute resolution methods help alleviate the effects of parenting disputes, specifically relocation disputes, on children. Finally, this Note proposes that all parents should be mandated to mediate any parenting disputes following natural disasters.     

INVISIBLE PARTIES: LISTENING TO CHILDREN

This article discusses how children are involved in family court proceedings in New Zealand. On July 1, 2005, the Care of Children Act 2004 came into force. One of the changes brought about by this Act is an increased expectation that children will participate in proceedings involving them, by the court giving the child a reasonable opportunity to express his or her view. Children may participate in three ways, the primary mechanism being through the lawyer for the child. Children's views can also be elucidated through a specialist report, and direct participation can be achieved through judicial interviews. As each child is different, it is important that the unique circumstances of the case are accounted for. This article will discuss how each of the three methods can be combined to tailor an approach that gives every individual child a reasonable opportunity to express his or her view. There are a number of examples given of this approach in practice, showing how the court has adapted the process to accommodate the child's situation and personality.     

Divorce, Custody, and Spousal Violence: A Random Sample of Circuit Court Docket Records

The fastest growing marital status category in America is divorced, with the number of divorced individuals quadrupling between 1970 and 1996. The majority of children in divorced families live with a single parent and often lose contact with the noncustodial parent. A recent review of the literature suggests that many noncustodial fathers fail to keep contact with their children and become delinquent in child support payments because of their dissatisfaction with the custody arrangement. However, there has been little examination of how custody arrangements are typically determined or settled. In addition, divorces that involve spousal violence bring further complications to child custody, visitation, and child support decisions. This study included a 20% random sample of court records for all divorces settled in one county judicial circuit court during 1998. The purpose of this study was to examine characteristics of divorcing adults as well as characteristics of child custody arrangements, visitation, and child support decisions. Contrary to popular belief, findings from this study indicate that divorce actions were almost always settled through agreement of the divorcing parties rather than by adjudication. About 38% of the couples had children in common and between 78 and 92% of cases were settled through agreement, which suggests that fathers are in fact agreeing to the custody arrangement, rather than being forced into it. About one in five records overall noted spousal violence, and there was no significant difference in settlement methods for couples with or without spousal violence. Cases with children and spousal violence were significantly more likely to have also mentioned substance use and postdecree activity. This study suggests a need for more focused attention on divorce cases with spousal violence to reduce postdecree court involvement and safety of children and adult victims, as well as further study into what causes noncustodial parents to lose contact with their children.     

ARE WE REALLY LOOKING OUT FOR THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD? APPLYING THE NEW ZEALAND MODEL OF FAMILY GROUP CONFERENCES TO CASES OF CHILD NEGLECT IN THE UNITED STATES

This Note advocates for state laws to be amended to implement family group conferencing (FGC) as the first step in cases of alleged child neglect. FGC was developed in New Zealand nearly twenty years ago and have since become a realistic method of balancing the best interests of the children, families, agencies, courts, and communities involved in the child welfare system. A FGC is a meeting among family members and professionals that is conducted in order to develop a plan for a child who is the victim of neglect. FGC places the family at the center of the welfare proceedings and empowers them to reach a solution without having to resort to the often lengthy and expensive adversarial court system. If FGC is incorporated into the child welfare systems throughout the United States, communication between the parents, social services, and the courts could increase, helping families adequately address the problem of neglect and getting the children out of the child welfare system quickly and more efficiently.     

Equal opportunities: protecting the rights of AIDS-linked children in the classroom

Within the past few years a number of children have been excluded from attending public school because they are linked to AIDS. School boards have justified their decisions to exclude these children on the basis that protecting the public's health, safety and welfare outweighs the rights of these children. Most courts have rejected this justification and have held that either under the equal protection clause of the Constitution or section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, children cannot be excluded from the classroom solely because they are linked to AIDS. This Note discusses both section 504 and equal protection analyses used by the courts. When analyzing a school board's decision to exclude an AIDS-linked child from the classroom, most courts have used a higher level of scrutiny and individualized inquiry in order to ensure that the rights of both the AIDS-linked child and his or her uninfected classmates and teachers are protected. After applying these analyses to a hypothetical case, this Note concludes that both section 504 and the equal protection clause ensure that AIDS-linked children will not be barred from the classroom unless the presence of additional factors increases the risk of these children transmitting the virus to others.     

