Helping set legal precedent, man gains custody of boy he helped raise
Forging a lasting bond
By Schuyler Kropf
The Post and Courier
Kenneth Middleton is a retired longshoreman who helped shape S.C. law by obtaining full custody of Joshua Hollington, whom Middleton helped raise from childhood even though he is not Joshua's father. They live in Middleton's Goose Creek Home.
Previous story
Man wins rights for 'psychological' parents, published 04/08/07
GOOSE CREEK — It took years for retired Charleston longshoreman Kenneth Middleton to get full custody of 16-year-old Joshua.
Maybe it was fitting that it happened just before Father's Day.
After years of legal wrangling in which Middleton helped cement a new legal doctrine of "psychological parent" rights in South Carolina, Middleton became the boy's permanent guardian last week after reaching an agreement with the boy's mother.
A family court judge signed an order giving Middleton full custody of Joshua, whom he has helped raise from childhood even after a paternity test showed that he was not the boy's father.
"I would recommend it for any father today," Middleton said of his six-year fight that went as high as the S.C. Court of Appeals. "If you have standing in the child's life and the child sees you as a parent, it's worth it."
Middleton's courtroom achievement is that he was able to prove a strong psychological bond had formed between the two, arguing that Joshua would be emotionally damaged if his relationship and father-figure role was abruptly removed.
The doctrine has been recognized in other states but not so much in South Carolina until Middleton forced the issue.
"It's a happy ending, and we don't see many of those," said Middleton's current family court attorney, Nancy Bailey of Florence.
Joshua Rashad Hollington was born in April 1993. Middleton acted as if he were the boy's father even though he and Joshua's mother never married. He took him to school and went to his ball games and teacher-parent conferences at school.
When a paternity test taken much later showed that Middleton was not Joshua's father, Middleton stayed on as the boy's "dad."
Tensions later arose with Joshua's mother. After she had married, she moved to cut Middleton out of their lives, prompting him to go to court, challenging the state's child-visitation laws.
The first round went against him when a family court judge denied his request for court-ordered visitation.
Under South Carolina law at that time, the fit biological parent — in this case Joshua's mother — retained the fundamental right to determine whether any third party could visit her child.
And because the youth understood that he had a biological father elsewhere, Middleton could not legally be his psychological parent, the court said, and therefore had no legal right for visitation.
Middleton appealed, and in 2006 his case was argued in front of the S.C. Court of Appeals. The judges backed Middleton and his then-attorney, Margaret Fabri of Charleston, sending the case back to Berkeley County, where a judge approved a visitation schedule.
Middleton's effort is now widely recognized as pioneering right-of-access law in the state. "It's a wonderful case because it established a precedent for nonrelated people to continue relationships with a child that may have been disrupted," Bailey said.
As the boy grew into a young adult, Middleton applied for full custody, which Florence County Family Court Judge Jerry Vinson approved last week, making what had been partial custody status full custody.
Adoption might come later. Joshua is an honor student and rising junior at Stratford High School.
Middleton said the issue is one of fathers sticking with their children, fighting separation and knowing there is a reward at the end.
"The thing that makes me feel good about this is, I got to rescue a young child and help give him the opportunity to be the best he can be," he said.
Reach Schuyler Kropf at 937-5551, or skropf@postandcourier.com.
E-mail this story
Printer-friendly versionComments
LAG (anonymous) says...
Mr.Middleton sounds like a great guy. Too bad all fathers aren't like him. I respect this man-he's an excellent role model to all fathers across the country.
June 21, 2009 at 12:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
stanish (anonymous) says...
WOW! What a fitting tribute especially on Father's Day. Kenneth Middleton could've easily and legally walked away when the paternity test PROVED that he was not this young man's father, which most men would've done! I admire his tenacity, devotion, character, and strenght! I don't really want to inject RACE into it, but it's a PLUS especially when I see Black Men being a role model and taking on the responsibility of a Father, because the Media and Society STILL label us as absentee father's and our children coming from single parent homes receiving Gov't Asst. and having NO male present in their lives and upbringing. Sadly, this is far from the TRUTH, and we continue to prove the FALSEHOOD by articles such as these. Congratulations Kenneth Middleton on A JOB WELL DONE! Joshua, you are truly BLESSED to have such an inspiring figure in your life, YOUR DAD, Kenneth Middleton.
