full report
Scott Sussman
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Wisconsin Supreme Court granted the Center for Family Policy
and Practice (CFFPP) permission to write an amicus curiae brief
in the case of In re the Termination of Parental Rights to Chezron
M. This case involved the termination of the parental rights of
an unwed father. The reason for the termination was that he did
not have contact with his child for a period of six months or more
before his paternity was ever established.
Wisconsin law provides that the state can generally terminate the
parental rights of unwed fathers before their paternity is established
under certain limited circumstances. Through this case the State
of Wisconsin attempted to expand the number of reasons the State
could terminate an unwed father’s parental rights. CFFPP believed
that the State’s interpretation of the statute was contrary
to both our nation’s historical treatment of unwed fathers
and the legislative history of the relevant statute. The Wisconsin
Children’s Code has never been interpreted the way the State
suggests is applicable to this father.
The issue before the Court is when for purposes of the Wisconsin
Children’s Code do unwed fathers become parents. Our nation
has historically distinguished between married and unmarried fathers
in their relationship to their children. Historically this was done
to discriminate against unwed fathers and their children and now
the State attempts to blur this distinction in order to terminate
the father’s rights.
CFFPP wrote this amicus curiae brief as part of its focus on Child
Welfare and Fatherhood policy. CFFPP is increasingly concerned that
social welfare policy is looking for ways to terminate the parental
rights of unwed fathers without affording them their due process
rights. This emphasis is partially the result of the 1997 passage
of the federal Adoption and Safe Families Act of which the goal
is to accelerate the process of adoption of children in the child
welfare system.
|
