The record of the federally-funded Legal Services Corporation and its grantees on pro-family issues within the past year continues to show a marked disregard for traditional values and common sense. One of the latest outrages is a Florida court case in which legal services advocated adoption rights for homosexuals.
Legal Services Champions Right of Homosexuals to Adopt Children
Legal Services of Greater Miami, an LSC grantee, fought for the
right of a homosexual couple to adopt a child. While applying for
parenting classes, James Cox and his partner informed the Florida Department
of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) that they were gay. Because
Florida law prohibits homosexuals from adopting children, HRS immediately
denied their application. Legal Services of Greater Miami, the American
Civil Liberties Union and homosexual activists filed a lawsuit claiming
that the state’s homosexual exclusion law was unconstitutional. Legal services
sought declaratory and injunctive relief for their clients, citing violation
of their rights to equal protection, due process and privacy. Initially,
a trial court struck down the law and enjoined HRS from enforcing the statute.
However, the state Supreme Court partially upheld the exclusionary law
but required that it be modified to better justify the prohibition on homosexual
adoptions.
For more information, see Cox v. Florida , No. 82,967. April
27, 1995
LSC Grantee Supports Unfit Parent’s Custody Claim
Legal services wants to take two young Chicago children from the
only home they’ve ever known and send them to live on a distant Indian
reservation. Acting on behalf of their Indian mother, Betty Jo Ironbear,
Prairie State Legal Services argues that the tribe has the sole right to
determine where the children should live. However, the half-Indian children
have never lived on the reservation and want to stay with their aunt who
got legal custody after the father’s death. In addition, Ironbear has been
separated from the children for years and even had her visitation rights
canceled for failing to take care of them during a visit. Besides being
a possible alcoholic, she is HIV positive. The children’s attorney accuses
Ironbear of being an unfit mother. However, legal services says her fitness
as a parent is irrelevant; all that matters is that the tribe wants her.
See Chicago Tribune, May 27, 1994
Couple Distraught Over Possible Loss of Adopted Son
In yet another adoption outrage, legal services lawyers are trying
to take a one-year old boy away from his adoptive parents because his natural
father wants him back. The problem is that, in addition to having a criminal
record, the father is unemployed, unmarried and unable to support several
children he already has. Despite his dubious character, Somerset-Sussex
Legal Services is prepared to take the case to court. The Reverend Paul
Rack and his wife are “shocked and devastated.” Outraged friends and relatives
of the couple are soliciting donations to defray legal costs.
See The Record, June 4, 1995
Legal Services Defends Negligent Parent
In Nebraska, Legal Services, Inc. tried to reduce the child support
owed by a woman to the state for taking care of her six children. The Department
of Social Services (DSS) took custody of the children after discovering
that she frequently left them alone in a “filthy and unsafe” residence.
Since she was perfectly capable of working full-time, the state ordered
her to pay $144 a month in child support. This amount was based on her
working full-time at minimum wage. Legal Services tried to reduce the child
support arguing that she didn’t have enough to live on. However, a state
Court of Appeals rejected this argument noting that not only did she not
work full-time, she also lived in free public housing and received food
stamps.
See Tamika S. v. Debra S., No. A-94-634 (Nebraska App.) April
4, 1995
Spousal Harassment
Last year, Legal Services of Iowa tried to overturn a court ruling
that found a man guilty of threatening his ex-wife. Soon after their divorce,
Beatrice Knight filed a petition against Roger Knight alleging several
incidents of physical intimidation and verbal abuse. A trial court ruled
that Knight was guilty of the incidents listed on the petition. However,
legal services challenged the decision on appeal. They argued Knight’s
right to due process was violated because the court based its decision
in part on an incident related in court -- but not listed on the original
petition. The incident in question, in which Roger almost caused
Beatrice to wreck her car, was not even disputed by him in testimony. The
state Supreme Court rejected the appeal
See Knight v. Knight, No. 357/93-1809, (IA Supreme Ct.) December
21, 1994