Supporters of joint custody in divorces trying another petition... | KXNet.com North Dakota News |
||
Supporters of joint custody in divorces trying another petition...Aug 6 2007 4:03PM
Associated Press Bismarck, N.D. (AP) North Dakota supporters of joint child custody in divorce cases are trying another ballot measure. The proposal was turned in to Secretary of State Al Jaeger's office today. Jaeger has to review the petition before it's approved for circulation. It says judges should award joint custody of children in divorce cases. This would happen if either parent asks for joint custody and neither parent is considered unfit. Joint custody is defined as children spending equal time with their parents. The proposed law also gives parents the option of negotiating their own time-sharing arrangement. Debora Vaagen (VAAG'-un) of West Fargo is the chairwoman of the initiative campaign. She says she would like to see it put on the ballot in November of next year. Last year North Dakota voters rejected a child custody initiative at the polls. Vaagen says the new version is simpler and gets to the core issue of joint custody of children in divorce cases. The measure is only two sentences long. (dash) The proposed measure reads: "It is the policy of this state that the courts shall award joint legal and physical custody in divorces and separations, when requested by either parent, if neither parent is found unfit or a danger to the children by clear and convincing evidence. The definition of joint physical custody (equal physical custody) shall be a rebuttable presumption of equal time with the children; or any written time-sharing agreement agreed upon by the parents." (Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) APNP 08-06-07 1554CDT | 
save this article / add to your favorites list
| ||
email to a friend
printable version
discuss in the forums
upload new photos for this story
Medicaid
Joint custody, agreed upon scheduled visitation and support if the parent has the child more than 6 months of the year. FAIR!!!
It is the selfish mothers who are putting their egos and financial needs first, and not their children!
Right on!!!
As far as child support and the wellfare system. The noncustodial parent should be happy to help with the financial responsibility of the life they helped to create. Joint custody should not be a way out of it. What is a fair amount? I don't really know. I do know that what I get doesn't touch the daycare bill even with assistance. It still costs me over $300 a month just to have a job (daycare and fuel for my vehicle). Assistance is crap. The more I work to provide a good life for me amd my kid the less I receive. I work 40-60hrs a week and get maybe $100 for childcare assistance, $20 for food, and no medicaid. That doesn't deter me from working as much as possible. What I pay per month to raise my child is more that double my chilsupport. Food, clothing, shelter etc...is not cheap. I for one do not squander my child support. It goes in an account to pay for my daughters needs.
Now with that said. I am sure there are plenty of people out there like myself that do not deserve to be penalized for being respectful for the help we receive. I only want the best for my child and that includes her emotional and mental welfare. Therefore, NO JOINT CUSTODY! And I believe that her father should help financially. It is a respect and responibility thing. He whines about what he pays too but I remind him that he is free to work as much as he needs to. I am not one that with have him reveiwed every chance I get so he has time to bank cash.
People, really think about this subject, really think about it. So far all I see is a bunch of adults acting like children. It is the children we should be thinking about and putting first. Their emotional and mental welfare as well as their physical needs. Raising a child in ths day is hard enough, raising a child that constantly has to abide by 2 sets of rules in 2 different households would be even harder not only for the parents, especially for the child.
well said!! I grew up with just my mother. She raised 3 of us by herself. With 100$ a month in support. Our Dad was 2 busy drinking 2 spend time with us and our mom had to drive us to see him!! Now that I am older, my father and I have had many emotional and heartfelt talks and we both have healed. I forgave him and we love each other. But it doesn't take away how my life is different because of the absence of a father when I was growing up. My mother still taught me everything I needed to know to be a responsible person but I missed out on the love and teaching from two parents that helps develop character.
Anyway, I am a non-custodial parent. My son live 2 hours away. I could have him every two weeks as stated in our divorce stipulations. Guess what? She makes it hard for me to do so. I cand have him Fri-Sun. So this is what I do for MY SONS EMOTIONAL SUPPORT AND MINE!! I leave home at 8am Fri mornings and pick him up at DAYCARE, WHILE SHES AT HOME WITH THE DAY OFF, SLEEPING! We leave there at 11am and drive home and arrive at 1-2pm. A day in the car. Then we spend some quality time 2gether and I go to work at 5pm. We spend all day and nite Sats. 2gether. And then Sunday is the same as Friday!!! So, I pay support, drive and pay for gas all to see him for 1 day. But thats how important our relationship is. So, would joint custody work for us?? Not in the true definition of it but, I could have him for longer periods of time and not have to pay 300$ in support a month to a woman who is remarried, to someone on the base, which scares me cuz what if they're relocated, and gets gov't help for food, health, housing, daycare, her TAX RETURN IS 4,000$ A YEAR!! And I need to pay support?? For what, so her and her husband can have every single item they ever want?? True, my son has every toy and game and clothing and matching shoes he could ever, ever dream of but is that a substitute for MY TIME??
well said!! I grew up with just my mother. She raised 3 of us by herself. With 100$ a month in support. Our Dad was 2 busy drinking 2 spend time with us and our mom had to drive us to see him!! Now that I am older, my father and I have had many emotional and heartfelt talks and we both have healed. I forgave him and we love each other. But it doesn't take away how my life is different because of the absence of a father when I was growing up. My mother still taught me everything I needed to know to be a responsible person but I missed out on the love and teaching from two parents that helps develop character.
