Posted on 05/05/2015 8:41:21 PM PDT by Pikachu_Dad
The bills digest clearly admits that the TERMINATION OF PARENTAL AUTHORITY is new law.
“Present law (C.C. Art. 216) provides that a child remains under the authority of his father and mother until his majority or emancipation and in case of difference between the parents, the authority of the father prevails.
Proposed law (C.C. Arts. 221, 232, 234, and 235) revises present law to provide that a married father and a mother share parental authority over their minor child, unless modified in accordance with law, until the child attains the age of majority or is emancipated, or upon termination of the marriage of the parents of the child.”
An ‘updating’ of this law for modern times would be the inclusion of single moms (50% of all Louisiana births) into the law on ‘parental authority’.
The Civil Code in Europe cited above does so.
This law strips parents of their rights and duties. It places the child(ren) under the authority of the State.
Under all current longstanding law in every State, parental rights can only be terminated for good cause.
the law terminates a mothers and fathers right to...
... Care for their child
... Protect their child
... Discipline their child
... Instruct their child.
“Art. 223. Rights and obligations of parental authority
Parental authority includes rights and obligations of physical care, supervision, protection, discipline, and instruction of the child.”
A person who is ‘just a tutor (guardian most everywhere in the world) has to report to the judge.
Say 600,000 children, 75% of them under court rule.
That is a lot of annual accounts!
“CHAPTER 10. ACCOUNTING BY TUTOR
Art. 4391. Duty to account; annual accounts
A tutor shall file an account annually, reckoning from the day of his appointment, and at any other time when ordered by the court on its own motion or on the application of any interested person.”
Indeed so. A huge discouragement to marriage.
Here is another problem with this law.
FAMILY COURT DOES NOT DO TUTORSHIP.
As soon as the divorce is finalized, any case in fmily court would need to be transfered to District court for the Tutorship proceedings.
The Family Courts award of custody would be temporary, lasting only untul the new Judge sits on the case.
Here is the Jurisdiction law from Orleans Domestic Court.
so much for Baton Rouge Family Court, Orleans Domestic Court, and the Family Courts of 21st and 22nd JDC.
“C.(1) Domestic relations matters shall include:
(a) Actions for divorce, annulment of marriage, establishment or disavowal of paternity of children, alimony, support of children, custody by habeas corpus or otherwise, visitation rights, and all matters incidental to any of the foregoing proceedings.
(b) The issuance, modification, or dissolution of conservatory writs for the protection of community property.
(c) The issuance of writs of fieri facias and garnishment under judgments for alimony, child support, and attorney fees, partition proceedings following divorce judgments, and suits for separation of property.
(2) For the purposes of this Subsection, family or domestic relations matters shall not include tutorship proceedings.
D. The provisions of this Section shall apply to the Civil District Court for the parish of Orleans or to the Forty-First Judicial District Court, whichever is applicable, and shall supersede to the extent of conflict with any other provision of law.”
Think GUARDIAN. That is the term used by all other locations. Louisiana likes to be ‘special’.
And the there is this very stupid clause.
When a child becomes an adult (by age or by emancipation), the parents have to turn over the former child’s estate to the new formed adult.
However, under this new law, the parents must also turn over the child’s estate to the child when they get divorced.
The child may be two years old. The child may be five. The child may be fourteen.
At the very keast, this law was written and passed on by very careless and inattentive people.
“Art. 231. Parents’ obligation to deliver and account
Parents are bound to deliver to the child his property at termination of
parental authority.
Parents shall also give an account of their administration when ordered
by the court. The action to compel an accounting is subject to a liberative prescription of five years that commences to run from the day the child attains the age of majority.”
Art 229 of the bill states: “Each parent has the right and the obligation to administer the property of the child. The parent must do so as a prudent administrator and is answerable for any damage caused by his fraud, fault, default, or neglect.”
So, in all situations, an adult is responsible for management of the child’s estate.
Parental authority ceases at divorce. Pre-divorce both parents have authority. Post-divorce, one or both parents have authority based on the court’s decision as to who is granted custody of the child. The child never really has custody of his own estate. What happens is that the court requires an accounting of what the child’s estate is at the point of divorce. That way neither parent can be hiding assets of the child. Post-divorce, it’s obvious that the parent with custody is bound by article 229 to administer the child’s estate. Actually, it looks like both parents have a fiduciary responsibility to the child’s property.
