I can put you in touch with them if you like. The Court has frequently emphasized the importance of the family. Advertisements Hi everyone, We are two somethings with an adopted baby looking to move to Northern NJ. Based on the testimony given, the evidence received and my interviews with J, S and C, I conclude that allowing defendant to continue unrestricted visitation would not be in the best interest of the children and that a reasonable limitation will not in any way hinder the continuance and furtherance of the sound parent-child relationships which exist between defendant and J, S and C. NJ 12, posts, read 30, times Reputation: Decided July 26, Gardner replied, "my recommendation would be that there not be any overnight visitation for any of the three children, both weekends and during summers.
The lack of understanding and controversy which surrounds homosexuality, together with the immutable effects which are engendered by the parent-child relationship, demands that the court be most hesitant in allowing any unnecessary exposure of a child to an environment which may be deleterious.
In Re Js & C.
The parental rights of a homosexual, like those of a heterosexual, are constitutionally protected. We know the "default" answer as far as towns to move to seems to be Maplewood or South Orange. A second and more difficult problem concerns the court. As recently as Decemberwhen the Board of Trustees of the American Psychiatric Association reclassified homosexuality from a mental disorder to a sexual disorientation, they were met with strong opposition from among the members. The father contends the Constitution prohibits restriction of parental rights on the basis of homosexuality.
I agree that the same standards should be applied to defendant in determining the extent of visitation but the factors which enter into consideration must be more inclusive than the threat of mere physical harm. Detailed information about all U. The basis for her request is the belief that the homosexual environment to which the father exposes the children is deleterious and not in their best interest. Originally Posted by HalfFull. My interview with S, an year-old girl, and C, an 8-year-old boy, elicited no aversion on their part to visiting with defendant. View detailed profile Advanced or search site with. It may be "up and coming" but it has a long way to go!