PORTLAND, Maine — People seeking reforms to the guardian ad litem program in the state court system expressed their concerns Thursday in a meeting with Leigh Saufley, chief justice of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court.
Many of the 50 or so people who attended the meeting had experience with the program during their divorce proceedings. Others at the event, which was structured like a hearing before a legislative committee, were lawyers who work as guardians ad litem.
Guardians ad litem, or GALs, are appointed by judges “to represent the best interests of one or more children in legal proceedings for divorce, determination of parental rights and responsibilities, child protection and similar legal actions in Maine,” according to information on the court system’s website. Guardians ad litem may be lawyers or mental health professionals.
Unlike with attorneys, judges, psychologists and other professionals, there is not a board to oversee their conduct. The guardian ad litem program now is supervised by the chief judge of the District Court.
There are about 320 registered guardians ad litem in Maine, Saufley said Thursday.
The judiciary has advocated for a board to oversee the guardian ad litem program for several years. In 2009, the cost of implementing such a program was estimated at between $400,000 and $500,000.
Saufley was asked earlier this year by the Legislature’s Judiciary Committee to come back in 2013 with a plan to implement a better way to resolve complaints about guardians ad litem.
Dr. Jerome Collins of Kennebunkport urged Saufley to change the standard used to determine custody from the child’s best interest to whether a child is safe.
“There are no underlying clear criteria that might define the concept,” he said Thursday. “We feel that ‘Is the child safe?’ is a better standard for the courts. It can be defined more easily, and there is apt to be greater consensus about baseline issues for child safety. Health, nutrition, home safety, evidence of parental mental illness, criminal activities, drug or alcohol issues can all be evaluated more clearly and lend themselves to criteria for custody.”
Collins, a retired psychiatrist, began networking with his son, Paul Collins of Rockland, after the guardian ad litem in his son’s divorce made recommendations both men felt were out of line. The process for appealing those decisions was cumbersome, time-consuming and costly, both men have said.
Diane Loranger of Saco said she is one of more than 15,000 grandparents in the state raising grandchildren. She urged improved training for guardians ad litem in child development, family systems, mental health and substance abuse. She also suggested that a system of supervision and mentoring be implemented along with licensing requirements.
In addition, she urged that “fee ceilings” be set “because there are increasingly more grandparents on fixed incomes raising grandchildren. They should not have to choose between their grandchildren and maintaining a roof over their heads.”
When guardians ad litem are appointed to represent children in a contested divorce or custody motion subsequent to a divorce, the parties are responsible for paying their fees, which range from $120 and $200 per hour, according to Collins. Guardians ad litem appointed in child protective cases are paid $50 per hour by the state, according to information on the court system’s website.
Steven Carey of Cumberland, an attorney who is returning to guardian ad litem work after working for the Indigent Legal Defense Commission, told Saufley that he did not think the system was broken.
“I am one of the few here today who is satisfied with the process,” he said. “I strongly believe that ‘in the best interest of the child’ is the proper standard which is used in other states.”
The number of cases that were the focus of Thursday’s meeting — contested divorce cases in which a guardian ad litem is appointed — represents less than 10 percent of the divorce cases filed each year, Saufley said. In 2010 there were 11,847 family matters cases involving children filed in Maine’s courts, according to information provided by Mary Ann Lynch, spokeswoman for the court system.
Of those, 3,407 were divorce cases with children, 2,110 were parental rights and/or paternity cases, and 6,330 were postjudgment family matters that may or may not have involved children. Guardians ad litem were appointed in 833 family matters cases, or 7 percent, according to the data.
The figures for 2011 were: 11,874 family matter cases involving children filed; 3,417 divorces with children; 2,258 parental right and/or paternity cases; and 6,100 postjudgment family matter cases. Guardians ad litem were appointed in 673, or 6 percent, of the cases.
The number of complaints about guardians ad litem filed each year is small, according to Lynch. Thirteen complaints were filed in 2010 and 14 were filed in fiscal year 2011.
As a result of investigations by Chief District Court Judge Charles C. LaVerdiere, he issued a verbal warning to one guardian ad litem in 2010, according to Lynch. He issued a written warning to one guardian ad litem the next year.
People need to know how to take immediate action when they feel a guardian ad litem is not acting in a child’s best interest or behaving unethically, Lee Feldman of Auburn said after the meeting. He said a motion to remove a guardian ad litem should be similar to the motion a criminal defendant is allowed to file when he or she is unhappy with the representation being provided by a court-appointed attorney.
This is just another prime example of the State of Maine adding to the cost of a divorce matter. At one time two lawyers could work out a divorce with child and property issues without State intervention. You could file the complaint and a memorandum of agreement between the parties and be done. Now it form after state form, mediators, court app. gals, grand parents and the list goes on. I stopped doing them because what you have to charge a client is not worth the time and aggrivation.
