ILNews

‘Marijuana legal elsewhere’ claim no help in parental termination appeal

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Termination of parental rights was properly granted for a molesting father in federal prison and a drug-using mother who failed to comply with court-ordered services after striking a child.

The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the Wabash Circuit Court ruling in In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: S.L. & D.L. (Minor Children) and K.M., (Mother) & D.L.,(Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services, 85A02-1304-JT-308.

Judge Nancy Vaidik wrote that the trial court’s findings of fact were sufficient and warranted termination of parental rights. Federal authorities didn’t allow father to participate in the termination hearings, but he was represented by counsel and received transcripts of two of three hearings. The panel rejected arguments that his due process rights were violated, noting this was only raised on appeal.

Mother had tested positive for marijuana, methamphetamine and synthetic drugs, according to the record, and indicated uncertainty about severing ties with father despite her belief that he posed a molestation threat to their children. She also argued that she eventually had clean drug screens, which the court noted was after she was behind bars.

The court also noted mother argued “her marijuana use is ‘not a sufficient reason’ for terminating her parental rights. … She claims that ‘there are many people in the United States that agree with her about marijuana’ and cites the legalization of recreational marijuana use in other states as support for her claim.

“Assuming for the sake of argument that this is true, Mother fails to acknowledge that recreational marijuana use is not legal in Indiana and, more importantly, that one of the prerequisites for reunification with her children was that she not use marijuana. Nonetheless, Mother used marijuana frequently during the termination proceedings,” Vaidik wrote in affirming the trial court.  



 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • I forgot to mention
    The last 3 Presidents of the US all smoked marijuana. No one has ever died from smoking marijuana. Almost every day medical studies are being reported showing amazing benefits to consuming marijuana. Drinking alcohol and smoking tobacco are far more dangerous to your health.
  • Note on marijuana
    George Washington grew it for 20 years on his farm and in his diary which you can view on line speculated about the medical benefits of smoking marijuana. Thomas Jefferson grew it and smoked it. Betsy Ross' flag, the sails of Columbus' 3 ships, and the early drafts of the Constitution of the US and Declaration of Independence were all made from hemp.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT
    Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
    1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

    2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

    3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

    4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

    5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

    ADVERTISEMENT