June 21, 2009 at 2:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
GAL2000 (anonymous) says...
P&C...thank you for finally listening to your readers, and posting a news worthy story worth reading and exposing some (very slim) family courts inner workings, when the system works.
HAPPY FATHERS DAY MR. MIDDLETON! WELL DONE!
:-}
June 21, 2009 at 5:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
GAL2000 (anonymous) says...
Curious...which family court judge heard the case P&C? Quote: "A family court judge signed an order". Justice Jean Toal will not get upset if you expose which family court judge did the right thing for once.
June 21, 2009 at 5:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lillycollette (anonymous) says...
"The doctrine has been recognized in other states but not so much in South Carolina until Middleton forced the issue."
Mr. Middleton had a good case to begin with. S.C. didn't grant him what should have been his from the beginning -- until family court and its henchmen got their cut of his finances.
My best wishes to Mr. Middleton. SHAME upon family court.
June 21, 2009 at 7:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jammer (anonymous) says...
this is an excellent fathers day article!
you have nothing but my full respect and admiration Mr. Middleton, my hats off to you...
and you're right stanish, this is the kind of example the black men in this area need to see and emulate
we have a jail full on Leeds Ave. of mostly black men that have run from their responsibilities of fathering a child, it's extremely refreshing to see the PC write an article showing the other side of the coin
June 21, 2009 at 7:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
retired (anonymous) says...
Greater love than this no man has that he lay down his life for another.
June 21, 2009 at 8:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Tulane75 (anonymous) says...
1. It is neither accurate nor fair to suggest that the people who work in and around the Family Court make extra money depending on the case.
2. The Family Court is a very painful place. People are always sniping at lawyers, when the clients often choose to litigate rather than treat one another with dignity.
3. Decisions are often made on emotion, which leads to any number of problems. For example, parents don't think twice about spending the cost of a college education on lawyers instead of compromising. There is often a need for one to "show" the other how tough and nasty they are. Revenge by one party against the other is not an unknown concept in the Family Court.
4. Parents litigate with such brutality that whichever party "wins", the children lose and they are scarred for life.
5. This is a nice story, but this case should have never come to court. While I am not personally familiar with the case, I would guess that the mother knew very well that Mr. Middleton was viewed by the child as the father. Nevertheless, she wanted to take advantage of what she believed at the time to be "beneficial" case law. That's the problem though! She should have been thinking like a parent, rather than a litigant. Her LEGAL position was arguable, but her moral position was not.
6. Every Family Court judge in this state would rather place an agreement on the record than have a trial.
June 21, 2009 at 8:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
abitskeptical (anonymous) says...
Tulane:
As a witness to a case that dragged through the family court for over 2 yrs., I know 1st hand that they were negligent & that negligence almost led to the destruction of an innocent child.
Family court, early on, ignored crucial facts indicating the father is a dangerous sociopath, yet left the 9 yr old child w/ him for over 7 mos before finally determining he was a detriment to the child's welfare & gave the mother sole custody-barring dad from contact w/ the child until he had sought counseling & completed an anger management therapy...dad of course being the sociopath that he is refused.
Also, as the main 3rd party witness to facts of the case I was asked to write an affidavit. The court-appointed attorney had this document for well over 6 mos when he called me(witness interview). It was clear he had not read one word of my affidavit. At 1st I assumed he was just making certain of some things, but as this telephone interview dragged on, I realized he was clueless about most details of the case. This was a Friday afternoon. A hearing was scheduled for Monday.
I later found out that a bill for the telephone interview was presented to the parents! At that point I felt like billing the attorney for my time, as I already had spent considerable time on the affidavit I had prepared & there was no legitimate reason for him to bill for the phone time.
What I have said here is only scratching the surface of the c-rap that occurred with this case.
(Also, on several occasions, the judge made everyone wait while she read through a stack of documents she should have reviewed prior to court...unbelievable)
June 21, 2009 at 9:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wonderdog (anonymous) says...
Having lived through the family court process, I agree with one family law attorney's assessment:
"If you want to have s*x, go to a wh*re house. If you REALLY want to get scr*wed, go to family court!"
June 21, 2009 at 10:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wonderdog (anonymous) says...
I met Kenneth Middleton about 10 years ago, and though we worked on opposite "sides" of a legal issue, I was very impressed by his demeanor and concern for his workers.