Thank you Judy for the follow up article and for coming all the way to Portland from Bangor. I disagree with Steven Carey not about the number of complaints that make it to the top but as to why there appear to be so few complaints. From our research, we have found people do not know that they can complain and who they can complain to. If you disagree with your guardian ad litem, tell them that you do disagree, take detailed notes, and record your conversations. If you do let the GAL know that you disagree with them as we have seen others do, be prepared for them to label you as difficult or as having an ‘anger’ issue. Without resistance it is ‘business as usual’ and nothing will change.
To make suggestions as to how to improve the system please contact:
lawcourt.clerk@courts.maine.gov
Let me tell you lawyers make some of the worst GALs you will ever find in court system. GALs should be professionals with backgrounds in mental health and substance abuse because those are the cases they get invovled in. I know from experience, one of the now esteemed asst. DA’s in Ellsworth as a GAL in a divorce of one of my family members and now we are working hard to help 4 very mixxed up abused kids over come the trama of being left with their mother at the GAL recommendation. It is my opinion that the GAL should be paying for their substance abuse treatment and for the pain and suffering these kids endured because he was not qualified to make a rocommendation about the fitness of a piecee of trash let alone the fitness of their parents.
With the 50 0r so people that attended the meeting in Portland yesterday only 3 people had positive things to say about the GAL system as it stands right now and 2 of the 3 happened to be Gals. Safety of the child is key. Prescription drug abusers, alcoholics and those with admitted mental illness need mental health exams, drug and alcohol testing to see if they can keep the child safe. That is above the training the guardian ad litems are administered currently. State Senators, Chief Justices, psychiatrists, lawyers and the everyday person all agreed the system is broken and the time for change is now.
Yes, appealing court decisions can become costly and cumbersome, but only if a parent continually appeals out of a sense of retaliation against one’s ex-spouse and against the GAL appointed to their case instead of taking a step back and trying to understand why a ruling was not in his favor. If a parent stubbornly refuses to do an introspective self-examination regarding his part in creating an unhealthy, oppressive environment for his child, it is up to the GAL to evaluate what options exist for the child and to determine which parent can truly provide a better, more nurturing environment. Being a GAL is NOT an easy job. It is emotionally taxing for everyone involved, and a GAL has to truly follow his or her gut feelings as well as evaluate what evidence presents itself prior to making a recommendation to the court. Sadly, it seems that many parents out there — specifically, divorced parents on the wrong end of the court’s ruling — don’t understand this and feel that the GALs are simply out to get them, or are blind to the “truth.” Wake up, folks… the “truth” of the matter is that there is something very obvious to the GAL and to the court regarding your ability to properly parent your child and to provide him with a positive environment. Refusing to recognize this, refusing to even contemplate that there might actually be something wrong with your behavior, attitude, and interactions, will of course lead to repeated appeals and higher court costs. It is my belief from personal experience that the GALs do an excellent job in a highly charged environment. Most of the times, their job is thankless. Occasionally, it comes paired with threats, public verbal attacks, and such malicious spite that a GAL may rightly become concerned for his or her safety. And this is a parent who feels he should have custody of his child and that the GAL chose incorrectly?
People need to know how to take immediate action when they feel a guardian ad litem is not acting in a child’s best interest or behaving unethically, Lee Feldman of Auburn said after the meeting. He said a motion to remove a guardian ad litem should be similar to the motion a criminal defendant is allowed to file when he or she is unhappy with the representation being provided by a court-appointed attorney. That combined with detailed and transparent billing, a lifting of immunity so Gal’s are responsible for their behavior during a custody case and oversight from an impartial board instead of the judge that appointed them are a nice start.
Hancock County is a lawless and radical feminist cesspool. There are numerous women who moved to the Ellsworth court district just to file divorces and make allegations against their husbands to gain an advantage in their custody battles. Dads are being victimized with false allegations and PFA abuse and it’s only getting worse. GALs are part of this for profit game which completely drains men of their life savings and leave them broke, homeless, and even in jail.
There is one biased GAL/Divorce attorney who became a prosecutor and engaged in criminal prosecutions of fathers for any false allegation that wives make during child custody fights. She intervenes in civil custody cases so the men could be labeled “abusers” and would not get parental rights. She tried one man twice for multiple counts of spousal rape because during child custody battle the wife alleged that the sex wasn’t loving enough. That prosecutor took the case to the Maine Supreme Court to try to bar all accused men in Maine from being allowed to present evidence of their bitter child custody battle with their false accuser. If the court system allows a prosecutor like that to continue openly abusing her office to victimize men and children, what will be done to make GALs more accountable other than further grow a bureaucracy that goes through the motions but does nothing? The people in the system need to be held accountable or find another profession.
The state only wants to pay $50 an hour, but allows them to charge private citizens $200 an hour? No oversight, who determines an appropriate amount of time to spend on a case, is there no ceiling on the charges? Not surprising there are problems with a system like this. These are attorney rates, what are the qualifications of these folks?