 |
 |
| Janet Miller-Jenkins (left) and her former partner, Lisa
Miller-Jenkins, dissolved
their civil union in Vermont. Their custody battle over daughter Isabella may
be the first time Virginia’s new anti-gay law that bans private contracts
between same-sex partners is tested. (Photo courtesy of Janet Miller-Jenkins)
|
|
|
| |  |
|  |
|
|
| |  |
HOME > NEWS > LOCAL
By: ADRIAN BRUNE
COMMENTS
The story rings familiar with couples in the throes of the family court system:
Two people fall in love, get married and have a child together, only to separate
years later with a judge left to decide the child’s custodial future.
But the account of Janet Miller-Jenkins and her former partner, Lisa Miller-Jenkins,
has a contemporary — and unforeseen — legal twist, brought about
by the national controversy over same-sex marriage.
In 2000, the Northern Virginia natives exchanged vows in a Vermont civil union,
gave birth and moved to the progressive New England state for its greater range
of gay legal protections.
Four years later, the Miller-Jenkins family is entangled in a bitter custody
battle over Isabella, their 2-year-old daughter, in a case that could test
the feasibility of interstate marriage laws, and particularly Virginia’s
newly enacted — and extremely stringent — civil union ban.
On Aug. 24, Frederick County Court Judge John Prosser will decide whether
a Virginia court has jurisdiction to grant full custody of Isabella to Lisa,
her biological mother who has moved back to Virginia, over a Vermont decree
granting co-parental status and visitation rights to Janet.
Lawyers on both sides said that while the Vermont court will most likely retain
its authority, Virginia could enforce its civil union ban, the Marriage Affirmation
Act, which does not permit recognition of civil unions and nullifies other
legal agreements that mirror marriage.
Last week, Prosser delayed the decision on jurisdiction and ordered both sides
to file further arguments.
Janet Miller-Jenkins’ attorney, Joseph R. Price, submitted a motion
invoking Virginia’s Uniform Child Custody Enforcement & Jurisdiction
Act, which prohibits Virginia from interfering with any custody proceeding
taking place in another state. Price, who has a long history of gay rights
advocacy, saidh he believed Prosser would rule in his client’s favor.
“We are asking that this case be dismissed and the original custody
order upheld. The law is crystal clear on this matter: Virginia courts have
no authority to issue a custody order when another state court has already
done so,” Price said.
“Virginia doesn’t want parents who get a custody order they don’t
like in one state to run here, live for six months and try to get another custody
order. The state would become the Las Vegas of gay custody battles.”
Price also asked the court to disregard a petition Lisa Miller-Jenkins filed
on July 1 — the day the Marriage Affirmation Act took effect — requesting
sole custody of Isabella and claiming that “no rights arising or claiming
to arise out of the civil union can be recognized or have any force” in
Virginia.
Phil Griffin, Lisa’s attorney, told the Associated Press that since
Virginia doesn’t recognize Vermont civil unions under its new law, the
Vermont court order granting Janet’s visitation rights is invalid.
“We’re cautiously optimistic,” Griffin said. “We believe
jurisdiction is in Virginia because the child was born here and her mother
lives here. … The court has to declare [Lisa] the mom.”
Lisa has refused all comment through her lawyers.
But the real test, Janet’s attorneys say, will come after a judge in
a Vermont family court decides on whether to grant Janet’s petition there
for full custody of Isabella.
Her right to custody hinges on that Vermont decree, not on her civil union,
since the U.S. Constitution’s “full faith and credit” requirement
is much stronger for court decrees than for marriages, according to John Harrison,
law professor at the University of Virginia.
“Most states operate under the standard principle that a marriage deemed
valid in its original jurisdiction is valid everywhere. But an exception arises
if a strong public policy to the contrary exists in the jurisdiction being
asked to recognize the marriage, and therefore the parental rights,” Harrison
said.
“The Virginia statute appears to make it the strong public policy of
Virginia not to recognize same-sex civil unions from other states. Under standard
conflict of laws principles, Virginia can do that.”
A Virginia court is more likely to feel bound by the Parental Kidnapping Prevention
Act, which legislators designed to keep a non-custodial parent from taking
children to another state and obtaining a more favorable custody decree, Harrison
said.
“That’s not inconsistent with the Virginia statute about same-sex
unions, because custody decrees are distinct from marriage and recognizing
one doesn’t mean recognizing the other,” she said.
While she realizes the significance of her case, Janet Miller-Jenkins, 39,
said she never wanted to become a legal crusader. When she and ...
|