Should Parents Be Entitled to Have Attorneys Appointed to Represent Them in Child Custody Cases?
A mother who lost custody of her three children in a divorce has argued to the Washington Supreme Court that she should have had an attorney appointed to represent her. The woman, who only has a ninth-grade education, attempted to get pro bono representation, but she was declined because of the complexity of her case. As a result, she ended up representing herself, while her husband had an attorney.
Her appeal focuses on the open courts provision of the Washington state constitution includes an open courts provision, which says that justice in all cases should be administered openly, and justice shouldn’t be delayed. The argument being made by the mother's appellate attorney is that "access" in this instance means "meaningful access," which requires a lawyer.
You can read much more about this novel theory in the article referenced below. You can also follow this case, King v. King, No. 57831-6-1, at the Washington Supreme Court's website.
Source: "Mom Wants State to Pay in Custody Battle" by Stephanie Francis Ward, published in the ABA Journal eReport.
Her appeal focuses on the open courts provision of the Washington state constitution includes an open courts provision, which says that justice in all cases should be administered openly, and justice shouldn’t be delayed. The argument being made by the mother's appellate attorney is that "access" in this instance means "meaningful access," which requires a lawyer.
You can read much more about this novel theory in the article referenced below. You can also follow this case, King v. King, No. 57831-6-1, at the Washington Supreme Court's website.
Source: "Mom Wants State to Pay in Custody Battle" by Stephanie Francis Ward, published in the ABA Journal eReport.
