The Law Office of Luis Basagoitia, P.A.

LETTER TO THE EDITOR OF THE FLORIDA BAR NEWS  PUBLISHED ON JANUARY 1, 2001 ISSUE.

Family Law

In response to a letter in the October 15 News taking to task the proposed Family Law Model Court plan, the writer's arguments strike me as "real politick". "Things are what they are and we better accept it. Since we cannot do anything about it, then at least let us not do something to make matters worse." I disagree with this approach in several respects.

Just because things are in bad shape does not mean that we cannot aspire to improve them. Of course, we have to make sure that the cure is not worse than the disease.

I have been a legal aid attorney for 10 years specializing in family law, and I strongly oppose the current system. It is my experience that those who are the oppressed do not have attorneys. They normally cannot afford them.

In other words, people who have money get legal representation. On the other hand, having more money has nothing to do with working toward the best solution for everybody concerned. In fact having more money is directly related with having power. Therefore, the people who are more succesful in attaining power apply this concept to the family law realm with disastrous results.

In other words, this party wants to win. Of course, he may win in a custody case with the aid of an attorney whose incentive is getting paid. The more litigation, the more income the attorney earns. However, in family law matters, losing is many times winning.

Yes, this person may get custody, but at the expense of the child's happiness and well-being and, I would argue, that of the instigator himself. I do not think you can be content by destroying the other party - especially in a family law matter.

I am not the only one who says this. There are judges who believe that our system as it is makes the situation worse. Removing the incentive for "winning' would go a long way toward working for the best interest of everybody involved. Of course, big attorney's fees would be affected.

I agree with the writer that the juvenile dependency system is defective. As I understand, the foster care system is overwhelmed. Children are taken from their parents sometimes for relatively minor concerns, only to be sexually abused in foster care homes.

It seems to me that the reason why we fail in solving social problems is because there is no money to be made. After all, we live in a capitalistic society. Only when the importance of caring for our children or our poor will be as important as our quest for money will any solutions in my opinion be effective.

For example, I will probably have to leave my position of defending the poor and the disadvantaged at least in part because of inadequate renumeration. The laws in the books as they are now may be appropriate, but it is in dedicating the necessary resources and interest in enforcing the laws where we fall short.