Lawyers' trainer Bush ready for family court role
If Eleanor Bush wins election as an Allegheny County judge, she'll likely end up exactly where she wants to work.
Most new Common Pleas judges start in family court, which handles the issues on which Bush, 53, of Squirrel Hill has focused for 25 years.
“I am the only person in this race with the depth and breadth of experience serving kids and families,” said Bush, one of 13 candidates running for four spots on the bench.
A New York native, Bush spent much of the first 13 years of her legal career in court working for the state Department of Education and the Juvenile Law Center in Philadelphia.
“I saw that there is so much opportunity for lives to change for the better from this work,” she told the Tribune-Review.
Bush's work in Pittsburgh over the past decade took her further away from the courtroom as she trained lawyers.
“The work I do now impacts families in 62 counties of the state,” she said.
She served on a committee that recommended changes as a result of the cash-for-kids scandal in Luzerne County, and she believes in allowing more public access to juvenile courts.
Through working with agencies that appear in family court daily, Bush knows their struggles.
“I so wish they could figure out a way to make scheduling better for families,” she said, citing possible evening hours.
On the issues:
What's the top issue facing the court? “From my perspective, the biggest issue facing the court is the family or litigants who are that moment standing before you.”
How do you keep political donations by lawyers from affecting decisions from the bench? “It isn't remotely an issue. I can't even tell you where the contributions are from.”
Should judges hire family members? “By far the most important thing for a judge to consider in how the judge runs a courtroom is to avoid any appearance of impropriety.”
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.