Why are US laws unfair towards men when it comes to parenting?

[Vendetta]

On this I will admit I am sexist. This stay at home crap is 60's stuff and by far is not a reason a woman should get sole custody. If you want to go there, men typically are the so-called "bread winners" therefore men should get custody. What woman is a stay at home mom nowadays? Show me proof. In large cities like New York and California even middle class couples work. I don't buy that woman get the child because of child rearing stuff. Like Mercy Not Sarcrifice said, it should be 50/50

 

[Mathematician]

You'd rather go to prison than pay support?

Yes, if she initiated the divorce and got sole custody. I'm not paying money for a child that is stolen from me.

 

[Storm]

Yes, if she initiated the divorce and got sole custody. I'm not paying money for a child that is stolen from me.

I think that's rather shortsighted.

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

I think that's rather shortsighted.

I don't, Storm. I think that Gene's reaction is a growing mindset among American men, that enough is enough, that they have rights too and are entitled to those rights under the law. Just as women did exactly the same thing back in the '60s (and a good thing, too, for all of us).

 

[Storm]

I don't, Storm. I think that Gene's reaction is a growing mindset among American men, that enough is enough, that they have rights too and are entitled to those rights under the law. Just as women did exactly the same thing back in the '60s (and a good thing, too, for all of us).

I meant personally, not politically. Prison isn't exactly going to help you or your kid.

 

[Kathryn]

Whoever does not have custody of the kids should be paying child support. NOT alimony - CHILD SUPPORT. Why should the children suffer because of the mistakes of the parents?

Divorces are complicated. Usually there's not one completely innocent party and one completely guilty party. But there is often one party who steps way out of the parameters, if you know what I mean. I do not think that party, who may not FILE for divorce, but who may be the main CAUSE of divorce, should have custody of the kids in most cases - unless the other parent just doesn't want or can't take on custody. And I don't think that a partner who is mistreated and then files for divorce should be then forced to provide for the children on their own, while the other partner simply skips out on custody AND child support.

I do however, think that fathers should be offered more opportunity by the courts to have custody. In Texas, this is often the case, and WHICHEVER parent has custody, the other parent pays child support. In the case of joint custody, whichever parent makes more money pays the difference in child support - and if both parties make similar incomes, that's the only case in which neither pays child support. That's a very rare scenario.

Truly joint custody is hard to pull of as well. For one thing, parents are forced to live near each other once the kids are in school - and often jobs and other relationships create scenarios where parents need or want to move to another area (not saying that's good or bad - it's just reality). And kids can struggle with the feeling that they don't truly have a permanent home.

I know these difficulties from personal experience. My husband and his exwife have for years had a nearly 50/50 split on custody of my stepson. Before he was able to drive, we were constantly trying to coordinate picking up things from his mother's house, or running out and buying him something he needed because it wasn't at our house, etc (all complicated by the fact that his mother has a security gate and there was always drama about that - she would make us sit out at the gate waiting for ten or fifteen minutes sometimes just for her to push a button to let us drive up their long driveway). Complicating this was the fact that she simply didn't work at all, and my husband therefore made quite a bit more money than her (though her current husband makes good money - that income doesn't count). So in spite of bearing the cost of having the son nearly half the time, my husband also paid a large amount of child support - and also all sorts of extras (just to keep from constantly fighting with his ex wife).

He then bought his son a vehicle - and the mother was supposed to pay the insurance. She paid this exactly two months. From then on, we paid it, along with the payment. He had several fender benders, which greatly increased the insurance premiums. What a nightmare - and yet the monthly child support checks just kept going out to her.

One good thing came of that vehicle though. From the moment he could drive, the stepson has spent much more time at our house than at hers, which has brought a lot of joy to my husband, considering how much visitation he lost during the earlier years because he worked overseas and his exwife wouldn't allow him to make up any days he missed while working.

Thank goodness - my husband just made the very last child support payment to his ex wife! The drama doesn't end though - next is six years of college (at least - he wants to be a dentist), and the mother has already insisted that he go to a very expensive college. Why so? Because she has a wealthy relative who has set up a trust to pay HER half of the college expenses - so money is no object to her. The trust is enough to pay for ALL of his college - but she won't do that. Oh no. We get to actually pay "our" half - though she won't be paying her half.

What an emotional drain - ongoing for years and years with really no end in sight.

 

[Vendetta]

Kathryn that is unforunate.....

So would you say from what you just mention that the courts are not impartial when it comes to fathers rights?

 

[Kathryn]

Yes, I would say that the courts tend to default in favor of the mother. However, I also believe that many men, for a variety of reasons (some honorable and some dishonorable) do not take advantage of laws which actually are, if not in their favor, at least fair, when it comes to custody and child support.

In my husband's case, he did not and could not pursue full custody because of the nature of his work (he worked overseas for weeks at a time in an unpredictable pattern - and considering that it's his career which he obtained a degree for, it would be very hard financially for all involved for him to change that schedule). He also didn't want to uproot his son from his home, so he and his exwife worked out a way for her to pay him for the equity in the home, which he built, and then take over the payments. Because he didn't want to take half the furniture and leave the house half empty for his son, he left nearly everything there, and started completely over, with a hefty chunk of child support going out each month for the next eleven years.

