Connecticut Connecticuts visitation statute applies to all interested third parties, not just grandparents. Under this statute, grandparents can ask the Superior Court to grant them visitation. Like the original Washington statute, Connecticuts statute requires the court to make its decision based on the childs best interests, giving consideration to the childs wishes if he or she is old enough and capable of forming an intelligent opinion (CGS § 46b-59). Rather than declaring the statute unconstitutional in light of Troxel, the Connecticut Supreme Court applied a “judicial gloss” to the statute by imposing additional requirements. In Roth v. Roth, 259 Conn. 202 (2002), the court noted that implicit in the statute is a rebuttable presumption that visitation that is opposed by a fit parent is not in a childs best interest. The court established the following requirements for the court to have jurisdiction over a petition: 1. it must contain specific, good faith allegations that the petitioner has a relationship with the child that is similar in nature to a parent-child relationship and 2. it must also contain specific, good faith allegations that denial of the visitation will cause real and significant harm to the child, which requires more than a determination that visitation would be in the childs best interest. Next, once these requirements are met, the petitioner must prove the allegations by clear and convincing evidence. The Court found that these requirements “serve as the constitutionally mandated safeguards against unwarranted intrusions into a parents authority.”
Posted on: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 18:31:30 +0000