Michigan Military Divorce

Michigan court to oversee a custody dispute in same sex relationship

The news is full of controversial topics these days. On February 20, 2009, the Michigan court of appeals said that courts can oversee a custody dispute between lesbian parents who adopted in Illinois, even though Michigan doesn't formally recognize gay relationships.

The court ruled 2-1 that the U.S. Constitution requires Michigan courts to recognize [both mothers] as adoptive parents. It reversed a trial judge in Berrien County who said Michigan's 2004 voter-approved gay marriage ban kept [one mother] from enforcing [her] parental rights.”

The focus of the majority was on the parent-child relationship, and not on the relationship between the two parents. Scott Bassett, an appellate attorney, said:  "[This was] an odd decision in many ways, including the lack of documentation proving the Illinois adoption.  The majority was uncharacteristically comfortable with this lapse.  I don't think I've seen a panel ignore such significant record/procedural flaws in nearly three decades of appellate work.  That makes it hard to give much credence to the substantive decision, irrespective of how one personally views the issue of gay/lesbian adoption."

The Chicago Tribune story may be read here.

The majority decision [Giancaspro v Congleton] may be read here.

The minority opinion may be read here.

Responsible reproduction - give us a break!

By KAY HYMOWITZ

I know I am not alone in being angry about any doctor who would facilitate Nadya Suleman' s conception of octuplets . . . especially when I think about the huge cost of this project. That cost will be born by taxpayers, of course. Why didn't we get choice about whether we wanted to take on that burden?

Kay Hymowitz wrote in the Wall Street Journal online on February 20th, questioning who and where "Octodad" is:

Nadya Suleman, aka Octomom, is now the mother of 14 children -- eight newborns and their six older brothers and sisters. She has also managed to give birth to debate on issues as far-ranging as welfare, reproductive technology, health care and celebrity worship (Ms. Suleman is said to have an Angelina Jolie fixation). She has even generated heated discussion about the tort system, because the young mother could have paid for her miracle babies through the $168,000 awarded for a back injury she suffered in 1999 at a psychiatric hospital where she worked -- an injury, it should be noted, that did not prevent her from delivering, on Jan. 26, more living babies than once thought humanly possible.

You may read the rest of Hymowitz's editorial here at the Wall Street Journal Online.

Insanity defense in "Clark Rockefeller" kidnapping case?

The Boston Globe reports on February 11, 2009 that negotiations for a plea bargain in a parental kidnapping case that captured national attention have collapsed. Christian Karl Gerhartsreiter, AKA Clark Rockefeller, is a German national who allegedly used many aliases during his thirty years in the US. He insinuated himself in high society from Los Angeles to Manhattan to Beacon Hill by claiming a lineage that increased his social status.

Gerhartsreiter is charged with parental kidnapping, giving a false name to a police officer, and two assaults. He is accused of kidnapping his daughter, Reigh Storrow Mills Boss, from a Back Bay street during a supervised visit on July 27. Earlier articles about the Rockefeller kidnapping may be found on this Blog may be found here.

Services to help individuals facing foreclosure in Michigan

Ann Routt, Deputy Director of Legal Services of South Central Michigan in Ann Arbor has shared the following valuable information regarding services to help individuals facing foreclosure:

Legal Services of South Central Michigan (LSSCM), through its Michigan Poverty Law Program (MPLP), has launched the Michigan Foreclosure Prevention Program. The program is a partnership with legal aid offices throughout Michigan, as well as housing counselors throughout Michigan and the National Consumer Law Center. The program has already begun accepting referrals and providing assistance.

Does a state court have exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over custody issues?

In today's mobile society where parents and children move from one state to another after a court has made a custody determination, the question often arises, "Does the state that made the initial child custody determination continues to have continuing exclusive jurisdiction over modifications of custody orders?" The Michigan Court of Appeal ("COA") recently answered this question, relying on decisions from Oregon and California for assistance.

It is helpful to parents facing these questions to know how the courts will likely resolve them. A most important thing to remember is that where a parent continues to reside in the state that made the custody determination, the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act provides for continuing exclusive jurisdiction over the custody issue.