Thank you for recently contacting the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General's Bureau of Consumer Protection regarding the above. To find the information that you are searching for, you need to find a law library. There may be one near you if you live close to a law school or another college campus. If the Bureau may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us. Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General Bureau of Consumer Protection www.attorneygeneral.gov

-----Original Message-----
From: yvettecopy [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 12:35 PM
To: *******, Mark A.
Cc: yvettecopy
Subject: RE: Information--2nd request
Why 2nd request? Because the first one went unanswered.)

I have accessed our local law library in the Monroe County courthouse and several sites on the web. However I can find no specific statute or other written authority granting this power to the state. As the constitution provides for, no vast, boundless, or unreasonably broad authority may not be exercised by any government office or official without being granted by the federal government. I can, for instance, state "in my role as supreme leader, grand poobah, or ___________ of the commonwealth do hereby...." and it means nothing unless I can say exactly what higher authority has designated me such a position. NO STATE may exercise ANY authority not provided for by the federal government and that authority must be laid out in scope and limitations in WRITING somewhere. This is to guard private citizens against unnecessary or unwarranted government intrusion. I am sure you can appreciate the necessit! y of such a guarantee. I am aware of the history and definition of the term as you provided me but it still does not suggest exactly where in writing the federal government has granted this authority to the state, nor the limitations to exercising such authority as binding on the state when it takes actions in the role of parens patriae. If authority is not derived from a federal written source, then the state may be challenged when it takes action in that role. If the state may act in this role, it must draw its' authority from somewhere--exactly where is that?

Dear [email protected],

Our body of laws are derived from three primary sources: 1. our federal and state constitutions; 2. our federal and state statutes; You make this sound like a separate and completely different source of law--since these statutes cannot operate outside of nor independantly of your #1 sources listed above, they're kinda related, right? and 3. the judicial opinions that are rendered interpreting those federal and state constitutions and statutes. But the attorneys and other officials I'm asking in PA are saying Troxel doesn't apply here. ?! Isn't that a US supreme court ruling? Doesn't that qualify as one of your #3s? Oh wait--we're just picking the ones we like??? Help!! As set forth in my previous email message, the authority for the parens patriae function of the state is principally found in the judicial opinions cited. Each opinion will undoubtedly contain citations to other cases and authorities, but you will be hard pressed to find any statutory citations in those opinions. I can only reiterate that parens patriae is a creature Creature?! Dear God! I knew there had to be a monster at work here somewhere! of common law -- it is not statutorily based, but is just as much a part of our body of laws as is any statute. Double-talk in triplicate. What you will be hard-pressed to find, actually, is any official or country clubbing attorney to admit that common law is in fact a "creature"...of the state's imagination. ALL LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY MUST BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE COMMON MAN. How do I know? Is ignorance of the law an excuse in America? NO! Knowledge of the law is both a right and a responsiblity. So here's a lawyer telling me in so many words (disagree if you'd like) that "It isn't written anywhere but you can kinda sorta in a way bee-line what this is by looking up a few hundred citations and case history, maybe 1% of which will be directly relating to 3rd party visitation laws." Bite Me! You telling me this is an invisible law with no written authority behind it that maybe I can sort of glean scant details by looking up all this sh*t? The written authority you seek is set forth in the case citations I have provided. Please note that the first case cited is a United States Supreme Court opinion specifically recognizing and discussing Pennsylvania's parens patriae authority. This case has been cited as authority for the parens patriae authority of other states as well and, but for its very old age, would be a good starting point for your research on the issue. If you have been unable to find the RAVEL opinion, try starting with PRUNER'S ESTATE, which should be much more readily available. You should also note that federal authority over the states is not as sweeping as your message suggests. The federal government was created by and acquired its grant of authority through the 13 original states -- state sovereignty played an important role in its creation and the states deliberately placed limits, checks, and balances on its authority over the them. In closing, the written authority you seek is contained in the case law cited. Again, I trust you find the foregoing helpful. Mark A. *******
Chief Deputy Attorney General
Charitable Trusts and Organizations Section
PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL
14th Floor, Strawberry Square
Harrisburg, PA 17120
Voice: 717.705.2536
Fax: 717.787.1190
m*******@attorneygeneral.gov

