| Title: | Discussions of topics pertaining to men |
| Notice: | Please read all replies to note 1 |
| Moderator: | QUARK::LIONEL E |
| Created: | Thu Jan 21 1993 |
| Last Modified: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 268 |
| Total number of notes: | 12755 |
I was home during the snow day Wednesday and watched part of one of
those talk shows hosted by a women. They were talking about custody,
time sharing of children after divorce-formerly called visitation
for men-(some consciosness raising here). On the show they had as
guests four women and one man who are fighting for custody
Don't have time to talk about everything that went on but it was
interesting! One of the guests was the woman from California who
*moved away* with their small child to pursue educational goals.
and has a court ruling to give custody to the father when she goes
back to school. She thinks she should have custody!
How does the saying go? "We want it all".
Anyone else see the show?
Bill
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 201.1 | MROA::SPICER | Thu Dec 21 1995 12:47 | 20 | ||
Bill,
I guess you have not been in a Probate Court. Frankly I am very surprised
that custody was transfered. There must have been some unusual
circumstances.
Obviously there is no restriction on where a person may live or what
they choose to do. With minimal legal formality the custodial parent can
move anywhere. If that means the child(ren) rarely see the non custodial
parent then that's just too bad.
That's the legal system - like it or not.
| |||||
| 201.2 | MPGS::PHILL | In casual pursuit of serenity. | Thu Dec 21 1995 13:15 | 4 | |
Funny. In MA moving out of state legally requires the non-custodial parents consent. I guess a court could override that. Peter. | |||||
| 201.3 | MROA::SPICER | Thu Dec 21 1995 14:21 | 22 | ||
Peter,
In MA the custodial parent can move anywhere under the bill of rights.
They can take the dependent child(ren) without the consent of the
non custodial by demonstrating to the Probate Court that the move may be
beneficial to the child(ren).
Most people who plan to move are doing so because they will benefit in
some way - nicer neighborhood, larger house, improving their standard of
living, better job prospects, better school system etc. Normally that
will also directly or indirectly benefit the child(ren).
In the cases I have seen (waiting my turn) the court gets through them
in a few minutes. I witnessed one case where the custodial parent moved
to Oregon with the 2 children without telling the NCP. Nice surprise.
When they got in front of the judge in Worcester it made no real
difference. It was successfully argued that the custodial parents family
were in Oregon and there close support was advantageous.
The custodial parent even asked for the NCP to cover the airfare - didn't
get it though.
| |||||
| 201.4 | She says she is an advocate for children! | SALEM::PERRY_W | Sat Dec 23 1995 12:15 | 11 | |
The thing I find so disturbing is that the woman who moved away with
their child claims she is an advocate for ***children***.
She claims that her career goal is to be the same -an advocate for
children-. How can this be possible when she doesn't support
fathers and their children. She has demonstrated her lack of support
for fathers and their children by moving away with her and the former
husband's child. I guess I am more sensitive to this issue because
it happened to me and my children.
Bill
| |||||