Unit 9ASSI - Essay Example

Insert Part Burke, S. Alafair. When Family Matters. 119 Yale L J. 1210-34. β6 . This journal is of primary importance, since it discusses legal issues that surround family life, in both nuclear and extended setting. The journal covers legal matters such as divorce, child custody and the principles and essence of contact law. Gallanis, P. Thomas P. & Gittler, Josephine. Family Caregiving & the Law of Succession: A Proposal. 45 U Michigan J L R. 761-786. β4 (2012). This journal is of great importance to this research study by the virtue of the discourse it sustains, concerning family inheritance.

In the article, Gallanis and Gittler discuss the laws, ethical and legal principles that are observed when the court of law determines the level of contact that a parent, a relative, or any other significant person may have with a child. Wasoff, Fran. Public Attitudes and Law Reform: Extending the Legal Framework for Child Contact to Unmarried Fathers, Grandparents and Step-Parents. 31 J S W & F L.159-72. β2 (2009). This journal article is important to this study since it discusses the demographic transformations that families go through, and how these in turn challenge parenthood and contact with the child.

In this article, Wasoff discusses the application of the law to demystify these changing trends when determining the application of contact law. Cases That Discuss the Legal Issue One of the cases that apply to Michelle and Tom’s situation is Jackson v. Tangreen, 199 Arizona 306 P 3d 100 (2000). In this case, the biological father of the child voluntarily withdrew his rights of contact after divorcing his wife, the child’s mother. This, the father did so that the new husband to the child’s mother could adopt the child.

However, in an interesting twist, the biological father’s mother petitioned to maintain her visitation rights. The Court of Appeal ruled that the grandparent’s statute of visitation was constitutional. Even the US Supreme court later refused to review the case. Another case that applies to Michelle and Tom’s situation is Troxel ET vir v. Granville, 530 US 57, 2000, which was presided over in the US Supreme Court. In this case, the deceased biological father’s parents filed for visitation, citing the Washington Statute.

Washington Statute granted petitions to visitation, whether the plaintiff is biologically related to the child or not, regardless. The mother of the child had agreed to the visitations, but objected the amount of time grandparents spent with the child, and thereby presenting the case to Washington trial court. At first, the trial court ruled in favor of the grandparents. Through the provisions of the Washington appellate system, the child’s mother made an appeal. Resultantly, the Washington Court of Appeal overturned the visitation order that had been issued by the trial court.

The statutes that had been considered include the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process and the principles that exist in the Troxel. The Troxel holding has it that all manner of non-parent visitations are applicable to the presumption that parents act and are, in the child’s best interest. In a closely related wavelength, the Lucille and Graville v. Dodge, 197 Arizona 591, 5 P 3 d 925; 322 (2000) also presents an interesting case study. Also known as Dodge II, this case presents grandparents seeking to have the child’s father charged with contempt of court, in respect to the court’s original visitation orders which the trial court had issued.

The Arizona Court of Appeal made a ruling that did not appease both the contestant and the respondent, so that the matter proceeded to the US Supreme Court. The grandparent’s request for contempt ruling was annulled, while the child’s father had his constitutional issues remaining unresolved. In this case, the US Supreme Court used the aforementioned Troxel holding. The two administrative agencies that have resources touching on this matter are the Legal Information Institute (LII) and the Law Office of Carrie M.

Wilcox, retrievable through the links, http://www.law.cornell.edu/lii/about/about_lii and http://www.wilcoxlegal.com/ respectively. LII’s mission is to facilitate an open access to the law, globally; while the Law Office of Carrie M. Wilcox’s mission is to provide the best and most affordable legal services that touch on all aspects of Family Law such as child support, divorce, paternity, alimony, emergency matters and orders of protection. Both agencies are important since they discuss legal issues, including family law.

The two reliable websites that can be consulted regarding this issue are Family Education: Back to School and Duhaime.org, which are retrievable through the links, http://www.familyeducation.com/home/ and http://www.duhaime.org/LegalResources/FamilyLaw.aspx Both websites are important since they extensively discuss family law. The research was conducted by considering secondary sources that are attributed to reputable authorities in law and legal maters. This means that the plan of the research is qualitative, and not quantitative.

Part 2To: From:Date:Dear Mr. & Mrs. Tom and Michelle Harbin, Re: A Brief Explanation on Contact Law. It is important that you have brought the matter forward, with the intent of probably seeking litigation over grandparent visitation. It is expedient to bring to your attention that your case has a strong locus standi, on several grounds. In the first case, note that grandparent visitation is a clear legal right throughout the United States. Grandparent visitation may thus give you the right of visitation, through a court injunction.

You qualify for visitation on two accounts: first, you are both Sam and Lola’s grandparents, and two; you have been constantly present in Sam and Lola’s lives. Likewise, even legal experts on Family Law such as Wasoff (165) consent to the fact that the statute of Troxel holding cannot be used to discount your claim since, there is no way in which your presence in Sam and Lola’s lives can be proven to be harmful, even if one may argue that Becky Smith as the biological mother have the best interests of Sam and Lola at heart.

Note that there are legal precedents such as Jackson v. Tangreen, 199 Arizona 306 P 3d 100 (2000) and the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process which totally solidify your case. In the latter, the Arizona Court of Appeal granted a grandmother the right to continue with her visitation, based on the constitutional provision of the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process. There are many resources which you may consider, since they are very helpful in divulging information that relates to this case. Duhaime.

org stands out as one of the most resourceful website in this case. For more information, you may consult the undersigned, using the address provided. Yours faithfully, Works CitedWasoff, Fran. “Public Attitudes and Law Reform: Extending the Legal Framework for Child Contact to Unmarried Fathers, Grandparents and Step-Parents” Journal of Social Welfare & Family Law, 31.2 (2009): 159-72. Print