Gender Bias in NH....Really?

DMVC Productions = Results: Gender Bias in NH....Really?:

Mark Twain once said "Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." In NH the facts more often than not, don't even have a chance to come out in the Judicial System.

Yes, NH has once again proven it is gender bias this article covers a recent case where the man who wasn't involved at the start of a child's life was able to receive a court order to have the child's last name changed to his. The NH Supreme Ct. again relied on and based it solely on their undefined best interests of the child, to which the lawyer representing the woman stated to the press:

"In affirming the best interest standard without outlining any factors, “my concern is the court just left every family court judge with absolutely unfettered discretion to do whatever that judge thinks best,” Gordon said. “That’s really no standard.”

Part of the problem in NH stems from the Judicial Branch's "unfettered discretion" Rule 1.2 which allows the courts to waive all rules. "This rule has been used in the family courts to waive the rules of evidence and allow hearsay evidence to be used against parents," And Rule 1.9 gives the court discretion to deny appeals to the Supreme Court, despite the fact that the N.H. Constitution protects that right. When the same government body that interprets the N.H. Constitution is allowed to waive the constitution by passing a rule, it makes the body untouchable" State Representative Avard said.

To understand how untouchable and that there really is no standard being followed consistently in the NH Court system you have to look at this recent Supreme Court Case In Re. Simon M. 2012-250 a request by a parent to review records was simply denied. However, the order of the supreme court shows the legislative intent behindNH RSA 169-C:25 I. (a.) and NH RSA 170-G:8 accessed 3/21/12 @ 1:29am (which appears to have been changed here without legislative intent, after the above order was issued)  is completely disregarded without substantiating their reasoning for doing so.

Read More: