Friday, April 08, 2005
NEEDED FAMILY COURT REFORMS
We have plenty of problems of our own, and much work to do. Additionally, we try not to second guess the results of individual cases in which all the information available to the Court is not available to us. But, we were recently driving down I-26 near Charleston, SC when a billboard caught our eye and we could not help commenting.
This billboard directed us to http://www.nofreespeech.com/. So we logged on to the site and read all the postings. While we cannot vouch for the veracity of either those who either created the Website or those who provided Affidavits in the underlying lawsuits, it is obvious that this litigation has been proceeding for an inordinate period of time--3 1/2 years and counting. Additionally, it made us wonder about what kind of public servant would sue a citizen involved in attempts to make needed Family Court Reforms. After all, aren't judges supposed to have thick skins? Surely these public servants must understand that people involved in Family Court litigation are often embroiled in issues that seem more important than life and death because those issues involve their children?
Maybe all those who aspire to act as Family Court Judges should have to undergo a screening process that includes a Psychological Evaluation. If nothing else, such procedures would insure that those who cannot stand the heat would not end up in the kitchen where--to mix metaphors--they could accidentally burn down the house.
We have plenty of problems of our own, and much work to do. Additionally, we try not to second guess the results of individual cases in which all the information available to the Court is not available to us. But, we were recently driving down I-26 near Charleston, SC when a billboard caught our eye and we could not help commenting.
This billboard directed us to http://www.nofreespeech.com/. So we logged on to the site and read all the postings. While we cannot vouch for the veracity of either those who either created the Website or those who provided Affidavits in the underlying lawsuits, it is obvious that this litigation has been proceeding for an inordinate period of time--3 1/2 years and counting. Additionally, it made us wonder about what kind of public servant would sue a citizen involved in attempts to make needed Family Court Reforms. After all, aren't judges supposed to have thick skins? Surely these public servants must understand that people involved in Family Court litigation are often embroiled in issues that seem more important than life and death because those issues involve their children?
Maybe all those who aspire to act as Family Court Judges should have to undergo a screening process that includes a Psychological Evaluation. If nothing else, such procedures would insure that those who cannot stand the heat would not end up in the kitchen where--to mix metaphors--they could accidentally burn down the house.
Labels: Family Court Reform
Comments:
<< Home
We haven't even thought of the idea of random drug and alcohol testing.
What do you think about requiring psychological evaluations for all lawyers who practice in Family Court and Criminal Court including those who prosecute cases of alleged abuse?
What is your position on Guardians. Shouldn't they be held to the same standards? And if judges receive immunity for what they do on the bench, shouldn't they be required to waive their right to sue those who publicly criticize them for their performance?
What do you think about requiring psychological evaluations for all lawyers who practice in Family Court and Criminal Court including those who prosecute cases of alleged abuse?
What is your position on Guardians. Shouldn't they be held to the same standards? And if judges receive immunity for what they do on the bench, shouldn't they be required to waive their right to sue those who publicly criticize them for their performance?
We do not completely agree with you on all issues. However, we think you make some good points and raise some valid questions.
In South Carolina, the Bar has recentty adopted the requirement that lawyers take a "civility oath." But, non-lawyer judges do not have to take that oath. Also, Magistrates do not have to be lawyers. This seems a little inconsistent.
But our focus is generally on Family Court Reform.
So, we repeat and clarfy our position on Judges. If a Trial Judge completely ignores the law regarding involuntary termination of parental rights and gives away custody of the child and the Appellate Court later reverses the decision, unless some sort of bribery or fraud is involved, neither the adoptee parents nor the biology parent can recover damages against the Judge. This actually happened in South Carolina, even though the Guardian recommended against the adoption. So we say, unless the Judge can be sued for simple negligence then the parents should be able to say just about anything they want as long as the comments are related to the case.
We will soon contact you by e-mail.
Post a Comment
In South Carolina, the Bar has recentty adopted the requirement that lawyers take a "civility oath." But, non-lawyer judges do not have to take that oath. Also, Magistrates do not have to be lawyers. This seems a little inconsistent.
But our focus is generally on Family Court Reform.
So, we repeat and clarfy our position on Judges. If a Trial Judge completely ignores the law regarding involuntary termination of parental rights and gives away custody of the child and the Appellate Court later reverses the decision, unless some sort of bribery or fraud is involved, neither the adoptee parents nor the biology parent can recover damages against the Judge. This actually happened in South Carolina, even though the Guardian recommended against the adoption. So we say, unless the Judge can be sued for simple negligence then the parents should be able to say just about anything they want as long as the comments are related to the case.
We will soon contact you by e-mail.
<< Home
