Facts
The appellant, [E.A.] , is the son of [A.A.] and [B.A.] . The parents divorced in September 2010 and parental custody was awarded to the mother. In October 2013, the Child and Adult Protection Authority (KESB) Weinfelden withdrew the mother's custody of the children and placed them in foster families. The father's visitation rights were provisionally withdrawn. In November 2013, a guardianship was established under Art. 308 para. 1 CC and a child representation was ordered under Art. 314a bis para. 1 CC. The child representative, lawyer [F.] , was dismissed from office in October 2015. [E.A.] applied in November 2015 for the appointment of a new child representation and the appointment of lawyer Simon Lichtensteiger as child representative. The KESB rejected the application, and the High Court of the Canton of Thurgau confirmed this decision.
The appellant now requests the appointment of a child representation, the appointment of lawyer Simon Lichtensteiger as child representative, and free legal aid. The KESB and the High Court of the Canton of Thurgau have spoken out against the appointment of a child representation.
Considerations
The Federal Court has dismissed the appeal, insofar as it is admissible. The appeal is to be considered as having been without prospects of success from the outset, as the requirements for the appointment of a child representation are not met.
The Federal Court has found that the KESB originally considered the child representation necessary and ordered it, but after the dismissal of the child representative in October 2015, no new representation was ordered. The appellant has not demonstrated how the situation has changed since the dismissal of the child representative in such a way that representation would now be necessary again.
The Federal Court has also…