Newmark v. Williams case brief

Newmark v. Williams case brief summary
588 A.2d 1108 (1991)

CASE SYNOPSIS

Respondent parents appealed from the order of the Family Court of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County that awarded custody of their three year old child to petitioner Division of Child Protective Services after respondents refused to authorize chemotherapy that had only a 40 percent chance of curing the child's cancer.

CASE FACTS
Respondent parents' child suffered from pediatric cancer. Chemotherapy offered only a 40 percent change of "curing" the child's illness. When respondents refused to authorize chemotherapy and indicated their intent to consult a Christian Science practitioner, petitioner Division of Child Protective Services sought temporary custody to authorize treatment of his condition with chemotherapy.

DISCUSSION

• The family court awarded custody to petitioner, and the court reversed and returned custody to respondents. 
• The court held that the child was not an abused or neglected child. 
• Further, respondents enjoyed the legal right to make important decisions for their child. 
• Although this right was not absolute, petitioner did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that intervention in the parent-child relationship was necessary to ensure the child's safety and health. 
• The court held that the family court erred in not explicitly considering the competing interests at stake, which included the importance and primacy of the familial relationship and the gravity of child's illness in conjunction with the invasiveness of the proposed chemotherapy and the considerable likelihood of failure.

CONCLUSION

The court reversed the family court's order granting custody of a child to petitioner Division of Child Protective Services and returned custody to respondent parents. The child was not abused or neglected. Petitioner did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that intervention in the parent-child relationship was necessary to ensure the child's safety and health. Finally, the trial court failed to consider the competing interests at stake.

Suggested Study Aids and Books