PA Courts, then Joe Paterno

What can we learn from the tortuous events of last week here in Central Pennsylvania, which unfolded following criminal charges filed against a former Penn State University coach alleged to have molested or assaulted many young boys?  See: Thirty-Third Investigating Grand Jury Presentment (Nov., 2011; 23 pp.; PDF).

Juvenile dependency proceedings can result from similar initial complaints, then investigations, of child neglect, abuse, or assault by a caretaker. The Presentment does not mention the word "dependency", but the common theme is protection of minors.

We cannot change past events.  People involved can be criticized, fired, imprisoned, and sued, as a judgment; but are those actions a healing "remedy"?

rem·e·dy  (rm-d)    n. pl. rem·e·dies
1. Something, such as medicine or therapy, that relieves pain, cures disease, or corrects a disorder.
2. Something that corrects an evil, fault, or error.
3. Law A legal order of preventing or redressing a wrong or enforcing a right. * * *

One commentator today recommended some remedies that could be initiated by someone at the center of the controversies.  In his article How Paterno can promote healing, posted by CNN (11/14/11), Prof. Jeffrey W. Pollard, of George Mason University (and a past president of both the American Board of Counseling Psychology and the American Academy of Counseling Psychology), made a suggestion -- to Joe Paterno:

Ironically, it is Paterno who is now uniquely able to help child sexual abuse victims summon the courage they need and to use this tragedy as a teachable moment that will benefit many. What should he do? * * *

Paterno is in a unique position to educate the nation that reporting child sexual abuse, and supporting those who have been harmed, often involves more courage than standing up to a blitzing all-American linebacker. 

Late in life, baseball legend Mickey Mantle admitted that his hard drinking had harmed his family. It also led to alcohol-induced cirrhosis of the liver, and Mantle's untimely death at age 63. In a Sports Illustrated cover story and other forums, Mantle urged others not to do what he had done and to get treatment for alcoholism. 

Through humility, and concern for others, it was Mantle's finest hour, on or off the field. 

Paterno's finest hour, which would facilitate healing for child sexual abuse victims, greater public education and more offenders' being locked up could still be ahead of him. 

More than any other play Paterno has had to call, this is clearly the most important one. But this is not a game: it is about children's lives. Let us hope and pray he gets it right.

If Paterno did so, he would be in good company -- Pennsylvania judges and the Commonwealth's court system.

A set of criminal prosecutions in 2008 arising from Luzerne County, PA, investigations, simply labeled thereafter by the media as the "Kids for Cash Scandal", is described in Wikipedia:

The "Cash for Kids" scandal unfolded in 2008 over judicial kickbacks at the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.

Two judges, President Judge Mark Ciavarella and Senior Judge Michael Conahan, were accused of accepting money from the co-owner and builder of two private, for-profit juvenile facilities, in return for contracting with the facilities and imposing harsh sentences on juveniles brought before their courts in order to ensure that the detention centers would be utilized.

Ciavarella and Conahan pleaded guilty on February 13, 2009, pursuant to a plea agreement * * *.  [Reparagraphed; footnotes omitted.]

Responses to that scandal were not limited to criminal prosecutions or civil lawsuits, but led into extensive study and then institutional changes, as represented by the Pennsylvania Courts' issuance of the Pennsylvania Dependency Benchbook (May, 2010):

The Pennsylvania Dependency Benchbook is a comprehensive reference guide designed to assist family court judges and child dependency practitioners in the process of helping abused and neglected children and their families. The Benchbook was written by Pennsylvania judges for Pennsylvania judges. * * *

The document is a comprehensive resource that combines Pennsylvania law, organized pragmatically to allow quick and efficient use, with a series of state and national best practices that will provide judges and practitioners, from the least to most experienced, with the best possible information to support children and families safely.

Read the Introductory Letter from Justice Max Baer

View The Benchbook Online

Download The Benchbook (PDF– 2.7 MB)

See: Press Release, Supreme Court Releases New Dependency Guide (07/23/10) which announced the "guide developed by Pennsylvania trial judges to aid lawyers and other judges in deciding whether, in juvenile dependency cases, a child should be removed from the home." See also:  Pennsylvania Dependency Benchbook Resource Companion.

The Benchbook was a product of those intensive investigations and self-examinations, which also resulted in creation of the Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice, in July, 2009, as noted in that Wikipedia article:

In the aftermath of the federal charges and defendant pleas, the Pennsylvania General Assembly moved to create a commission to investigate the entire set of circumstances surrounding the miscarriage of justice in Luzerne County. 

Sponsored by Representative Todd Eachus of Butler Township in Luzerne County, House Bill 1648 established the Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice in July 2009. The commission comprises 11 members, appointed from each branch of government in Pennsylvania, with four members chosen by the judiciary, four by the legislature and three by the governor. 

In signing the legislation on August 7, 2009, Governor Ed Rendell castigated Ciavarella and Conahan, saying they "violated the rights of as many as 6000 young people by denying them basic rights to counsel and handing down outrageously excessive sentences. The lives of these young people and their families were changed forever." 

Scheduled to meet a minimum of once per month, the commission was organized to investigate the actions of and damages caused by the two judges and review the state of the Luzerne County courts left in the wake of their tenures. The commission was given power of subpoena and was required to complete its work and report its recommendations and findings to the three branches of state government by May 31, 2010.

The Commission's Final Report, along with a Summary of Recommendations, was issued in May, 2010.

Awareness can be expanded, lessons can be learned, change can occur; and that is what we can remember, and how we can find inspiration.  

It is how we react to find a "remedy" to wrongs that defines our character and that alters the future.  That re-action can become our legacy and others' hope:

Mickey [Mantle] died in Dallas on August 13, 1995.  During the first Yankee home game after his death, Eddie Layton played “Somewhere Over the Rainbow” on the organ because Mickey had once told him it was his favorite song.

