KANSAS DISTRICT COURT Shawnee County Courthouse Officer Chanbers of ‘Division No. Twelve PeLACTA DAVID E. BRUNS Topeka, Kansas 6603-3922 Admiisrave DISTRICT JUDGE (785)353-8200 Ft, 4405 DOROTHY SHEL, CSR, RFR FCRR. June 24, 2004 Claudine Dombrowski PO Box 15212 Kansas City, MO 64106 : Donald R. Hoftinan Attomey At Law 112 SE Tth St. Topeka, KS 66603 RE: Richardson v. Dombrowski Case No. 96 D217 LETTER DECISION Dear Ms. Dombrowski and Mr. Hoffinan: Court Services has completed the investigation ordered in this case pursuant 10 KS.A. 60-1615. During her investigation, Amanda Smith reviewed numerous documents, obtained records from several sources and conducted multiple interviews, cifically, Ms. Smith spoke to the child’s third grade teacher, the Principal at ‘Tecumseh North Elementary School, representatives of the Girl Scouts, including Vieki ‘Ash, and Dr, David Rodeheffer. At the Court’s direction, Ms, Smith also conducted an unscheduled interview with ‘the minor child in order to receive her input regarding the various events which led to the ‘Case Manager's recommendation for supervised parenting time. Pursuant to K.S.A. 60- 1615(c), Ms. Smith has prepared a written report which has been presented to the Court It should be noted that the report does not contain any recommendations but simply a summary of the investigation,Richardson v. Dombrowski Case No, 96 D217 Under the circumstances presented in this ease, the Court does not believe that release of Ms, Smith’s report would be in the best interest of the minor child. If the Court ‘were to release the report to one party, it would need to disclose the report tothe other party in the interests of firmness. However, as more fully discussed below, the Cour is ‘appointing a Guardian Ad Litem to serve in tis case and she willbe permitted to review ‘the repors in her positon as an advocate forthe best interests ofthe child ‘Turning to Dr. William Albot’s request to be released from further court-ordered “duties in this ease, the Court finds that his request should be and itis hereby granted. The ‘Court thanks him for is service. Likewise, Dr. David Rodehefferis hereby released from further court-ordered duties inthis ease. The Court also appreciates his service. ‘Moreover, Amanda Smith is hereby released from further investigatory duties in this ease ‘and the Court thanks her for her service. 1 should be noted that Division 12 has been advised that it will no longer be handling aay domestic cases once a new judge is appointed to replace the Honorable James M. Macnish, fa the near futur, this case willbe transferred to one of the four (4) {judges in the newly established Family Law Department. In fac, this Division has ‘already been assigned all of Judge Macnish’s civil cases as well ns numerous civil eases, from other Divisions. Thus, tho amount of time which this Court will have #9 spend on ‘any particular case will be extremely limited over the next couple of months. Inan attempt to determine what, ifanything, this Court could do to help the minor child, it has reviewed the entire cout fle. Te review reveals that there have been many juges and attomeys involved in this ese prior o this Court being assigned this ease as zesult of Judge Schmidt's recusal in July of 2003. Unfortunately, ithe lengthy history of this case serves a a guide, there will likely be several more judges and atomeys involved ‘efor the child eaches the age of majority. ‘There is one thing, however, which appears tohave been missing inthis voluminous file, Although there has been a great deal of zealous advocacy fo both parents over the years, nobody has served as an advocate on behalf of the Notwithstanding the substantial disputes between the parties, it appears that they bath recognize the nced for someone to serve as an advocate for their daughter. ‘The Court notes thatthe Petitioner's attorney stated in his April 27th letter to the Case Manager that “[iJt seems to me that itis Rikki who is being let down by all of us in positions of responsibility in this case.” Similarly, the Court notes in Dr. Rodeheffer’s record for March 25, 2004, thatthe Respondent told him that “nobody is advocating for ‘my daughter..." Unfortunately, these statements appear to be accurate.Richardson v, Dombrowski Case No. 96 D 217 Although a Case Manager attempts to make decisions which are inthe best interests of a minor child, he or she is not an advocate for the child. Likewise, although a judge must attempt to determine what isin the best interests of a minor child, he or she is not an advocate for the child, Moreover, the primary duty of attomeys representing patents in a divorce action is not to serve as an advocate for the children of ther clients, ‘Thus, the Court believes itis appropriate in this ease to appoint a Guardian Ad Litem whose only duty will be to advocate for the best interests of the minor child, The Court hereby appoints Jill Dykes to serve as Guardian Ad Litem in this case. Ms. Dykes is an experienced attomey and also an experienced Guardian Ad Litem. Fier role in this case shall be as set forth in Kansas Supreme Court Administrative Order No. 100 (2003). (A copy is enclosed and incorporated herein by reference.) The Court hhateby ovdets that Shawnee County advance the Guardian Ad Litem’s initial fee of $225, ‘Any additional fees and expenses by the Guardian Ad Litem will be assessed ata later date, ‘The Guardian Ad Litem, as an advocate for the minor child’s best interest, shall have access to all reports, records or other information concerning this ease. Since ‘Administrative Order No. 100 states that “[cJontinuing investigation and ongoing contact ‘with the child arc mandatory,” the appointment of a Guardian Ad Litem should also bring ‘a degree of continuity to this case which appears to have been lacking. The Court anticipates that once the Guardian Ad Litem has become familiar with this case that she ‘will be advocating for a long-term Parenting Plan which is truly in the best interests of the child. As far as Case Management is concerned, the Court will yield to the judge t0 ‘whom this case is reassigned. That judge should be the one to decide whether he or she believes the continued assistance of a Case Manager would be helpful. ifso, hat judge Should also be the one (o deteruuine wheter the eairent Case Manager should continue in that position or ifa replacement should be named. Regardless, it should be noted that this Court has found Mr. Swartz’s assistance as a Case Manager to be helpful in an extremely difficult case and it thanks him for his service. ‘The Court notes that inthe Petitioner's most recent motion she states that she has fot seen her daughter fora long period of time. Although itis recognized that there were problems related to the parenting time which was to be supervised by Dr. Rodehefer, this Court has never prohibited the Petitioner from seeing her child. In fact, the Petitioner is strongly encouraged to spend time with her daughter.Richardson v. Dombrowski Case No, 96 D217 If there isa problem with the parties utilizing the services ofthe YMCA Saf Visit ‘acilty in Topeka, the Guardian Ad Litem may wish to consider utilizing The Farm in Lawrence for supervised parenting time on a temporary basis and perhaps for monitored ‘exchanges in the future. This appears be a reasonable altemative since the Petitioner lives in Kansas City and the Respondent lives inthe eastem part of Shawnee County. Regardless, the Guardian Ad Litem should approach ths issue, as well as any other Which may be presented inthis ease, from the perspective of what is in the best interests of the child rather than from the perspective of what is best for the parents. “The Court sincerely hopes that unsupervised parenting time can and will be reinstated at some point in the foreseeable future. Rarely i ever, should supervised parenting time to be considered to be a long-term solution in a divorce ease. However, ‘the Court does not find it to be in the best interests of the minor child to lift the requirement of supervision at Us point in time based upon a review of the investigation report and supporting documents submitted by Amanda Smith of Court Serviees. Inthe interim, both parties are directed to fully cooperate with the Guardian Ad Litem in order to develop a parenting plan which is inthe best interests oftheir child “This letter shall serve as an order of the Court. No further Journal Entry is required, Entered by, David E. Bruns District Court Judge Dr, William L. Albott, Jill Dykes, GAL Dr. David Rodehotir ‘Amanda Smith, Court Services Lloyd Swartz, Case Manager