Grandparents Rights, if any

[sisjean23]

I live in Florida. I have 3 grandchildren by the same woman, the oldest 11 yrs. old, is my youngest sons daughter and the other two are boys, being fathered by my oldest son. All 3 children are living with both mother and my oldest son.

Their mother has never cared for me regardless of the many things I have done to help her over the years. I have always gone out of my way to be nice because I knew this type of control over these children was likely to happen someday.

My first thread was too lengthly and I hope I can express my concerns over circumstances in a more timely manner. My worst fear has happened. I am no longer allowed to see my grandchildren, even though one of them, now 7 years old, would be in foster care now had I not taken custody of this drug infested child at birth. This child is emotionally and physically abused. I believe that this child was never wanted and is still resented strongly by his mother. The inability to visit or see these children has left him(the 7 yr. old) open for what I believe is more abuse. Does Florida have any laws stating that I have a right to see my grandchildren?

When HRS took this child at birth, I went to court to be awarded custody. When I advised HRS that the mother seemed to want this child, I was told just to return the child. No court action was ever taken. HRS says that this is their procedure. Does this sound legal to you?

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

My response:

You have no rights to your Grandchildren, unless specifically offered by the parent(s). Run a search for Troxel vs. Granville, the United States Supreme Court decision which was handed down to all of the States in July 2000.

IAAL

 

[sisjean23]

To: IAAL, Thank you, I did research the Troxel vs Granville casr of June 2000, but it does say that the decision is not poured in concrete and that since several members of the court were definitely thought otherwise, that it could be overturned. I feel strongly also that a parents rights are and should be most important as long as parents do not jeopardize those rights by depriving children of their right to be loved and shown love by a blood relative like a grandparent. i am pretty broadminded myself but I would think that the courts would want to help instill some of the old time philosophy in these parents today that obviosly don't feel that they are necessary. Again, thanks for your response and the info. on the case mentioned.

 

[sisjean23]

To: IAAL or I AM ALWAYS LIABLE,
Also, I never received any answer to my question about HRS and is a return of custody legal in the manner that it was performed by HRS? This of course was in Florida

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

To: IAAL, Thank you, I did research the Troxel vs Granville casr of June 2000, but it does say that the decision is not poured in concrete and that since several members of the court were definitely thought otherwise, that it could be overturned. I feel strongly also that a parents rights are and should be most important as long as parents do not jeopardize those rights by depriving children of their right to be loved and shown love by a blood relative like a grandparent. i am pretty broadminded myself but I would think that the courts would want to help instill some of the old time philosophy in these parents today that obviosly don't feel that they are necessary. Again, thanks for your response and the info. on the case mentioned.

My response:

I agree with your thoughts concerning "old-time" philosophy; that the younger generation would lose that special insight that only a person of age and experience can give. But, if the parents say "No" to visitation, then that's the "final word". This is the "law of the land", as the U.S. Supreme Court is the final arbitur of claims. There is no higher court and, as such, all lower courts must follow the ruling and mandate of that decision.

The U.S. Supreme Court has rarely "overturned" itself. The decision of the Court in "Troxel" was :

DECISION:
The court, by a 6-3 vote, the United States Supreme Court dealt a setback to grandparents’ rights, ruling that parents cannot be forced by state law to allow visits with their children.
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, writing in the court’s main opinion, said, “So long as a parent adequately cares for his or her children... there will normally be no reason for the state to inject itself into the private realm of the family to further question the ability of that parent to make the best decisions concerning the rearing of that parent’s children.”

I don't have an answer for your HRS question.

Good luck to you, though.

IAAL

 

[sisjean23]

To: I AM ALWAYS LIABLE
Many thanks for your response and well wishes.