ELIZABETH BARTHOLET
The complex family
T he US Supreme Court handed
down a decision this week that
shows the court's members
struggling admirablyto do jus-
tice to the issues involved in deciding on
the constitutionality of a state statute
that allowed grandparentsand others to
petition forchildvisitation rights and au-
thorized courts to grant such rights
based solely on the "bestinterest of the
child" standard.
The court's decision in Troxel v.
Granville sets a standard that protects
parents against undue intervention in
theirfamilies while stillgiving appropri-
ate scope for states to protect children .
The multiplicity of opinions reflects
the complexity of the issues presented
by the non-nuclear modern family, in
which grandparents, step parents, un-
married same-sex partners, foster par-
ents, and adoptive parents are often vy-
ing for the parenting role once thought
of as belonging exclusively to biological
parents.
The courtruledtheWashington stat-
ute at issue unconstitutional as applied,
calling it "breathtakingly broad" and
noting that it gave state courts the pow-
er to force visitation rights upon fullyfit
parents without any deference to par-
ents' views as to whether visitation
would serve their children's best inter-
est.The court gaveappropriate recogni-
tion to the costs ofhaving courts assert
jurisdiction overfamily decision-making
even in thename ofanidea asworthy as
that of promoting children's best inter-
ests . States have in the past used the
vaguebest interest standard to interfere
withparenting seen as unorthodox-tak-
ing children away, for example, simply
because a parent was involved in an in-
terracial or a same-sex relationship .
The court's constitutional standard
means that state intervention must be
basedonsomethingmorethan disagree-
ment with the parent's lifestyle. Some
states are contemplatinglegislation that
would give biological parents enforce-
able visitation rights in their children's
new adoptive families so long as ajudge
finds such visitation con-
sistent with the child