Class Action Lawsuit for Equal Custody!

[nextwife]

A parent should need to be UNFIT, incarcerated, abusive or impared BEFORE their right to equal custody is denied. Normal parents (the vast majority I know) should both have equal rights to their kids.

And making babies outside of marriage should not have become an almost automatic "Get Out of Sharing Custody FREE" card for woman. Don't believe me? Go through the archives and see how many dads have come here because they are scared to death for their kids and the system just won't change custody. There are plenty of deadbeat moms out there. It is incorrect to presume that all moms who have custody would have been the better custodial parent of the two.

But many have custody SOLELY because of their gender. IS THAT in the "best interests" of the child?

Gender and factors that automatically favor one gender should not be the deciding factor is the point.

 

[tigger22472]

The other problem dealing with this is NOT only is custody being given to the mother 90% of the time but many times they get SOLE custody. The judge in my case never ever asked anything about that and I just assumed one day we had joint legal custody and yet pulled out my papers and I had sole legal custody. Now, in my case it was a good judgement call, however, my ex was never given the chance to prove or disprove himself.

 

[LdiJ]

The other problem dealing with this is NOT only is custody being given to the mother 90% of the time but many times they get SOLE custody. The judge in my case never ever asked anything about that and I just assumed one day we had joint legal custody and yet pulled out my papers and I had sole legal custody. Now, in my case it was a good judgement call, however, my ex was never given the chance to prove or disprove himself.

This is to both Nextwife and Tigger...I don't disagree with anything the two of you have to say on this subject.

I think that joint legal custody is a must for everyone (except those that nextwife listed...with a few more "exceptions"...there really are some really bad parents out there, male and female, who don't specifically fit that exact list...one obvious example comes to mind...disinterested parents).

Anyway, the biggest problem with true joint custody, 50/50 is logistics. I think its rare that its truly workable...particularly in the long term. (and I admit that I am totally opposed to it for infants..I would rather see an infant in the primary care of dad rather than have an infant do a true split schedule...my ideal for infants is daily contact with both parents, but living with mom if mom is breastfeeding or had the infant in her custody to start with, assuming mom is fit) I prefer to see kids split their non-school, non sleeping time equally, but have one primary "home".

However that is just MY personal opinion. I don't think I am biased gender wise, I have just as many male friends with primary custody as female ones. (in fact, its probably just a tad more male). However I also know quite a few kids in true 50/50 and all but one set hate it and are miserable. So that definitely colors my opinion. Its hard to be "pro" something if the majority of the kids that you know in that situation aren't happy.

Tigger, aren't you in Indiana? I just don't see how it happened in Indiana that you got sole legal custody unless dad just rolled over and played dead.
Its harder than heck, normally, to get an Indiana judge to EVER order sole custody...normally you have to practically walk on nails to get that to happen....even when its REALLY necessary.

 

[tigger22472]

Tigger, aren't you in Indiana? I just don't see how it happened in Indiana that you got sole legal custody unless dad just rolled over and played dead.
Its harder than heck, normally, to get an Indiana judge to EVER order sole custody...normally you have to practically walk on nails to get that to happen....even when its REALLY necessary.

Yes, I live in Indiana. As I said I never asked for sole custody. Dad didn't fight me for custody at all but I wouldn't say he rolled over per se. That was probably the only decent thing he did in our divorce and that was know that the kids were at that time better off with me. The only thing I can think of as to why I MIGHT of gotten sole custody is at the final hearing dad was already almost $3,000 behind in support and had moved to Michigan (although I wasn't in the same county at that time either). In any other situation I would say that wouldn't warrent getting sole custody but as I said this judge must of been smarter then me at the time in seeing where he was headed. Another reason could of been that he didn't ask for a revised visitation schedule (it says he was to following Indiana visitation guidelines) and he obviously wasn't going to do the EOW thing. It could of been too that the judge knew on certain issues that I was trying to be compliant and although he wasn't necessarily 'fighting' me, his demeaner wasn't the best. (i.e. Before the initial hearing he told me he planned to take the children to Michigan in his two seater car. I agreed to them being removed from the jurisdiction for visits and vacations, however stated that he planned to drive the children in his car. He denied saying this. It's in my initial order that he is required to have a car with enough seats and seatbelts to transport the children.)

 

[JAguirre]

A parent should need to be UNFIT, incarcerated, abusive or impared BEFORE their right to equal custody is denied. Normal parents (the vast majority I know) should both have equal rights to their kids.

And making babies outside of marriage should not have become an almost automatic "Get Out of Sharing Custody FREE" card for woman. Don't believe me? Go through the archives and see how many dads have come here because they are scared to death for their kids and the system just won't change custody. There are plenty of deadbeat moms out there. It is incorrect to presume that all moms who have custody would have been the better custodial parent of the two.

But many have custody SOLELY because of their gender. IS THAT in the "best interests" of the child?

Gender and factors that automatically favor one gender should not be the deciding factor is the point.

I don't disagree with most of what you said. Should gender be factors that decide? No! The process that determines who is UNFIT, abusive or impared is one that is taken far too lightly -- at least where I live. That is by no means gender specific. Also, I think NEGLECT should be added to that list respectively.

As stated in my post, I don't have statistical data to back up my thoughts. However, my personal experience strongly weighs in that direction -- it's fortunate that your personal experience weights otherwise. I don't doubt the men who have posted, but who knows a stranger's real motive? Could it be to build a case to get out of paying more child support? Maybe, maybe not.

 

[haiku]

if men supposedly are more likely to want custody to avoid paying child support why is it statistically (U.S. census) that non custodial mothers are more likely to default paying child support than non custodial fathers?

parents need to be looked at for custody with an equal eye.

once custody is established, the NCP should not have less 'power" and should not be given less time and more scrutiny than a grandparent, aunt, uncle or friend of the CP.

 

[kcs00]

Has Anyone heard anything on this case??