Can one of you law students please explain the legal basis of this decision? Even if you disagree, I'd like to understand the legal point of view of the judge who made this decision.
From what I gather, "marital masters" are unique to New Hampshire, and although they are not not judges, they make recomendations to judges who hear custody/divorce/family issues. See: http://www.hamker.com/practice_areas/MaritalMasters.htm
As you might know, a guardian ad litem is appointed by courts in divorce cases (and sometimes other cases) to represent the interests of minor children. The rationale here is that the parents might use the children to serve their own interests, so a "neutral" party is appointed to be unbiased in deciding what is best for the kids.
This seems like an odd (and hopefully rare) occurrence where the political inclinations of the guardian ad litem, the marital master, and the judge all aligned to produce this result.
I suppose it's possible that the father, who isn't mentioned, is not religious and so the guardian ad litem and the marital master were essentially making an effort to split the difference between the two belief systems the girl will be exposed to by ordering her to go to public school-- but that is just conjecture.
Anyway, I agree that the result is messed up. Happy Monday!
I didn't understand half the words in your comment, Jo. Thanks for the explanation, but now I'll make sure to get a dictionary before I read your "legal" comments. You're so smart!
3 comments:
From what I gather, "marital masters" are unique to New Hampshire, and although they are not not judges, they make recomendations to judges who hear custody/divorce/family issues.
See: http://www.hamker.com/practice_areas/MaritalMasters.htm
As you might know, a guardian ad litem is appointed by courts in divorce cases (and sometimes other cases) to represent the interests of minor children. The rationale here is that the parents might use the children to serve their own interests, so a "neutral" party is appointed to be unbiased in deciding what is best for the kids.
This seems like an odd (and hopefully rare) occurrence where the political inclinations of the guardian ad litem, the marital master, and the judge all aligned to produce this result.
I suppose it's possible that the father, who isn't mentioned, is not religious and so the guardian ad litem and the marital master were essentially making an effort to split the difference between the two belief systems the girl will be exposed to by ordering her to go to public school-- but that is just conjecture.
Anyway, I agree that the result is messed up. Happy Monday!
I didn't understand half the words in your comment, Jo. Thanks for the explanation, but now I'll make sure to get a dictionary before I read your "legal" comments. You're so smart!
Thanks Drae!-- I spent the great majority of each day of law school feeling really stupid, so that's nice of you :)
Post a Comment