According to the Associated Press, Jolie’s lawyers alleged in the filing that “Judge Ouderkirk denied Ms. Jolie a fair trial, improperly excluding her evidence relevant to the children’s health, safety, and welfare, evidence critical to making her case.” They also claimed that the judge “refused to hear the minor teenagers’ input as to their experiences, needs, or wishes as to their custody fate.”
Family law attorneys will be the first to tell you that Massachusetts custody laws differ from California.
Family law attorneys will also advise you that it is a bad idea to allow children, of any age, to testify at a trial for which parent will have custody over them. Courts in Massachusetts rarely, if ever, allow this to occur. The overriding standard probate and family courts uphold in custody issues is the “best interests of the child” standard. Regarding a child’s direct participation in litigation, it is simply against the best interests of any child to be placed into that untenable and awkward position.
In Massachusetts, children, but especially teenagers, can have a say and make their voices heard to the court, but not directly. Third party professionals- like guardian ad litems (GALs) and Attorneys Representing Children (ARCs)- must be first appointed by the court. Although they have different jobs, once appointed, they can interview and learn the facts and positions of the children. The difference between them, however, is that an ARC will advocate for their position and a GAL will investigate and report on the overall situation taking into account their feelings.
