Court Opinion

ID: 9652110
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 17:17:35.32256+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:12:48.358484
License: Public Domain

WOLCOTT, Chief Justice
(dissenting):
I do not agree with the conclusion reached by the majority of this Court for two reasons. First, I think it is a grave mistake to treat the two minor children differently with respect to visitation with their adoptive mother. Second, while I agree that the limited right of visitation heretofore provided has not worked out satisfactorily, I think it entirely possible that this is because of the strict limitations placed upon the right.
The right of visitation was limited to the State of Delaware. In so limiting it, we inadvertently deprived Y, the adoptive mother, of the ability to take the two children to her mother’s home which is situated a short distance from the Delaware line in Pennsylvania. The result was that it was necessary for Y to take the children to the home of a friend of hers which, partially at least, prevented the establishment of a family environment.
It would seem far better to me to modify the present order of visitation to permit the taking of the children to the home of Y’s mother in order to have the visitation in a family atmosphere.
For these reasons, I would reverse the order of the court below granting permission to take the children to the State of Connecticut, and permit Y to take them on her days of visitation to the home of her mother in the State of Pennsylvania. If, after a reasonable trial period, this expanded visitation proved to be unsatisfactory, then the matter could be re-examined.