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.     

Privative clauses in special education legislative schemes: are they constitutional under the Canadian Charter?

This paper suggests that privative clauses in the enabling statutes (Education Acts) governing provincially appointed special education appeal tribunals (SET) are unconstitutional under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is suggested that ‘final and binding’ SET decisions about children's designation as special needs and their educational placement infringe upon the Charter rights of both parent and exceptional child. The standard for judicial review of SET decisions, given a privative clause, is whether the decision is ‘patently unreasonable’ while ‘correctness’, according to case law, is the appropriate standard when finally determining fundamental rights. Parents of exceptional children in practice have recourse to the courts regarding only procedural rather than substantive issues regarding SET decisions due to the high deference the courts afford any administrat ive tribunal protected by a privative clause. The very high judicial review standard of ‘patently unreasonable’ rather than ‘correctness’ is not consistent, furthermore, with the child's ‘best interests’ or in meeting international obligations to disabled children under the Convention on the Rights of the Child.     

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.     

The AIDS epidemic and gay bathhouses: a constitutional analysis

Some legal scholars propose that the right of privacy articulated by the United States Supreme Court should be extended to protect homosexual activity. In light of the advent of AIDS, should that extension include constitutional protection for homosexual men who frequent gay bathhouses? The author argues that although the government has the power to close the baths in the name of public health, it should not do so without careful and conscious balancing against the privacy rights infringed upon by its actions. Balancing the tension between public health policy and individual rights applies not only to the specific situation of the baths, but also to insurance companies' aim to test all single, young, male life and health policy applicants for exposure to the putative AIDS virus; to potential health department releases of names of those testing antibody-positive for HTLV-III; to the military's rumored plans to discharge all personnel suspected of having AIDS; and to school districts seeking to exclude children with AIDS.     

WHEN JAIL FAILS: AMENDING THE ASFA TO REDUCE ITS NEGATIVE IMPACT ON CHILDREN OF INCARCERATED PARENTS

The Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) requires states begin termination proceedings when a child resides in foster care for fifteen out of the last twenty‐two months. Many states interpret this to mean that an incarcerated parent is unfit when they leave their child in foster care just because they are separated from their children. Parents and children can still have meaningful relationships even when separated. Thus, parental unfitness should depend on many factors such as the relationship with the child, age of the child, and ability to provide support for the child—not just the time spent away from the child. This Note advocates for the amendment of ASFA to include factors courts should consider when terminating the parental rights of incarcerated parents and encouraged states to focus not on a time frame for termination, but rather consideration of circumstances relevant to each individual family. States should incorporate the factors into their state laws. Further, states should actively work with prisoners and their children to help maintain contact and if possible, reunify families after incarcerations. These services will help prevent the need for termination after a parent completes their sentence and will help to reduce recidivism.     

LESSONS LEARNED FROM A CHILD PROTECTION MEDIATION PROGRAM: If At First You Succeed and Then You Don't…

This article discusses the U.A.L.R. child protection mediation program as well as several other child protection mediation programs in order to examine what makes a program a continuing success. Child protection mediation programs have gone through a period of tremendous progress and growth over the past 20 years in the United States and Canada. Numerous studies have shown that child protection mediation helps families and courts by lowering the amount of time that children spend in foster care and the amount of costs for courts and agencies. Child protection mediation is an essential tool for juvenile courts and the families that have cases there. This article addresses the development of child protection mediation programs, their importance to juvenile courts, and some reasons that these programs succeed or fail. Although many of these programs have early accomplishments, they have not always been able to maintain their growth or to continue to exist. The U.A.L.R. Mediation Project has not sustained its early levels of cases or referrals from court for numerous reasons. Using the techniques of other thriving programs, we will attempt to restart and re-energize the program. It has been established that the people who have a role in the establishment of a program, the funding sources and especially the commitment of the parties to the program all have a significant long-term impact. This article points out how programs should begin and proceed if they are to be a long-term success.     

家事诉讼与儿童利益保护

儿童利益是一种身份利益,具有显著的公益性,国家与社会必须给予特殊保护。涉及儿童的家事审判要遵循儿童利益最大化、儿童参与以及儿童优先保护等原则。从我国家事审判立法看,涉及儿童利益保护的规定散见于诸多的法律、司法解释以及政策性文件中,这些规定尽管为家事司法提供了基本的依据,但缺憾亦非常明显,表现为没有上位法的原则性规定,没有形成体系完整、结构合理的专门制度,部分立法规范前后矛盾,缺乏科学性和严谨性,缺乏实现儿童利益最大化的具体程序和相关配套机制。为此,有必要在基本法和部门法层面确立儿童利益最大化的法律原则;保障儿童表达意见权利和诉讼参与权;从司法层面看,确认儿童的诉讼主体地位,确立涉儿童家事案件职权探知、职权调查原则,建立专业化的家事审判机构。通过上述多重举措,真正实现家事审判对儿童利益的充分保障。     

Pat‐Downs But No Hugs: Why Prison Visitation Protocol Should be Changed to Help Keep Familial Structures Intact

In the United States there are almost three million children who have one or both parents incarcerated. Parental incarceration negatively impacts children in several ways. Visitation protocol varies across facilities nationwide with no modification in protocol for minors. Parental rights are disrupted by visitation protocol because of cost‐prohibitive access and extreme security measures. This Note proposes a model statute that would change visitation protocol to facilitate a clear‐cut set of visitation processes that are tailored to ensure prison safety while also fostering and maintaining a positive relationship between a minor child and his/her incarcerated parent.     

