Judge Gerald Hardcastle issued a decision this afternoon (June 22) in the matter of the parental rights of Tamara Bergeron. The State of Nevada sought to terminate Bergeron’s parental rights and severe her from her daughter Brittney. Judge Hardcastle denied the state’s request to terminate parental rights.
In an excerpt from the ruling, Hardcastle states:
The reunification process has been ended by TAMARA’s incarceration. BRITTNEY will not be physically reunified with her mother during her minority. To the degree that BRITTNEY is concerned about being returned to her mother’s care and living the life she knew prior to January 2003, that concern is satisfied. BRITTNEY will not be physically reunified with her mother.
But is it in BRITTNEY’s best interests to terminate TAMARA’s parental rights? The Department case manager says that it is not. This Court believes that it is not. BRITTNEY’s best interests are served by allowing TAMARA and BRITTNEY to continue to have a parent-child relationship, even if that relationship is other than traditional.
BRITTNEY’s love for her mother is so substantial that loss of that relationship would be detrimental to BRITTNEY. BRITTNEY’s desires for stability and safety have been assured. Her desire for a continuing relationship with her mother can be assured by denial of this Petition. It is simply not in her best interest to remove her mother from her life.
The hope is that free of the influence of the notoriety of this case, BRITTNEY and TAMARA will have a future relationship mutually agreeable to both. BRITTNEY also has the great benefit of having a truly unique foster family. Both TAMARA and the foster family love BRITTNEY. Both can be important in her life. There is no reason to choose one over the other. There is certainly no reason to exclude one over the other.
Since the mother’s rights are not terminated, there is no interest in terminating the father’s parental rights at this point.
Accordingly, the Petition is DENIED. This Decision shall constitute Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as well as the final Judgment in this matter.
This decision comes as a result of a trial held in Dept. D of the Family Court before Judge Gerald Hardcastle which concluded on June 16, 2006.
#1 by D. Victoria - January 9th, 2009 at 21:18
Unfortunately, the Family Court system failed Brittney Bergeron and her deceased sister miserably. This tragedy could have been avoided had these children not been placed in the custody of their disfunctioning parents. These children were used as a pawn between the two parents and the Family Court system allowed this to happen. What ever happened to making decisions in the child’s best interest?
#2 by Sage - January 10th, 2009 at 01:42
Your decision is very unfortunate for many eyes have been watching. Not only do the courts provide example of second chances to thoughs childless parents, it gives others a chance to take from their child their last breath. So live on in your normal lives and continue to accept the unacceptabel for you will see the blinding light in the end and be in a never ending bad karma. There are no real second chances. Big mistake guys.