Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Guardianship Gal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs bill requiring attorneys as guardian ad litem except in limited cases
Summary
The subcommittee voted 5-0 to give House Bill 3,622 a favorable report as amended, requiring guardian ad litems in private child custody or visitation cases to be licensed attorneys in most cases while allowing court discretion and written party agreement to appoint lay guardians in some situations.
House Bill 3,622 would require guardian ad litems in private child custody or visitation proceedings to be licensed attorneys in good standing with the South Carolina Bar, except in limited circumstances where lay guardians remain allowed.
The bill would change current law, which allows both attorneys and qualified laypersons to serve as guardian ad litems (GALs) regardless of whether the parties are represented. Under the subcommittee amendment adopted Thursday, a lay GAL may be appointed if both parties are unrepresented, parties may mutually agree in writing (with court approval) to a lay GAL regardless of representation status, and the court would retain discretion based on the facts and circumstances to appoint either a lay or attorney GAL. The amendment also preserves eligibility for individuals currently serving as attorney or lay GALs in pending cases.
Representative Paula Calhoun, chair of the Domestic Relations Business and Probate Law Subcommittee, brought the bill to the panel. Representative David Martin, who described his family-court practice experience, supported the amendment. "We have been very blessed in York County to have some really good lay guardians who have 20 years experience," Representative Martin said, adding that lay guardians "charge a fraction of what attorney guardian ad litems do." He said the amendment preserves access to representation for parties who cannot afford an attorney by allowing lay GALs when both parties are unrepresented.
A member of the Judiciary and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel were noted in debate: the committee discussed that guardians who are attorneys would be subject to the rules of the South Carolina Bar and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel. The amendment was described as drafted with assistance from Representative Barton and adopted by voice vote; the committee then ordered a roll-call vote on the bill as amended. The roll call recorded five "aye" votes and none opposed; House Bill 3,622 received a favorable report as amended from the subcommittee.
The action sends the amended bill forward with a committee endorsement; the amendment leaves courts with discretion and preserves current appointments in pending cases while tightening the default that GALs be attorneys when parties are represented.
Votes at a glance: House Bill 3,622 — favorable report as amended; roll call vote 5-0.
