•  
  •  
 

Authors

Abstract

The United States Supreme Court has recognized that parental rights implicate fundamental interests and that statutes adversely affecting those rights require close examination. However, the Court has been inconsistent in both its analysis and results when deciding which statutes burdening parental rights nonetheless pass constitutional muster. The Court’s ambivalence and lack of clarity have made parental rights jurisprudence confused and confusing, as illustrated by the dissensus among the state supreme courts regarding which visitation statutes are constitutional. Yet, this jurisprudential quagmire cannot be blamed on one particular decision, as if a single clarification or modification could resolve the problem. Rather, the jurisprudence is rife with analyses both asserting and undermining parental rights; it must be significantly revised if it is to provide helpful guidance to legislatures and lower courts. The Court must take more seriously its obligation to discern and apply constitutional tests with respect to families—the integrity of families and the best interests of children hang in the balance.

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.