Throughout her 32 years of practice in law, Pat has helped thousands of people with the most sensitive issues – those related to family law. She practices exclusively in the area of family law, which includes guiding clients through the difficult process of divorce, custody matters, child support, maintenance and paternity issues. She is routinely appointed by judges to act as a Guardian ad Litem to represent the best interests of minor children who are involved in family law disputes.
Pat is an advocate for mothers, fathers, children, and is a long standing proponent of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). She believes strongly in the ADR process as a method for helping people to resolve legal problems. Pat was certified as a mediator in 1989 when this process was in its infancy stages. These skills have been very helpful in her area of practice, such as cooperative and collaborative divorces. Pat continues to attend workshops on conflict resolution to maintain her skills in this area. She is often appointed as a “neutral” independent third party who helps parties to resolve areas of conflict and hopefully, keeping them out of court.
Pat understands family law disputes are not just a legal process, but have significant emotional and psychological effects on individuals and families. On a regular basis, she collaborates as a team approach with mental health professionals on her individual cases. In addition, she has attended advance training in these areas, which in turn, have aided mental health professionals in understanding the impact of the family law process that their clients are enduring during this difficult time. Pat takes a broader perspective of the client’s needs in an effort to be a zealous advocate in an attempt to meet the multitude of needs of her clients.
Notable Representation
In 1998 Pat became involved with a significant case which ultimately led to a change in Wisconsin law. Pat was retained to represent a nine year old boy. Based upon the long family court position that it is in the best interests of a child to have a relationship with his parent, even for closure, the court-appointed Guardian ad Litem and psychologist recommended the boy visit his father. This may not sound unusual, but the boy’s father was serving a life sentence in Waupun for murdering his wife, the boy’s mother.
Following their recommendation, the court entered an order requiring the boy to visit his father the upcoming weekend. Within 72 hours of being retained, Pat filed several motions to “stay” the court order and the boy was not required to visit his father for that weekend visit. In fact, throughout the case, Pat was successful in countering further visitation requests of the father and the boy was never required to go to Waupun to visit his father.
The outcome of this case was one among others to persuade the Wisconsin legislature to change the law in special circumstances and focus on the child’s rights, not just the parents.
This change is codified in §767.43 Visitation Rights of Certain Persons. Now in (1m) there is an exception wherein the court shall not grant visitation to a parent who has been convicted of a first or second degree intentional homicide of the other parent, except if very specific conditions are met. Those conditions are set forth in §767.43(6). Due to this change in the law and philosophy of parents’ rights being tantamount, the child’s wishes to visit the parent in prison shall be automatically considered, rather than the assumption that his best interest would be served to maintain a relationship with this parent.