Jump to content

Judge Who Ordered Foster Child Removed From Lesbian Couple Withdraws From Case


sjdawg

Recommended Posts

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865641636/Alliance-for-a-Better-Utah-calls-for-impeachment-of-judge-in-lesbian-foster-case-controversy.html

 

The judge who initially ordered a foster child removed from a lesbian couple (and then reversed his decision) has withdrawn from the case.   A group called Alliance for a Better Utah is calling for his impeachment.    Is it fair to impeach the judge based on this one ruling?

 

 I'm not convinced he should be impeached based on this one decision (which he then changed).   I personally think it is obvious that he made a mistake but that mistake now appears to be corrected.  As long has the judge is willing/able to apply the law fairly in future cases I don't think impeachment is necessary.  Any thoughts?

Link to comment

He might be more careful in the future than a judge who has made borderline cases but not any bad enough to catch attention.

Makes more sense to me to keep an eye on him if he doesn't have a significant history.

OTOH, I can see why some want him out because of his stated belief that a mother and father are better. Has he disavowed this belief? A judge should be able to put personal beliefs aside for the law, but in rulings that are based on choosing which is better for a child and not a law issue which can be pretty subjective, of course you want a judge who feels the same way you do.

Link to comment

OTOH, I can see why some want him out because of his stated belief that a mother and father are better. Has he disavowed this belief? A judge should be able to put personal beliefs aside for the law, but in rulings that are based on choosing which is better for a child and not a law issue which can be pretty subjective, of course you want a judge who feels the same way you do.

You are correct.  This would be the ongoing concern however the justice system does have an appeals process if the law is not applied fairly.   I would hope this experience has demonstrated to the judge that his role is to implement the law and not impose his own belief system.   I'd be happy to let him continue on and monitor any rulings related to SS couples.   I don't want anyone to lose their job unnecessarily.

Link to comment

Looks to me like Judge Johansen has made other questionable calls/rulings in the past.

 


This is not the first time Johansen has been in the news for making controversial rulings.

In 1997, he was reprimanded by the Utah Judicial Conduct Commission for "demeaning the judicial office" after slapping a 16-year-old boy who became belligerent during a 1995 meeting at the Price courthouse. 

Johansen was also criticized in 2012 for ordering a woman to lop off her 13-year-old daughter's ponytail as punishment for the teen cutting the hair off a 3-year-old girl at a restaurant. The judge offered to shave off 150 hours of community service from the sentence if she cut her daughter's hair in court.

http://www.sltrib.com/home/3165669-155/carbon-county-judge-orders-same-sex-couple

 

In 1987 my wife and I divorced. Our children included an 11 year old daughter and a 6 year old son. The courts presumed that the children would be better off with their mother (cultural prejudice), and she was consequently allowed to move them out of state — despite what might be best for them. Nonsense. Since we all "know" that children best thrive within a marriage between a man and a woman, and since my children were now left with their mother alone ... why not just take the two of them from now divorced father and [single] mother and place them with some heterosexual married couple? Gee, wouldn't they be "better off"?

 

Consider the loving couple who gives life to three beautiful children. The husband (or wife) has been militarily assigned to Iraq or Afghanistan. When that military employed partner is killed in battle, should it reasonably be considered that the children should be removed from the household and awarded to some heterosexual married couple because it is in "the best interests of the children"? Nonsense.

 

Consider the heterosexual married couple who can't seem to get along. BECAUSE they are heterosexual must mean that they are better candidates for raising children (through natural childbirth, or through adoption) than a single caring parent, or a married gay couple. Nonsense.

 

I pretty much lost constructive influence on (not over) my children for nearly a decade because of legal (judged-ordered) crap. Fortunately we have a positive connection now (my daughter 40, and my son 35). But how much improved might their lives be (and mine), if judicial decisions were more 1) in line with the law, and 2) were without cultural prejudice. 

 

We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment

You are correct. This would be the ongoing concern however the justice system does have an appeals process if the law is not applied fairly. I would hope this experience has demonstrated to the judge that his role is to implement the law and not impose his own belief system. I'd be happy to let him continue on and monitor any rulings related to SS couples. I don't want anyone to lose their job unnecessarily.

I can see how the policy will forever, unless reversed, paint the gay as the unfit parent if the judge is a member. They will favor the heterosexual over the gay say in a custody case issue, since the gay is unable to be a member nor their children possibly, depending on the FP. So the policy has or will create some serious outcomes of prejudice. To the point it might effect the heterosexual parent as well, depending on the judge. Not even close to what the policy will do to families, and how it pits them against one another. The devout LDS see it as more unacceptable, SSM, as ever before. Family it's about time...geat PR statement, but now feels hollow. Edited by Tacenda
Link to comment

He might be more careful in the future than a judge who has made borderline cases but not any bad enough to catch attention.

Makes more sense to me to keep an eye on him if he doesn't have a significant history.

OTOH, I can see why some want him out because of his stated belief that a mother and father are better. Has he disavowed this belief? A judge should be able to put personal beliefs aside for the law, but in rulings that are based on choosing which is better for a child and not a law issue which can be pretty subjective, of course you want a judge who feels the same way you do.

This judge has a history of questionable rulings.  I believe the Utah legal system would be better off without him.

Link to comment

This is only the review, not the primary research (which costs money): 

http://www.fathermag.com/news/3772-fatherneed.shtml

 

I couldnt find the research I read recently that prompted my response.  It was not research about same gender parents, it was research on the importances of a mom and a dad.  I'll come back here and post it if I run into it again.

Edited by rpn
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...