Florida Trial Judge Rules That State's Ban on Gay Adoptions Is Unconstitutional

Today in the news there was yet another interesting development in the world of gay rights, this one in Florida: Florida ban on gay adoptions ruled unconstitutional - MiamiHerald.com.

EXCERPT FROM MIAMI HERALD ARTICLE OF TODAY:
BY CAROL MARBIN MILLER (cmarbin@MiamiHerald.com)

A Miami-Dade circuit judge Tuesday declared Florida's 30-year-old ban on gay adoption unconstitutional, allowing a North Miami man to adopt two foster kids he has raised since 2004.

In a 53-page order that sets the stage for what could become a constitutional showdown, Circuit Judge Cindy Lederman permitted 47-year-old Frank Gill to adopt the 4- and 8-year-old boys he and his partner have raised since just before Christmas four years ago. A child abuse investigator had asked Gill to care for the boys temporarily; they were never able to return to their birth parents.

''This is the forum where we try to heal children, find permanent families for them so they can get another chance at what every child should know and feel from birth, and go on to lead productive lives,'' Lederman said in court before releasing the order. ``We pray for them to thrive, but that is a word we rarely hear in dependency court.''

''These children are thriving; it is uncontroverted,'' the judge added.

Moments after Lederman released the ruling, attorneys for Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum announced they would appeal the decision to the Third District Court of Appeal in Miami.

.....

For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.

Guardian ad Litem or Attorney for the Child?

The Family Law Prof Blog yesterday issued the following post, which in discussing a recent Iowa appellate case also pointed to several other useful sources that explore some issues regarding the appropriate roles of, and distinctions that should be made between, guardians ad litem, appointed by courts to investigate issues in custody and abuse and neglect cases, and lawyers appointed to represent children:

Family Law Prof Blog: Case Law Development: Attorney for Child May Not Act as GAL

"The confusion between the status of attorney for the child and guardian ad litem was the target of appeal in Marriage of Anderson, an Iowa Court of Appeals decision. In this case, Mother requested appointment of a guardian ad litem in a custody case. However, the trial court's response was to appoint an attorney under the Iowa statute allowing appointment of an attorney for the child. The court then rejected the attorney's report and request to testify, finding that the attorney had not been appointed as a guardian ad litem.

Read In Re Marriage of Anderson (Iowa Court of Appeals, Dec. 28, 2007) (Last visited January 7, 2008 bgf)

The case is a fine example of the continuing debate regarding the role of attorney representatives for children. The Standards of Practice for Lawyers Representing Children in Custody Cases require that a judge appointing a lawyer for a child specify whether the attorney is a “Child’s Attorney” or a “Best Interests Attorney.” The ABA’s Standards of Practice for Attorneys Who Represent Children in Abuse and Neglect Cases, while recognizing the hybrid attorney/guardian ad litem role for lawyers under certain circumstances, expresses a clear preference for the attorney for the child model. Based in part on these standards, the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws is preparing a Uniform Representation of Children in Abuse and Neglect and Custody Proceedings Act. Professor Atwood's fine article exploring the policy choices in the uniform act can be accessed from her SSRN page: Atwood, Barbara Ann, "The New Uniform Representation of Children in Abuse, Neglect, and Custody Proceedings Act: Bridging the Divide Between Pragmatism and Idealism" . Family Law Quarterly, 2007 Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=938211

...."

For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see Law Offices of Steven Ballard.

Same-Sex Divorce Challenges the Legal System, Washington Post Reports

The Washington Post just published the following article, Same-Sex Divorce Challenges the Legal System - washingtonpost.com, by Dafna Linzer about the peculiar problems same-sex couples face, both here in Massachusetts and elsewhere, when they split. Given the topic, the article naturally had a big focus on Massachusetts, and it includes quotes from interviews of family law specialists here who do a lot of work with gay and lesbian clients.

The article points out some of the important ways in which same-sex married couples face different legal problems and challenges than traditional (heterosexual) married couples, even though the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's equal protection ruling in Goodridge et al. v. Department of Public Health et al., aimed to equalize treatment of same-sex couples and traditional couples. This just goes to show that no matter how hard one state's supreme court may try, there are many things standing in the way of equal treatment, including federal law, other states' laws, and biology itself.

Thus, gay and lesbian couples should not assume that simply by getting married they automatically have all of the exact rights and responsibilities of heterosexual married couples, even here in Massachusetts. It's not exactly true. For example, in a gay or lesbian marriage only one parent can be the biological parent, and nonbiological parents in such marriages will not automatically have the same parental rights and responsibilities as the partners in a traditional marriage - to effect such similar rights and responsibilities, such couples will need to adopt.

There are also some serious differences between the financial treatment, upon divorce, of couples married as same-sex couples and those married as heterosexual couples. And of course this all brings to mind the Golden Rule: When in doubt, see a lawyer first!

"When her three-year-old marriage broke up, the 44-year-old doctor assumed she and her ex would split their property and jointly parent their two children. Her stay-at-home spouse wanted sole custody and the right to move the children out of Massachusetts.

In pretrial motions, both parents made the same argument to a judge: The children should be with me; I'm their mother.

For years, family court judges leaned toward a maternal preference when it came to custody disputes. But what to do when both parents are women, or neither is? Judges in Massachusetts have been grappling with that question since gay and lesbian couples began filing for divorce in 2004, seven months after the state Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage.

Nearly 10,000 gay and lesbian couples married after the ruling. Massachusetts does not keep records on the number who have divorced, but lawyers who specialize in family cases say it is in the dozens. Those who choose to end their marriages soon discover that the trauma of divorce is compounded by legal and financial difficulties that heterosexual couples generally are spared.

'One of the benefits of marriage is divorce,' said Joyce Kauffman, a Boston divorce lawyer who has handled a dozen same-sex divorce cases. 'But for a lot of couples, that benefit is very complicated and very costly in ways that heterosexual couples would never have to experience....'


For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the Massachusetts Divorce & Family Law Page of my law firm website.