214 H
may be detrimental to both the child and the parents in cases of spousal abuse,
Judges are not required to take spousal abuse into consideration when determining
the custody of the child. When the laws changed to the Best Interest of the Child
standard, courts were no longer required to assess parental behaviors. As a result, the
courts are less concerned with the parental relationship as long as the relationship
does not appear to have a physical impact on the child. In fact, because statutes do
not require a judge to take parental abuse into account when determining custody
an abuser may be granted custody. Oftentimes, the abuser is the financial supporter
for the family, and the judge may see it in the best interest of the child to be placed
with a parent who can provide for him or her. Kurtz (1997) argues that legislation
"must create a statutory presumption against awarding a spousal abuser custody of
a child. Only then will the best interests of the child truly be met" (p. 2).
Family law has begun to take into consideration children's emotional well-being
and their rights of emotional stability. However, the law has been criticized for not
protecting the emotional interests of children in all situations. From the literature,
it is apparent that the law has progressed further toward protecting children's emo-
tional rights when it comes to custody disputes between biological parents than
it has for custody disputes involving third parties. Possibly, the changes in law for
custody disputes between biological parents is further advanced because such dis-
putes have existed longer and the detrimental effects to children have therefore been
more publicized. Prior to the 1960s adoptions were closed. As a result, no disputes
between biological parents and potentially adoptive parents existed. Now such cases
are more common, and activists have proposed legislation that they believe would
protect the child's emotional interests.
Forensic Psychology and Policy Implications
Activist groups for children's rights have begun to propose amendments which could
potentially help protect children's rights (Wynne, 1997). The National Task Force
for Children's Constitutional Rights began writing an amendment to the United
States Constitution that would grant children rights such as the right to a safe home,
the right to adequate health care, the right to an adequate education, and the right
to the care of a loving family or a substitute that is as close to a loving family as
possible. In addition, the amendment would provide children with the right to an
attorney in an any legal matter affecting their interest (Wynne, 1997). The amend-
ment is clearly a starting point toward protecting children's rights; however, the
wording in the amendment is ambiguous. What one may consider adequate health
care or a loving family may be quite different from another's opinion. Children's
emotional rights cannot be protected unless amendments consider psychological
research that indicates what children need emotionally. Had psychologists' opin-
ions been considered in the Baby Jessica case, it is doubtful that she would have
been taken from the only parents she knew.