NEED TO BE HEARD: INCREASING CHILD PARTICIPATION IN PROTECTION MEDIATION THROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MODEL STANDARDS*

There are more than three million reports of abuse and neglect each year. Some children may enter the court system while others will voluntarily or by court order enter a mediation program. What these children have in common is these youths are often removed from their home and placed in foster or institutional care without ever expressing their wishes or concerns. This Note advocates for the adoption of model standards drafted to ensure universal and meaningful child participation. The Model Standards are set forth in detail and accompanied by useful tips on their implementation. Through the course of this Note, the benefits of child participation are outlined, as are the reasons most often given for denying children the opportunity to meaningfully participate. The Note concludes with an explanation of how the benefits derived from implementing these standards far outweigh any potential negative side effects.     

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.     

One, two or three parents? Lesbian co-mothers and a known donor with 'family life' under Dutch law

In recent years much attention has been paid to the equal treatment of same-sex couples in the Netherlands. This led to the introduction of registered partnerships in 1998 and culminated in the opening of marriage to same-sex couples on 1 April 2001. But what of the children being raised or growing up in these registered partnerships and marriages? How much attention has been paid to their rights to equal treatment? Since 1998 the Dutch government has taken a number of measures to give more legal protection to same-sex families and their children. However, the regulations introduced for this purpose turn out to be rather incoherent and do not yet guarantee full equality, in particular for the children concerned. This article discusses the problems that may occur in practice and suggests possible solutions in the context of a specific case that recently came before the Dutch courts which concerned a lesbian couple who had met a man willing to donate his sperm, on the condition that he could be involved in the child's life in the background and be known as the child's father. The dispute centred on the question of which two of these three adults were entitled to become the legal parents of the child.     

The right to minority language public school education as a function of the equality guarantee: a reanalysis of the Gosselin Supreme Court of Canada Charter case

This paper concerns a recent Supreme Court of Canada decision dealing ostensibly with the protection of language minority rights. The case, in fact, however, concerns the Court imposing statutory limits on constitutionally guaranteed equality and liberty rights. The Court in the instant case held as constitutional Quebec legislation permitting access to English language schools only to children who have received, or are receiving the majority of their instruction in English in Canada, or whose parents received the majority of their instruction in English in Canada at the primary school level. The appellants, members of the French majority in Quebec, could not meet those eligibility criteria. Therefore, they were held to have no right to access English language public schools for their children. The ruling, as discussed, is inconsistent with the equality and liberty guarantees as well as the minority language protection clause of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.     

Knocking on the Door: Juvenile and Family Courts as a Forum for Facilitating School Attendance and Decreasing Truancy

While there is debate about whether courts should be involved in truancy reduction efforts, less recognized is how courts can impact school attendance without lengthening their reach or further penalizing children and families. Courts are already involved with school‐related decision making in child welfare and delinquency cases. This article reports on data from a qualitative study of stakeholder perspectives (N = 64) on school attendance in Maryland. Respondents suggested that courts adopt engagement‐focused approaches to guide their work such as family assessments, school attendance plans, monitoring coordination and delivery of services, and ensuring that agencies meet their obligations to children.     

INTERNATIONAL PARENTAL CHILD ABDUCTION: WHY WE NEED TO EXPAND CUSTODY RIGHTS PROTECTED UNDER THE CHILD ABDUCTION CONVENTION

The Child Abduction Convention, an international treaty, protects custody rights internationally among its member states by providing a remedy of return in cases where a child was wrongfully removed in violation of a parent's custody right. There is no such remedy for the violation of a parent's access (or visitation) rights. A ne exeat clause in a child custody agreement restrains a custodial parent from removing a child from a predetermined jurisdiction (such as a particular country) and can be issued when there is a risk that the custodial parent might flee to another country with the child(ren). Currently there is a circuit split within the United States as to whether a ne exeat right coupled with the right of access should equal a protected custody right under the Convention. Most international courts protect the ne exeat right under the Convention; however some do not. A ne exeat right should convey a protected custody right for policy reasons. The beneficial implications of a ne exeat right creating a protected custody right under the Child Abduction Convention clearly outweigh the detriments. While there is no instant solution to the inconsistencies among various courts in interpreting the Child Abduction Conventions’ scope in regard to a ne exeat right, there are ways to resolve the problem. If consistency in judicial interpretation cannot be achieved, a movement needs to be initiated to create a protocol to the Child Abduction Convention to further explain the scope of custody rights and ne exeat rights under the Convention.     

