TASK FORCE MEETING, JANUARY 16, 2014, PART III: TASK FORCE VOTES DOWN SHARED PARENTING!

Continued from Part II


http://divorceinconnecticut.blogspot.com/2014/01/task-force-meeting-january-16-2014-part_23.html

Judge Thomas Weissmuller:   There is a difference between legal advice, case law and statute, versus rules of evidence.  Judges state the rules, direct pro se regarding the rules—for example under hearsay there are 32 exceptions.  Our job is to get it right not quick.  In DV law, if you see 5 attorneys on one side, and have an advocate on the other who will not legally advise but will cite  the rule, that would be good.  There is a need for an advocate.

Also, trial by affidavit is very clean.

Attorney Sharon Dornfeld:  Nothing anybody can do, I assume, that is going to give equal footing in terms of knowledge and skills when it comes to law school or not.  There will not be a level playing field. 

[My view is that if you listen to the simple requests pro ses are making, if you don't want to play games or run circles around the pro se party just for fun, you can get exactly at what they need as a judge and either grant it or not.  It is simply a question of whether a judge wants to do the right thing or not.]

Ok, we have only 30 minutes more and I still don’t have a  sense of whether there is something wrong with language of the statute or or not?  That’s a compound question! (Joke!)  Do you think the language of the statute adequately covers what we need or not?

Attorney Linda Allard:  Re shared custody, re shared physical custody, it should not be changed.  The Court is always supposed to come up with a shared parenting statute.

Jennifer Verraneault:  You would define that how—non custodial every other weekend and one dinner per weekday?  That's too vague.

Attorney Linda Allard:  Assume 50,50.

Attorney Sue Cousineau:  The typical plan is 35 to 40 percent for the non-custodial parent—we are seeing this more and more.

Attorney Linda Allard:  I see a lot more, usually Friday after school. Pick up at School, and then drop off at school on Monday. 

Attorney Sue Cousineau:  I think the statute is sufficient.  If the answer is that it is not, that would be a process requiring legal minds to look at international law, and also keep in mind  States’ law can run into the Hague Convention, particularly since we are such a mobile society.

Jennifer Verraneault:  What does she think in one word?  Can you answer that right now?  I do believe there is a part that’s sufficient, but when you go further down to areas that would be considered…

Attorney Sue Cousineau:  That is a separate charge.

Jennifer Verraneault:   I believe in equal shared parenting and no I don’t agree with the statute as it is now.

Dr. Elizabeth Thayer:  I believe the language is sufficient.  It holds expansive opportunities for parents to work out their differences.  I’m not sure if reconciliation is there to assist in working out problems in divorce or if it is to save the marriage.

Mr. John Di Tunno:  I agree the statute is acceptable.  We received a study to see what happens in other states. CT is equal to or far surpasses them. 

Representative Ed Vargas:  My concerns are not so much with the language as with the process.  If the decision is made with all the facts and evidence weighed with whatever worth it has, some is more reliable than others, I believe in giving judges discretion and I don’t believe in coming up with rules that tie judges into a straight jacket.  I am still concerned about the process of getting the evidence in so the final decision is a fair decision.

[Every time Rep. Vargas speaks he makes a sensible remark.  Please make this man Governor!]

Dr. Robert Horwitz:  I agree the process is the issue.

Representative Minnie Gonzalez:  I think we...

Dr. Robert Horowitz:  Do you have proposed wording?

Representative Minnie Gonzalez:  No, but we should look into it and see what’s working and what’s not working.

Dr. Robert Horowitz:  Does anyone else have proposed wording.

Jennifer Verraneault: If we don’t have wording, then we should wait on voting until we have some.

Dr. Robert Horowitz:  I don’t think we have final wording.  I’m open to open  new wording.

[I do believe that if you are intending to revolutionize the way custody has been handled in a particular State such as Connecticut up to that point, you should have some suggested wording for the new Statute you are proposing.  So advocates fell down here and need to do some preparatory work if they seriously want a new statute and present wording for the new statute they say they want.  When you don't have that wording for a new statute you say you want, it is pretty hard for anyone to take you seriously.]

Judge Thomas Weissmuller:  The standards are different if they are in agreement versus if they are not.

Attorney Sharon Dornfeld:  I think we have a vote  of 7 who don’t have an issue with the current statute.  The focus is less on the statutory language than on the application or the procedures.


