In the matter of Harris v. Harris, Del. Supr., No. 390, 2014 (Mar. 4, 2015), the mother of two children sought to appeal the Family Court's decision appointing the children's maternal grandfather and step-grandmother, who had been the children's guardians, as permanent guardians. Specifically, she opposed step-grandmother's appointment. Mother argued that at the time of the filing of the Petition for Permanent Guardianship the statute required petitioners to be a blood relatives or a qualified foster parent, which step grandmother was not. The Delaware Supreme Court noted, however, that before the Family Court resolved the case, the statute was amended to allow a guardian to be appointed as a permanent guardian. Additionally, the Supreme Court stated,
Perhaps most important, the mother does not dispute the well-reasoned and well-supported findings of the Family Court that the mother is not capable of caring for the children adequately and that the grandfather and step-grandfather are well-equipped and well-motivated to be effective and caring guardians. Given the record before it, the Family Court did what was best for the children within the statutory discretion granted to it by the General Assembly in the revised Act. What would have been error would have been for the Family Court to have failed to use the full statutory flexibility it was given to shape a guardianship order consistent with the statute's primary focus—the best interests of the children. Id. at 2 (citations omitted).
The decision may be read in its entirety here.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