I would like to repeat my post yesterday: Happy Father's Day, Mr. Middleton!
June 21, 2009 at 10:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lillycollette (anonymous) says...
Abit don't worry about the "self-justification" that Tulane75 feels compelled to share.
I doubt that he can help it.
(LMAO) I know he can't back it up. Now let me get up off the floor before someone mistakes me for -- Tickle Me Elmo.
June 21, 2009 at 11:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
coolfreaknbeans (anonymous) says...
Mr. Middleton is wonderful role model for all fathers. Happy Father's Day to you !!! Great story PnC !
June 21, 2009 at 1:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
abitskeptical (anonymous) says...
Well, over the years I, like many others, have heard various horror stories about family court & DSS.
Mostly, in an attempt to be objective, I took them all with a grain of salt, assuming that one's perspective in whatever the situation was, certainly colored how the various actions of the court, lawyers DSS etc were judged.
Perhaps it is not fair, but after what I saw 1st hand, I no longer think the other horror stories are merely a matter of an emotional perspective. I believe they were legitimate horror stories of ineptitude,negligence, laziness, etc. by the movers & shakers in the family court & DSS system, plain & simple.
June 21, 2009 at 3:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
TheTruthFighter (anonymous) says...
Speechless, God has a special place for you Mr. Middleton. Wow, I take my hat off to ya!
June 21, 2009 at 4:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
abitskeptical (anonymous) says...
With all my railing against family court...I forgot to congratulate Mr. Middleton on being a wonderful & inspiring example of love in action. The world could use more people with your character.
Blessings to you & your new charge.
June 21, 2009 at 5:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sardis12 (anonymous) says...
Judge Vinson from Florence signed the order. He's actually a pretty even-tempered, respectful, and considerate judge, not something you always find in family court...
June 21, 2009 at 5:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Tides (anonymous) says...
Congrats, Mr Middleton. I am only sadden by the fact of how long it took. What all this cost you in dollars, I can only imagine.
Many know that the majority of South Carolina's Family Court judges are biased towards men; and, that custodial mothers often use children as weapons against the child's father. The entire system is a nasty cesspool that lawyers use to make a living with hopes of getting rich. And many do get rich off working this racket. The people should be voting for their judges in SC. Not the legislature. A corrupt and power hungry legislature at that! Judge Segars-Andrews and Judge Garfinkel's ... two judges that have violated due process more than a couple of times. Just ask investigative reporter Karen Winner from NYC who wrote "Divorced From Justice". Ms Winner knows a lot that the public doesn't about this corrupt divorce court system in SC.
June 21, 2009 at 5:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jammer (anonymous) says...
yeaa family court and DSS are a joke, unfortunately not a very funny one
we have the bottom of the barrel at DSS, most of them can't even speak proper english and the attitudes are ridiculously rude
DSS needs a serious overhaul of it's staff and objectives
June 21, 2009 at 10:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
TRODI (anonymous) says...
A partner of mine went in Dorchester county to do a review thing for his son a while back who recently graduated.the ladies were literally trying to get his ex to get more money out of him.they had a agreement of 600 a month.they were looking at what he made and didn't take into account the four children he has with his new wife with that factored in she would be getting a lot less.she told them that was fine.he was doing what he needed to do he was a good father ect.they were persistent at trying to get this woman to ream him as she didn't want to.as he quoted someone looked at the computer for what he made and used the term big baller.he said it was a very hostile environment.he actually said one of the ladies in there gave him some grief when he left.like she would be getting some big money from him ect if it was her.the ignorance of our local system is unreal.someone should go in and tape this crap undercover and put it all over the news.iguess thats what happens.when you have to hire on quotas instead of actually taking a test for your knowledge and level of education.i haven't gone through it personally but it sounds like a typical government handout convention.
June 21, 2009 at 11:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
flgeechee1 (anonymous) says...
God bless Mr. Middleton. He is a perfect example of what so many children need in their lives. A parent who is there , who cares, and the loving advocate for his child. Biological or not, He is the true earthly Father of this future man, who will surely pass these qualities on in his lifetime.Blessings heaped on you, Mr. Middleton," The Irish Blessing" to you,my friend.
June 22, 2009 at 5:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lillycollette (anonymous) says...
