USA Today editorial opposing creating enforceable rights of grandparent visitation. A supporter writes a counter-editorial. (Both via Bashman.) We explored the problems Aug. 30, 2004 and Oct. 21, 2002.
Chronicling the high cost of our legal system
Cato Institute
Individual liberty, free markets, and peace: the world's premier libertarian think tank. Publishes Cato at Liberty, where I blog on contemporary policy issues.
Schools for Misrule
Get your copy today! My new book tackles the question of why so many bad ideas come from the law schools. "Cutting-edge commentary, hard-hitting, witty, astute." -- Publisher's Weekly. "Excellent... A fine dissection of these strangely powerful institutions" -- Wall Street Journal.
{ 2 comments }
I tend to agree with the first idea.
I can’t imagine how it is better for the child to legislate over a fit parent’s decision, especially when balanced against some arbitrary, unquantified, benefit that the forced presense of grandparents may provide.
The counter-editorial disturbs me by stating It is naive to assume that parents who are not abusive or neglectful will always make the right decision where their children are concerned.
That is a common-sense position, and generally true, but extremely frightening when used to advocate legislative intrusion.
“It is naive to assume that parents who are not abusive or neglectful will always make the right decision where their children are concerned.”
What makes the author of that comment so sure that Grandparents will make the right descision? The only rights for Grandparents that I am in favor of is that of first refusal of custody in the event the parents become incapacitated or negligent.
Comments on this entry are closed.