The Grand Rapids Press shows the difference between counties in how the law is applied. Doug Guthrie writes (excerpt):
New rules from Michigan’s Supreme Court requiring attorneys to visit with juveniles they represent in adoption and child protective cases are being accepted as already-routine practice in Kent County.
But some lawyers practicing in Detroit-area juvenile courts are angry and have threatened to refuse appointments as lawyer-guardians ad litem.
The different reactions, according to local lawyers, state officials and the chief judge of Kent County’s Family Court, show the stark difference between priorities on the needs of juveniles in West Michigan and those in the southeastern part of the state.
***
The American Bar Association recommends no lawyer’s guardian ad litem caseload should exceed 40 cases.
Debra Gutierrez-McGuire, special assistant on foster-care issues to state Supreme Court Chief Justice Maura Corrigan, said, “Two hundred cases per year for some attorneys is pretty average here. Some could handle 300 to 350.” Gutierrez-McGuire said it was not unusual for her to carry 375 cases while working at Wayne County Legal Aid. She said the office’s 19 lawyers handled 25 percent of the state’s entire caseload.
“The practices may vary from county to county, but the bottom line is meeting the needs of children and guaranteeing they have a voice in court,” Gutierrez-McGuire said.
Nanaruth Carpenter, chief judge of Kent County’s Family Court, said she feels fortunate that kind of caseload never has existed here. She vowed it never will.
“I have felt consistently that our county commissioners are supportive of providing for children in the system,” Carpenter said. “When I talk about services we have available in this county, people are amazed and jealous and comment they wish they could provide for children and families as we do.”
The rules, which went into effect Jan. 1, require attorneys who represent children to submit an affidavit swearing they visited their clients before each hearing. Lawyers also would be required to meet with their clients at least every three months. They also will be discouraged from substituting for one another without becoming familiar with the case.
Family court judges and referees now will ask the lawyers whether those visits took place with a goal of shortening delays in cases of children under family court jurisdiction. The courts also are ordered to give child welfare cases the highest possible priority.
Lawyer David Murkowski said Kent County’s lawyers are accustomed to providing that information without being asked. Carpenter said in her 13 years on Kent County’s bench, she has had to warn a lawyer to visit a child client only “once in a blue moon.”