MEYERS v. MEYERS
No. 33262
199 P.2d 819
1948 OK 246
Decided: November 16, 1948
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
In Miller v. Miller, 234 Ala. 453, 175 So. 284, it is said:
"We may further observe that where the jurisdiction of the court is invoked and obtained by a fraudulent 'concoction' and the fraud is consummated through the instrumentality of a court of justice, it would impeach the moral sense and that of justice that courts be not protected against such fraud. . . .
" 'We can conceive of no worse reflection upon a judicial system, no lowering of its dignity and of the respect due to its findings more regrettable than that the tribunal of justice may become an impotent agency of fraud against those who look to its for protection. . . . That the fraudulent scheme contemplated perjury and was consummated thereby does not lessen the call to the jurisdiction of a court of equity.' "
[:] the definition of "extrinsic fraud" set forth in the Supreme Court's 1878 decision in United States v. Throckmorton. In that case, the high court gave several examples of extrinsic fraud, such as when the losing party was kept from making his case by his opponent's fraudulent actions, or when a party's attorney colludes with the other side.
June 22, 2009 at 5:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lillycollette (anonymous) says...
This newspaper has an obligation to the people of this community to start investigating what is going on in that criminal industry under guise of a family court.
June 22, 2009 at 5:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
GAL2000 (anonymous) says...
Thanks sardis12 for the information on the judge. I'm familar with the name only.
June 22, 2009 at 6:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
follygirl (anonymous) says...
Mr Middleton, what a man! Joshua, you are such a lucky boy. I know you will grown into a wonderful man with Mr Middleton as your "dad" and role model. Congrats to both of you!
June 22, 2009 at 6:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
GAL2000 (anonymous) says...
As I stated earlier Mr. Middleton, you are a fine example, and this was a good story posted...keep that smile going.
Hopefully, we can start to see the "Four-pronged test" used more use in the Charleston Family Courts as quoted below.
The S.C. Court of Appeals adopted this four-pronged test to determine whether a bond exists between a child and a "psychological parent."
1) Did the biological parent encourage the relationship to flourish between child and adult?
2) Did the psychological parent and child live together for a time as part of the same household?
3) Did the psychological parent take on some of the obligations of parenthood, such as child care and education, without expectation of financial compensation?
4) Was the person in a parental role for a significant length of time, enough for a bond to be established?
June 22, 2009 at 7:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
charlestonbill (anonymous) says...
Congratulations Mr. Middleton! Job Well Done!!
Maybe grandparents can use this to regain some visitation lost because a husband and wife divorce. When they loose the right to see their grands, it is a painful thing. I know first hand.
Given that the grandparents rights were removed a few years ago, this case may give us grounds to move forward for visitation of our grand children.
We are not the bad guys.......
Thanks again Mr. Middleton
June 22, 2009 at 8:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Lovely_One (anonymous) says...
Mr. Middleton, you have my utmost respect. Lots of me in your position would have walked away, but you STOOD UP like a MAN should and took care of business. Happy Father's Day to you!
June 22, 2009 at 8:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Chicago_Thug (anonymous) says...
Great story and great ending (beginning?) for a couple ofgreat guys. Congrats Kenneth Middleton, way to hang in there and not give up.
You have taught this young man a great life lesson & set an example for all of us.
Thanks sardis12 for the information on the judge.
June 22, 2009 at 8:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BlackReign (anonymous) says...
"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy." MLK
Well done Mr. Kenneth Middleton, well done!
June 22, 2009 at 9:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
stanish (anonymous) says...
Posted by BlackReign on June 22, 2009 at 9:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy." MLK
Well done Mr. Kenneth Middleton, well done!
These are the words of Dr. King, and it is a fitting tribute to Mr. Middleton. You on the other hand, Black Terror, is a RACIST and it makes one sick to the stomach to have such a disgusting vile puke like yourself to use these powerful words when you despise the LEADER who spoke them!
June 22, 2009 at 8:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.
Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!
Full terms and conditions can be read here.
- Most Commented
- Most Emailed
- S.C. losing port traffic to other states
- Out with old ...
- Water — 'The smell is gone'
- Cart gives Buddy new lease on life
- Schools plan to update visitor-security system
- GenPhar site 'red-tagged'
- Man, 17, killed in motorcycle wreck
- Off campus
- Historic manor house used by Girl Scouts is among buildings that might be torn down to make way for future
- Tough times have taught comedian's sister to love life