Sharkfish answered my basic question. The bill is obviously bringing old law into modern times. There is nothing nefarious about it.
Yep. Works! Thanks for the ping.
I am especially interesting in learning how we can fight this. I don’t live in Louisiana, so it doesn’t affect me directly, but it’s the sort of thing that if/when the dominoes start falling, we all might be facing this situation.
Note to government (federal, state, local): Stop being control freaks. Mind your own business. Get out of our personal lives. Your responsibilities are very narrow and limited and interfering with families is not one of them.
Please help get the word out. We need to get some press covering this.
Let me reemphasize the Example from the European Union - another Civil Code State.
Not a big fan of the EU, the put out to much bullshit regulation, but this code is beautifully written.
This is what MODERN law looks like.
The key is that father and mother retain authority over their child until the child becomes and adult.
The second key is that the courts may not take the child from the parents except for grave cause.
The third key is that the words FATHER AND MOTHER are used in the document. WOW.
*** EXAMPLE FROM THE EURO UNION CIVIL CODE
V. Living relationships
5.3 Standards of a Living Family
Article 125 - Parental Rights
135.1 Parental rights (link)
Every child, regardless of age, owes respect to his father and mother.
A child remains subject to the authority of his father and mother until his majority or emancipation.
The father and mother have the rights and duties of custody, supervision and education of their children. They shall maintain their children.
The father and mother exercise parental authority together.
If either parent dies, is deprived of parental authority or is unable to express his or her will, parental authority is exercised by the other parent.
The person having parental authority may delegate the custody, supervision or education of the child.
135.2 Permission from the parents link
No unemancipated minor may leave his domicile without the consent of the person having parental authority.
135.3 Challenges to parental authority
In the case of difficulties relating to the exercise of parental authority, the person having parental authority may refer the matter to the court, which will decide in the interest of the child after fostering the conciliation of the parties.
Whether custody is entrusted to one of the parents or to a third person, and whatever the reasons may be, the father and mother retain the right to supervise the maintenance and education of the children, and are bound to contribute thereto in proportion to their means.
135.4 Deprivation of parental authority
The court may, for a grave reason and in the interest of the child, on the application of any interested person, declare the father, the mother or either of them, or a third person on whom parental authority may have been conferred, to be deprived of such authority.
Where such a measure is not required by the situation but action is nevertheless necessary, the court may declare, instead, the withdrawal of an attribute of parental authority or of the exercise of such authority. The court may also directly examine an application for withdrawal.
The court may, in declaring deprivation or withdrawal of an attribute of parental authority or of the exercise of such authority, designate the person who is to exercise parental authority or an attribute thereof; it may also, where applicable, obtain the advice of the legal guardianship council before designating the person or, if required in the interest of the child, appointing a legal guardian.
Deprivation extends to all minor children born at the time of the judgment, unless the court decides otherwise.
Deprivation entails the exemption of the child from the obligation to provide support, unless the court decides otherwise. However, where circumstances warrant it, the exemption may be lifted after the child reaches full age.
A father or mother who has been deprived of parental authority or from whom an attribute of parental authority has been withdrawn may have the withdrawn authority restored, provided he or she alleges new circumstances, subject to the provisions governing adoption.
In no case may the father or mother, without a grave reason, interfere with personal relations between the child and his grandparents.
Failing agreement between the parties, the terms and conditions of these relations are decided by the court.
Decisions concerning the children may be reviewed at any time by the court, if warranted by circumstances.
Not bad. Thanks for posting.
Three things that legislators and courts need to understand.
1. Kids, particularly teenagers, can be rebellious. Recognizing the difference between normal rebellion and an unmanageable situation is critical in making decisions. Just because a kid says they hate their parents doesn’t mean that they actually do or that the parents are doing anything wrong.
2. Busybodies who interfere in family relationships should be viewed with reasonable skepticism, especially “professional busybodies” who work for government organizations. No one wants a child to be beaten or abused by a parent. But failing to raise a child the way a nosy neighbor, CPS, or any other outside party would prefer is not abuse.
3. Failure to be “perfect” is not abuse. There are no perfect parents.
The bar for removal of parental authority should be set very high.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.