m*******@attorneygeneral.gov wrote: Dear yvettecopy, Your Monday, May 20th email regarding the origins of the government's parens patriae authority was referred to me for a reply. Please note that my expertise in the area of parens patriae authority concerns the regulation of property committed to charitable purposes, but the authority itself is much broader. When translated, the term "parens patriae" means "parent of the country" and refers to the traditional role of the state as sovereign and guardian of persons under some legal disability. It is a concept of legal standing that affords the government the legal status to protect the health, comfort and welfare of its people, all of which are broad concepts liberally construed by our courts to promote the public good. It originates from the English common law where the king had the prerogative to act as the guardian for persons ! with legal disabilities, such as the mentally disabled or incapacitated -- today in our country, that same role is performed by the individual states. In Pennsylvania, as in most other states, certain aspects of the parens patriae function have been delegated to one or more state officials, which typically includes the state attorney general. The fact that it is a creature of the "common law" is the reason you have been frustrated in identifying the authority by statute. "Common law" is specific to legal concepts and principals that arise out of court rulings and opinions developed over time. Accordingly, while there are many judicial opinions discussing the state's parens patriae authority, I am unaware of any specifically dedicated statute codifying it -- I believe that the only statutory manifestation of the authority are the various requirements that certain government officials receive notice of particular actions and events, ! etc. If you are interested in reading about the subject, some of the more prominent cases discussing parens patriae can be found at the following cites: VIDAL v. GIRARD'S EXECUTOR'S, 43 U.S. 127, 2 HOW. 127, 11 L.ED. 205 (1844) (describing the parens patriae power of Pennsylvania as a "paternal power" . . . existing somewhere to take care of the sick, the widow, and the orphan . . . if there is no protection for the infant and the aged, the charm of civilization is lost . . . in Pennsylvania Uh, my son isn't sick, widowed, or orpaned. Your point? These sound like persons in society who are disadvantaged or have no one to care for them. By any stretch of the imagination, how does this apply to a child who is in no way impaired and who has a competent, fit parent caring for him? all this is cared for; by hospitals and houses of refuge . . . all that is asked of government is, that under the protection of law, the great duty of charity may be fulfilled); FONTAIN v. RAVENAL, 58 U.S. 369, 17 HOW. 369, 15 L.ED. 80 (1854); PRUNER'S ESTATE, 390 PA. 529,136 A.2D 107 (1957) (Attorney general represents a broader interest than that of the charity alone . . . he must protect the interests of the public at large 'to whom the soci! al and economic benefits of charitable trusts accrue'). I just love it when politicians use words like "economic benefits" and "accrual" when discussing children. And when did I inquire about your job description? Your way of saying "not my table." ??? You can find the legal opinions above at any well run county law library and I believe on-line as well. I trust you appreciate that how the authority has been exercised in your specific situation is beyond my ability to access. Nevertheless, I hope you find the above information helpful.

Mark A. *******
Chief Deputy Attorney General
Charitable Trusts and Organizations Section
PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL
14th Floor, Strawberry Square
Harrisburg, PA 17120
Voice: 717.705.2536
Fax: 717.787.1190
m*******@attorneygeneral.gov
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 20:01:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: "YVETTE CATHERS"
Subject: RE: Fwd: Ironically
To: m*******@attorneygeneral.gov

If the Title pertaining to parens patriae does not allow for this authority to extend into private families, then this authority has been "taken" by the state and saying it is common law tells me that states exercise this power based on NO written authority. However parents HAVE written authority to raise their kids as they see fit--the 5th and 14th amendments. I'm sure you can sense my frustration and anger but put yourself in my shoes: I am a fit parent whose son was being verbally abused, emotionally manipulated and tormented, and witnessed numerous physical fights at the grandparent's house.

