The Roaring Fork Valley is not unlike most other
places in the U.S. when it comes to inter-generational relationships; namely,
the occurrence of grandparents and great-grandparents having a substantial role
in their grandchildren’s upbringing. As of 2009, 7.8 million children, nationwide, lived with
at least one grandparent.[1] What is more, the average life expectancy of
Americans is 78.7 years of age, and the mean age of mothers birthing their
first child is 25.1 years of age.[2] Thus, there is a good chance that children
born today will have a significant relationship their grandparents and great-grandparents.
Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.) §19-1-117
outlines the provisions where grandparents can seek a court order granting them
visitation of their grandchildren.
Specifically, there needs to be an action in place for Allocation of
Parental Responsibilities (formerly child custody); whether it is dissolution
of marriage/“custody dispute,” non-parent disputes over children, or
guardianship proceedings. Grandparents
may also have the ability to seek parental responsibilities under C.R.S. §14-10-123
in certain limited situations; for example, when a grandparent has the child
under his or her care.
In recent history, the world of grandparent
visitation has been a hot-bed of legal activity in the family law arena. In the year 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court
found a Washington State grandparent visitation rights statute to be
unconstitutional in Troxel v.
Granville. Since that time, Colorado
appellate courts have ruled on multiple grandparent visitation cases, clarifying
the laws of visitation and custody.
However, it wasn’t until January 2013, that the Colorado Court of
Appeals heard In re the Parental
Responsibilities of M.D.E., --- P.3d ----, 2013 COA 13 (2013),
which defined a great-grandparent’s lack of rights under C.R.S. §19-1-117.
The facts of M.D.E.
are not uncommon in today’s world. The
mother and father of M.D.E. were divorced; and, the visitation order, with
regard to M.D.E., did not mention any visitation for the great-grandmother. The great-grandmother filed a motion, under C.R.S.
§19-1-117, for visitation. The great-grandmother’s
rationale was that she had rights (also known as standing) under C.R.S. §19-1-117
because she was a grandparent. However,
the Court of Appeals did not see it that way.
The Court decided that the definition of “Grandparent” is “a person who
is the parent of a child’s mother or father.” In re M.D.E at ¶11. Thus, as
it stands today, great-grandparents do not have standing to intervene for
visitation under C.R.S. §19-1-117.
If you find yourself in a situation like this, it
may be helpful to consult with an attorney to determine if your role as
caretaker falls within the provisions of C.R.S. §§14-10-123 or 19-1-117.
The Law Office of Angela Roff, PC, is available to
consult or assist you with your questions surrounding this or other family law
topics. Visit us in person at 817
Colorado Ave, Suite 202, Glenwood Springs, CO or at our website at
www.roff-law-office.com
[1] Kreider, Rose M. and Renee Ellis,
“Living Arrangements of Children: 2009,” Current Population Reports, P70-126,
U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, 2011.
[2] Donna L. Hoyert, Ph.D., and Jiaquan Xu, M.D., “Deaths: Preliminary Data for
2011,” National Vital Statistics Reports,
Vol. 61, No. 6, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, D.C.
October 10, 2012. See also, Joyce A. Martin, M.P.H.; etal, “Births: Final Data for 2009” ,” National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol.
60, No. 1, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, D.C.
November 3, 2011.
No comments:
Post a Comment