‘Permanent’ custody of Justina Pelletier awarded to Mass.

A long-running child custody case took a dramatic turn Tuesday, when a Massachusetts juvenile court judge awarded “permanent” custody of teen-ager Justina Pelletier to the state Department of Children and Families.

The ruling by Judge Joseph Johnston leaves it up to the agency, not the court, to decide whether or when Pelletier should be returned to her West Hartford, Conn., home.

“It’s a huge ruling,” said a person who had been briefed on the decision. “It’s a setback for the parents.”

This person said the state, which has had temporary custody of Pelletier for more than a year, has no immediate plans to have the 15-year-old sent back home, or to a facility in her home state.

But a decision to award permanent custody can be revisited by the judge after six months, at the parents’ request. The judge made his order retroactive to late December, so a review could occur as soon as early summer.

Rev. Patrick Mahoney of the Washington D.C.-based Christian Defense Coalition, who has become the parents’ spokesman, said Tuesday that Lou and Linda Pelletier are “outraged” by the decision, though they have yet to get a written copy of it.

“There is no reason Justina should not be returned immediately back to the parents,” he said.

Mahoney said the parents continue to believe that their daughter is being “treated as a pawn and piece of property.”

Judge Johnston also denied a request by out-of-state lawyer Mathew Staver of Liberty Counsel in Florida to represent the girl’s parents.

Probably the only psych ward for peds at BCH is a locked psych ward. I am not sure about why they did not place her with other family members, unless maybe the parents refused to give out the names? Or CPS thought the parents would visit unsupervised? From what I have read, the medical providers thought Justina got worse when mom was in the room. They probably thought any interaction with the parents would be detrimental. Placing in a foster situation in which the parents knew the address would not be good.
I am just speculating here. However, I dont think there was evil intent at BCH. They cannot defend themselves.You get to that opinion after seeing huge numbers of child abuse cases. It changes your perspective on the issue.

It would take me 10 minutes on my iPhone to find a person's relatives.

The law doesn't stipulate you keep some one in a hospital because “their parents might try to see them”. The law deals with the parents if they were forbidden from seeing their child by court order and do so anyway. The law deals with the offending party. In your "best guess" the law is punishing Justina for something her parents might do, is that your opinion? Highly unethical and unconstitutional if true. How do you know how Justina acted in the presence of her mother if only the family has spoken out? If I was kept from my parents at that age and sick, I'd probably freak at the sight of my mother as well, wanting her near me and wondering why I was being abandoned.

A locked psych ward is no place for a child that doesn't belong there.Why couldn't she be in a normal pediatric wing if her major complaints were supposed “fake” pain?

I just read yesterday her original doctor from Tufts has agreed to treat her and the judge agreed, and BC’s held that up for a while. Supposedly today they were “allowing” him to see her, take blood samples, and he wishes to restart her mitochondrial diagnosis meds. I haven't read any articles on the case today, so I don't know if that has happened.

As I said before my husband has seen and dealt with many cases of child abuse. It doesn't mean you can always jump to that conclusion just because “it happens all the time”. Alan Dershowitz doesn't offer to help just anyone for free. No matter what the outcome as a Harvard Law guy I doubt he'd weigh in if there were not blatant issues of the state overstepping it's bounds. Even if Justina's condition is psychological and/or there is abuse involved, where are Justina's rights to not be wear housed with little contact until age 18?

When this story first came up I did a search on mitochondrial disease and one of the things I read is that because the symptoms do not fit a familiar medical pattern there have been accusations against parents of children with MD of Munchausen’s.

I don’t know what to think. I have been seeing more and more cases where hospitals are getting CYFD involved when there is a dispute about medical care for minors. There was a recent story where parents did not agree with doctors at one hospital and took their child to another and the first hospital went after them for neglect or something like that, not sure that one is sorted out yet either. I have seen several similar stories.

I have not seen Alan Dershowitz actually doing anything on this case. As for your husband, what is his job in which he testifies on child abuse cases? If you read the very informative article in the Boston newspaper- they did a very balanced story on this case, and the staff at BCH thought Justina was acting out worse when the mother was around. A locked psych ward is not the place for a child unless- they were unable to find placement, or the child had severe psych issues , in which we will never find out due to HIPAA. And when the doc at Tufts does take over the care he should do some basic things to come at a true diagnosis-like perform a muscle biopsy and draw a metabolic panel to determine if Justina had mito. Per the Boston newspaper, he had not done that.
Unless you have all the info, you cannot draw a conclusion on anything in regards to this case.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.