1)

Both Janice and her mother have rights that must be considered and respected under the 14th
amendment. Janice is a 15 year old who has proven to be academically advanced for her age. This is
made evident by the fact that at 15 she will begin her senior year at Central High School in September.
Janice is also a member of the debating team as well as the editor of the senior yearbook. Janice has been
invited by Salem University to take early admissions and would like her to begin courses at the University
in the Spring Term.
Janices mother has expressed concerns about Janices welfare and is demanding that she not accept early
admission. Janices mother feels that Janice is too young and that early admission would require her to
sacrifice her graphic design business and courses at the art studio. The mother has also stated that she
wants Janice to go to law school. Due to the fathers death, the mother has also expressed some concern of
losing the supplementary financial assistance provided by Janices income.
Janice has stated that she would like to take early admission. Through an administered competency test, it
is evident to this court that Janice is a competent minor. Janice believes that 26 hours a week working at
her business and various other activities will not interfere with her ability to complete her high school
subjects and take early admission. Tinker vs. Des Moines established that the rights of minors are
protected by the constitution. In this case, Janices 14th amendment rights must be considered and
respected. Janice is mature and bright enough to weigh the factors that need consideration to make a
rationale determination as to whether or not to accept early admission.
Janice also has rights that must be considered and respected under the 14th amendment. She has equal
protection under the law just like Janice. She has the right to voice her concerns and opinions on Janice
potentially accepting early admission.

2) In this case we have Grandparents who want custody over their grandchildren after the death of both of
both parents. Joan and Peter had two children form their marriage: Billy who is now 8, and Jennie now
age 10. The parents divorced and the custody of the children was granted to Joan. Later, Joan married
Patricia, and during that same year Peter was killed in an accident. A few years later, Joan passed away
and Patricia continued to raise the children. Now, both Peters and Joans parents want custody of the
children and both feel that Patricia should not have custody of the children. They reason that she has no
right because she has never officially adopted them and she is not their biological parent. Patricia has
expressed her wishes to continue raising the children.
A relevant factor in determining whether Peter or Joans parents should be awarded custody is seeing
whether Patricia is a good guardian. In this case Patricia is shown to be an unfit guardian. She is shown to
be financially unstable due to the fact that she has not been able to stay at a job for more than three months
in the past year. Furthermore, it is shown that the deplorable state of Patricias home is unfit to raise two
children. Another factor that is relevant in determining custody is the opinion of the children themselves.
A competency test administered by this court has determined that both Billy and Jennie are competent.
Both Billy and Jennie express their desire to no longer be under the custody of Patricia. Another relevant
factor in determining the custody of the children is how fit are the grandparents in raising these children.

3) Alexis Sommers is 13 years old and weights 261 pounds. The school made a report to the Social
services agency expressing concern over childs health. Initially the court ordered nutrition counseling,
cooking classes and gym workouts. Social services checked on Alexis several months later and reported
that there was no loss of weight. The mom is reported to have a drug problem and was severely overwight
as well. Social services is skeeing to relieve Mrs. Somers of custody over Alexis stating that her health
was in grave danger.
Mrs. Sommers rights in this situation are that she is the legal biological parent of Alexis. She has the right
to raise her child the she seems fit.
One determining factor that must be considered is the opinion of Alexis. Alexis is 13 years old and was
administered a competency test by the court. The court found that Alexis was competent, mature and
bright enough to weigh the factors that need consideration to make a rationale determination as to whether
she wants to stay in the custody of her mother. Another factor that must be considered is the actual gravity
of Alexis health. A doctors report informs us that while Alexis weight poses some health issues it is not
an immediate threat to her life. Alexis is in no danger of losing her life currently because of her weight and
this is important because that is the argument that is being made by social services. What also must be
considered are the sociological factors contributing to the issue at hand.
In Prince v Massachusetts it was established that parental rights do not override the health of the
community. If a childs ailment poses a threat to the community or other children than the court has the
authority to limit parental rights. In this case although Alexis Sommers overweightness poses potential
health issues for her, it does not pose a threat to the community or to other children