In his eulogy, sportscaster Bob Costas described Mickey Mantle  as “a fragile hero to whom we had an emotional attachment so strong and lasting that it defied logic.” 

He added: “In the last year of his life, Mickey Mantle, always so hard on himself, finally came to accept and appreciate the distinction between a role model and a hero. The first, he often was not. The second, he always will be. And, in the end, people got it.”  

-- Mickey Mantle: The Man Behind the Legend, posted by Self-Help Daily

Update: 11/15/11:

In "Joe Paterno legacy needs new final chapter" (11/14/11) posted on ESPN's Big Ten Blog, Brian Bennett argued that the "legacy of Paterno" could, and should, be altered by his future efforts against child abuse:

It's inarguable that JoePa has done a lot of good for a lot of people in his life. Now he must undertake his greatest challenge. He cannot let this be the final chapter of his story.

When Paterno emerges from his cocoon, he has only one choice for going forward. He should spend the rest of his time working for victims of child abuse. * * *

Paterno could travel around the state of Pennsylvania and across the country leading fundraisers and charity events, telling his story and letting everyone know how truly sorry he is.

He could star in public-service announcements and lead a movement to locate all the victims and give them whatever help they need. Paterno knows how to rally teams together, and he has led fundraising campaigns before. * * *

[H]e can spend the rest of his life atoning and doing whatever he can to ease the pain of those victims -- and working to make sure a similar situation never happens again. That's a much more fitting final act. * * *

Update:  07/23/12:

Coach Paterno's debilitating lung cancer leading to his death on January 22, 2012, at age 85, may have prevented him from embarking on a new crusade for awareness and remediation of child sexual abuse; but others here in Central Pennsylvania will do so as part of an educational mission.

Today, the National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) issued program sanctions against, and required remedial actions by, the Pennsylvania State University arising from Sandusky-related child sex abuse crimes.  See:  NCAA's statement, Penn State failures draw unprecedented NCAA sanctions (07/23/12).

The NCAA's harsh judgment of Penn State and its clear warnings to other educational institutions, stands in contrast to the accepting and remorseful message, President's statement regarding NCAA decree, posted on the Penn  State website by its current leader, Rodney Erickson.

* * * Penn State accepts the penalties and corrective actions announced today by the NCAA. With today’s announcement and the action it requires of us, the University takes a significant step forward.

The NCAA ruling holds the University accountable for the failure of those in power to protect children and insists that all areas of the University community are held to the same high standards of honesty and integrity.

The NCAA also mandates that Penn State become a national leader to help victims of child sexual assault and to promote awareness across our nation. Specifically, the University will pay $12 million a year for the next five years into a special endowment created to fund programs for the detection, prevention and treatment of child abuse. This total of $60 million can never reduce the pain suffered by victims, but will help provide them hope and healing. * * *

It is important to know we are entering a new chapter at Penn State and making necessary changes. We must create a culture in which people are not afraid to speak up, management is not compartmentalized, all are expected to demonstrate the highest ethical standards, and the operating philosophy is open, collegial, and collaborative. * * *

The NCAA decree was entered voluntarily by Penn State before the announcement was made.  According to the NCAA's Statement:

Penn State fully cooperated with the NCAA on this examination of the issues and took decisive action in removing individuals in leadership who were culpable.

"The actions already taken by the new Penn State Board of Trustees chair Karen Peetz and Penn State President Rodney Erickson have demonstrated a strong desire and determination to take the steps necessary for Penn State to right these severe wrongs," said Emmert.

I said many months ago in my blog posting: "It is how we react to find a 'remedy' to wrongs that defines our character and that alters the future."

These rigorous pledged actions, in the process of fulfillment over not just the ensuing five years, but beyond, will emphasize values of caring over competition, will encourage us at all levels to be aware, responsive, and accountable, and thereby will protect helpless children from future abuse.

This is not punishment; it is a proper "remedy".  Such processes should occur not only at Penn State, or in Pennsylvania, but across America.

Grandparents WIN in Child Dependency Enactment

On October 7, 2008, President Bush signed into law the new federal "Fostering Connections to Success and Improved Adoptions Act of 2008" (formerly H.R. 6893), as Public Law No. 110-351.

A Breaking News bulletin posted by Generations United announced "a historic day for grandfamilies" because "[t]he bill is a significant recognition of the contribution grandparents and other relatives make in raising the nation’s children."

GovTrack posted links to the many supportive floor speeches made in the House (09/17/08) and in the Senate (09/22/08).

The Congressional Research Service had summarized H.R. 6893 upon its introduction on September 15, 2008. Technically, the Act amends the Social Security Act with new provisions, as follows:

• Amends Part E (Federal Payments for Foster Care and Adoption Assistance) of title IV of the Social Security Act (SSA) to give state plans the option of providing for the state to enter into agreements to provide kinship guardianship assistance payments to grandparents and other relatives who have assumed legal guardianship of children for whom they have: (1) cared as foster parents; and (2) committed to care on a permanent basis.

• Amends SSA title IV part B (Child and Family Services) to authorize the Secretary of Health and Human Services to make matching grants to state, local, or tribal child welfare agencies and experienced private nonprofit organizations to help children in, or at risk of entering, foster care to reconnect with family members.

The Pew Charitable Trusts, through its national, non-partisan Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, had researched appropriate changes in foster care funding, participation, and procedures, delivering a report in 2004, then advocating thereafter with its website, newsletters, and briefings. See: "Foster Care Reforms Advance in Congress, Courts and States" (04/06/06).

