In an interesting decision released today, NJ Superior Court Judge Lawrence Jones expanded the scope of those who are to be protected under the NJ Domestic Violence Law. It stands to reason that the adult victim can seek protection from abuse whether she was pregnant or not. In this groundbreaking case the court expanded the protection to the unborn child. This is a decision that can have widespread ramifications in several contexts. When domestic violence occurs and the parties have children, there is a presumption of custody in favor of the victim. Presumably, there now exists a presumption of custody with the mother once this child is born. How long the restraining order may remain in place is also a question to be answered. A restraining order may be vacated upon a showing that the victim is no longer in fear and therefore no longer needs the protection offered under the restraining order. At what age can this child be able to demonstrate that he or she is no longer in fear? With respect to the abortion debate, this decision could have huge implications which are beyond the scope of any discussion on this blog. While I certainly cannot fault the goal of Judge Jones’ decision, I remain curious as to how this decision will play out
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RESTRAINING ORDER MAY COVER UNBORN CHILD IN ADVANCE
A domestic violence restraining order can provide in advance for protection of a child not yet born, a state judge has ruled in a case of first impression. “[W]hile a fetus is not yet legally a person, upon live birth the fetus becomes a person, with rights of redress and protection from harms which originated before birth,” Superior Court Judge Lawrence Jones held in B.C. v. T.G., FV-15-1033-13. There is an “inherent logic in allowing a pregnant domestic violence victim to obtain pre-birth, advance protection for her unborn child against a violent abuser,” he concluded.
