Court Allows Paraplegic Mother Visitation Rights

By: Zannie Carlson

March 26, 2011 marked a legal victory for mother, Abbie Dorn, when the Los Angeles County Court temporarily granted Dorn injunctive relief holding that she had children’s visitation rights. Severe complications during the labor of triplets led to Dorn’s permanent disability. As a paraplegic, Dorn’s primary mode of communication is through a series of blinks, which, following divorce, the father of the children deemed psychologically harmful to the triplets. The father chose to raise the children on his own, barring Dorn from visiting. Consequently, Dorn has only seen her children three times since their birth in 2006; it wasn’t until last year that the father even told his now-four year old daughters that they had a mother.

The court tentatively found that although Dorn’s interaction with her children is significantly impaired, the children still have the ability to interact with their mother. The court found that such interaction would in fact be beneficial to their psychological growth. This decision is still early in the case’s development, as a full trial is set for later this year. Nevertheless, Dorn and her parents, who filed suit on behalf of their daughter, are celebrating this temporary holding as a sign of the success to come. The fact that the case may end at the county level may limit its effect but the case, nonetheless, marks a notable achievement in disability rights.

--Zannie Carlson

   TMA Staff Writer

Do You Have A Receipt For That Rape?

By: Shailee Diwanji

Fancy filing away that receipt for your hush-hush abortion along with your latest business entertainment expenses? The No Taxpayer Funding For Abortion Act might just make it so you have to. This bill, introduced by representatives Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.) and Chris Smith (R-N.J.), has significant support from the GOP (and some Democrats) and is expected to sail through the House of Representatives. Slightly modified from its original version, which only recognized "forcible" rape, the bill now focuses on federal funding for abortions with some flagrantly ill-devised consequences. The bill mandates that federal funds not be used to fund an abortion, unless it was the result of rape or incest, or seriously endangers the life of the mother.

Amidst Financial Crisis, Politicians Try to Redirect our Attention to the Usual Scapegoats

By: Zannie Carlson

The March 21 edition of The Nation features an article on Washington’s lackluster efforts in improving the lives of unemployed or soon-to-be laid off Americans: Finding that individuals with college degrees comprise less than half of the unemployment rate, the article observes that “while the overall economy continues to suffer through the worst labor market since the Great Depression, the elite centers of power have recovered.”

Wisconsin Workers’ Woes: Fiscally Sound or Unions Aground?

By: Shailee Diwanji

In 1959, Wisconsin was the first state to pass a comprehensive collective bargaining law for public employees and was the birthplace of the national union representing all non-federal public employees. In a dramatic shift, today, Wisconsin's Assembly passed a bill attempting to curb union rights. Protests, both for and against the bill, have been underway across the country for weeks. But the fight is far from over. Wisconsin's Senate is now in the hot seat, as it gears up to tackle this bill. And with the fourteen "missing" Democratic state senators (they can be found in Illinois in an effort to prevent a quorum from voting on the issue), this could prove to be a real challenge.

The bill creates an interesting dichotomy. It purports to reign in fiscal spending and end the budgetary woes (or at least begin to), but many are concerned that it may foreshadow the demise of unions. The bill terminates collective bargaining for most public employees and requires employees to contribute heavily to their pensions and health care. On the other hand, the bill bars unions from forcing employees to pay dues and does not terminate collective bargaining rights for local police, firefighters, and state troopers. Most significantly, the bill has the potential to save up to $300 million over the next two years.

Although the battle appears to be largely political and based on fiscal policy, it implicates the centuries old battle between the rich and the poor. Unions, according to its ardent advocates, allow the American middle class to bargain for increased wages and benefits, better job security, and guaranteed retirement benefits. These may seem like meager demands when pitted against the inflated bonuses doled out on Wall Street. Without a doubt, the passage of this bill could deteriorate the quality of education and other public services in the state. But budgetary problems are looming large. The result of continued fiscal irresponsibility could be unquestionably devastating. One Ohio state senator pointed to Camden, New Jersey saying, "It's an example of where the union refused to renegotiate, and now that city is suffering a 45 percent reduction in the size of its police force because management had no choice."

This bill has elicited passionate responses on both sides of the issue. As neighboring states move to adopt similar legislation, the people are left with a difficult question. Is this sound fiscal policy, or simply a strategy to widen the rift between the economic classes?

-- Shailee Diwanji

   TMA Staff Writer

Terminating the Parental Rights of Undocumented Immigrants

By: Shailee Diwanji

The recent media coverage of the illegal termination of undocumented immigrant Encarnacion Bail Romero's parental rights has, once again, brought the issue of the parental rights of undocumented immigrants to the forefront. While, under law, an individual's immigration status is unrelated to his or her parental rights, we are increasingly witnessing the tenuous connection that does, in fact, exist between the two.  Bail Romero's case exemplifies the numerous injustices and flagrant violations of due process that undocumented immigrant parents may be subjected to.