In "New Law is Designed to Improve Lives, Outcomes of Nation's Foster Children and Youth" (10/08/08), PCT, celebrated the derivative bill's enactment as "the most significant reform of the nation's foster care system in more than a decade."

These are the new Act's important provisions, according to that Press Release:

• Incentives to increase adoptions of children from foster care, especially older youth and those with special needs.
• Phased elimination of an outdated eligibility requirement for adoption assistance that will increase the number of special needs children who can be adopted with federal support.
• Federal resources to assist children who leave foster care for legal guardianships with family members.
• Direct federal foster care funding for tribal governments, so that more American Indian and Alaskan Native children can receive the supports and services they need while remaining in their own communities.
• Allowance of states to provide foster care supports and services to young people up to age 21.
• Improved oversight of educational progress and health care needs of children while in foster care.
• Mandated "reasonable efforts" to place siblings together when they enter the foster care system.

During consideration, Rep. Gerald Weller noted that H.R. 6893 favors involvement by grandparents in the lives of foster children:

The bill also promotes stronger family ties in caring for children removed from their own parents due to abuse and neglect, and expects States to do more to locate adult relatives like grandparents or aunts and uncles who can step in to care for such children. * * *

Rep. Fortney Stark followed up those remarks with his own, emphasizing the role of grandparents with children who become subject to foster care proceedings:

Madam Speaker, I point out that this subcommittee stands as proxy parents for half a million children in this country who spend time in foster care each year.

So I would like to thank Grandpa McDermott and Grandpa Weller on behalf of these 500,000 children whose lives are being improved, and Grandma Tauscher, for helping see that these children's lives are improved. * * *

[This bill] allows relatives, grandparents, to participate in supporting the foster children and allows them in many cases to live in loving homes rather than group homes and less permanent settings. * * *

Morris Brasovankin, bless his departed soul, would be so pleased.

He lost his court battle -- and custody of his grandson, Steven -- in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, but he may have inspired others to win a legislative war in Washington, D.C.

"All kids deserve families
so they can believe in themselves and grow up to be somebody."

-- Former foster youth,
in his testimony to the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care

Juveniles Can Aid Elders Through Courts

On October 11, 2008, the Patriot-News (Harrisburg, PA) published an article entitled "Juvenile offenders' community service helps senior citizens" by Matt Miller, who reported about "the free help the teens in the community service program of Cumberland County's juvenile probation office were providing" to senior citizens.

Supervised personal services provided directly to senior citizens who have needs, by juvenile offenders ordered into a community service program, continues an evolutionary approach seeking a "win-win" solution to rehabilitation.

On October 31, 2006, a Press Release entitled "Governor Rendell Praises Changes in Juvenile Justice System" had celebrated the tenth anniversary of a reorientation in Pennsylvania's criminal justice system that instead "places priority on repairing harm done to victims" rather than punishment, as to juvenile offenders.

The face of juvenile justice is changing in Pennsylvania, Governor Edward G. Rendell said.

Today, other states are following the commonwealth’s lead as young offenders are paying restitution to victims and contributing hundreds of thousands of hours of community service in a system that is as concerned about victims as it about rehabilitating the young who have committed a crime, the Governor added.

“For the first time in history, the juvenile system places balanced attention on community protection, redeeming youth and restoring victims,” Governor Rendell said. “It is a system no longer shrouded in secrecy.” * * *

That reorientation was proposed in 1996 by the Pennsylvania Juvenile Court Judges' Commission, a committed group created by the Legislature in 1959 that remains active in devising, monitoring, and expanding affirmative programs to rehabilitate juvenile offenders.

The old system, while well-meaning, focused primarily on the offender’s supervision and rehabilitation. Victims were mostly observers, not participants.

The Juvenile Court Judges’ Commission, which proposed the changes and played a pivotal role in their passage, has worked with juvenile court judges, juvenile probation officers, prosecutors, defense attorneys and victim advocates to help them understand and carry out the new mission of the juvenile system.

It has been an evolving process. * * *

A subsequent Press Statement, dated February, 2007, entitled "Juvenile offenders and communities across the state benefit from innovative community service programs", highlighted how, "[a]s part of their rehabilitation program, juvenile offenders have the opportunity to use their skills and talents to help their community."

Every county in the state gives youth offenders the opportunity to work in their community on different projects, such as building houses for Habitat for Humanity, planting trees at a local park, or helping at a local food bank.

Community service, which is part of their rehabilitation, helps juvenile offenders by making them feel proud of the work they are doing and the community in which they live. For example, in Dauphin County, juvenile offenders helped build a new park in their community; in Berks County, teen offenders helped to plant flowers and vegetables at a local park.

Not only do youth find community service rewarding, but local authorities and community members are also seeing the difference this program is making in the lives of teenagers. * * *

JCJC remains at the forefront of this rehabilitative movement that required juvenile offenders to perform helpful services and offers a positive community experience.

For example, its "2008 Conference on Juvenile Justice", as co-sponsored by the Pennsylvania Council of Chief Juvenile Probation Officers and the Juvenile Court Section of the Pennsylvania Conference of State Trial Judges, will present discussions consistent with the theme "Competency and Career Development for Delinquent Youth: Creating New Expectations" on November 5-7 (Wed-Fri), 2008, in Harrisburg, PA.

The general nature of community service by juvenile offenders is well-explained in a description posted on the Franklin County (PA) website for its program, established in 1992:

Community Service is an integral part of the juvenile dispositions and most juveniles referred to this office are assigned community service as a condition of their probation supervision.

All community service projects are done at locations that benefit the community and/or nonprofit agencies. Community service youth participate in the Adopt-A-Highway program, community clean-up days, and help maintain County owned property.

