From @BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU:owner-glb-news@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU Sat Sep 11 12:22:19 1993 Return-Path: <@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU:owner-glb-news@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU> Received: from BROWNVM.brown.edu by mail1.its.rpi.edu (4.1/SMHUB42); id AA24758; Sat, 11 Sep 93 12:22:17 EDT for buckmr Message-Id: <9309111622.AA24758@mail1.its.rpi.edu> Received: from BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU by BROWNVM.brown.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 8779; Sat, 11 Sep 93 12:17:25 EDT Received: from BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@BROWNVM) by BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 9366; Sat, 11 Sep 1993 12:17:23 -0400 Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1993 12:17:39 EDT Reply-To: anonymous sender Sender: Information Repository for News of Interest to GLB* Folk From: anonymous sender Subject: ACLU Plans Appeal of Bottoms Case X-To: glb-News 71 To: Multiple recipients of list GLB-NEWS Status: U RICHMOND, Va. (UPI) -- The American Civil Liberties Union said Wednesday it will almost certainly appeal a decision by a Virginia circuit court judge that took a 2-year-old son away from his lesbian mother and her lover and placed him in the custody of a grandmother. The circuit ruling partially was based on a 1985 Virginia Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Roe, which held that homosexuality in itself is a legitimate reason to deny a parent custody. Henrico County Circuit Court Judge Buford Parsons ruled late Tuesday that Sharon Bottoms' sexual orientation "is illegal and immoral and renders her an unfit parent." The ruling pitted Bottoms, 23, and her lover, April Wade, 37, against Bottoms' mother, Kay, who was awarded custody of Sharon Bottom's son, Tyler Doustou. The decision upholds a juvenile court ruling, also based on the Virginia high court's 1985 decision, that deemed Bottom's 41-year-old mother a preferable custodian. Kent Willis, executive director of the Virginia affiliate of the ACLU, said although a final decision has not yet been made, the challenge in Virginia's Supreme Court probably will be two-fold. The first part will challenge the 1985 Virginia Supreme Court decision itself. "In Roe v. Roe," Willis said, "there was no research like we have now. Almost all the research on the effects of gay parents on a child has been done since then (1985)." Willis said during the circuit court trial, the mother's attorney presented expert witnesses who testified that the mother's sexual orientation would not adversely affect the child. Willis said that testimony was not challenged by the grandmother. The second part of the appeal will challenge Parsons' ruling that taking the boy away from his mother was in the child's best interests. Willis said the trial included testimony that Sharon Bottoms "hugged and kissed" her lesbian lover in front of her son, and that at one point the boy had called the lesbian lover "Dada." But Willis said "the dominant presumptive force" in deciding best interests is almost always the link between a child and his or her natural mother, and there has to be an overwhelmingly compelling reason to break it. He pointed out that Roe v. Roe dealt with two parents, a mother and a father, whereas the Bottoms case deals with a mother and a grandparent. Willis said "a grandparent has the same rights as a stranger in a custody case." Willis said the circuit ruling is the same as if a stranger "could point to a house next door, and say I want this child, they are gay parents, and therefore unfit."