In a child custody case, a Maryland judge may appoint an attorney to represent the interests of the minor children involved. Such attorneys may serve different roles depending on the situation. For example, a Best Interest Attorney (BIA) is, as the name suggests, a lawyer appointed to advocate for the “best interests” of the child. This does not mean the BIA actually provides legal counsel. Rather, the BIA’s role is to explain the child’s wishes to the court while also offering an independent assessment of what decision would actually serve the child’s best interests.

Court Intervenes to Allow 17-Year-Old to Stay in Boy Scouts Over Mother’s Objection

A BIA may be called upon to help a court resolve a deadlock between parents who cannot agree on how to deal with an important decision affecting a child’s life. Take this recent unreported decision from the Maryland Court of Special Appeals, Wolf v. Wolf. In this course, a BIA was named to help a judge decide whether or not a child should be allowed to continue their participation in the Boy Scouts of America.

The parents in this case have five children altogether. The couple separated two years earlier. The child involved in this dispute is 17 and lives with the father. She joined the Boy Scouts in 2019.

The daughter wanted to continue in the Scouts and work towards the rank of Eagle Scout. The mother, however, objected to the daughter’s participation in the Scouts. Consequently, the Boy Scouts said that neither the daughter or any of the other children could stay in the organization “until both parents agreed on their participation.”

The court appointed a BIA, who attempted to negotiate a resolution to the impasse without success. Time was of the essence, as the daughter had to complete her work towards the Eagle Scout rank before her 18th birthday. The BIA therefore asked the court to hold an emergency hearing. The BIA believed that the daughter’s best interests would be served by letting her remain a Boy Scout. He therefore asked the judge to grant father “temporary legal custody” or tie-breaking authority on this specific issue, effectively allowing him to overrule the mother’s objection.

The judge ultimately sided with the BIA and issued an order stating the daughter only required the father’s consent to continue with her Scouting career. The mother appealed that decision. But the Court of Special Appeals saw no legal error in the trial court’s handling of the situation and affirmed the order. The Court specifically noted that the BIA fulfilled their role in “[p]etitioning the circuit court to intervene on an emergency basis to resolve an impasse between parents involving a matter concerning the best interest of a child.”

Contact Waldorf, Maryland, Family Law Attorney Robert Castro Today

This article has been provided by the Law Office of Robert Castro. For more information or questions contact our office to speak to an experienced lawyer at (301) 870-1200.

Source:

https://www.courts.state.md.us/sites/default/files/unreported-opinions/0097s21.pdf