Additionally, the community service youth work at local fire departments, police departments, hospitals, schools, soup kitchens, and animal shelters. * * *

See also: Westmoreland County, PA's "Community Service Work Program" and its six listed examples of work sites.

The guidelines for such programs, to be followed by trial judges and juvenile probation departments, are set forth in JCJC's "Standards Governing the Assignment of Community Service in Juvenile Delinquency Cases", found in 37 PA. Code, Ch. 200, published 06/02/07 at 37 Pa.B. 2517.

However, in searching the excellent website of the JCJC under the terms "senior", "elder", "aged", "retired", and "older", I find no references whatsoever to that class of individuals. One could conclude that no such programs or studies link the service of juvenile offenders to the needs of individual senior citizens.

So that is why the recent news article attracted my attention. It reported how, in Cumberland County, PA, juvenile offenders are assigned, as their community service requirement, to assist elderly residents in meeting their pressing personal needs.

Maylie McGlaughlin stood on the porch of her Camp Hill home and watched a bunch of one-time troublemakers tidy up her yard.

The 85-year-old widow was grateful for the free help the teens in the community service program of Cumberland County's juvenile probation office were providing.

Health problems prevent her from doing the chores herself, she said. "Just vacuuming the floor is exhausting for me," McGlaughlin said. "These kids have done my yard work. They took out my air conditioner. In the winter they've shoveled snow for me. "They're all so willing, and they're polite," she said.

They're sweating to atone for past misdeeds.* * *

So, it can be done; and such community services should be expanded to benefit senior citizens.

I suggest that the Pennsylvania Department of Aging work with the JCJC to devise programs that would benefit senior centers, and also individual homebound senior citizens, which would teach the youth about caregiving at a basic level.

With proper supervision, such programs could further expand JCJC's mission, and also fill a growing need in this Commonwealth.

I further suggest that each participant should be required to watch "The Ultimate Gift" movie to peek at the lifelong benefits that could be realized by the youths while interacting with the seniors.

"Any process you are going through will get tougher before it gets easier.
That's what makes learning a gift. Even though pain is your teacher."

-- Character Red Stevens in The Ultimate Gift

Pennsylvania Lawyers Publish Profusely

On August 7, 2008, Professor Gerry W. Beyer noted in his posting on the Wills, Trusts & Estates Prof Blog that "Carmina Y. D'Aversa (estate tax attorney with the International Estate Tax Group of the Internal Revenue Service in Washington, D.C.) has published her book entitled Tax, Estate, and Lifetime Planning for Minors."

His introduction seemed somewhat misleading to me on two minor points, but his recognition of the book remains laudable; and it caused me to think about other Pennsylvania attorney-authors.

First, Carmina Y. D'Aversa edited the book (382 pages), as described on the American Bar Association's bookstore website (as also noted by Gerry within his posting):

Tax, Estate, and Lifetime Planning for Minors brings together the knowledge and insights of fourteen experienced practitioners and law professors, including Jon J. Gallo, Christopher P. Cline, E. Paul Van Horn, Nancy E. Shurtz, Aen Walker Webster, Naomi R. Cahn and Cynthia L. Barrett.

Second, the book was published on January 25, 2007 (copyrighted 2006) -- not recently. The ABA's bookstore website offered a one-page update for the book, as issued through May, 2007, but not since then. The book is also referenced by commercial vendors online, including Barnes & Noble, Amazon, and Best Book Buys, among others.

Those points aside, I am happy that Gerry drew our attention again to this book, one edited by a Pennsylvanian.

Well, perhaps I should say, more accurately, a former Pennsylvanian. Her biography correctly notes that she "served as an elected member of the Council of the Pennsylvania Bar Association's Real Property, Probate and Trust Law Section." That is how I met her before she moved to Washington, D.C. around 2002 to join the Internal Revenue Service's central offices.

I communicated with her after she left Pennsylvania, as she was arranging for contributors to the book and writing the section about advanced reproductive technologies (ART).

She thought about ART in Pennsylvania before few others did. Carmina is the person who inspired me to an interest in that cutting-edge topic. I am certain that she would be pleased with our attempts to create a legal framework for advanced reproductive technologies here, now. See: EE&F Law Blog posting JSGC's Final Report on Assisted Reproductive Technologies (06/25/08), and the topic "Reproductive Technology" on this Blog.

Since its publication, the book that she conceived and edited remains unique among legal publications in addressing personal-, estate-, and tax-planning issues from the distinctive viewpoint of a minor, someone under the legal age of majority (18 years old). It is highly-recommended as a resource.

Carmina is not the only lawyer from or in Pennsylvania who has written or edited useful books on estate and trust topics, or elder law practice.

• In January, 2005, Don W. Llewellyn & Jill R. Fowler (who currently serves as the Chair of the PA Real Property, Probate & Trust Law Section) published Tax Planning for Lifetime and Testamentary Dispositions, 2nd Edition, with Forms (672 pages; ISBN-13: 9780831807580), through the American Law Institute.

• In July, 2006, Stephan R. Leimberg, Jerry A. Kasner, Stephen N. Kandell, Morey S. Rosenbloom, & Herbert L. Levy published Tools and Techniques of Estate Planning, 14th Edition (716 pages; ISBN-13: 9780872186934), through National Underwriter Company.

• In 2007, Patti Spencer published Pennsylvania Estate Planning, Wills and Trusts Library Forms and Practice Manual, 1st Edition (2 volumes, 1,500 pages, 280 forms; ISBN# 978-1-57400-117-4) through Data Trace Publishing Company.

• In July, 2007, Robert C. Gerhard, III published Pennsylvania Medicaid: Long-Term Care Lawsource (605 pages; ISBN: 0-9755281-6-5) through George T. Bisel Co., Inc., as a complement to the previously-published Pennsylvania Medicaid — Long-Term Care treatise. See: EE&F Law Blog posting Gerhard's Revised Book on Medicaid in PA.

