If an alienated parent feels that they can't trust the Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) or Court Appointed Counselor who are responsible for determining what is best for their family, they may experience a range of emotions and reactions. Here are a few potential ways an alienated parent might respond in such a situation.
The alienated parent may feel frustrated and angry if they believe that the GAL or counselor is biased, not acting in the best interest of the child, not considering their perspective. They may express their frustration by questioning the credibility of the GAL or counselor and challenging their decisions or recommendations.
Feeling unable to trust the GAL or counselor can lead to doubt and distrust in the entire legal process. The alienated parent may question the fairness and legitimacy of the system, fearing that their concerns and rights are being overlooked or disregarded.
In response to their lack of trust, the alienated parent may seek additional support or advocacy. They may consult with other professionals, such as family, criminal and civil attorneys to gain a better understanding of their legal options and strategies for addressing their concerns.
To counteract their perceived lack of trust in the GAL or counselor, the alienated parent may proactively collect and document evidence to support their claims. This may include gathering documentation, recordings, or witness statements that they believe demonstrate the bias or untrustworthiness of the GAL or counselor.
If the alienated parent strongly believes that the GAL or counselor's actions or decisions are unjust, they may request a review or reconsideration of their case. This could involve asking for a second opinion from another professional or filing a petition to challenge the GAL or counselor's recommendations.
What would a review or a reconsideration of a family law case look like?
A review or reconsideration of a family law case typically involves a reevaluation of the original court decision to determine if there are grounds for a change or modification. The process can vary depending on the jurisdiction, but generally, it involves the following steps:
The first step is to identify the specific grounds for seeking a review or reconsideration. Some common grounds could include newly discovered evidence, errors in the original judgment, or a change in circumstances that warrant a modification.
The party seeking the review or reconsideration must file a motion with the appropriate court. The motion should clearly outline the grounds for the request and provide supporting documentation or evidence.
The party filing the motion will need to present legal arguments that support their case for a review. This may involve citing relevant laws, statutes, or previous court decisions that establish the basis for the requested review.
The opposing party will have an opportunity to respond to the motion, presenting their own arguments against a review or reconsideration. They may dispute the grounds presented or provide counterarguments to maintain the validity of the original judgment.
The court will evaluate the motion, the arguments presented, and any supporting evidence. The judge will consider the legal merits of the request and make a determination on whether a review or reconsideration is warranted.
Depending on the specific jurisdiction and circumstances, a hearing may be scheduled to allow both parties to present their arguments orally. Each side will have an opportunity to present their case and respond to questions from the judge.
After considering all the arguments and evidence, the court will make a decision on whether to grant a review or reconsideration of the case. The court may uphold the original decision, modify it, or order a new hearing to gather additional evidence.
Comments