Family Law and Emotional Rights 211custodial decisions for divorce. However, children's emotional rights are not always
considered in legal decisions, especially for custody decisions in which spousal abuse
occurred in the home or in those cases in which adoption went wrong. Laws vary
from state to state and while some states apply the best interest of the child standard
for custody issues, others do not. Even when such standards are applied, some
researchers indicate they may not, in reality, protect the child's emotional rights
(Kurtz, 1997).
In most states, the best interest of the child standard is applied for child custody
cases (Kurtz, 1997). In fact, states are mandated to consider the best interest of the
child in making custody decisions for divorce cases (Bracco, 1997; Oppenheim &
Bussiere, 1996). Rather than allowing divorcing parents to make whatever deci-
sions they want regarding the custody of their children, judges are now required to
consider what portions of the divorce will affect the children and make certain their
needs are met (Bracco, 1997). However, despite the Best Interest of the Child man-
date for divorce custody decisions, a child's right to a loving family and emotional
support is not always considered. For other custody decisions, courts may use the
Parents Rights standard (Wynne, 1997). This standard does not even acknowledge
the emotional rights of the child. The following vignette gives a case example of
such a rilling.
Jessica Deboer was 2 when she was taken away from the only parents she had ever
known. Baby Jessica's biological mother, Cara Clausen, signed away her parental rights
to the Deboers only 40 hours after the birth of her daughter, despite the Iowa law bars
against signing a release before at least 72 hours after the birth of a child. When the
Deboers attorney called and asked Cara who the father of the child was, she lied and
named Seeteldt, an ex-boyfriend who signed away what he thought were his parental
rights.
Two days after the Deboers received custody of baby Jessica, Cara told Dan Schmidt
that he was really the father of the baby. When Jessica was 3 weeks old, Cara sued to
have her parental rights restored, and Dan made a legal claim later the same month. The
Deboers refused to give Jessica back without a fight, and when Iowa courts continued
to rule against them, they took the case to Michigan, hoping to win on the question
of the child's best interest. The Deboers won the case in Michigan, but the ruling was
appealed when Iowa argued that Michigan did not have jurisdiction. The Iowa court did
not consider the child's best interest, arguing that it was not required under Iowa law. By
the time the court had determined a ruling, Jessica was 2 years old and did not know her
biological parents.
Psychologists argue that nothing is more devastating than losing both parents as a
toddler. Nevertheless, baby Jessica was returned to her biological parents. In August.
1993, the Deboers packed baby Jessica's things and tried to explain to her why she had
to leave. When the van arrived to pick Jessica up, she began crying and screaming and
continued to do so as the van drove away. Follow-up reports indicate baby Jessica, now
named Anna, has adjusted well and is happy; however, there is no way to determine the
long-term effects this court decision may have on her psychological well-being (Cowley,
Springen, Miller, Lewis, & Titunik, 1993; Hansen, 1994b; Ingrasia & Springen, 1993,
1994).