I made what I considered a responsible decision to no longer allow him contact with 3 people diagnosed with serious mental disturbances. Does it sound right to you for the state to come in, NOT question my competence and fitness to parent, and say I have to continue taking my son over to house with 3 violent schizophrenics, allow these people access to one of my utilities (phone, after harassing phones both at home and work to the tune of over an hour's worth just on my work voicemail), and allow them full access to my son's records?

I'd like to draw a parallel: My brother had his 3 kids seized by the state of NJ. My brother is one of the 3 diagnosed schizophrenics in the house. One full year of evaluation, interviews, home studies, and one-hour supervised visits AND THEY WERE EVALUATING AND INTERVIEWING ALL 3 PEOPLE--ALL 3 PETITIONED TO GET THOSE 3 KIDS, WHO ARE ALSO MY MOTHER'S GRANDCHILDREN. How bad does a situation have to be before a state--presented with 3 RELATIVES actively trying to gain custody of children taken by a state-run child protective agency--instead opts to adopt those children out to total strangers???? That's when my brother was diagnosed. Those children were adopted out to strangers, apparently because NJ at least somewhat concerns itself with safeguarding the welfare of children. PA, who let Ashley Crafton die after repeated reports of physical abuse, and whose foster agencies can't seem to pick out a burly man in a dress when placing children for foster care, seems more concerned with intruding into people's lives to satisfy presumptions like all grandmothers are good and loving and FIT and baking cookies. This woman is D A N G E R O U S. Can we presume all mothers are fit? Susan Smith--2 dead kids. Andrea Yates--5 dead kids. Diane Downs--3 kids shot, 1 dead. Kenneth and Adelle Dudly--6 kids starved to death. Mary Ann Cotton--21 people dead, including her own kids. Is it just Mothers? How about fathers: John List--whole family dead including wife and mother. Brian Stewart--injected own son with HIV to get out of child support. So none of these are grandmothers. Maybe they are all good. Velma Barfield--stanch christian and grandmother who poisoned husbands, boyfriends, elderly people, and her mother. Nannie Hazle Doss, "the giggling grandma"--killed 5 husbands, 2 children, and her own mother.

So, pardon me if I get a little tense here and there but I've started my 3rd month of insomnia and in addition to working 60 hours a week, I must do mountains of legal research trying to find out where and when parents lost their rights to raise their children as they see fit in this country. And what I find, after trying for weeks to chase down where states' got the idea they can intrude into families with fit parents--no abuse or drug use or alcoholism or ANYTHING and simply mete out custodial and parental rights to people who are NOT that child's parent.

I do not have the right to limit, suspend, or terminate contact with abusive people and I do not have the right to make responsible parenting decisions for my son. Did I lose either of these rights as a result of PA exercising authority under parens patriae? This power may be used when there IS NO HARM OR POTENTIAL HARM ALLEGED OR PRESENT on my son? This power may be used when I have not broken any laws? This amounts to the state merely disagreeing with a decision I made and then having the power to come into my home, reverse my decision, and impair my custody rights to my son. The state can simply force me to take my son over to a house with 3 mentally disturbed people against my wishes when I am not unfit and have broken no laws? What part of this sounds right to you?

If there is no written authority to extend parens patriae to custodial and familial matters, then it is exercised illegally in those instances. There are no boundless government powers with no written limits. Period. And attorneys here tell me PA is not bound by the Troxel case. Washington must satisfy a harms test but no other state? That sounds like a punitve measure if it was never meant to be binding on other states. How does PA get around it?

From Troxel: "As we have explained, the Due Process Clause does not permit a State to infringe on the fundamental right of parents to make child rearing decisions simply because a state judge believes a better decision could be made," ruled the court.

The Court strongly upheld general parental rights within the ruling as well:

"In a long line of cases, we have held that, in addition to the specific freedoms protected by the Bill of Rights, the 'liberty' specially protected by the Due Process Clause includes the right ... to direct the education and upbringing of one's children.

tcbchronicles.com

There was already an incident at the house on 17 MAR 02 wherein my son was returned to me hysterical and told me he was subjected to several hours of verbal abuse, and emotional manipulation--he is being emotionally blackmailed every day he is there and has asked me "can't we just leave?!" He says the mediator Stephen Higgins asked NO questions on abuse and violence in the home, and that he told my son "No matter what you say here, you're going over to your grandmother's house," and "grandmothers have special rights in this country." Not at the expense of parents rights!! According to chapter 1940 pertaining to rules of mediation, once abuse is alleged on either side, the mediator has an ethical obligation to deem the case inappropriate for mediation and sent the matter to evidentiary trial. Higgins ordered visitation in the interim and will be sued for liability, contributory negligence, bias, and malpractice arising from the incident in March. There should be no visitation order in force when there is abuse alleged until all the home studies and evaluations are completed. He has directly endangered my child, as well as deprived me of my son's companionship on numerous days beginning 19 JAN 02, including easter and mothers' day. I have to loan out my son? Why? There was another incident at the house wherein my son tried to leave and was threatened with calling police and their lawyer. My son can't leave if he is in danger or being assaulted again?

M*** at the ***** police office on fifth street in *********** said I could not see the incident reports on domestic violence calls to the grandmother's house without a subpoena--which my attorney Holly Conway will try to do. However, first she found 6. Then she found another one. Then looking in the summary sections for my brother's name, she found 8 more. Sounds like 15 so far and she didn't try to look under my mother or sister's names yet--just my brother's and just under that one address on Ann Street. IF ANYTHING happens to my son at that violent house during ANY visit, the state is liable. If the state is exercising authority of ANY kind but there is nothing written anywhere endowing PA with such authority, how does PA answer this challenge in court? I am an army veteran. I have never used any kind of illegal drug--including pot. I drink one winecooler a year. I do not beat or abuse my son. I have no criminal past. How is any of this justified and can you picture just how bad all this is going to look when the evaluations come back and all the police reports are subpoened? Do I understand you correctly that there is NO WRITTEN AUTHORITY providing for a state to extend parens patriae to custodial or familial matters? It is very important that I understand you correctly because this is alarming. Parens patriae is based on a WRITTEN law or an UNWRITTEN law? PA considers that I am divorced by common law, based on the length of separation--for me, 11 years. But I must claim that I am married or separated on most legal paperwork, including tax returns. See how far common law takes you? When you say parens patriae as pertains to custody matters, exists only in common law, then you pit an unwritten, assumed authority against a WRITTEN liberty granted federally.

Fenton v. Fenton, www.courts.state.pa.us (damn pdf file)

Disputes involving custody of a minor child, other than those involving a parent against another parent, are considered to be "third party" disputes. Van Coutren v. Wells, 430 Pa. Super. 212, 633 A.2d 1214 (1993). As such, "[a]bsent a prima facie right to custody, a third party lacks standing to seek custody as against the natural parent." Id., 430 Pa. Super. at 215, 633 A.2d at 1215-16 quoting Rosada v. Diaz, 425 Pa. Super. 155, 158, 624 A.2d 193, 195 (1993). However, an exception to this rule, other than a child being declared dependent, is for the third party to prove that she stands in loco parentis to the child. Although we recognize and applaud appellant's participation in the care-taking of her granddaughter, our review of the record before us and the arguments of the parties brings us to the same conclusion as that of the trial court that "[a]ppellant proved that she acted as no more than a care-taker, in effect, a baby-sitter for the child, albeit a frequent caretaker. That is not enough to confer standing." Trial court opinion at 3. We agree with the trial court's characterization that appellant's daughter's acts of leaving her child with appellant "were appropriate and were consistent with that which would be expected of a young, unwed mother who was trying to obtain an education, be productive, and continue to develop socially. (My note: I never left my own son in the grandparent's care to socialize. If I wasn't at work or running household errands, I was home with my son. I never left my son at my mother's house to socialize, go to bars, or hang out with friends or other functions.) Fortunately, she had a mother, [a]ppellant, who was willing and able to help her with child care." Id. at 2 n.1. As we find nothing further in the record we acquiesce with the trial court's holding that "[t]he evidence in this case can in no way be stretched so far as to reach the conclusion that [a]ppellant acted as one who had informally adopted the child or that she intended to be bound to the legal duties and obligations of a parent." Id. at 4. Accordingly, appellant's claim of standing in loco parentis to her granddaughter is baseless

