• Home
  • News
  • Mom Fights Judge’s Order Preventing Partner From Staying the Night

Family Law

Mom Fights Judge’s Order Preventing Partner From Staying the Night

Posted Dec 24, 2008 6:58 AM CST
By Molly McDonough

A lesbian mother of two is asking a Tennessee appellate court to remove a "paramour" clause in her child custody agreement that prevents her longtime partner from staying the night.

A state court judge ordered that Angel Chandler's partner of nine years not be allowed to spend the night, effectively forcing the couple to live separately, the Jackson Sun reports.

The May 15 order bars Chandler's partner from staying the night on days Chandler's children are with her.

The paper reports that the judge issued the order even though a court-ordered psychological evaluation of all the parties noted the partner was a positive influence on the children. The American Civil Liberties Union is representing Chandler in the case.

"By all accounts, this family was succeeding, having gotten through a divorce and introduced a new parent into the home," Christine Sun, the Southeast regional senior staff attorney with the ACLU's Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Project, said in a release about the appeal. "But nine years on, a judge has done his best to destroy all that by imposing this impossible restriction. We are hopeful that the appeals court will recognize that it is unfair to tear this family apart."

The Sun notes that the Chandler and her partner, who now reside in North Carolina, live in a duplex to accommodate the order. But they are losing rental income because of the forced separation.

Comments

1.

B. McLeod
Dec 24, 2008 10:13 AM CST

From the headline, I thought this would be about one of those roving, Big Law partners.  But now I see it was about a “partner” in the domestic sense.  Apparently, Tennessee has a rule that a custodial parent may not have a “paramour” (irrespective of sexual preference) stay the night while the children are present.  So, the plaintiff and her paramour reside in opposite halves of a duplex at night, even though they now reside in a different state (because Tennessee has continuing jurisdiction on the custody issues, and presumably sends agents into North Carolina at night to check for compliance).  But hey, this is making work for lawyers, and after all, what could be more important than that?

Flag this comment

2.

Juan R. Pollo
Dec 24, 2008 10:45 AM CST

Fantastic! I’m waiting for the precedent to sue to remove the clause on my mortgage that says I have to pay the money back.

Flag this comment

3.

Adam Selene
Dec 24, 2008 1:51 PM CST

As a divorce and family mediator, this would be an issue that could be resolved by a post-judgment stipulation on consent, but since this looks a lot like a fact pattern for a test case and the ACLU is apparently involved, I am suspicious. 

Key question, who initiated the Tennessee Petition and who is the respondent?

Adam

Flag this comment

4.

Bill Dugan
Dec 24, 2008 2:08 PM CST

Comment removed by moderator.

Flag this comment

5.

Allen Sheketovits
Dec 30, 2008 8:07 AM CST

This seems to be a questionable ruling.  How many lesbians have to be considered here?  The best interests of the child must be considered, but this is best considered in light of the family; irregular as it is.  What is the alternative?  For the woman to send her lesbian girlfriend away to a local motel, in Tennessee as a condition of visiting her own children?  This is not safe, and this does not make sense, if the other lesbian does not maintain her own residence.  Depending on the number of days of visitation, perhaps the judge should allow the first lesbian to stay with her children at the publis shelter.  This is not a good solution, either.

Flag this comment

Add a Comment

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.

Commenting has expired on this post.