Bail Romero was picked up by INS in a 2007 raid at the factory at which she was working. She was imprisoned for using a stolen Social Security Number and deportation proceedings were initiated against her. Meanwhile, Ms. Romero’s then six-month-old son, Carlitos, was cared for first by Ms. Romero’s brother, then by her sister, and then by a clergy couple who offered to help. The clergy couple sought to adopt the boy, but when Ms. Romero refused and asked that her son be placed in foster care, the couple introduced the boy to the Mosers. Carlitos, now renamed Carlos, was placed under guardianship of the Mosers, who first petitioned for temporary custody, and a year later, filed for adoption. Since Ms. Romero, who was still in prison, had not sought to visit her son in over a year, a judge approved the adoption. Ms. Romero, who spoke no English, was left with no way to plead her side. Last month, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the State had terminated Ms. Romero's parental rights without a fair trial in violation of its own laws, which require a trial in such cases. The court, however, refused to return the child to Ms. Romero, and instead ordered a new trial.

Professor Marcia Zug at the University of South Carolina, School of Law, has researched several such cases and says that this chain of events is far more common than we may think. In fact, children are separated from their undocumented parents by state welfare agencies even before their parents' immigration status is called into question. The reason for such separation is usually "abuse and neglect." "Abuse and neglect," however, can range from violence to the inability to speak English or simply the undocumented status of the parent. The latter cases are usually dismissed on appeal; but in the case of an undocumented immigrant, the opportunity to appeal may only occur after he or she is deported and left without an opportunity to do so.

- Shailee Diwanji

   TMA Staff Writer

From ‘Victim’ to ‘Accuser’: A Misguided Attempt at Courtroom Neutrality?

By: Shailee Diwanji

Last November, Georgia State Rep. Bobby Franklin introduced a bill to re-label "victims" of rape, stalking, and domestic violence cases, "accusers." The bill seeks to "amend Titles 16 and 17 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to criminal law and criminal procedure, respectively, so as to change the term 'victim' to the term 'accuser' in the context of a number of statutes making reference to the circumstances where there has not yet been a criminal conviction."

The bill seems to have been met with little support from both sides of the aisle. Most agree that this bill could create an additional barrier to reporting the already underreported crime of rape. Worse, the bill disproportionately affects women, who form the majority of victims of rape and sexual assault. Besides creating a disincentive for victims to come forward, the bill leaves a glaringly obvious question unanswered - Are victims of these unreported crimes not victims at all, but simply accusers? Even when these crimes are reported, convictions are generally difficult to get and this bill just makes it more difficult to get a conviction because it insinuates, perhaps unintentionally, that the crime was fabricated.

Many want to know why these crimes were specifically targeted for reformation. As Carolyn Fiddler, the communications director for the Democratic Legislative Committee, pointed out, "Burglary victims are still victims. Assault victims are still victims. Fraud victims are still victims." There is, however, some merit to the notion of neutralizing the language used in the courtroom to encourage jurors to focus on the facts of the case rather than the emotions that necessarily accompany it. But even the proponents of language neutrality in courtrooms admit that "accuser" sounds rather hostile. Instead, they recommend "complainant," a term currently used in Pennsylvania.

The outcome of this Georgia bill remains to be seen. The Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee has organized a petition urging Republicans to denounce this bill. It can be found at: http://www.change.org/petitions/rape-victims-are-not-accusers.

- Shailee Diwanji

   TMA Staff Writer

Reconceptualizing Race Across Campus: Multiracial Youth’s Engagement in Identity Projects

By: Zannie Carlson


In my Critical Race Theory course, we have been discussing a contingent of critical race theorists who asserted that race should no longer be considered a relevant means of self-identification. These theorists’ rationale is that the social construct of race has been used to oppress and divide, and by rejecting these dangerous categories, individuals of color will be better able to create unity based on personality or humanity rather than skin tone.

However, increasing numbers of multiracial youth have been engaging in a different kind of racial project where they assert and embrace both parents’ lineages in efforts to celebrate their multiracial identities. The student organizations offer support for mixed-race individuals, who are more common in American society now more than ever before. Likewise, more individuals are filling “other” as their racial identity on the census so that they do not choose one parent’s racial background over another’s.

 Shifting demographics and attitudes hardly makes us post-racial, however. Part of the reason for establishing these organizations originates from students’ interest in creating a safe space to express their experiences to address a defining characteristic that strangers and friends tip-toe around, misrepresent, or misunderstand. America’s racial hierarchy is not broken, but rather accommodated for multiracial individuals.

What is most moving about these student organizations, however, is the fact that they are encouraging dialogue. Through dialogue, the students promote cross-racial understanding.  These connections may have a more profound effect on attitudes on multiculturalism than the diversity itself.

- Zannie Carlson
   TMA Staff Writer