The legal duties and obligations of a parent? I have fulfilled these by carrying full medical and dental insurance, as well as some coverage for visual...housing my son...feeding my son....buying him clothes. The 3 people who now have visitation still patronize the food banks at St. Matthews and the Salvation Army in East Stroudsburg. 2 are on disability for mental illness. The 3rd is a job hopper, makes minimum wage and steals from his employers--food and cleaning supplies. These 3 people are incaple of self-support without all living together and still make less than my son's single mother (me.) They provide no financial or other support of my son.

Also: Also, "[i]n a grandparent visitation case, the grandparent has the burden to prove that it is in the child's best interest to have 'some time' with the grandparent." Id., 422 Pa. Super. at 249, 619 A.2d at 340 citing Bishop v. Piller, 399 Pa. Super 52, 56, 581 A.2d 670, 672 (1990), aff'd 536 Pa. 41, 637 A.2d 976 (1994).

How does a grandmother who tried to gas her own children in 1982 prove that having a 14-year old spend time with 3 schizophrenics is in his best interest? I had to completely dismantle and sell off a home office, including computer, scanner, printer, and fax. I sold my paid off van to Raceway auto in Brodheadsville for $2,000 and am making $500 a month payments back to the tune of $4,000. I was loaned $4,000 by my employer--all to pay for home studies, my evaluation, half of my son's evaluation, and for my brother and sister, plus lawyers' fees. The burden of proof was placed on whom? I asked for evaluations done on everyone in the house--first Higgins said "no," then I got a "yes" only if I pay. Is that how PA insures a house is safe for a child to be placed there? This will be my brother's 2nd evaluation done in a custody matter. My sister has numerous mental health hospitalizations at Pocono Medical Center. My mother and sister are both on total disability for mental illness. My brother was found to be schizophrenic and his own kids adopted out. Who is bearing the burden? The electric company has been on my porch to shut off power. I wrote a post-dated check to the borough for the water bill or it was to be shut off 19 JUN 02. I have a second shut off notice from Met Ed on a deadline of 11 JUL 02. This from a woman with a monthly income of $2,300. This is how a $3,000 raindrop causes a $6,000 ripple. You put off several things and take on heavy losses over time to get the right amount of money in your hand when you need it. I sold my paid off van for $2,000 up front in order to buy it back at $4,000. See the ripples? And you are telling me there is NO WRITTEN authority granting this power to any state, let alone PA? Do I understand you correctly? And there are no limits laid out anywhere? PA is not bound by the "unwritten" requirement that parens patriae be exercised ONLY TO PROTECT A CHILD FROM HARM OR POTENTIAL HARM? PA is not bound by the Troxel requirement of satisfying a harms test?

Appellants v. E.E. A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HER PARENTS AND NATURAL GUARDIANS, C.E. AND D.E. v. D. AND C. PROPOSED ADOPTIVE PARENTS, Appellees, : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 41 W.D. Appeal Docket 1998 :www.courts.state.pa.us (this is another pdf file, this custody case)

The court stated: Without more, a child�s preference and the fact that the child and grandparent resided together for a period of time is insufficient to support a finding that [the grandparent] stood in loco parentis and has overcome the parents� prima facie right to custody. A third party cannot place himself in loco parentis status in defiance of the parents� wishes and the parent/child relationship. 610 A.2d at 1003.