She IMMEDIATELY remarried (proving his suspicion that she was having an affair), moved her new husband into the ranch and house my husband built, and began milking both her husband and her exhusband for all they were worth.

She has used the child support to pay off the house, so she has no mortgage now and refuses to move because she would have to settle with her current husband on the equity, and the new house would have to be joint property.

She's a real piece of work. Even though we still have to deal with her, at least my husband doesn't have to write her a check every month anymore. Her sense of entitlement as THE UTERUS WHICH BORE THE SON has bordered on the ridiculous for years.

 

[Oneatatime]

Any bias in favour of the mother seems to be undesirable. The judge, or whoever, should be making their decision on who should have guardianship not on the basis of sex but suitability.

Not to spoil anyones rose tinted glasses when it comes to mothers but I've dealt with plenty who aren't fit to have children. I've not idea where the father was because that generally isn't a question you ask but its likely that they didn't get a look in, especially if the relationship broke down while the woman/girl was pregnant.

 

[Storm]

Any bias in favour of the mother seems to be undesirable. The judge, or whoever, should be making their decision on who should have guardianship not on the basis of sex but suitability.

Agreed.

Not to spoil anyones rose tinted glasses when it comes to mothers but I've dealt with plenty who aren't fit to have children.

My own among them.

 

[Oneatatime]

Agreed.


My own among them.

The father often aren't any better so its a wonder that the child isn't put up for adoption rather instead of being left with the least worse option. I know adoption has its own problems and the process can cause much distress but so can be raised by a terrible mother.

 

[Otherright]

I can give you a fair example from the child's point of view. This happened to me.
When I turned 3, my parents finalized a divorce.As U.S. army non-commisioned officer, my dad did not fight for custody, merely for visitation rights. Due to being active military, he did get an allowance for his schedule. However, my mother repeatedly denied him visitation during the first 13 years. She remarried to a man when I was 8 years old, who then went on to physically,mentally,emotionally, and sexually abuse me and my brother for 5 straight years. When my dad learned of this, he called my mom into court at his own expense, citing that my stepfather was endangering us. The judge, after reviewing all evidence (which included a physical examination and psychological exam on us kids which showed evidence of abuse) then ruled that my dad was unfit as a parent, doubled his child support payments, and limited his visitation rights to supervised only. My mom then continued to use both my brother and myself as weapons to hurt my dad until I finally reached 18. After my dad's death 8 years ago, mom went to court to eize all of his assets.What was found out was that my mom actually owed my dad 7000 dollars in child support from when I was 15 to when I reached 18, and that my mom had lost custody of us kids during this point. Once this was revealed, along with all of her illegal and questionable actions, she walked out of court without any fines or punishments of any kind. What this has taught me is that the legal system is not on the side of most fathers, and that as far as the child's wellfare is concerned, often there is nothing done here. Sure, if I had been killed, then they may had cared. Otherwise, I was only a case number, nothing more.

P.S: The stepfather (tried in Salt Lake county,Utah) was released by the judge in the criminal case my dad had filed against him, due to bringing his mormon bishop into court with him as a character reference. This, despite enough evidence to convict just about anyone. This taught me that me that the lds church does, at times, violate the part of the constitution that states clearly: "seperation of church and state." I'm welll aware that some people will likely post on how I should just forgive and forget, but to me there is no forgiveness for what he did on this side of the grave. He will go to hell, where the wieght of everything he has done will drag on him forever. There is no forgiveness without earning it (in my opinion,) and he will never earn it.

I am saddened by the story you've shared. I have a similar story from my childhood, but that is bygone days, and I have learned from the pain.

I'm not going to preach to you about forgive and forget. That's for you to deal with, but I can tell you this. If a crime has been committed, a character witness is not going to trump legal precedent. If the burden of proof had been the focus of the prosecution, a character witness should not have mattered.

Your legal representative should've pounced on the opportunity to remedialize the testimony of a character witness. This is actually quiet easy to do, the reason being, the defendant cannot introduce character evidence of specific good acts to show that he or she did not commit a bad act. Character witnesses can be reduced to hearsay. Having said that, it isn't uncommon to use clergy as character witnesses.

 

[Kathryn]

The father often aren't any better so its a wonder that the child isn't put up for adoption rather instead of being left with the least worse option. I know adoption has its own problems and the process can cause much distress but so can be raised by a terrible mother.

Or dad, like you said.

The bottom line is that courts should be UNBIASED when evaluating each parent.

Divorce is hard on kids even in the best of circumstances. I will say that even with the problems (mostly problems of attitude and entitlement) that we've had with my stepson's mom, all four adults involved have managed to be civil with each other, and as my stepson has gotten older (and slightly wiser), he's been able to reason things out himself - WITHOUT us badmouthing his mom. (I have no idea what she says to him about us.)

With five kids over 18 between us, I can say this with some certainty: If the parents balance honesty and frankness about the other parent, with a generous and magnanimous approach, the kids will figure things out for themselves when it comes to the character - and character flaws - of both parents. The parent who has been the least inflammatory and has played the fewest mind games and vindictive ploys wins in the end.