HEIDIOLOGY
QUALIFYING BEHAVIOR
BY HEIDI HARRIS

A couple of years ago, I was speaking at a seniors’ luncheon when the subject of family court surfaced. I asked if anyone in the room had ever been in family court. Not one hand lifted. It spoke volumes about the generation gap. I guess it’s my generation that’s crowding family court with so many heartbreaking cases. 

I can’t sympathize with adults who wind up in family court via poor choices — poor choices in spouses or partners, poor behavior, etc. My heart breaks, however, for children caught in the middle. In these cases, the family court judge should be the last line of defense for the defenseless.

One such case is currently being decided by Clark County Family Court Judge Gerald Hardcastle. Two years ago, Brittany Bergeron was paralyzed and her 3-year-old sister killed when two teens attacked them both in retaliation for a bogus drug deal involving the girls’ mother, Tamara Schmidt (now Bergeron). Schmidt claims her then-boyfriend had defrauded the teens, who now await trial for murder. 

At the time of the attack, Brittany and her sister were being raised, if you can call it that, in a travel trailer in a casino RV lot. According to witnesses who testified in family court, the girls were frequently left unattended, and Brittany was the main caretaker for her sister. In addition, Schmidt had a long history of drug abuse, in at least two states. Since her injury, Brittany has lived with foster parents who want to adopt her. This is the only stable home Brittany has ever had, and she wants to stay. Brittany will have special medical needs for the rest of her life, issues her foster family is equipped to handle. 

In a perfect world, that would be the end of the story. Mom’s a loser; the daughter has a stable new home; case closed. Right? 

Not so fast.

Hardcastle is currently reviewing the testimony and will issue a decision on or about June 1. State authorities have labeled Tamara Schmidt “chronically unfit,” her sister is dead, yet Hardcastle said he was “still waiting for substantial evidence that Schmidt was an unfit parent.”

Is he kidding? How much evidence does he need? Hardcastle went on to say, “I don’t take children away from their parents for this type of behavior.” 

Really? Exactly what type of behavior qualifies, Your Honor? If Tamara Schmidt can retain her parental rights under these circumstances, the system has definitely failed.

Rather than rule in the best interests of the child, Judge Hardcastle seems to be looking for ways to return Brittany to Tamara, without regard for Brittany’s feelings and well-being. 

The mere act of giving birth does not impart wisdom, compassion or a sense of responsibility to anyone, especially a drug user. A judge’s responsibility in Family Court is to protect real victims, not to maintain the “rights” of those whose actions victimize others. LW