Rhode Island Grandparents’ Rights Trial Highlights Complex Legal and Ethical Issues

A contentious legal battle in Rhode Island is bringing the complexities of grandparents’ rights into sharp focus, raising questions about family autonomy, medical ethics, and the role of the courts in determining familial relationships. The case centers around Scott Naso, a police detective, and his in-laws, Dr. Jila Khorsand and Dr. Siavash Ghoreishi, who are seeking visitation rights with their granddaughter, Laila, following the death of their daughter, Sherry Naso, in April 2024.

The Core of the Dispute

Dr. Khorsand and Dr. Ghoreishi initiated legal action three months after their daughter’s death, arguing that Laila is their only remaining connection to her. Yet, Scott Naso alleges that his in-laws’ medical care and advice contributed to his wife’s death and potentially harmed Laila. He is actively fighting to prevent them from having access to his daughter. The case is unfolding in the Kent County Family Court, with Judge Felix Gill now presiding after the retirement of the initial judge, Debra DiSegna, who had previously granted supervised visitation without a full trial – a decision Naso is challenging.

Medical Concerns and Allegations

The trial has revealed a deeply personal and troubling history. Dr. Ghoreishi testified that he and his wife were intimately involved in their daughter’s healthcare, even conducting a breast exam themselves when she first noticed a lump in 2017. They subsequently facilitated her diagnosis and treatment at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. However, Scott Naso claims that his in-laws’ frequent prescriptions – 124 to Sherry Naso over a decade and 36 to Laila – and medical advice may have masked the return and spread of Sherry’s cancer.

Further complicating matters, Dr. Ghoreishi admitted to prescribing medication to his daughter frequently, believing she might be sharing it with Scott Naso. He also testified to keeping Sherry’s Dexedrine pills at his home and dispensing them to her, citing concerns that his son-in-law might misuse them, but offered no supporting evidence for this claim. He also stated he was unaware of the American Medical Association code of ethics and Rhode Island Department of Health advice against treating family members, and even consulted ChatGPT, which he said indicated it was permissible.

Legal Framework and Grandparents’ Rights

The case highlights a growing legal debate across the United States: the extent to which courts can intervene in parental decisions regarding grandparent visitation. The US Supreme Court and the 14th Amendment generally grant parents the right to oversee their children’s upbringing. However, state laws, like the one in Rhode Island, allow judges to grant visitation rights to grandparents under certain circumstances. Scott Naso argues that this law infringes upon his constitutional right to decide who has access to his child, stating he has spent over $300,000 in legal fees defending this right.

Ongoing Proceedings and Future Outlook

Hearings in the case were held in October and December 2025, and are expected to continue through the first week of March 2026. Scott Naso is expected to testify, along with Sherry Naso’s primary care physician and Laila’s fresh pediatrician. The judge’s decision will ultimately determine whether Dr. Khorsand and Dr. Ghoreishi will be granted the right to visit their granddaughter, setting a potential precedent for similar cases in Rhode Island and beyond.