Court Opinion

ID: 9516814
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 23:53:01.594762+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:39:21.194852
License: Public Domain

White, J.,
dissenting in part.
Although I agree with the majority’s disposition of this case, I join with that part of the dissent which questions whether a guardian ad litem and legal counsel can be one and the same person in cases adjudicated pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-292(5) (Reissue 1984).
I am of the opinion that our analysis and holding in Orr v. Knowles, 215 Neb. 49, 337 N.W.2d 699 (1983), is dispositive of the question. If one compares the societal and individual interests involved in cases of minors seeking abortions with cases where parental rights may be terminated due to a parent’s prolonged mental illness or mental deficiency, it seems that the function and necessity of a guardian ad litem in these cases is analogous, if not identical. Therefore, eadem est ratio, eadem est lex (the reason being the same, the law is the same). In both cases the duties of a guardian ad litem are not coextensive with those of legal counsel.