“Where does a child stand when things break?!”

What is the definition of paramount?

Let’s start there.

Let’s start at the root.

Let’s strip it down to what the language breathes.

Paramount: more important than anything else; supreme.

As a single mother from Wyoming who has tried to advocate for, and with my son, in a system that has successfully ignored him most of his adolescence, the sheer unfeeling for requests for help is demoralizing to the freedoms of women and children nationwide. After a tumultuous marriage that ended in me quietly serving paperwork to my ex-husband it has been one battle after another with the legal system.

I can honestly say, I am not angry, or even put out by my previous counterpart. He is not heavily involved in advocating for our son, or even himself. He has a team of sideline legal advisors and the legal system of Wyoming actively advocating for him. Need I mention, he is no longer a resident of this state! We have both moved on for reasons of our own.

My entire four-year struggle from 2018-2022 did at least garnish a small victory as I can recollect in September 2021, so I thought.

In September 2021, the judge assigned to our case since early 2019 for visitation monitoring and modifications for our 11-year-old son, after the first district court judge here recused himself for unknown reasons from our case in 2018, assigned an advocate. That private advocate or guardian ad litem (GAL), is for our son to have his voice in court. This allowed our son to advocate with his own voice; he so desperately wanted a chance to be heard. That is all I was asking for at each hearing; I was asking that the system listen to the boy’s needs and wants.

I eagerly scheduled our appointment. We went in for an initial interview. I spent hours multiple evenings after the GAL’s assignment to the case preparing case history statements, a confidential financial affidavit, and working with my attorney on his case history submittal and exhibits that were imperative in outlining why visitation modification needed to happen in the best interest of our son.

There were meetings at the guardian ad litem’s office.

There were in-home interviews in my home, which is where our son lives 100% of the time other than visitation weekends.

There were, or so I was told at the time by the GAL, investigative steps taken to speak to my son’s doctor and school personnel relating to his diagnosis of Type II autism, his specific IEP, and current events that warranted the school nurse contacting me to make an appointment with swallowing and stress issues for our son with the reintroduction of his father after a two-year absence with a visitation schedule.

From the end of September 2021 until mid-February 2022 everything was going well and the system, at least it looked that way from the outside looking in. The legal system seemed to be listening and reviewing concerns that we had about the present visitation agreement, and most importantly, was giving the much-needed representation for an 11-year-old boy with his wishes, concerns, and apprehensions regarding the situation he is forced to adhere to from the civil legal system of Wyoming.

So, let’s review the timeline quickly to be sure we are all on the same page.

-Guardian ad Litem assigned September 2021

-Visits and interviews happening continually until mid-January 2022

-January 24th, 2022 the guardian ad litem submits a pre-trial memorandum (PTM report) filled with statues, case law references, and concerns based on after a 3-month investigation there was no contact from the other side and there were rising concerns visible in our son

-early in February my attorney reaches out multiple times to ask the GAL if he had heard anything from the opposing counsel and her client, since a court hearing was looming on February 24th, 2022

Something to take note of, the other side had been totally silent thus far. So, with confirmation of no contact, we finalized witnesses, and reviewed our evidence that was submitted on January 24 along with the pre-trial memorandum from the guardian ad litem.

Within 24-hours after a negative response my attorney suddenly hears from the guardian ad litem. He changes his stance in an email sent to my counsel and the opposing counsel that he finally has contacted the other side through a “15-minute ZOOM video” conference. He then, in the same email, clears my ex-husband of all tardiness and silence to court requests and demands I settle. The GAL proceeds to label me as the non-communicative parent. In one fatal blow, our son’s voice is crushed…again to give way to his father’s self-serving and unstable lifestyle. Our son is yet another victim to a state judicial system that only gives lip service to child advocacy concerns.

Let’s digest that again.

I am deemed the non-communicative parent even though I have multiple emails, court documents, requests, school records, doctors’ notes, medical files, trial transcriptions, a 40-gallon tote filled with evidence, communications folders to CASA (Court Appointed Special Advocates), and phone logs of my communication to everyone involved! I have proof and actual PHYSICAL evidence that the other side has yet to ever produce or show the legal system of Wyoming on advocating and communicating on behalf of our son.

Remember the word paramount?

I mentioned that simple, yet profound word at the beginning of this article. The meaning of paramount is crucial in understanding the rights of certain minority groups involved here in this case.

An autistic individual and working single mother have been pressured by the onset of recent inflation. Competitive job markets paying overall less to women in the same position as a man, are being attacked continually by a legal system that states they are there primarily to represent us, instead, beat us down in the state’s hierarchy of social statuses.

We will NOT yield to an overly demoralizing patriarchal mindset that thinks it is necessary to control groups such as these. I personally will not allow it!

I was raised in a household by a mother, who is an extreme individualist. She understands equality to its core. If you are honest and work hard you deserve and have EARNED a spot at the table of progress: color and gender DO NOT matter!

The Wyoming case law (Rowan vs. Rowan) that everyone in the legal system advocating for parental rights in this “equality state” loves to brandish like a loaded gun, is that BOTH parents have rights to a relationship with the child. I agree.

However, why is it that they forget to quote the second half of the case law, where the CHILD’s needs and wants are PARAMOUNT as to their health and well-being!?

When the child’s well-being or relationship with a parent is detrimental why can we not step in? The state has the legal right to. Is it because the legal system would have to admit fault? Would they have to admit their wrong in their first assumption of humanity? Would they have to face the fire in that they flippantly quote all men ARE created equal, but heaven forbid we allow all men ACCESS to equality in society? And when I state men, I mean mankind, so women are included here.

With a right comes responsibility.

People lose rights every day in our judicial system.

You lose your license when you drink and drive. Detrimental consequences or situations arise, and you are arrested and cited.

You lose your right to your 2nd amendment when you commit an egregious felony.

You lose your right to work for certain employers when you cannot pass a drug test.

You lose your rights because of exhibited irresponsibility.

No one is arguing that people have rights, but for hell’s sake Wyoming, understand that exhibition of irresponsibility cancels out rights as legislated from the founding of the country.

Or am I mistaken? Those founding fathers never really wrote a constitution and legislated laws in our first Congress. Just because there are only 500,000 of in the Cowboy State, does not mean you get to pick and choose and CREATE your own constitution that tramples the inalienable rights of American citizens.

I am sure I am not the only “type” of minority group that feels this way with centuries worth of right-crushing mindsets that have been overcome day in and day out through advocacy by law. This narrow-minded viewpoint no less from such a conservative, we believe in freedom and less government control, let’s-save-the-country, and make it great again.

It is like the adage, when every man suddenly becomes “a God-fearing Christian” when he wants to “control” a woman quotes Ephesians 5, “wives should submit to their husbands” BUT inadvertently forgets the ENTIRE context of “husbands love your wives as Christ loved the church!” And let’s really tear that language apart. It says wives, not every woman because a man claiming manhood states that he can force you to submit as a non-equal!

So, my question to the professional legal populace that keeps aiding in the dysfunction of society by helping and/or protecting non-responsible parenting is, “Who is the child in your mind?”

Your professional, legal opinion combined with a “helpful” attitude or “nonchalant” attitude or plain “lazy” approach to the written legal statutes of this state are the cause of societal breakdown and inequality overall.

From the gal.wyo.gov website it defines clearly that the GAL’s (guardian ad litem) client is the child.

Not the parents.

Not attorneys.

Not your best-informed opinion to play god.

The CHILD is your client.

It is your job, and I quote, “to represent both what the child wants and what is in their best interest.” It is not the GAL’s obligation to track down certain parents that refuse to listen or follow stipulated court orders and “counsel” them into a position to then tell the child that “I made it better. Let’s try trusting the untrustworthy again.”

Parenting the irresponsible parent is NOT your job nor your function as mandated by procedure and law.

How this case has been handled from its inception to the assignment of a GAL who has taken on the mantel of “fixer” instead of mitigator and legal advisor of the legal statutes as officially tasked by the BAR association and governor office of this state, is abhorrent.

The equality state!?

I can honestly say, it is a far sight from being that, if ever it was. Just because 2 centuries ago the Wyoming governor signed into law, in a historical movement of suffrage across the world, as being the first formalized territorial government to allow women voting rights on Dec. 10, 1869 doesn’t mean you are counting our votes now does it!?

The remedy was the fight to a new life for us and taking on the mantle of responsibility to hold hard lines and take hits for them.

Today we still have battles, but they are smaller now through changes and moving away from my hometown. Sometimes you have to draw a line that will burn bridges indefinitely to the point of no reconciliation to give your child a chance to form their life.