This is probably a bit tangential to the discussion but it has really been eating at me after some comments someone made the other day in a conversation I was sitting next to at a coffeehouse.
One of the people made the claim that "parents always know whats best" for their children. Sure sounds good doesn't it? PRetty sure most parents would agree, and most of the time it probably is true. But in is definitely NOT always true.
Seriously, how can people say this rubbish and think they are being accurate. Look at the millions of cases of parents physically, emotionally and sexually abusing their children. Think of all of those cases of parents who kill their children (some make the news, others get ignored).
When you consider those things, can you honestly say or even think that those parents knew what was best for their kids?
Sometimes, I think the best solution for the children is to not be in the custody of either parent.
As to the fathers vs mothers debate, I really do think it should come down to several things: the ability of each parent (financially, time available to deal with them, ability to show themselves as being responsible adults), the wishes of the child once they are 5 or 6 years old or older, the mental stability and criminal records of each parent, and which parent initiated the divorce and why.
I do get upset an the numbers of cases in America that end up with the mother having custody and getting alimony as well as child support from the father, especially in cases where the mother either makes more money than the father or when she marries another man. In those two cases, the mother should be financially responsible for the kids (or her new husband). This is most especially how it should be in a case like the one I personally know of. The woman cheated on her husband with a man who was making more money than the man she was married to. She got caught, husband divorced her, and now he pays out more than two thirds of his monthly pay to care for the kid, who is already living in an pretty expensive house with a stepfather who is a surgeon. How the hell can this be right?
At the same time, I get upset over the deadbeat dads who refuse to have anything to do with their kids, who have the money to pay child support but refuse to. Deadbeat dads really need beatdowns in my opinion. Same for the (smaller number of) deadbeat moms.
All told, in custody cases, the GENDER of the parents should have NOTHING to do with the decision. Gender shouldn't ever be used as the basis of a court decision (at least I cannot think of a theoretical situation in which using gender to decide the case would be the right thing to do).
For precisely the reason you cite; I have heard anecdotal cases (though many of them) where "single" moms in long term committed relationships refuse marriage to preserve alimony and/or child support.
As to the rest, the question is not whether parents know what is best for their kids. Most people would concede they do; they spend the most time with the kids, have since birth and share half the same DNA: Unless especially incompetent, they should know what is best for the kid. The question is what they DO about it. In many cases government eagerness to declare parents unfit has gotten kind of scary, but whenever it is dad vs. mom rather than parents vs. state dad usually has little to no chance. Example:
One of my relatives' ex got sole custody (and house and truck) despite unemployment with no visible means of support (save my relatives alimony and child support, plus him paying the mortgage on the house where he is no longer allowed.)
Since then it has come out she was already sleeping with someone else prior to the divorce, and she turned the house into a practically destroyed flophouse for their two daughters, oldest daughters boyfriend, resulting grandchild, her sister and her sisters boyfriend. The latter boyfriend (literally) tried to climb into the oldest daughters bed; the ex was renting rooms to exchange students till the company refused to send her more people after complaints he tried the same with them. Despite a court against the six year old leaving the COUNTY the ex took her >1000 miles to another STATE on a trip with her last boyfriend. She also made (at least) one statement in a sworn affidavit and a contradictory one in sworn court testimony (i.e. perjury, a felony punishable by five years in prison.)
My relative has held down a steady job for years, paying his bills and hers and getting his six year old every other weekend. While his ex tries to obtain fake passports for the child and court permission to take her to the Philippines, from whence none of us expects to ever see either of them again.
It really is a horror story, the more so because a not atypical one.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
*NM*
- 19/08/2013 11:45:22 PM
948 Views