[blindlaw] child custody

Sat Dec 15 00:02:04 UTC 2012

To follow up on some earlier posts I have made on this issue, if the Court
views the extra person as exercising a supervisory rather than an assistive
role, then the argument is that having a supervisory person is not in "the
best interest" of the child since the child is likely to be confused as to
who is his real parent.  If the extra person is a supervisor, then the child
might view that person as the real authority figure; on the other hand, if
the person's role is merely to assist, the child will understand that his
parent is his blind father.

Regards, 
RUSSELL J. THOMAS, JR.
Principal Attorney 

Law Office of Russell J. Thomas, Jr. 
4121 Westerly Place, Suite 101
Newport Beach, California 92660
T: 949-752-0101
F: 949-257-4756

Follow me on Twitter @EmplmntAttorney

The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the
personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above.  This message
may be an attorney-client communication and/or work product and as such is
privileged and confidential.  If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in
error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in
error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original
message.

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Steve
Jacobson
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2012 3:40 PM
To: Blind Law Mailing List
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] child custody

Dan,

I am also writing as one who is not a lawyer but who has spent some time
following cases like this.  I am also a blind parent of blind kids and have
had to consider my actions with respect to social service agencies.

I must echo what I have understood to have been written in response to your
inquiry regarding the ADA.  To put it more directly, if it is believed,
particularly by a judge, that a blind person cannot perform the duties of a
parent safely, the ADA will not likely force that judge to respond
differently.  Those of us in the NFB are very, very concerned that
precedence not be set that blindness, by itself, makes a person an unsafe
parent.  However, the situation can be clouded if the blind parent involved
does not have good blindness skills.  Someone who cannot travel
independently or handle reading materials is not necessarily a bad parent,
but it makes it harder to make a case with a judge.  It can be essential
that we move how a judge looks at blind persons from thinking of all he or
she couldn't do if he or she were blind to an understanding that blind
people develop techniques that let us do most things that sighted people do,
just differently.  This can be a hard sell but showing other successful
blind persons is a pretty good way to accomplish that.

It is very important, as others have said, to be as certain as you can that
all evidence that have led to this point is well understood.  Getting
examples of other successful blind parents may well be your most effective
approach.  If your client is in need of getting some of his skills of
blindness improved, having a plan to do that which can be presented to a
judge may also help.  It may also be worth contacting our national office to
see if there might be materials that can help.  Even if a case cannot serve
as a precedence, showing how another case was resolved positively may make a
difference.  If there are gaps in your client's training that can be
addressed, this might make any negative decision temporary until the gaps
are addressed, and of course, I do not know that there are any gaps.  This
should normally just not be an issue, but it unfortunately does come up from
time to time.

Best regards,

Steve Jacobson

On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 20:49:12 -0600, Daniel McBride wrote:

>There are no other issues.  The sole issue is his blindness and the 
>child's age.

>Further, it would be more accurate to refer to the condition of 
>possession as "chaperone" than "supervision".  A subtle distinction I 
>know, but a distinction nonetheless.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Steven 
>Johnson
>Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 8:44 PM
>To: 'Blind Law Mailing List'
>Subject: Re: [blindlaw] child custody

>Out of curiosity, is there any other Child Protective History with this 
>potential client?  Take out the blind aspect, is there anything else 
>that has been provided that would suggest that supervised visits are
necessary?
>For example, Hx of drug, alcohol or other substance use, maltreatment 
>at any level, a criminal background that could suggest that such 
>supervision is necessary?

>I am not a lega expert, but I do work in the Child Protective Service
field.

>Steve

>-----Original Message-----
>From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Daniel 
>McBride
>Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 8:29 PM
>To: Blind Law Mailing List
>Subject: [blindlaw] child custody

>Potential client has Suit Affecting Parent Child Relationship pending 
>in Texas.  Potential client is granted Possessory Conservatorship with 
>the Family Code standard visitation of first, third and fifth weekends 
>of the month.

> 

>However, potential client is blind, the child is a 19 month old 
>daughter and the Court has conditioned his possession of the child on 
>him having sighted assistance by any competent adult during his periods of
possession.
>Potential client asks whether the condition of possession violates any 
>concepts of discrimination pursuant to the Americans With Disabilities Act.

> 

>I would appreciate any thoughts you have.  Thank you.

> 

>Daniel McBride, Attorney

>Fort Worth, Texas

>_______________________________________________
>blindlaw mailing list
>blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>blindlaw:
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/blinddog3%40chart
>er.ne
>t

>_______________________________________________
>blindlaw mailing list
>blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>blindlaw:
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dlmlaw%40sbcgloba
>l.net

>_______________________________________________
>blindlaw mailing list
>blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%40
>visi.com

_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rthomas%40emplmntattor
ney.com