Patient confidentiality statutes in Medicare & Medicaid fraud investigations

The Medicare and Medicaid programs have been burdened with health care providers' fraudulent and abusive practices since their implementation in 1965. To help states discover and prevent Medicare and Medicaid fraud, Congress has enacted statutes permitting access to patients' medical records in investigations of fraud. The majority of states have enacted physician-patient and psychotherapist-patient privilege statutes to protect confidential information from disclosure. Thus, the state's need for patient information conflicts with the patient's right of privacy. This Note discusses several court decisions that have wrestled with the tension between these two policies. The courts, after balancing the state interest in eliminating fraud against the patient's privacy interest, have often allowed disclosure of patient medical records. Although some courts have attempted to limit the extent of the information disclosed, few have set forth explicit standards to protect patient records from unwarranted disclosure of confidential information. This Note suggests guidelines for courts, legislatures and health care providers to uniformly limit the extent of this disclosure.     

MAKING ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) LESS ALTERNATIVE: THE NEED FOR ADR AS BOTH A MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENT AND A BAR EXAM TOPIC

Divorce proceedings have had a negative reputation due to their adversarial nature. Litigation in the family law field has exacerbated an already emotionally charged atmosphere. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) has grown in importance over the past three decades and has helped to alleviate some of the animosity which accompanies divorce and child custody matters. Parents in particular are aided by the benefits of options such as mediation and collaborative divorce, obtaining increased control over their agreements in situations where the relationships will be continuous due to shared parenting responsibilities. However, much more could be done to increase the use of ADR in family law proceedings. Current family law practitioners could fill many roles, including mediator, advocate during mediation, collaborative negotiator, arbitrator, and counselor regarding which process to implement. Knowledge about these different roles, with their attendant skills and ethical issues, has become imperative. This Note will advocate for a mandatory continuing legal education requirement in ADR for matrimonial attorneys, as well as for the inclusion of ADR as a topic on state bar examinations. An increased knowledge of ADR will benefit divorcing parents and their children, ease an overcrowded court system, and lead to greater personal and professional satisfaction for the family law practitioner.     

Keeping the Family Together: Why New York Must Amend Evidence Rules to Protect a Parent's Right to be a Parent

In New York, hearsay statements made by children may be admissible in a child protective proceeding. Under Article 10 of the Family Court Act, an out‐of‐court statement only requires corroboration to support the statement's reliability. The Family Court has the choice to determine what evidence will be sufficient for corroboration. In comparison to other statutes from different states, New York's statute is very broad. This Note proposes amending the current evidence statute under Article 10 of the Family Court Act to strengthen the standard for admitting hearsay statements in child protective proceedings.     

Best Practices for Serving Traumatized Children and Families

This paper highlights the traumatic impact of child abuse and neglect upon children and adolescents who are commonly seen in court systems. In addition to describing prevalence rates of trauma exposure and psychological reactions among traumatized children, it addresses the need for judges and court personnel to work with children and families in a manner that is sensitive to their traumatic experiences and emphasizes the need for these children to receive the very best evidence‐based care available in order to help them more effectively cope and recover from trauma exposure. Cultural issues and model adaptations are covered in relation to the use of evidence‐based practices with children from various cultural and ethnic backgrounds. Specific recommendations are given to help judges and court personnel become better informed about the use of evidence‐based practices for treating child trauma, enabling them to respond more sensitively and appropriately in these cases.     

Voices of minor children heard and unheard in judicial divorce proceedings in the Netherlands

Under Dutch divorce law, children in theory have ample opportunity to make their voices heard: the petition for divorce must state how the children have been involved in preparing a parenting plan; all children aged 12 or 16 (depending on the context) or older have the right to be heard by the judge, and the judge may additionally hear younger children; the court may appoint a guardian ad litem to represent the interests of the child; and the child has the right to seek informal access to the court (by letter or telephone, for example) which may lead to an ex officio decision that changes the arrangements agreed by the parents in a divorce settlement or an earlier judicial decision. In practice, however, there is no guarantee that children's voices will actually be heard in divorce proceedings. Notably in the case of separation after an informal relationship (other than marriage or registered partnership) the opportunities given to children to be heard are often a dead letter.     

Ensuring Insurance for Foster Care: Requiring Foster Parents to Obtain Liability Insurance to Cover Harm Done to Foster Children in their Care

This Note proposes that all states should require that foster parents have liability insurance before children are placed in their care. This Note also proposes that the liability insurance needs to cover not just harm to third parties but also harm to the foster children through the negligent acts of the foster parents. This legislation will allow foster children to have standing to bring claims against their foster parents and insurance companies and give them a greater opportunity for recovery. Currently, the policies and statutes governing the policies in place do not cover all types of harm that can occur during the foster parent–child relationship. Certain policies leave children who are harmed by their foster parents’ negligence unable to recover any damages from the people who have harmed them. Because foster parents can be left to defend the actions themselves, they often become judgment proof due to their low income, leaving the children who are harmed with little chance of recovery.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• States need to require foster parents to obtain liability insurance, which covers harm done by the foster children to third parties, harm to the home, and any harm done to the child by the foster parents.