• On September 1, 2007, Jeffrey A. Marshall published Elder Law in Pennsylvania, 2nd Edition (PBI Product №:04882-BK) through the Pennsylvania Bar Institute. See: EE&F Law Blog posting PBI Publishes "Elder Law in PA", 2nd Edition (09/07/07).
  

• In January, 2008, Daniel B. Evans published How to Build and Manage an Estates Practice, 2nd Edition (232 pages; ISBN: 1-59031-951-6) through the American Bar Association (sponsored by the Law Practice Management Section and the Section of Real Property, Trust & Estate Law). See: EE&F Law Blog posting Evans' Book on "Estates Practice" Updated (03/20/08).

• In March, 2008, Professor Lawrence A. Frolik published Residence Options for Older and Disabled Clients (416 pages; ISBN: 1-59031-916-8), through the American Bar Association (sponsored by the Senior Lawyers Division). See also: EE&F Law Blog posting "Elder Law" Textbook by Frolik & Barnes (07/11/07).
  

• In April, 2008, Stephen L. Bloom published The Believer's Guide to Legal Issues (208 pages; ISBN: 0899570313), through Living Ink Press. See: EE&F Law Blog posting Bloom's Book for Christians in Law (04/03/08).

This is only a partial list of attorney-authors and their publications that relate to the subject matter of this Blog.

Dozens, perhaps hundreds, of Pennsylvania lawyers write book-length legal materials issued by the Pennsylvania Bar Institute (the legal education arm of the Pennsylvania Bar Association). Pennsylvania lawyers probably write most of the publications issued by George T. Bisel Co., Inc., of Philadelphia, a distinctive, family-owned legal publisher. Pennsylvania lawyers also write textbooks and contribute to legal works published by other prominent national & international publishers.

Pennsylvania is a great place to practice law, partly because such attorney-authors professionally and precisely map this Commonwealth's legal topography.

Caring, Responsible (Wealthy) Children

Can wealthy parents raise caring, responsible (wealthy) children?

Wealthy parents worldwide are interested in the answer, and wonder about the process.

On July 30, 2008, Arabian Business posted an article entitled "Wealthy kids to get lessons in finance" by Soren Billing, who related how "Investment bank Merrill Lynch is to teach children of its wealthiest clients how to make the most of the money they inherit, with a special focus on how to effectively invest in charities."

Every year, children of the company’s richest clients are invited to a one week course where they are taught about topics such as different asset types, discretionary asset management and wealth structuring.

“A priority for our clients is equipping their sons and daughters with the skills and responsibility to manage the wealth they will inherit,” said Amir Sadr, Head of Middle East Wealth Management. * * *

This year’s London programme will include a special day about effective charitable giving. * * *

The programme will also focus on life coaching, developing leadership skills and personal security, giving the participants, aged between 18 and 25 years old, practical advice about how to keep themselves safe when they travel or go online.

Wealthy Arab families are not alone in wishing to inculcate skills, sense, and sensitivity in their children. Recent articles evidence that wealthy Americans pursue the same ends for their offspring.

On May 12, 2008, The Wall Street Journal's "Wealth Report" published an article entitled "10 Things the Wealthy Should Leave Their Kids — Besides Money":

When it comes to understanding the dysfunctions of wealthy families, Peter White is among the wisest.

He’s spent more than 20 years counseling wealthy parents and privileged children about how to better understand the adverse effects of wealth and to search for more meaningful lives.

He’s plied his trade at his own firm, as well as at Citi Private Bank and U.S. Trust. * * *

The article lists and briefly explains Peter A. White's "Ten Elements of Care" by parents towards their children. He recommends parents' attention to:

1. Necessaries
2. Affection
3. Affirmation and Support
4. Boundaries
5. Guidance
6. Respect
7. Trust
8. Forgiveness
9. Religion or Spirituality
10. Letting Go

The article notes (and the readers' posted comments ratify) a key point:

The list isn’t just for rich parents. But as Peter told me, it’s helpful for wealthy parents to learn that “the first thing to be concerned with is loving children in a way that enables them to take charge of their lives as adults, so they can use wealth to enhance, not diminish, their lives.”

Clearly, there are risks involved where children are raised in wealthy circumstances. An article entitled "Psychological Costs of Material Wealth" (summarized from "The Culture of Affluence Psychological Costs of Material Wealth" by S. Luthar published 2003 in Child Development, Vol. 74, Issue 6, by The Society for Research in Child Development, Inc.) suggested that affluent teenagers might be "troubled":

Children in wealthy families are usually thought of as being happy and well-adjusted, but recent research suggests that that they can be quite troubled.

In two studies affluent, suburban teenagers reported higher levels of substance use, as well as symptoms of anxiety and depression, than did other children of the same age. Exploration of causes suggested that two factors might be implicated: excessive pressures to achieve, and isolation from parents (both literal and emotional). * * *

Studies also indicate that parents in very wealthy communities can be more emotionally vulnerable than those in the middle classes.

When adults place inordinate emphasis on material success, for example, they tend to compromise attainment of other rewards critical for their psychological well-being, such as close interpersonal relationships. At the community level, too, material affluence can inhibit the formation of supportive networks, as services – such as child- or elder-care -- tend to be bought and not shared with neighbors. * * *

Not surprisingly, advisors, institutes, and organizations seek to address clients' concerns of educating children about money management and social responsibility.

For example, the Gallo Institute professes its two founders' belief that "The Most Important Service Financial Professionals Can Offer Clients Is Helping Them Educate Their Children About Money!"

