SPARC Forums  
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
Mar 16, 2010, 02:39:14 am

Login with username, password and session length
Stats
311416 Posts in 38574 Topics by 6851 Members
Latest Member: Momma2RE
Search:     Advanced search
home | articles | guide | chat | links | search | attorneys | faqs | dictionary
Time Tracker | Statistics |   Win Or Change Custody With OPTIMAL!  | Calendar | Support Tracker
* Home Help Search Login Register
SPARC Forums  |   Main Forums  |  Divorce News (Moderators: Kitty C., olanna, Buff)  |  Topic: NY Dad gets custody - feminists upset... « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print
Author Topic: NY Dad gets custody - feminists upset...  (Read 1813 times)
mdegol
Jr. Member
**
Karma: -2
Posts: 77

View Profile
« Reply #15 on: Nov 11, 2009, 11:14:52 am »

"The issue is which living arrangement would be in the child's best interest.  The judge felt that it would be better for the child to live with the parent who had a family member available to care for the child, as opposed to a daycare worker."
 
 
That is quite a different statement from the one that I was responding to.  I agree that it is circumstances.   An educated parent is a circumstance, just like daycare versus family member care is a circumstance.
Logged
gemini3
Hero Member
*****
Karma: 1006
Posts: 810

View Profile
« Reply #16 on: Nov 11, 2009, 12:55:51 pm »

I don't know of any state that lists the parents education levels in the best interest of the child's statutes.
Logged
mdegol
Jr. Member
**
Karma: -2
Posts: 77

View Profile
« Reply #17 on: Nov 11, 2009, 08:40:20 pm »

Here is Michigan's best interest statutes.
Michigan
Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 722.23 (LexisNexis through 1-16-08)
As used in the act, ‘’best interests of the child’’ means the sum total of the following factors to be considered, evaluated, and determined by the court:
The love, affection, and other emotional ties existing between the parties involved and the child•
The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to give the child love, affection, and guidance and to • continue the education and raising of the child in his or her religion or creed, if any
The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to provide the child with food, clothing, medical care, or • other remedial care recognized and permitted under the laws of this State in place of medical care, and other material needs
The length of time the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment, and the desirability of maintaining • continuity
The permanence, as a family unit, of the existing or proposed custodial home or homes•
The moral fitness of the parties involved•
The mental and physical health of the parties involved•
The home, school, and community record of the child•
The reasonable preference of the child, if the court considers the child to be of sufficient age to express • preference
The willingness of each of the parties to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing parent-child • relationship between the child and the other parent or the child and parents
Domestic violence, regardless of whether the violence was directed against or witnessed by the child•
Any other factor considered by the court to be relevant to a particular child custody dispute
Logged
MrCustodyCoach
Jr. Member
**
Karma: 10
Posts: 102

View Profile WWW
« Reply #18 on: Dec 04, 2009, 09:43:44 am »

Let's not pretend that the family court system ever has "the best interests of the children" in mind.  It's used as both a sword and shield to justify the mindless rulings that they make every single day with only one entity's best interests in mind:  the state's coffers.

"The best interests of the children" is one of the most bastardized phrases in our vernacular and makes me cringe every time I see and hear it used in the context of a family court event.
Logged

Mr. Custody Coach - Win Child Custody "Better Prepared, Better Outcome"

*The opinions in this post are solely my own and do not represent the only way to address any particular issue.
mdegol
Jr. Member
**
Karma: -2
Posts: 77

View Profile
« Reply #19 on: Dec 04, 2009, 01:36:48 pm »

I completely agree, it can mean whatever they want it to mean.  The Michigan statue is blatent about it : "Any other factor considered by the court to be relevant to a particular child custody dispute" Some states have things that cannot be considered, such as the relative financial status of the parties (as long as food and shelter are taken care of).  I have seen lawyers use it to justify almost any request I or the bf have made (although not always successful of course).
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print 
SPARC Forums  |   Main Forums  |  Divorce News (Moderators: Kitty C., olanna, Buff)  |  Topic: NY Dad gets custody - feminists upset... « previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Mercury design by Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC






User name:
Email:
state:
country:
Phone: