Itzel Garcia-Razo
We all sometimes wonder if grandparents have a right to visit or take care of their grandchildren without parents’ permission nor become custody after one of their parents passed away? Here is the case of Jones v. Jones.
Summary:
Mother (Sharon has since remarried and now goes by the name of Sharon Dunn)i married Tracy Jones Jr. (Father) in 2006. The Child was born in November 2007, and Mother and Father separated in January 2009. Mother and Father shared equal custody of the Child following their separation. Between January and March 2009, Father lived with Grandparents, who helped care for the Child while she was in Father's custody. After Father moved out of Grandparents' home, Ellie Jones (Grandmother) continued to visit him two to three times a week. Father died in May 2009, when the Child was approximately eighteen months old. Mother continued to facilitate contact between the Child and Grandparents during the months immediately following Father's death. On July 24, 2009, Grandparents took the Child to a baseball game and brought her home after 10:30 p.m. Although Grandparents believed that Mother had agreed for them to bring the Child home late, Mother later expressed concern about the late hour.
Following the baseball game, Mother denied several of Grandparents' requests to spend time with the Child and also requested that Grandparents not call the Child on weeknights. Grandparents then wrote Mother an email requesting visits with the Child two full weekends per month, visits on holidays and birthdays, an extended visit each summer, and two phone calls per week. When Mother did not respond, Grandparents threatened to sue for grandparent visitation.
Mother then responded with an email outlining concerns she had about permitting the Child to continue visiting Grandparents and informing them that she intended to limit their contact with the Child to one phone call per month and one visit every other month for a few hours in the presence of Mother or one of Mother's family members. Grandparents responded that they would not submit to being supervised and that they intended to initiate court proceedings.
Jones v. Jones, 2013 UT App 174, ¶¶ 1-3, 307 P.3d 598, 600–01, aff'd, 2015 UT 84, ¶¶ 1-3, 359 P.3d 603
As a result, the Court determined that this short-term assistance was inadequate to establish a substantial relationship within only three months. Father lived with grandparents while the Child was in Father's custody; therefore a mother has a right to say no to in-laws visiting their grandchildren. The statute establishes a rebuttable presumption that requires a court to presume that a parent’s decision in regards to grandparent visitation is in the best interests of the Childii from Utah Code Section 30-5-2: Visitation Rights of Grandparents.:
(b)
If the Court considers whether grandparent visitation is in the best interest of the child, the Court shall take into account the totality of the circumstances, including:
(i)
the reasonableness of the parent's decision to deny grandparent visitation
Question:
- Do you think parents should have the right to deny grandparents’ visitation requests?
- If so, should that right be absolute, or can the right be overridden in certain circumstances?
Explain your answer
Sources:
i. Jones v. Jones, 359 P.3d 603, 2015 UT 84, 795 Utah Adv. Rep. 58 (Utah 2015)
ii. Jones v. Jones, 2013 UT App 174, 307 P.3d 598, aff'd, 2015 UT 84, 359 P.3d 603
What an interesting and sad topic. I had never consider the rights of grandparents, considering I don't have any so this is all new information to me!
ReplyDeleteTo answer your first question, Itzel, yes, I do think parents should have the right to deny a visitation request from grandparents. While that does not seem fair, I believe the primary rights as a guardian of that child lie first and foremost with the parent.
Grandparents can sue parents under the Family Law Act, which allows the grandparents to apply to court for orders that requests their grandchild either live with them or spend time with them. In most cases, the grandparents do not prevail here.
What circumstances would facilitate the courts overriding the parent's denial of grandparent rights? Here, the grandparents would have to prove the parent/ guardian as unfit and that the child is in danger or potential danger. In Utah, to prove a parents unfit, one must either prove a mental illness, emotional illness, or a mental deficiency, all of which can be short-term or in expected in the future. While the grandparents would win here, I question the rights of the child.
This is not a win-win situation. It is sticky and convoluted and no one side prevails without damage to the child.
This sounds like a challenging situation. While I believe it is ultimately up to the parents if they want to grant or deny visitation, I would hope some serious consideration went into the decision if it was to deny visitations.
ReplyDeleteIn Jones v. Jones, it seems like a lot of miscommunications, and maybe some previous hostile/upset feelings from the deceased father’s medical bills caused the visitation restriction, but it appeared to be triggered from the baseball game and late return home.
If the grandparents had not pursued this, I do wonder, would they have ever been allowed unsupervised visitations, was this mostly due to the child’s age?
I think the bond between grandparents and their grandchildren is something very special (yes my grandparents are my favorite people) – but why would you want to deny your child that relationship if they are not in any harm? If the mother suspected her child was not being properly cared for, I could understand the hesitation with visitation but I didn’t gather that from skimming the case, and it was determined the grandparents were well fit for the visitations.
How do parents separate their own feelings of annoyance/frustration from the potential emotional harm of denying their child visitations/contact with their grandparents?
I do not have children of my own so it’s probably easier for me to lean towards grandparents having visitations, as long as they are fit.
I agree this is a very interesting topic, and one I hadn't given a lot of thought to. The idea of being a grandparent and having zero control over when and how I see my grandkids is frightening. It seems grandparents have little chance to change this in court, unless, as Arin mentioned, they can prove the parents are unfit and that the child is in danger or potential danger. The other option stated is if the grandparents have filled the role of caregiver in the manner akin to the parents, and that the loss of the relationship between the grandparents and the grandchild would cause substantial harm to the grandchild. Both factors seem quite subjective especially given the court shall presume that a parent's decision regarding grandparent visitation is in the best interest of the parent's child. My takeaway is to make sure to stay in good graces with my sons and/or daughters in law 😊.
ReplyDeleteLike the others, I believe that parents should be first and foremost in determining what (and who) is in the best interest of their child(ren)--with the caveat that the parent is acting in their best interest. In cases of abuse or neglect of the child, I think it would be reasonable for courts to intervene and award visitation (or primary custody) to grandparents.
ReplyDeleteIt seems like in a case like this, a little communication would have gone a long way. Not every child is lucky enough to have loving and involved grandparents. Given that this is the only connection both grandparent and child have with the deceased father, clear communication of expectations would have solved the problem in a more amicable way. After getting sued, I'm not sure how open I would be as the mother to let grandparents be involved in the future. Whereas some sort of mediation would have been likely to generate both a better outcome and a better relationship between both parties.
Great case with interesting issues. It is hard to imagine being either of the parties in this case and I wish there was a better way.
ReplyDeleteI do think your first question is a loaded question and my answer would be “it depends.” In the situation described in the case, I think it is really sad the mother was denying the grandparents visitation and I don’t think she should have the right to deny this visitation if there was no harm to the child. That child is all the grandparents have left of their son and to not be able to see the child grow up has to be so difficult. I also can see the point the appeals court made regarding forcing a parent to allow visitation to someone they do not feel comfortable with is also hard as it takes away parents rights to raise their child. So difficult! Maybe they need mediation. 😊
If the right is granted, it is not an absolute right. The health and wellness of the child will need to be considered as well. The right can be overridden if the relationship and visits are detrimental to the child.
Ouch! This is tough. It is good that we have family courts, where decisions are made with the intent for the best outcome, rather than deciding who is right and who is wrong. The child's best interest needs to be primary in this court decision. The child in this situation is most likely not old enough to articulate their preference; however, I am aware of custody decisions where the children were asked. A descerning judge can often make a wise decision if they read the child's answer carefully and correctly. A judge deciding a case like this would have to check their biases at the door, especially if they are a grandparent.
ReplyDeleteIn answer to your questions, Itzel, I believe parents have the primary responsibility, and hence the right to determine what is best for their children; however circumstances change, and I think a final decision on a matter like this would not be the best benefit for a child.
Thank goodness I have never had to file such a claim. I hope that never changes.
Iztel, your choice in posting this is all too familiar and often very sad in my work as an educator. I see and deal with issues similar to this every day. My unscientific, yet somewhat informed guess is that 50-60% of my students are involved with some sort of "non-traditional" familial relationship and around half of these involve grandparents. I have fortunately witnessed many incredibly positive, well-functioning successful households and family situations of all kinds... and they really can work for kids. I've come to believe: if you can think of any combination of household situations that includes kids, it exists. What's sad is when children become the unlucky ball in the grownups' games.
ReplyDeleteI firstly believe the biological or legally adoptive parent should have primary decision making ability. And as many have mentioned, in the absence of abuse, neglect and endangerment. Secondly, many other family members can and should be involved when possible and safely. Though I won't take time to cite it hear, plenty of research suggests that the more healthy and supportive relationships children have, the more resilient and successful they become. Grandparents can be a large part of that.
I believe a key here, beyond family court, is professional family mediation, as suggested by Trina. I feel the need for this service is huge and would much better serve a lot of similar disputes.
This case absolutely breaks my heart, not only due to the story of the case on its face, but because I know the family of the little girl’s father. I remember when this fight was being fought and how the Jones extended family promised to make sure that this little girl would know who her father was after his death. I don’t know the mother, nor do I know why she felt so strongly about her daughter not being able to see her grandparents without supervision. There were no claims of abuse or neglect, so it is hard for me to understand Sharon’s perspective.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that parents should have the right to deny grandparents’ requests, but without real harm involved, I don’t know why you would. The grandparents’ expert witness in this case did them a disservice by trying to turn the tables using the word “harm”, stating that the child would be harmed if not given an opportunity to be around her grandparents. She was not able to prove that in the court proceeding, which then backfired when considered on appeal. I agree with Trina and Eric that all parties involved would have been better off using mediation which could have not necessarily overridden Sharon’s rights as a parent but could have allowed all parties to settle on a compromise that was best for the child.
Being the nosy person that I am, I looked these people up on Facebook to see how things appear to be going for this family now that this little girl is a teenager. I didn’t get much from that search other than to go back to the family’s posts around the time of the case and read the anguish from the Jones family. One thing that came to mind is that children will grow up and when they do, they can make decisions for themselves to investigate certain circumstances of their childhoods. Will this little girl hold ill feelings against her mother for her choice to pursue this case? Will she try to establish a relationship with her grandparents and other extended family? Carbon County is a small place where everyone knows everyone and the short 7 miles from Price, where the granddaughter lives, to Helper, where the grandparents live, is a road easily traveled by a teenager in a short amount of time. (Lord knows, I did my fair share of traveling that road in my teens.) My hope is that time heals these wounds and that the parties in this case can move forward in a mature and positive way.
This post hit more home due to my profession as a social worker, and having a personal experience with this. I will try to respond, attempting to take those factors out of the equation.
ReplyDeleteSimply, yes, I do think a parent has the right to request, and seek legal limits to a grandparent visiting their grandchild. I included both in that sentence as I do believe they are separate. I see a request as just being between the parent and grandparent, as this case initially started out. If that request is not honored, I believe the parent has a right to take legal action.
The trickier part is to how the legal case would be decided. Just skimming the surface, it may appear cut and dry to say if the parent could prove abuse, though I believe it is much more complicated than that. If a grandparent is constantly undermining the parent, which can alter the way the parent believes the child should be raised and/or creating issues in the parent/child relationship. While that may not be seen as abuse, it definitely hinders a parent's right. On the flip side, as Stephanie brought in, there may be a number of emotional ramifications towards the child if the case were pursued and/or the child is not able to spend time with their grandparent. Not only is this their grandparent, it is their connection to their dad which they may no longer have in their life (thinking not just in terms of this case of the dad being deceased, but in other situations as well).
Should the ruling be absolute? That could be just as tricky. Let's say the grandparent has an issue with substance use. If the ruling was absolute, does that take away the opportunity the grandparent may have to see their grandchild if they were to get sober? What if there were terms that the grandparents did not initially agree to, but out of the passage of time and growing to miss their grandchild, they did agree? Again, on the flip side, does having the case continue, and continually change, cause the child more distress?
It seems like with this case their was a rapid escalation that may have come to a different resolution with better communication, such as mediation. Whether a parent's request, or formalizing the request through legal action, mediation would appear to be a good first step.
Do you think parents should have the right to deny grandparents’ visitation requests?
ReplyDeleteBy reading more about the case, a parent does to a certain extent. I believe that because the late father had parents that played an initially important role in the child's development, the grandparents cannot be denied without a cause.
If so, should that right be absolute, or can the right be overridden in certain circumstances?
Explain your answer
I do not like absolutism. Every situation involving a family unit is complicated. Methinks as the next generation of families are being created, more complexities will arise as the understanding of the social unit is being reworked. As the queer identity becomes socially more accepted, family units will reflect such queerness. A family should not be limited to blood rather to closeness and importance.
My first knee-jerk reaction here was, good for the grand-parents and good for the Court supporting the elements of establishing family relationships. While I agree with many of the comments above, parents do have the right to protect their child(ren). However, Stephanie made two (2) excellent points above: (1) there was no element of harm to the child to have regular contact with the grandparents minus the issue of supervision, and (2) the child will grow up and make decisions to foster her grandparent relationships or not. For now, there is no detriment to the child having a full circle of blood relatives in her life. As long as that issue prevails, especially in today's complicated world, I see no harm. Luckily, I have not experienced anything like this. I can only imagine the frustration, anger and hurt it brings into families under these circumstances.
ReplyDelete