Ex-partners in court
Standing-room-only crowd hears case on visitation of 3-year-old
Members of both liberal and conservative camps flooded the court chambers. State Sen. Scott McCoy, D-Salt Lake, and Rep. Lavar Christensen, R-Draper, were present in a foreshadowing of what is expected to be one of the most heated political issues during the 2006 Legislature.
Cheryl Pike Barlow, the mother of the girl, says she has left her lesbian life and is now an evangelical Christian. Barlow said she does not want her former partner, Keri Lynne Jones, to have visitation with her daughter.
Last December, a district court judge ordered Barlow to allow Jones visitation, noting that when the couple was together, they held themselves out to be the parents of the girl with the intent of raising the girl together. Barlow has denied that she planned to raise the girl with Jones, although the girl's last name at birth was listed as Jones-Barlow.
In court Tuesday, Barlow's attorney, Frank Mylar, argued that a court should not be able to "second guess" the decision of a fit mother who is looking out for the best interests of her child.
Mylar argued even live-in boyfriends are not entitled under the law to child visitation, only the biological father.
"So one episode of sexual intercourse," Justice Ronald Nehring asked, has greater legal standing than someone who stays to raise a child?
Mylar replied that Utah common law only recognizes the rights of a biological father.
Chief Justice Christine Durham took issue with the case law Mylar cited.
"You're talking about common law that is decades old here," Durham said, adding there is a need to understand common law that applies to "contemporary" circumstances.
With the number of children being born out of marriage nearing almost 50 percent, Durham said, there is a need to address issues of children raised in non-married households by two adults.
Justice Matthew Durrant also raised the issue of grandparents' rights to visit grandchildren, something with which the courts have struggled. Mylar pointed out U.S. Supreme Court rulings have established that a parent's fitness has to be in question before parental rights can be addressed to grandparents or non-relatives. In this case, Barlow's fitness as a mother has never been an issue, Mylar said.
Durham asked why Barlow shouldn't be held responsible for allowing Jones into her life as a "co-parent." Mylar minimized Jones' importance in the child's life, saying Jones has overblown her role. But, Durham said, given scientific studies that show that newborns bond to their caretakers, how can Mylar claim there was no such bond between the child and Jones?
You can be the first to comment on this story.