According to a recent study [conducted by The New Retirement Mindscape, Ameriprise Financial, in conjunction with Harris Interactive, Inc., in January 2006], 61% of affluent parents with financially-dependent adult children rated “advice to help children become more financially savvy” as their top priority. And 52% of adults planning retirement share this concern as well.

Eileen and Jon Gallo have spent more than 20 years helping financial professionals and their clients navigate the complex issues of family wealth. Through their books, seminars and media appearances, the Gallos provide tools to help affluent parents raise financially intelligent children. * * *

The Gallos wrote a book, Silver Spoon Kids, as "a parent's guide to raising financially responsible children in an age of unprecedented wealth."

Drawing upon their experiences as members of the renowned NYU Family Wealth Institute, they tell you how to talk to kids about money, how to teach them to handle it responsibly, and how to instill in your kids a sense of giving to their communities.

Eileen Gallo (a psychotherapist) and Jon Gallo (an estate planning attorney), of Los Angeles, California, were interviewed as the authors of Silver Spoon Kids: How Successful Parents Raise Responsible Children by Aish.com about "money, kids and the sudden discovery of being Jewish" after their book was featured in a Time magazine article.

Similarly, The Inheritance Project (also known as Trio Press) seeks to smash myths that the "possession of wealth brings happiness" and that "[t]hose who inherit (money they did not earn) do not deserve their wealth." That organization offers ten "publications for heirs, wealthy parents, and professional advisors" that address "the many complex issues that surround inheritance."

More recent studies indicate that wealth is a positive factor in families, if properly handled.

On March 26, 2008, a summary entitled "How wealth affects children's cognitive achievement" noted that "a new study published in the March/April 2008 issue of the journal Child Development found that family wealth might partly explain differences in test scores in school-age children."

The study, conducted by researchers at New York University, also found that family wealth is positively associated with parenting behavior, home environment, and children's self-esteem.

In Pennsylvania, on February 12, 2007, PNC Bank issued a Press Release about its commissioned study, released as "Growing Up Wealthy", that found "affluent teens don't fit tabloid stereotype."

PNC Wealth Management's "Growing Up Wealthy" study depicts an affluent youth culture that is privileged yet more responsible, hard working and ambitious than the perception fueled by the antics of young celebrity socialites.

On the PNC Bank website, "Growing Up Wealthy" resources are offered: a Press Release, Survey Highlights, a PowerPoint presentation, and various "sound bytes" by Bruce Bickel, Managing Director of PNC's Private Foundation Management Services.

Another resource for bringing awareness to a child about personal and social responsibility in the setting of an anticipated inheritance is the Fox Studios movie, released in February, 2007 -- The Ultimate Gift. Its website offers discussion materials. For additional background and links, see PA EE&F Law Blog posting "The Ultimate Gift" Movie (03/12/07).

Finally, parents might wish to consider another resource: a game.

On March 12, 2008 the Wall Street Journal published an article entitled "Games Can Help Rich Kids Value Money" by Josee Rose, who described "a board game, a stock-market contest and donating $1,000 to charity" as "techniques financial advisers are using to help wealthy parents introduce concepts of financial and social responsibility to children of wealth."

Wealthy families frequently worry that, as money trickles down through the generations, its value is lost. The first and second generation sacrificed to accumulate their wealth, and they tend to pamper the next generation, says Glenn Kautt, president of the Monitor Group, a wealth management firm in McLean, Va. "That generation is the one that has the sense of entitlement."

Financial advisers find that sometimes the easiest way to raise the topic of the responsibilities of wealth is by playing a game.

GenSpring Family Offices LLC, which serves 600 families whose collective worth exceeds $15 billion, created a board game called "Shirtsleeves to Shirtsleeves," meant to open a discussion on family-wealth issues.

The name is based on the old proverb, "Shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations," and the game, which feels in some ways like the game Monopoly, asks the question, "How long will your money last?" * * *

The game addresses a "curse" that may be real: Marilyn Gardner described the "Midas Curse" in "The curse of vanishing wealth" originally published by The Christian Science Monitor, then posted by MSN Money:

"Almost everybody knows a family or has seen a case where the money hurt somebody in the family, or the kids or grandchildren blew it all," says [Rodney] Zeeb, an attorney and coauthor (with Perry L. Cochell) of "Beating the Midas Curse" [Heritage Institute Press, 2005,] a reference to the destructive relationships with money that splinter some families.

So widespread is the problem, that six out of 10 affluent families will lose the family fortune by the end of the second generation, Zeeb says. And nine out of 10 will have depleted the family wealth by the end of the third generation.

It's a modern-day drama summed up in an ancient Chinese adage: "Wealth never survives three generations."

Nineteenth-century Americans updated it to read, "From shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations." * * *

See also: "7 ways to raise kids who can hold onto money", by Terry Savage, posted on MSN Money, who advises: "Strengthen your child's grasp of financial matters by starting early, keeping lessons simple and setting an example."

That game, "Shirtsleeves to Shirtsleeves", was featured in an audio article entitled "The game of wealth management" broadcast June 25, 2008, on National Public Radio's "Marketplace." You can listen to the show to determine if you (or your children) might prefer it to Monopoly.

[Graphic Source: Educational Week, here]

JSGC's Final Report on Assisted Reproductive Technologies

In May, 2008, the Pennsylvania Joint State Government Commission, through its Subcommittee on Assisted Reproductive Technologies, issued its final study & complete recommendation report entitled "The Proposed Assisted Reproductive Technologies Act, 2008" (PDF, 77 pages).

