Saturday, July 22, 2017

ME Judiciary Committee to Chief Justice Saufley on GAL Review Board and Complaint

In what was a surprise move by the Judiciary Committee - a letter was sent to Honorable Leigh I. Saufley, Chief Justice of Maine's Supreme Court regarding the Guardian ad litem Review Board and Complaint process.

The recommendations made - while they do not go nearly far enough in our opinion - is a start. It also shows that consumers of these services who spoke out or wrote in had an impact on the opinions of this committee. Below is the letter which was sent:

July 18, 2017

Honorable Leigh I. Saufley, Chief Justice
Maine Supreme Judicial Court
Cumberland County Courthouse
205 Newbury Street
Room 139
Portland, Maine 04101-4175

Re: Guardian Ad Litem Review Board and Complaint Process

Dear Chief Justice Saufley:

As you may know, the Judiciary Committee this session considered and unanimously supported LD 457, An Act To Repeal the Sunset Date on the Children Guardians Ad Litem Law. As the title suggests, this bill repeals the sunset provision in Title 4, Chapter 32, the comprehensive law enacted by the 126th Legislature to reform the statutes, rules and procedures involving the court-appointment, compensation, and oversight of children's guardians ad litem in guardianship, adoption, divorce, parental rights and responsibilities, and child protection proceedings.

At the public hearing on LD 457, we encouraged to learn from Chief Judge E. Mary Kelly about the reforms the Judicial Branch implemented after the enactment Of Title 4, Chapter 32: the development and adoption of the new Maine Rules for Guardians ad Litem governing the qualifications, standards of conduct, and appointment of guardians ad litem as well as the procedures governing oversight of guardians ad [item by the Guardian ad Litem Review Board, a new, independent unit of the Board of Overseers Of the Bar. We are satisfied that these reforms were necessary responses to address the concerns that led to enactment of Title 4, Chapter 32.

We were troubled, however, by the testimony we heard and received indicating that some parties in court proceedings where guardians ad litem have been appointed remain frustrated by the perceived lack of accountability enjoyed by guardians ad litem. Individuals who testified against LD 457 expressed confusion surrounding what they view as an overly complex and impersonal Guardian ad Litem Review Board Complaint system as well as dismay that the heavy representation of rostered guardians ad litem on the Review Board prevents complainants from receiving a fair evaluation of their grievances. We therefore respectfully request that the Judicial Branch and the Guardian Ad Litem Review Board consider implementing the following changes to the Guardian Ad Litem Review Board and the complaint process:

  • improve the balance in board membership between rostered guardians ad litem (currently 8 members) and members of the public (currently 4 members);
  • clearly inform complainants both on the complaint form and on the board's publicly accessible website that board staff are willing and able to assist complainants both with filling out the complaint form and with understanding the complaint process; 
  • remove question C. 1 from the complaint form, which inquires whether the complainant is aware of any past complaints against the guardian ad litem; 
  • require board staff to immediately acknowledge receipt of all complaints in writing; 
  • ensure complaints are processed in a timely manner, with periodic updates provided to complainants to keep them informed of the status of the complaint; and 
  • provide a written explanation to the complainant of the reason for dismissal whenever a complaint is dismissed at any point in the complaint process.
Thank you for considering these recommendations. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions.

Senator Lisa Keim
Senator Chair

Representative Matthew W. Moonen
House Chair

To review a copy of the actual document please follow this link.


  1. People need to audio record GAL and Attorney's. It is legal in Maine without them knowing you are recording them. Simply store them and submit them with any complaint otherwise it will be your word against theirs and most complaint boards side with them. You can also transcribe them and have them notarized and submit them with your complaint. I also recommend to go put a review about them online at Yelps, yellow pages etc.. That's legal and may even be better then filing a complaint with the board. In addition, post recordings online on youtube etc... That's legal as well. Once these thugs start being exposed publicly that's when you'll see their heads spin and start making real changes.. Don't feel bad about it either. Do you think they fell bad when they screw over your child or family? They laugh.

  2. We had Walter Ollen GAL in our case. He is nasty and despicable. I will never forgive him for what he allowed to happen to my children. He is a father's rights advocate even if it's a convicted domestic abuser that's sending his children home with Fractures, even dropped one child off a pre school years ago with cigarette burns on my child's body. He made excuse after excuse, he buried it, and basically told me to shut up about it. He intimated me, acted inappropriate, and lied in secret family court. He said I agreed to a visitation schedule that I never agreed to. He made no effort to keep my children safe. The parent alienation was horrific. My ex was even sabotaging the children by jacking them on sugar foods before coming home, even jacking them up on coffee before school on his days creating a false picture that the children had ADHD. Walter Ollen GAL also told me, there is nothing he can do to protect the children. Unless there so badly beaten that it causes a hospital admission and even then it would have to be proven that my ex did it intentionally. Walter Ollen, GAL you are not fit to be a GAL and you need a psychological evaluation.

    1. You offer some good advice on recording everything because it is your word (from the courts perspective a nobody) against theirs (a respective vendor of the court). Who will the courts believe? The idea of going to a site and rating the service rendered is an interesting one as it does allow for the voicing of ones own opinion. On LawyerRatingz he has a 1.1 out of 5. Google search his name. Thank you for the thoughts