Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Toward A Child-Centered Approach To Evaluating Claims Of Alienation In High-Conflict Custody Disputes, Allison M. Nichols
Toward A Child-Centered Approach To Evaluating Claims Of Alienation In High-Conflict Custody Disputes, Allison M. Nichols
Michigan Law Review
Theories of parental alienation abound in high-conflict custody cases. The image of one parent brainwashing a child against the other parent fits with what we think we know about family dynamics during divorce. The concept of a diagnosable “Parental Alienation Syndrome” (“PAS”) developed as an attempt to explain this phenomenon, but it has been widely discredited by mental health professionals and thus fails the standard for evidentiary admissibility. Nevertheless, PAS and related theories continue to influence the decisions of family courts, and even in jurisdictions that explicitly reject such theories, judges still face the daunting task of resolving these volatile …
No Harm, No Foul? Why Harmless Error Analysis Should Not Be Used To Review Wrongful Denials Of Counsel To Parents In Child Welfare Cases, Vivek Sankaran
No Harm, No Foul? Why Harmless Error Analysis Should Not Be Used To Review Wrongful Denials Of Counsel To Parents In Child Welfare Cases, Vivek Sankaran
Articles
The application of a harmless error standard by appellate courts reviewing erroneous denials of counsel in child protective cases undermines a critical procedural right that safeguards the interests of parents and children. Case law reveals that trial courts, on numerous occasions, improperly reject valid requests for counsel, forcing parents to navigate the child welfare system without an advocate. Appellate courts excuse these violations by speculating that the denials caused no significant harm to the parents, which is a conclusion that a court can never reach with any certainty. The only appropriate remedy for this significant problem is a bright-line rule …
Representing Parents In Child Welfare Cases, Vivek Sankaran
Representing Parents In Child Welfare Cases, Vivek Sankaran
Book Chapters
A parent's constitutional right to raise his or her child is one of the most venerated liberty interests safeguarded by the Constitution and the courts.2 The law presumes parents to be fit, and it establishes that they do not need to be model parents to retain custody of their children.3 If the state seeks to interfere with the parent-child relationship, the Constitution mandates that the state: (1) prove parental unfitness, a standard defined by state laws; and (2) follow certain procedures protecting the due process rights of parents. The constitutional framework for child welfare cases is premised on the belief …
Protocol For Attorneys Representing Parents In Child Protective Proceedings, Frank E. Vandervort, Vivek S. Sankaran
Protocol For Attorneys Representing Parents In Child Protective Proceedings, Frank E. Vandervort, Vivek S. Sankaran
Other Publications
This protocol is intended to guide attorneys through the strategic decisions they will need to make while representing parents in child protective cases. The protocol does not provide a comprehensive action-step checklist. Parents’ attorneys can find that kind of guidance in other resources, including the “How-To-Kit: Representing Parents in Child Protective Proceedings” by the Institute of Continuing Legal Education; “Guidelines for Achieving Permanency in Child Protection Proceedings” by Children’s Charter of the Courts of Michigan; and the American Bar Association’s “Standards of Practice for Attorneys Representing Parents in Abuse and Neglect Cases.”1 For its part, this protocol delves more substantively …
Damned For Using Daycare: Appellate Brief Of Jennifer Ireland In Ireland V. Smith, Julie Kunce Field
Damned For Using Daycare: Appellate Brief Of Jennifer Ireland In Ireland V. Smith, Julie Kunce Field
Michigan Journal of Gender & Law
At issue is custody of three-and-a-half-year-old Maranda (date of birth: April 22, 1991). The trial court found that Maranda had an established custodial environment with her mother, Jennifer Ireland, but then nominally ordered custody changed to Steven Smith. The court's order changing custody was based on a determination that day care is an inappropriate choice for care of a preschool child, and that no one effectively can be a single parent and a student at the same time. Those findings have no factual basis in the record, no legal basis under Michigan law, and no logical or even common sense …