Tips on Dealing with “Guardian Ad Litems”

From “Stop Judicial Child Abuse” and Dr. David Vandenberg, a list of suggestions on how to handle a Guardian ad Litem:

The N.H. Family Court is causing children to be abused and neglected all across the state by its unlawful conduct, and in part, has used the N.H. Guardian ad Litem “program” to effectuate these child-abusive ends.

It is no surprise that the Guardian ad Litem (“GAL”) system in New Hampshire is severely broken and has destroyed thousands of families and relationships between children and fit parents. So broken is the system that, in fact, that the state cut off all funding for “public pay” or “indigent” flagged cases, thereby collapsing the involvement of the vast majority of GAL’s in New Hampshire as of June 1, 2011 (See Admin order 2011-03)

The underlying problem with the GAL system is that it is overly broad and not narrowly tailored to the “best interests of the child” and actually, it fundamentally competes with the liberty interests of fit parents who are presumed to act in the best interests of their children – this principle being well-settled by both the U.S. and N.H. Supreme Courts.

The following is an excerpt of a memorandum compiled by STOP! Judicial Child Abuse Contributor, Dr. David D. Vandenberg. This memo is not in any way legal advice and is provided for informational and educational purposes only, and is not necessarily exhaustive, but should shed some informative light on some techniques that may be effective in dealing with your GAL.

† † †

Firstly, never sign GAL stipulations. You can’t be forced to, even if the judge and everyone else says you have to. It’s a contract and you can’t be coerced into agreement. So, don’t agree, then the GAL will have to go away, because she won’t be paid.

Secondly, GALs are often improperly appointed. Superior Court Administrative Order 17 and Family Court Administrative Order 2005-01 describe proper appointment methods. These must be complied with.

Thirdly, the work of GALs is controlled by Ross v Gadwah, 131 NH 391, 554 A.2d 1284 (1988). GALs are parties to a matter, but not attorneys. They are also expert witnesses. Very important. Because GALs are parties to a matter, they are subject to discovery. Get her case file, billing, all of it. That will show misconduct better than anything else. Remember judges LOVE GALs. So, you can’t go after what they say, you have to show bias–billing–and fraud–case file.

Fourthly, GALs are expert witnesses, per Ross v Gadwah. There are statutes that govern the conduct and admission of testimony into court proceedings. The importance of statutes is that judges must comply with statutes. Rules are disposable, as we all know. Statutes must be complied with.

Fifthly, RSA 516:29(A & B) govern the introduction of expert witness testimony. There must be a report, and the report must be delivered 90 days before any hearing. So, remember when the GAL appeared at your hearing with a report in her hand and said she spoke with your kid the day before? Illegal. Totally, according to RSA 516:19. Also, if certain elements are not in the report, the report cannot be entered into evidence. No report, no testimony allowed. In the report, the GAL MUST, MUST provide her reliable principles and methods used to reach conclusions, the sufficient facts and data, and the proof that the principles and methods were reliably applied to the facts of the case. The GAL must also show that her theories and techniques have been or can be tested, have been subjected to peer review and publication, have a known or potential rate of error, and are generally accepted in the appropriate scientific literature.

Does that sound like any GAL report you ever looked at? Didn’t think so. This rubbish that passes as GAL reports is nothing close to what the law demands. Without these elements in the report, the report may not be accepted, and without a report no testimony provided as an expert witness. So, all that work, sitting and watching Oprah and talking with mom on the phone? Does not pass muster. Testimony and reports should properly be excluded.

Read more at Free Keene