The ART Subcommittee functioned from April 2005, until May 2008. It was comprised of representatives from:

• JSGC's Advisory Committee on Adoption Law
• JSGC's Advisory Committee on Decedents’ Estates Laws
• JSGC's Advisory Committee on Domestic Relations Law
• Experienced private practitioners familiar with "assisted reproductive technologies"
• Consultants from the Pennsylvania Department of Health
  

These members included: Lawrence A. Kalikow, Esq. (Chair), Craig B. Bluestein, Esq., Frank P. Cervone, Esq., Mitchell E. Chadrow, Esq., Lisa W. Clark, Esq., Mary Cushing Doherty, Esq., Neil E. Hendershot, Esq., Albert Momjian, Esq., and Prof. Robert Rains.

For two years, the Subcommittee reviewed the proposed model Uniform Parentage Act (2002 Version) approved by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws), current Pennsylvania statutes, Pennsylvania court decisions (which further developed even while under study), present Pennsylvania court practices in counties, and current statewide procedures of the Department of Health, Vital Statistics.

Its Initial Report, issued in May 2007, proposed and explained a partial statutory framework for assisted reproductive technologies (ART).

An ART statute would be placed into Chapter 59 of the Domestic Relations Code (Title 23 of PA Consolidated Statutes), as Subchapters A, B, & C. It would cover "gestational agreements", also known as "surrogacy arrangements". See: PA EE&F Law Blog posting "Assisted Reproductive Tech Act Proposed in PA" (05/27/07).

But more work remained, as outlined in that Initial Report:

• The Subcommittee recommended that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court consider conforming Orphans’ Court rules to the provisions of the proposed new 23 Pa.C.S. Chapter 59 (if adopted into law).
• The Subcommittee further recommended review of the report issued by the President’s Council on Bioethics, entitled Reproduction and Responsibility: The Regulation of New Biotechnologies (March 2004).
• The Subcommittee announced its intention to continue studying provisions relating to children of assisted reproduction and to records, which would be added as Subchapters D & E of the proposed act in a subsequent report.
  

After concluding its additional work in Spring 2008, the Subcommittee published its entire proposed Assisted Reproductive Technologies Act (Subchapters A-E) Report, with a recommended new statutory Chapter, which begins at Page 23 of the Final Report.

This report, therefore, reflects the latest recommendations of the subcommittee -- a fully integrated proposed Assisted Reproductive Technologies Act.

As was the case in the May 2007 report, notes and comments follow the statutory provisions. Official comments may be used to construe a statute and determine the intent of the General Assembly.

This report also contains a summary of the statutory recommendations and a detailed table of contents for the statutory provisions.

Following the proposed statutory provisions are conforming amendments to §§ 711 and 713 of the Probate, Estates and Fiduciaries Code * * * and transitional language (applicability and effective date provisions). * * *

Thus, its Final Report superseded its Initial Report, expanding and further annotating a complete proposal for an Assisted Reproductive Technologies Act for Pennsylvania.

The Final Report addresses some issues affecting the estate & trust area, where inheritance or beneficiary rights might arise in the context of births provided by assisted reproductive technology. See: Proposed Section 5932 ("Legal parentage") and Section 5935 ("Parental status of deceased individual").

The Final Report's summary regarding the "Parental status of a deceased individual" (Pages 11 & 12), explains one interface between the Domestic Relations law and the Probate Code, and offers a customized approach for resolution:

A decedent is not a parent of a child conceived as a result of assisted reproduction after the decedent’s death unless consent is given pursuant to § 5935. In addition, for the decedent to be a parent of the child in this case, the placement of eggs, sperm or embryos must occur within 18 months of the decedent’s death and the decedent’s surviving spouse must file the consent with the clerk of the court and serve notice on the executor or administrator within six months after the decedent’s death.

Section 5935 could cause a result that is contrary to the decedent’s intent, as in the case of an individual who intends the embryos to be implanted but who then dies unexpectedly before consenting in a dated, signed writing.

Absent written consent, the death of an individual whose genetic material is subsequently used either in conceiving an embryo or in implanting an already existing embryo into a womb ends the potential legal parenthood of the deceased. Section 5935 is designed primarily to avoid the problems of intestate succession which could arise if the posthumous use of a person's genetic material leads to the deceased being determined to be a parent. Of course, an individual who wants to explicitly provide for such children in his or her will may do so.

Section 5935 eliminates the possibility of having a deceased individual’s estate open indefinitely. It balances the interest of effectuating the decedent’s intent to be a parent (and have an heir) and the practical need to close the decedent’s estate after a reasonable amount of time.

The section is to be broadly construed to effectuate the purposes of the Probate, Estates and Fiduciaries Code, including provisions concerning inheritance, succession and notice requirements.

Although Subchapter D contemplates that a woman who may be the genetic mother of the child will give birth to the child, a situation may occur where that is not the case, thereby implicating § 5935.

For example, the surviving husband of a deceased woman may use his deceased wife’s eggs to create a child. If the requirements of § 5935 are satisfied and the surviving husband uses his deceased wife’s eggs and enters into an agreement regarding assisted reproduction with a carrier, who will carry the child, his deceased wife would be the parent of the resulting child. In this circumstance, parentage would be determined under § 5904(b), since neither § 5932(b) nor Subchapters B or C are instructive in resolving the parentage issues regarding the mother of the child. To wit, § 5932(b) provides that the woman giving birth to a child is a legal parent of the child, and Subchapters B and C concern gestational agreements, a term specifically defined in § 5902.

In this case, the agreement executed by the surviving husband and the carrier would not be a “gestational agreement” as defined in § 5902 because the deceased wife would not have executed the agreement.

In addition, in this case, the Division of Vital Records of the Department of Health would need some type of order determining that the deceased wife, instead of the carrier, is to be listed as the mother of the child. * * *

The proposed legislation would provide guidance on these complex substantive and procedural issues that develop in the context of new, more frequently-employed medical technologies resulting in planned births.

As one who served on the Subcommittee, I now encourage careful consideration of its Final Report by the Legislature regarding these important matters.

Bills Proposed for Grandparents' Child Custody

On November 6, 2007, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review published an article entitled "Grandparents may win rights in state", by Katen Roebuck, which noted "[g]randparents could get preferential treatment to rear grandchildren under a proposed state law."

The "grandparents rights bill" would require courts to consider giving grandparents legal custody when parents or guardians will not be granted the children.

Although it passed the House by a 181-11 vote last week, supporters and opponents disagree on how much preferential treatment grandparents would gain under the bill.

The PA House Bill under discussion is HB 1548, now in Printer's No. 2726. According to the legislative history of HB 1548, after passage by the House on October 29, 2007, it was introduced in the Senate on November 13, 2007, and then referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Pennsylvania, among the states, had been labeled "the worst by far" by advocates for grandparental rights regarding grandchildren. See: "Courts giving grandparents a big say on visitation, custody issues", by Barbara White Stack, published June 22, 2003, in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

Grandparents' rights were expanded in Pennsylvania with the enactment of the "Grandparents Visitation Act", 23 Pa.C.S. § 5311. It provides:

If a parent of an unmarried child is deceased, the parents or grandparents of the deceased parent may be granted reasonable partial custody or visitation rights, or both, to the unmarried child by the court upon a finding that partial custody or visitation rights, or both, would be in the best interest of the child and would not interfere with the parent-child relationship. The court shall consider the amount of personal contact between the parents or grandparents of the deceased parent and the child prior to the application.

For an overview of the Act, see: "Grandparent Rights", posted by the Erie County Bar Association.

In 2006, the Act was upheld as to constitutionality by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Hiller v. Fausey, 904 A.2d 875 (Aug. 22, 2006; PDF, 24 pages), in the situation of "partial custody or visitation to grandparents upon the death of their child who is also the grandchild’s parent." A "concurring" opinion was filed by Chief Justice Cappy; and a "dissenting opinion" was filed by Justice Newman.

For a commentary on this decision, see: "Pennsylvania’s Grandparents’ Visitation Act is Constitutional, and Granting Maternal Grandmother Partial Physical Custody of Her Grandson After Her Daughter Dies Does Not Violate Father’s Constitutional Rights", posted by the Juvenile Law Center.

This expansion of grandparents' rights follows a national trend. See: "Recent legal rulings favor grandparents", by Joan Biskupic, published September 12, 2006, by USA Today.

But grandparents rights remain undefined in other situations, such as the setting of "juvenile dependency" proceedings. This was the setting of a much publicized case before Philadelphia's Family Court, where custody in caretaking grandparents of a five-year old child was denied. See: EE&F Law Blog posting, "Grandparents Lose in Child Dependency Case" (10/17/07).

That trial court's ruling is authorized by principles repeated in a PA Superior Court decision issued May 4, 2007, captioned In the Interest of B.S., Appeal of D.D. A three-judge panel of that Court held that a paternal grandmother of a child "did not have standing to participate in the child’s dependency proceedings."

The Superior Court cited the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 6301-65, and cases decided under it, including In re L.J., 691 A.2d 520 (Pa. Super. 1999), and In re L.C. II, 900 A.2d 378 (Pa. Super. 2006), to support its holding. It reiterated:

This statutory section [§ 6336.1 "Notice and Hearing."] is silent regarding either the right to be heard or statutory standing for grandparents or relatives who at some time in the past served as primary caregiver for the child.

Particularly after that Superior Court decision and the Philadelphia trial court ruling, powerful seniors' organizations, such as AARP, allied with other child welfare advocates, now seek expansion and clarification of grandparents' rights in child custody & juvenile dependency matters.

The recent article mentions the tension that is perceived to exist, however.

"I think it does clearly show a very strong lobbying effort to give grandparents a serious advantage," said Harry Gruener, assistant clinical professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.

"They've always had that favored status, and they have it in every state."

Proponents say grandparents' interests generally are disregarded in custody cases. Critics, including Gov. Ed Rendell, say the bill puts grandparents' interests above children's.

The bill would give grandparents legal standing in custody cases, which no relative automatically has in Pennsylvania, according to Gruener and Randall Wenger, chief counsel of the nonprofit Pennsylvania Family Institute, a Harrisburg public policy group that suggested the law. * * *

Although state laws require the Department of Public Welfare to consider grandparents and other relatives while making custody recommendations, no relatives have legal rights to argue their cases in court, Gruener and Wenger said.

"This law is going to force (judges) to consider the grandparents," said Rep. William Kortz, D-Dravosburg, who co-sponsored the bill. The law would be good for children's psychological health by keeping intact at least some of their families, Kortz said. * * *

The article also reports that the Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to consider soon a somewhat similar bill, Senate Bill 515, which was introduced on March 19, 2007.

If the bill is approved by the Legislature in its existing form, there appears still to be some question as to its effect, reports the article, and this may prevent its signature by the Governor:

The proposed law is unclear about whether it gives grandparents first crack at custody over other relatives, Mackereth said.

Rendell's office and the Welfare Department said it does; Kortz and the Pennsylvania Family Institute said it does not.

Another article, entitled "Grandparent Rights, Capital Punishment Bills Proceed in Pa. Legislature", posted by the Associated Press on October 30, 2007, quoted Rep. Randy Vulakovich (R-Allegheny), a co-sponsor:

"We have recognized as a society that it's not always in the best interests of the children to be raised by their birth parents, such as in abuse and neglect."

"Sometimes the best candidates for caring for dependent children are overlooked — their own grandparents."