Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Guardian Ad Litem Eligibility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subcommittee narrows guardian ad litem appointments to attorneys except by agreement or court discretion
Summary
The Domestic Relations, Business and Probate Law Subcommittee voted 5-0 to give a favorable report to House Bill 3,622 as amended, which would generally require guardian ad litems in private child custody or visitation cases to be licensed attorneys, while preserving limited roles for qualified lay guardians under certain conditions.
House Bill 3,622 would require guardian ad litems (GALs) appointed in private child custody or visitation cases to be licensed attorneys in good standing with the South Carolina Bar, unless the parties mutually agree in writing to a lay GAL or the court exercises discretion to appoint a lay GAL based on case circumstances.
The bill’s sponsor and committee members discussed an amendment that (1) allows parties, regardless of whether they are represented, to agree in writing — with court approval — to appoint a lay guardian ad litem; (2) gives the court discretion to appoint either a lay or attorney GAL based on the facts and circumstances; and (3) preserves the eligibility of individuals already serving as attorney or lay GALs in pending cases. The amendment was adopted before the committee issued a favorable report on the bill.
Representative David Martin, who spoke in support of the amendment, said his experience in family court informed the change: “When I practice family court, I've done hundreds, probably thousands of family law cases throughout the state, and we we have been very blessed in York County to have some really good lay guardians who have 20 years experience.” He added that lay GALs typically charge “a fraction” of what attorneys charge and that allowing lay GALs for unrepresented parties helps families who cannot afford attorney fees.
The committee chair offered the amendment and noted the South Carolina Bar and members of the judiciary had been consulted. The chair also said by having GALs who are attorneys, those GALs would be subject to the rules of the bar and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC).
Amendment 1 to H. 3622 was adopted on a voice vote. The committee then took a roll-call vote and returned a favorable report on H. 3622 as amended by a vote of 5 to 0.
The bill would change current practice under which both attorneys and qualified laypersons can be appointed as GALs in private custody or visitation matters; under the amendment, lay GALs remain available where the parties agree or where the court finds it appropriate. The measure preserves existing training and continuing-education requirements for lay GALs.
Further steps: The subcommittee’s favorable report moves the measure forward in the legislative process; no statutory effective date was stated during the subcommittee discussion.