See all the legal digging around I've had to do for this?? I'm not an attorney! No common citizen is supposed to have to do all this to get at laws in this state or country to which that citizen may be subjected. See what I mean by "inaccessible law?"

Troxel again:

"In a long line of cases, we have held that, in addition to the specific freedoms protected by the Bill of Rights, the 'liberty' specially protected by the Due Process Clause includes the right ... to direct the education and upbringing of one's children.

"In [our] view, a right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children is among the "unalienable Rights" with which the Declaration of Independence proclaims "all Men are endowed by their Creator." And in [our] view that right is also among the "other [rights] retained by the people" which the Ninth Amendment says the Constitution's enumeration of rights "shall not be construed to deny or disparage," the court stated.

The Court ended the case without taking the usual step of remanding the case to the lower court for further proceedings. "The decision leaves little wiggle room," says Werme.

I just need to clarify: PA exercises parens patriae without ANY WRITTEN authority? Do I understand you correctly?

-----Original Message----- From: yvettecopy [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 1:23 PM To: Innfo; *******, Mark A. Cc: yvettecopy Subject: Fwd: Ironically If states were supposed to be able to exercise some law with roots in "royal perogative" from a country we revolted against and they were supposed to be able to exercise that law to any capacity beyond those outlined in Title 15, why wouldn't the federal government have granted that right to begin with? The 5th, 9th, and 14th amendments amount to barring states from passing laws or exercising any authority which impairs liberties granted in the constitution. Question: If I am a fit parent and have made a decision concerning my child as are my rights under those amendments--a decision which breaks NO laws, how does PA justify intrusion? There is no law saying children MUST have accesss to a grandparent and the authority to exercise parens patriae is unwritten. MY rights as a parent ARE written. No matter how you slice it, this does not make sense. The grandmother is insane--how is intrusion justified? Me and my son had our evaluations with Dr. Abbruzzese in Stroudsburg--after interviewing my son, he began asking me a lot of questions about the grandmother's home (I'm sure he asked the grandmother the same questions about me.) He then asked why I had terminated contact. I explained the stories my son had told me. I then said straight out I didn't want him emulating certain behaviors and that I was alarmed that he was exhibiting some of those behaviors and didn't seem to see some bizarre behavior as being abnormal or disturbed. I said I was concerned for his safety. Dr. Abb******* then said "yes, I...uh...already see some damage." A PSYCHOLOGIST said the word "damage" and all the blood drained out of my face. He advised me to take my son to a psychologist for regular visits! I'm not some weirdo harrassing you--I am a single mother who is experiencing fear, anxiety, and a great deal of financial hardship--I make $2,300 a month and I have a shut-off notice from met-ed for July 10th. I can't get my finances to settle back where they were before this all started because of all the fast dancing I had to do to get thousands of dollars together for all these expenses, which hit all at once. I still have $700 of $4,000 I borrowed from my employer yet to pay back, and now a $501 a month van payment on a van I paid off last August! My son has been over a month now without TV because that was not a priority so I had to let it go. I CANNOT TAKE JIMMY TO A PSYCHOLOGIST BECAUSE I CANNOT EVEN AFFORD MY MEDICAL CO-PAYMENT that I will have to have for the visits! Now, SIMPLY, and without having to look up cases unrelated to 3rd party disputes or countless others which are related--that amounts to an inaccessible law and our laws are supposed to be accessible--WHAT IS THE CURRENT THRESHOLD FOR INTRUSION per the limits on parens patriae in the state of PA? I can look up any other law without having to research numerous case histories--which is a lawyer's task, not a citizen's--and determine that law's limits. Why can't I do this with parens patriae? Any law that any branch of our federal or state governments may exercise at will without clear limits or having to show just cause or having to observe some procedure (due process) amounts