[So essentially, the task force voted down shared parenting at this juncture in the meeting!]
 

Attorney Thomas Weissmuller:  My take on the statute is that it is very long.  Length may not be a problem but it tells the public that this is the long and complex plan for addressing your parenting problem.  If you come in and ask the judicial branch to help you resolve your parenting challenges via the adversarial process it appears difficult.  This is in contrast to a simple statement that absent DV the presumption is you have shared custody.  If you are engaged in alienation, if you did not tell other parent about the child, you have basically been sneaking around the law.

Attorney Sue Cousineau:  That last one is a different topic. 

Attorney Thomas Weissmuller:   It doesn’t deal with obligation, the obligation of a parent.  If a statute identifies an obligation.  We should have a presumption of the right way it should be.  To suggest that it is all about the children and not the parents, that isn't right.

Attorney Sharon Dornfeld:  I didn't say that, only that the primary concern is child, not that parents aren’t important. 

Attorney Linda Allard:  Shared vs. Joint

Attorney Sharon Dornfeld;  Shared versus joint

Attorney Linda Allard:  We don’t really know the difference between shared and joint.

[Ok, so advocates, you really haven't done your job if the people you are trying to persuade have no idea what you are talking about.  You have to define your terms--seriously!]

Tom, the Practice book has a different policy for never marrieds.  So custody is not applied the same way to this group

In mediations, never married folks are happy that lots of rules don’t apply to them.

Attorney Sharon Dornfeld doesn’t agree that the rules don’t apply to that group.

Jennifer Verraneault:  I think Attorney Allard, I think we could recommend what shared parenting is.  I would start with that and move forward.  Put the 16 factors in order of importance.  Like #15 should be #1.  Start with 15 and work your way forward by looking at the charges.

Attorney Sharon Dornfeld:  We are getting off topic.  Take a look at other states’ rules.  We should look at process.  I

Ok, regarding scheduling, I am not available on the 21^st.  Could we spend more time next Thursday?  Between now and next Thursday, please email to me and Sue your recommendations re what you would like the task force to consider.  I would like a recommendation regarding the definition of shared parenting.  Whatever recommendations there should be on the three charges, we will look at them individually and vote on them and whatever gets members support will be a recommendation and can also have a minority recommendation.

This way we have some idea of what can be supported. 

Attorney Sue Cousineau:  You would like feedback by Wednesday?

Attorney Sharon Dornfeld:  Yes, get them in Wednesday.  I will have copy of all the suggestions by next Thursday.  You do not need to identify where they came from. 

Representative Minnie Gonzalez:  I have to think about it.  Zaslow had no business to get involved in my questionnaire and we in the task force have the right.  Let me check into it.  I will decide. 

Attorney Sharon Dornfeld:  If you received anything from that questionnaire, in regard to transparency I would like copies of responses.

Representative Minnie Gonzalez:  There have been emails sent out from which I was excluded so I don't have any obligation.

Jennifer Verraneault:  A Subgroup can meet on Tuesday, January 21, 2014.  I am putting a motion forth to have a subgroup on Tuesday to help come up with solutions which could come up with on Thursday.

Attorney Linda Allard:  Can a task force committee meet without the chairs?

Jennifer Verraneault:  Yes

Representative Ed Vargas;  I have a concern.  I like what Jenn said re the checklist.  The 16 issues should be looked at and maybe only 2 may apply so we should limit the scope re what should be involved. I believe that doesn’t have to be addressed through the statutes.

Attorney Sharon Dornfeld:  That can be a recommendation which can be sent in with the task force report.  We can vote on it.  If recommended we can follow thru, or not.

[I think most of us in the audience observing this meeting felt that shared parenting received short shrift.  The legislation that established this task force asked that the task force investigate the option of shared parenting.  If the task force did not have experts in to respond to questions regarding how shared parenting would be implemented and what is the value of shared parenting, and, what is most important, how does shared parenting differ from joint custody, I don't think this task force has done the job it was established for.  That is pretty shameful, because I know that the citizens who worked to set up this task force had specific hopes and expectations and they have been shattered by this quick dismissal of shared parenting which has occurred without any significant investigation or thought.  I want to say, quickly, it wasn't every member of the task force that is responsible for such a shabby job-- mostly I would direct my attention to the co-chairs Attorney Sue Cousineau and Attorney Sharon Dornfeld--but the circumstances make everyone look bad.]