SJC Gives Grandparents Legal Tie to Unrelated Parents
By Kathleen Burge, Globe Correspondent
Originally published in The Boston Globe, June 16, 2001
Once again paying homage to evolving notions of family, the state's highest court has ruled that a child born out of wedlock can legally bind together two unrelated women: the paternal grandmother who is raising the child and the child's biological mother.
The Supreme Judicial Court yesterday overturned a lower court decision that had denied Orrina Turner, the grandmother, the right to request a restraining order against the child's mother, who attacked Turner. Civil restraining orders are designed to protect victims of abuse in families and households. Since Turner's son never married his child's mother, the probate and family court judge ruled, Turner didn't qualify.
But in a 4-2 decision, the SJC justices concluded that Turner, of Mattapan, and her granddaughter's mother, Denise Lewis of Dorchester, are related by blood—the blood of the 10-year-old girl who connects them.
"We take judicial notice of the social reality that the concept of 'family' is varied and evolving and that, as a result, different types of 'family' members will be forced into potentially unwanted contact with one another," Justice Roderick Ireland wrote. "The recent increases in both single parent and grandparent-headed households are two examples of this trend."
The SJC decision is apparently the first of its kind in the country, according to Rochelle Bobroff, a staff attorney at the American Association of Retired Persons who submitted a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of Turner.
But the two dissenting justices, Judith Cowin and Martha Sosman, argued that their colleagues on the SJC expanded the definition of the law, a change they say only the Legislature should make.
"I do not believe that it is the court's function to interpret a statute in accordance with the most recent 'trend' or judicial perception of what 'is best' as a matter of social policy," Cowin wrote.
Turner charged that Lewis entered her house unannounced and "obviously high" on Sept. 2, 1999. Lewis called out for her daughter, and demanded that the girl come downstairs, Turner said.
When Turner told Lewis the child wasn't home, the grandmother said, Lewis punched and pushed her, saying, "You know what I want to do to you, don't you?" Lewis punched Turner again, and pushed her head into a windowsill, Turner said.
Turner went to court and got a 10-day restraining order against Lewis. But when she tried to get the order extended, Judge Elaine Moriarty denied Turner's request, ruling that she and Lewis are not related by blood, marriage, or household membership.
Turner then sought protection from Lewis in criminal court, and Lewis was found guilty, placed on probation, and ordered to stay away from Turner, said her lawyer, Pauline Quirion of Greater Boston Legal Services. But the process of filing criminal charges is longer and more cumbersome than obtaining a restraining order, Quirion said.
"Oftentimes, people prefer a civil remedy," she said. "They don't necessarily want people to go to jail. They just want to be left alone."
In the majority decision, Ireland wrote that the parents of children who live with grandparents are often resentful or jealous, making it especially important to offer grandparents the legal protection of restraining orders.
"The relationship here meets the definition of 'family,' carrying with it all the risks and problems inherent in domestic violence," he wrote.
The decision quoted statistics from a US Census report that showed the number of children living in households headed by grandparents rose 75 percent between 1970 and 1997.
Statistically, African-American and Hispanic grandparents are more likely to raise their grandchildren than white grandparents, Quirion said. "If you took a narrow view of this, it would basically have a racially discriminatory effect, which of course the Legislature didn't intend," she said.
The state's restraining order law was passed in 1978 to protect victims of "family or household abuse." The definition of who is covered has gradually expanded, and now also includes roommates and gay and lesbian partners.
