This hour, we take a closer look at some of the issues within Connecticut’s family court system. A state task force is looking into what some have called a broken system. What’s fueling the tension between families and family courts? What can be done to resolve it?
GUESTS:
- Peter Szymonik - Leader in Connecticut's family court reform movement
- Attorney Jeffrey Mickelson - Guardian ad litem
- Dr. Elizabeth Thayer - Partner at Beacon Behavioral Services, LLC
- State Representative Edwin Vargas - Representative for the 6th Assembly District
Excellent job John Dankosky and NPR. Szymonik and Vargas were disappointing. North Korea? Really? Like the Courant's editorial, NPR seems to agree that cooler heads need to prevail. Our families are at stake. Interesting that two callers both had good experiences with their GAL's.
ReplyDeleteEarly on in the my process and I call it a process because I had yet to understand the complexity of the judicial system while complexity is a representation of so many things it also represented a system that is fraught with issues and while those involved never essentially lied about those issues I always heard that a guardian ad litem was fair and just . They were that singular person who would consider the situation holistically and use their judgement and the facts to make fair decisions . Unfortunately all of my experiences has not been representative of that fact what I can say that the enormous legal bills are the only thing that is fairly consistent ultimately the children suffer and not the adults . The system itself needs to be reconfigured to accurately represent what they tell so many of us which is a just decision will be reached .
DeleteAn excellent discussion - while the issue of cost is a big part of a parents complaint about the role of Guardian ad litem it should not be the sole focus.
ReplyDeleteHector Morera and Peter Szymonik both hit the nail on the head when they touched the subject of Guardian ad litem (GAL) oversight and management. While in theory there is oversight in practice there is none or at least none that has any effectiveness. While some GALs like Jeffrey Mickelson can work with no oversight and do the job they are supposed to do. What of those GALs who have trouble in the same scenario - what happens to those parents who have to work with this GAL?
While a complaint may be filed what are the realities of filing this complaint? In Maine where I am from there are on average 15 complaints filed with the head judge per year (there is no data on complaints filed with the presiding judge of a case that is ongoing ). This is the last place where a parent can try to let the Judicial Branch know of a potential issue with a particular GAL. Since 1999 out of over 225 complaints only 2 GALs have been removed. They were removed not because a parent complained but because these two GALs had mental health issues that the Judicial Branch recognized.
In those 15 years there have been complaints brought against GALs because a GAL did:
1. Told the court that a child would become the next unabomber - twice. No red flag in the court as to how anyone could foresee this happening.
2. Where there was evidence of a child being abused - physically and emotionally.
3. Where a parent was forced by the Family Court to allow an overnight unsupervised visit with the GAL - who was a 60 year old male and the child was 8 years old. The parent relented under threat of jail.
4. Where a GAL told the court that it was normal to bring a child to a bar late at night - this child witnessed adults fighting and saying "bad things" to each other.
5. Where a GAL felt the request of a parent to bring his/ her child to school would not be in the child's best interest. The parent had brought the child to school on numerous occasions to school.
The list goes on. These examples are not unique to Maine and can be found in any state including Connecticut. There is no state that tracks how many complaints there are against GALs. So no one knows if - let alone where the problems are with a GAL program, with a particular court house or GAL. It begs the question of how does anyone know if a GAL program is really working the way it was intended. No one knows if a particular GAL has malpracticed in his/ her role? There is no data? This gives the Judicial Branch in any state plausible deniability. According to the divorce industry the problem is with the parent(s) not the Judicial Branch.
In Maine while the Judicial Branch has no public record of GALs with issues at any level. Data collected on GALs has been taken up by private citizens - not by the Judicial Branch. Out of almost 300 GALs rostered 10% show up time and time again as parents comment on their experience. Data has also been collected on Judges and lawyers that show which judges, courts and lawyers are or could be trouble for a parent. Parents in Connecticut might also want to consider doing the same....