MANDATORY VISITATION

The term visitation rights connotes that noncutodial parents have the discretion, not the responsibility, to visit their children. This article examines the assertion that visitation rights should instead be viewed as an obligation owed by noncustodial parents to their children. Excluding circumstances in which visitation would be injurious to a child, the expectation of visitation should be enforced by the courts.     

“I WANT MY MOMMIES”: THE CRY FOR MINI‐DOMAS TO RECOGNIZE THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILDREN OF SAME‐SEX COUPLES*

In child custody cases, courts will look to the best interests of a child to maintain visitation/custody rights only with the child's biological parent, not third parties. However, with a same‐sex couple, it is inevitable that one parent will not be the biological parent. Thus, when that parent is in a mini‐DOMA state, where same‐sex couples from non‐mini‐DOMA states do not have to be recognized, that parent will be viewed as a third party and lose all visitation/custody rights if the couple separates. This note advocates that mini‐DOMAs allow both the biological and nonbiological parents of a same‐sex couple to have visitation/custody rights of their children if it would be in the best interest of the children to do so.     

Transgender Family Law

Transgender people face unique issues in parentage, custody, and divorce cases. Many transgender people are raising children or wish to do so. This article examines the main legal issues facing transgender people who become parents by giving birth or impregnating a partner, through assisted reproduction, through marriage, by raising a child, or through adoption. In the past, some courts viewed a parent's gender transition as a sufficient reason to terminate parental rights. Today, the law has shifted to provide much more security for transgender parents, though significant bias still remains, particularly in divorce and child custody cases. In addition, many states have not yet fully addressed how to determine the legal parentage of children born through assisted reproduction. I analyze the legal landscape for transgender parents and spouses and offer critical suggestions to ensure that transgender people are able to protect their families and their parental rights.     

Administrative "health courts" for medical injury claims: the federal constitutional issues

Our article analyzes whether the federal government may constitutionally supplant a traditional system of common-law trials before state judges and juries with new federal institutions designed by statute for compensating victims of medical injuries. Specifically, this article examines the federal constitutional issues raised by various proposals to replace traditional medical malpractice litigation in state courts with a federal system of administrative "health courts." In doing so, we address the following constitutional issues: 1. Is there federal authority to preempt state law (the commerce clause and spending clause issues)? 2. May jurisdiction be created in non-article 3 tribunals, and may claims be decided without trial by jury (the separation of powers and Seventh Amendment issues)? 3. Would pilot programs that require some claims to be pursued in a federal administrative forum while other claimants are left to pursue traditional state tort law remedies be constitutional (the equal protection issue)? The article concludes that a federal compensation system through administrative health courts should be constitutional provided the statute is appropriately drafted and that appropriate factual findings are made concerning the benefits to patients and the public as well as to doctors and their insurers.     

NIPPING IT IN THE BUD®: ADOPTING A FAMILY DRUG COURT APPROACH TO FIGHTING THE CYCLE OF ALCOHOL ADDICTION FOR CHILDREN WHEN PARENTS ARE CONVICTED OF DUI

Many states have implemented Drug Courts in recent years by combining drug and alcohol treatment with ongoing judicial supervision. Through the use of incentives such as reduced and dismissed charges and fines combined with supervised treatment, Drug Courts have been shown to be very effective in helping to break the cycle of addiction, crime, and repeat incarceration for those involved. However, these courts do little to address situations in which the addict is the custodial parent of a minor child, who is exponentially more at‐risk for future alcohol addiction simply by being the child of an alcoholic, due to both environmental and biological factors. Thus, while the parent's addiction is theoretically being addressed by the courts, little is being done, absent a showing of abuse or neglect, by the judicial system to combat the seeds of addiction that have already been planted in these children. Therefore, this Note advocates for states to include an alcohol education and counseling program aimed at children of alcohol‐related offenders based on the Drug Court Model. Participation in this program would then act as a mitigating factor for the addicted offender when receiving their final sentence. This proposed program would then serve as a model for other states to adopt in the near future.     

MEASURING PROGRESS IN IMPROVING COURT PROCESSING OF CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT CASES

With all of the changes in federal law relating to child maltreatment, foster care, and adoption, courts have become active partners with child welfare agencies in assuring safety and permanency for children. Outcome measures are needed to track achievement of the distinct goals of courts and those goals they share with child welfare agencies. This article presents a set of measures that focuses on the court contribution to desirable outcomes for children and families. These measures have undergone extensive development, review, and field testing by representatives from several national organizations interested in court reform and child welfare, but they still require more discussion and refinement. Indeed, outcome measures are an essential component of a process of continuing improvement, which means they need to be reviewed periodically to ensure they are valid, reliable, and not redundant.