The case that governs "third-party custody" cases in GA is clear, to wit, Clark v. Wade, 544 S.E.2d 99 (2001
According to this article from: http://www.noelhbenedict.com/legal-essays/grandparent-custody-and-grandparent-visitation.html
"Georgia has a specific statute entitled O.C.G.A. § 19-7-1 (b.1) that governs the right of a grandparent to seek custody of a grandchild from that child's parent."
The constitutionality of that statute was in question before the Georgia Supreme Court in an important case called Clark v. Wade; 237 Ga. App. 587; 544 S.E. 2d. 99 (2001). The issue before that court was whether the statute was constitutional in how it applied to the taking away of a parent's parental rights to a child.
The article further states:
"The court determined that the statute was constitutional when it was applied with the following two-prong test: First, the third party, that being the grandparent(s), must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the child will suffer physical and emotional harm if custody were awarded to the biological parent. This is important because the "clear and convincing" evidence test is not expressly stated in the statute. Once the court has determined that there is clear and convincing evidence that the child will suffer physical or emotional harm if custody is awarded to the biological parent; then the third party, that is the grandparent(s), must show that an award of custody to the grandparent will best promote the child's welfare and happiness.
Of course, in cases where a child has been physically abused by a parent, then meeting the first prong of the test for a grandparent to get custody of the child should be relatively easy. The obviously more difficult part is where the long term harm to the child which must be proven by clear and convincing evidence is psychological harm. Obviously, one way to prove psychological harm is with a psychological evaluation by a qualified psychotherapist. In a custody dispute, a judge specifically has the right to require a psychological custody evaluation for the family or an independent medical evaluation. Another way psychological harm might be proven is through the testimony or observation of the Guardian ad Litem appointed by the court to determine what would be in the best interest of the child or children. In fact, it appears that in at least one recent Appellate Court case, the determination that the child's being in the mother's custody would adversely affect the child's mental well-being seemed to have primarily come from the Guardian ad Litem. That case is Lidely v. Bowen; 272 Ga. App. 479; 612 S.E. 2d. 625 (2005).
Each custody dispute case must be evaluated by its own set of facts. Decisions made by courts on grandparent custody differ from each other for different sets of facts. The court in these determinations is required to look at all of the facts, not just opinions. Therefore, these kinds of cases can be quite complex and require a direct conversation between the attorney and grandparent-client with an initial evaluation and really can not be subject to a general evaluation."
I'm not saying that you're right or wrong, just that each case is different. If you've been fighting this for 10 years and haven't made any headway, I have to question how successful you will ultimatly be in your endeavour.
I have spoken to many lawyers ALL of them say what happened to me is plain BS. It is unconstitutional.
If that is the case, why hasn't one of these many lawyers stepped up to protect your rights. Have you considered that they were merely telling you what you wanted to hear?
It is true that I am Pro Se, but it is not that I haven't made valid arguments to overturn this case.
That is your opinion and obviously the courts disagree.
"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." - Mark Twain