to a form of tyrannical rule. If the federal government has said there must be a "strong countervailing interest" and a "harms test." and PA is not bound by either of those, then WHAT IS THE THRESHOLD FOR INTRUSION in this state? If you want to contact me ever about what exactly is going on, please feel free to call me at work at ************ at ***-***-****, ext ****. If you want to run any background checks on me, I'll sign the same form I signed when I applied for notary and send it to you. (2 applications for notary and an army enlistment--I've had my background run 3 times--I WILL sign another one, no problem. It will come up clear.) If you want acccess to Dr. Abb*******'s records pertaining to me and my son, I'll sign a release and tell him to show you EVERYTHING. Now get this, my schizophrenic mother tried to have me committed at Pocono Medical Center in the beginning of March! I was handcuffed in front of my son and lead out of my house in front of my child and the neighbors I must live among--now supposedly I'm nuts and the cops that took me down there said I would be there a minimum of 6 hours for observation...2 doctors and a social worker later, I WAS RELEASED IN 2 HOURS. Why is PA empowering a mentally-disturbed person to harass me? I will sign a release and have ALL my medical records sent to you! If a schizophrenic says I'm nuts, why was I released in 2 hours? The police were used to facilitate harassment! Can you see why I am frustrated??? When my discharge packet from the army arrives, I'm going to send you the paper from my mother's psychologist in Ohio, Dr. James K***--it was this paper ALONE that earned me a hardship discharge out of the army and I had made E4 Specialist in 20 months in an MOS with cutoff scores over 450! If you want to run ANY RECORDS ON ME WHATSOEVER, here is my vital information: ****** ********** ***** (nee *******), SSN# ***-**-****, PA DL# ** *** ***. Need any other information? Let me know. You look at something that at first glance seems suspiciously lop-sided and figure something isn't right. Guess what--something ISN'T right, and I need to know what that is because it isn't me. Do you need a release to run records on mee through the local police department? Let me know! I'll sign ANYTHING. Like the social worker at the hospital said "This is just a woman with a child and a job! Why is she here?! I'm denying the 302--she presents with NOTHING!" Now ask me how I was able to hear that through the 2 sets of doors on the room I was in--the social worker was pissed! What you have is a frustrated mother and what appears to be a very inaccessible law. I need an answer here. m*******@attorneygeneral.gov wrote: Dear yvette, I was out of the office last week and unable to respond to your prior messages. I regret you found my past efforts and information unsatisfactory, but I understood your inquiry to be concerned about the origins and authority for the government's parens patriae authority. Section 15 of Title 15 of the United States Code pertains to our federal antitrust law and simply acknowledges the existing parens patriae authority of the states as the basis upon which Congress felt it appropriate to enable states to also enforce that statute in our federal courts. The reference in Title 15 does not equate with having created the authority of parens patriae, it merely makes reference to it, as do 15 U.S.C. � 6103 (telemarketing), 15 U.S.C. � 6309 (boxing), and 18 U.S.C. � 248 (civil rights). Please appreciate that none of those statutes define the limits or materially answer your inquiry regarding where parens patriae authority comes from. Consequently, I still believe my prior answers are responsive to your request, which essentially asked "where is the written authority for the state's parens patriae authority?" To reiterate, it is a creature of hundreds of years of common law, most notably discussed within the court opinions offered; its limits are not readily apparent and while it can be found at play in cases concerning everything from charitable trusts to right to die issues, it almost always equates with protecting the interests of those unable to adequately represent themselves. Again, I regret being unable to satisfy your expectations in this regard and wish you all the best in your endeavors. Mark A. ******* Chief Deputy Attorney General Charitable Trusts and Organizations Section PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL 14th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 Voice: 717.705.2536 Fax: 717.787.1190 m*******@attorneygeneral.gov