Opinion
No. FA 01-0728561 S
March 4, 2008
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
The issue before the Court is whether or not a mother who is granted final decision-making for education and health care decisions is in any way restricted by limitations imposed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The defendant mother was granted decision-making power for educational and health care decisions by Solomon, J. in February 2005. The children have been taking religious instruction in Watertown at a Roman Catholic Church where the mother has been worshipping for the past year and a half. The children are soon to receive the sacraments of First Reconciliation and First Communion. Father objects to having these sacraments received in mother's parish in Watertown and would prefer a church in Rocky Hill, Both parents are Roman Catholic.
The Court is not being asked to decide what religion is best for the children. The Court is being asked to decide where the sacraments should be received and what is in the minor children's best interests. The court must ultimately be controlled by the welfare of the particular child. Seymour v. Seymour, 180 Conn. 705, 710-12, 433 A.2d 1005 (1980); Stewart v. Stewart, 177 Conn. 401, 408, 418 A.2d 62 (1979); Palmieri v. Palmieri, 171 Conn. 289, 290, 370 A.2d 926 (1976). This involves weighing all the facts and circumstances of the family situation. Homonnay v. Homonnay, FA-03-0401627, 2004 WL 124563 (Conn.Super. May 19, 2004).
Plaintiff asserts that the Court does not have jurisdiction over this matter but makes no alternative suggestion. The facts are that: (1) Mother has primary residence of the minor children; (2) the children spend the majority of their time with their mother; (3) the children attend CCD classes through mother's church; (4) mother, father and children are Roman Catholic; (5) the religious leaders with whom the GAL consulted advised her that the children should have their First Reconciliation and First Communion in the church where they attend CCD courses.
It is clear that the established clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits excessive State entanglement with matters of religion. Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 614-15, 91 S.Ct. 2105 (1971). However, the United States Supreme Court's holdings do not call for total separation between church and state; total separation is not possible in an absolute sense. Some relationship between government and religious organizations is inevitable. Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306, 312 (1952); Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398, 422 (1963) (Harlan, J., dissenting). Judicial caveats against entanglement must recognize that the line of separation, far from being a wall is a blurred, indistinct, and variable barrier depending on all the circumstances of a particular relationship. Homonnay at 5.
"The first amendment requires the state to stay out of controversies over religious doctrine and policy to ensure governmental neutrality in these matters . . . [j]udges realize that deciding which parent's religion is better for the child unduly entangles them in a religious dispute. There is no constitutional difference between deciding one faith is better than another and deciding that faith is better than no faith. In both case, the judge is evaluating the relative merits of the parents' sentiments on religious maters. This type of decision takes judges too far down the path of religious philosophy . . . thereby entangling them in debates particularly inappropriate to the judicial function." 82 Mich.L.Rev. 1702, 1725-27. The above areas are clearly not the issues with which the court is being asked to deal in this case.
The parties are not asking the Court to chose between religions or even whether or not to have a religious ceremony. The controversy before the Court is where the ceremony should take place. Mother feels the ceremony should take place in the church where the boys are being trained through their CCD classes for said ceremonies. Clearly, it is in the best interests of the minor children and the parties to know when these events will take place and where and, since the mother was given final decision-making in this area, her decision must be upheld.
The court has jurisdiction to determine whether the children should attend their First Reconciliation and First Communion in father or mother's church. The First Reconciliation and First Communion shall take place in the minor children's church in Watertown.
SO ORDERED.