scholarly journals Terminating Parental Rights through a Backdoor in the Virginia Code

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dale Margolin Cecka

This article explores deficits in the statute, in light of constitutional law, other Virginia adoption and termination of parental rights statutes, and other states' codes and jurisprudence. Part II describes the history and practice of the statute. Part III describes the flaws of the statute, including Fourteenth Amendment violations and inherent conflicts of interest. Part IV calls for the revision of section 1202(H) based on recent precedent in which the Supreme Court of Virginia recognized the sanctity of the parent-child relationship and the state's interest in preserving it.

2021 ◽  
pp. 205-238
Author(s):  
Sanford N. Katz

This chapter addresses the establishment of a new parent–child relationship through adoption. It explores the recurring tension between individual autonomy and state regulation in the placement of children for adoption, and how it is reflected in the major developments in adoption in the past half-century. During the twentieth century, adoption was a specialized child welfare service performed by social workers in private and public child welfare agencies. Whether a birth mother relinquished her infant for adoption voluntarily or whether adoption was the final outcome of a child dependency proceeding, the articulated goal, sometimes achieved and sometimes mere rhetoric, was to advance the best interests of the child. These two tracks—voluntary relinquishment and involuntary termination of parental rights—resulting in adoption have given rise to dual systems in the past forty years. Even though the ultimate outcome of adoption for children from either system may be the same in terms of a court establishing the adoptive status, there is a major difference in goals. The goal of the voluntary system may well be to provide a childless couple with an infant so as to continue the adoptive family name. The aim of dependency proceedings resulting in the termination of parental rights is to protect children, and the disposition of adoption is a vehicle for providing a child with a permanent attachment to a family.


Author(s):  
Nancy Woloch

This chapter assesses Muller v. Oregon (1908), its significance, and the law it upheld: Oregon's ten-hour law of 1903. Convicted of violating Oregon's law of 1903 that barred the employment of women in factories and laundries for more than ten hours a day, Curt Muller—the owner of a Portland laundry—challenged the constitutionality of the law, which he claimed violated his right of freedom to contract under the due process of the Fourteenth Amendment. On February 24, 1908, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the Oregon law. This decision marked a momentous triumph for progressive reformers and a turning point in the movement for protective laws. At the same time, by declaring woman “in a class by herself,” the Supreme Court embedded in constitutional law an axiom of female difference. The Muller decision thus pushed public policy forward toward modern labor standards and simultaneously distanced it from sexual equality.


1993 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Fuligni ◽  
Jacquelynne S. Eccles

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document