Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Guardianship Gal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subcommittee narrows guardian ad litem rules, keeps lay guardians in some cases
Summary
The Domestic Relations Business and Probate Law Subcommittee gave House Bill 3,622 a favorable report as amended, requiring guardian ad litem (GAL) appointments in most represented private custody and visitation cases to be licensed attorneys while preserving limited use of qualified lay guardians in certain situations.
The Domestic Relations Business and Probate Law Subcommittee on Thursday gave House Bill 3,622 a favorable report as amended, changing who may serve as a guardian ad litem in private child custody and visitation proceedings.
The amended bill would require that guardian ad litems generally be licensed attorneys in good standing with the South Carolina Bar when parties are represented, while allowing lay guardians in two specific circumstances: (1) if both parties are unrepresented; or (2) if the parties mutually agree in writing and the court approves the appointment. The amendment also preserves the eligibility of individuals already serving as attorney or lay guardians in pending cases so their appointments are not interrupted by the law change.
The measure’s sponsor and committee members said the intent is to ensure guardians who represent a child's interests in cases where attorneys represent parents are subject to the bar’s professional rules and Office of Disciplinary Counsel oversight. The amendment further gives judges discretion “based on the facts and circumstances of the case” to appoint either a lay or attorney guardian ad litem when appropriate.
Representative David Martin said his experience in family court informed his amendment request. “When I practiced family court, I’ve done hundreds, probably thousands of family law cases throughout the state,” Martin said, noting that York County has experienced lay guardians with decades of service. He added that lay guardians often charge a fraction of attorney fees, and that requiring attorneys in every case could leave unrepresented parties with no affordable option for a GAL.
Committee members voted to adopt the amendment, then approved a favorable report for the bill as amended. Roll call recorded five votes in favor and none opposed.
The subcommittee did not identify any amendments that change filing deadlines or implementation dates; the bill text as discussed includes transitional language preserving current appointments in pending matters.
The measure will proceed to the next step in the legislature following the subcommittee’s favorable report.
