First things first, I believe today (Dec 5th) is Greg’s birthday. Happy Birthday, Greg. I hope you celebrate in style.
And therein lies the irony: Greg gets to keep celebrating his birthdays. But not all the children in cases he’s represented get to celebrate theirs.
You see, Greg was the lawyer for the grandmother seeking custody of her granddaughter. Greg was up against Frank Pettigrew whose client was a violent, child-abusing, heroin addict who had just gotten out of prison. I wrote about Frank in the blog https://the325th.com/can-a-lawyer-act-in-the-best-interest-of-children-lets-ask-frank-pettigrew/
There is a lot to digest in the above paragraph and related blog so let me summarize it:
Greg was representing a grandmother who had cared for her granddaughter from birth. Greg’s opponent, Frank Pettigrew, was representing the mother who was a violent, child-abusing, heroin addict who had just gotten out of prison.
So for everyone reading this blog, are any of you thinking Greg was in over his head? Or are you thinking, “Gee, a system that acts in the Best Interest of the Child should have been able to address this situation quite handily”?
For the record, if you want to know Greg’s qualifications to see if he was in over his head, here is a link to his website: Greg Housewirth
Go ahead, click on the link. Did you see that he is Board Certified in Family Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization?
In other words, he’s the best this industry has to offer.
So why did the child get placed in the custody of the violent, child-abusing, heroin addict who eventually murdered her – and why am I reminding Greg of it on his birthday?
Now, I wasn’t in the room when Greg was “discussing” the terms of the settlement with his client, but I can take a pretty good guess one of the things he told her was that she would lose. Can you take one guess as to why he may have used this tactic?
Was your guess, “He was probably acting in the Best Interest of the Child”?
Or was it, “The grandma couldn’t afford to keep paying him”?
I’m betting it was money. If you came up with a different answer, please comment and let me know.
Once again: irony. In this case, fatal irony. Divorce lawyers tell you the system acts in the best interest of the child. They don’t add the disclaimer…
“…if you have enough money.”
As a side note, how much money should someone have to pay to protect a child? $5,000? $10,000? $25,000?
If the Family Court system has Best Interest of the Child as its foundational principal wouldn’t Greg’s situation be the perfect example of when it should have worked?
So my answer to the question, “Why did Greg Housewirth advise his client to agree to the settlement?” is, “Because she didn’t have the money to pay him.”
And my answer to the question, “Why am I reminding Greg of it on his birthday?” is simple,
“So he can remember the advice he gave that condemned a 4-year old child to be murdered. He can consider this blog to be my birthday gift to him. He can read it every year. And someday, maybe, he will grow the courage to speak out against the system that allows this to happen and help us remove the (anti) Family Courts from the judicial landscape.”
If they will lie to you about what they can do for a child, they will lie to you about anything.