Justice Delayed: Parenting Rights and the Waiver of Appeal in Vetter v. Vetter

Case HRPM-MMAPAUUA, Vetter v. Vetter, et al., serves as a critical study in family law and the fundamental rights of children. Based on the legal precedent [2026 ND 36], this investigation explores the 'medium' severity human rights implications when parenting time is restricted without meeting the 'preponderance of the evidence' standard. It highlights a common judicial failure: the deeming of arguments as 'waived' due to inadequate briefing, which often leaves the underlying human rights of the child unaddressed.

Key Findings

The Preschool of Precedent

Under [2026 ND 36], any argument not adequately articulated, supported, and briefed on appeal is waived. In the Vetter case, the HRPM platform identifies this as a point of contention. The investigation reveals that the technicalities of appellate briefing are being used as a barrier to the 'best interest' of the child, effectively stripping away the child's right to spend time with their parent.

The Burden of Proof

The law states that parenting time is a right of the child, not merely a privilege. Restrictions require a showing that unrestricted time is 'likely to endanger the child's physical or emotional health.' The research indicates that without rigorous adherence to this standard, judicial discretion becomes arbitrary, violating the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).

Evidence & Data

Case Reference: HRPM-MMAPAUUA

Precedent: [2026 ND 36]

Standard applied: Preponderance of the evidence.

Status: Active.

Legal Framework

Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) Article 9: Children should not be separated from their parents against their will, except when competent authorities determine it is in the best interests of the child.

ICCPR Article 23: The protocol that the family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

UDHR Article 16(3): Reaffirms the State’s duty to protect the family unit.

Recommendations

Mandatory Evidentiary Hearings: Courts should be barred from restricting parenting time based on procedural waivers alone; a substantive evidentiary hearing must occur.

Child-Centric Legal Aid: Provision of independent legal representation for children in high-conflict cases like Vetter to ensure their rights are not 'waived' by the failings of their parents' legal briefs.

Read the full case file on HRPM for more exhaustive documentation on Case HRPM-MMAPAUUA.