Anyway, I am a non-custodial parent. My son live 2 hours away. I could have him every two weeks as stated in our divorce stipulations. Guess what? She makes it hard for me to do so. I cand have him Fri-Sun. So this is what I do for MY SONS EMOTIONAL SUPPORT AND MINE!! I leave home at 8am Fri mornings and pick him up at DAYCARE, WHILE SHES AT HOME WITH THE DAY OFF, SLEEPING! We leave there at 11am and drive home and arrive at 1-2pm. A day in the car. Then we spend some quality time 2gether and I go to work at 5pm. We spend all day and nite Sats. 2gether. And then Sunday is the same as Friday!!! So, I pay support, drive and pay for gas all to see him for 1 day. But thats how important our relationship is. So, would joint custody work for us?? Not in the true definition of it but, I could have him for longer periods of time and not have to pay 300$ in support a month to a woman who is remarried, to someone on the base, which scares me cuz what if they're relocated, and gets gov't help for food, health, housing, daycare, her TAX RETURN IS 4,000$ A YEAR!! And I need to pay support?? For what, so her and her husband can have every single item they ever want?? True, my son has every toy and game and clothing and matching shoes he could ever, ever dream of but is that a substitute for MY TIME??
And one more thing, Yes deciding what is TAXING on my child is my decision to make! I am the one with her every day, I am the one who sees how her behavior changes from one day to the next and looks into why it changes and trys to compensate so that she grows up with healthy mental and emotional wellbeing. I am the parent that will take her for counseling if it is warranted and am more that willing to get help for myself if it will help her. I don't want her to ever feel like I did as a child. Her father is not willing to do these things for her or himself. So I will raise my child and HE will have visitation. And I allow more time than is agreed upon in our decree....So I refuse to be lumped in a general pool of adults crying poor me.....but, it is FOR THE CHILDREN. Right?
So how responsible is that way of thinking??
NOT AT ALL!!!
Let me tell you how this plays out when the mom and kids get screwed by some good ole boys club "family court" system.
First, mom finally FLEES an abusive marriage. Only, the creep has been so sneaky about everything that while she and the kids are very emotionally wounded, ... they "look" flakey to the courts while abuser dad looks all calm and "reasonable" to the courts.
So, second, she is scared to death to stand up to the creep in court. Her words come haltingly, she's afraid to tell the whole truth about how horrible he's become because her scumbag attorney has convinced her if she tells the truth, the judge will accuse her of trying to prejudice the courts against the father. Somehow, though, he's allowed to go on and on as he LIES about her to the same court.
Third, hopefully it's "cool" in her jurisdiction to get herself and the kids into badly-needed therapy. But too many therapists count in daddy dearest's wages in determining the fee in this situation so guess what? Mom can often get the court to order him to pay his share, but he won't. OR he'll pay so slowly that eventually he cuts off that avenue of therapy for her and the kids. He'll especially do this if the therapist is on to what a jerk he's CHOOSING to be.
Fourth, Mom is close to a breakdown because of the continuing abuse. The good ole boys club "family courts" both allow, condone and SUPPORT the jerk CHOOSING to mis-use the court system as his new method of abusing her. He will continue to use any sneaky method he can to punish her for 1. leaving and 2. telling on him. She can barely hold down a job now. Jerk uses this against her in court, fighting like deranged lunatic to take the kids away from her just to ... punish her for leaving him.
Fifth, the kids are absolutely shattered by all this crap! They turn to gangs, drugs (anything they can get their hands on), sex, violent video games and etc to try and quiet the hell inside their own heads. In fact, if you want to see an excellent depiction of what it's like for kids when their fathers WON'T CHOOSE THERAPY and HEALING, please see this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4Fyg08kHUM where the lyrics include the words "I carry the weight of the world on my shoulders." "Daughter to father! Tell me the truth, did you ever love me?"
IF you really LOVE children, you will VOTE AGAINST this STUPID attempt to push IDIOT legislation on your CHILDREN.
It really seems some freaky group is USING you as a test. I can see NO GOOD coming from them succeeding ... please, Just Say No to these idiots who do NOT love children at all!!!!!
When did men corner the market on abuse and women corner the market on being victims of abuse. Good ole boys' family court system???? What drugs are you taking? Maybe you haven't noticed, but women are awarded custody in 85% of cases. The only women who don't gain custody are the ones who are so certifiably insane and unfit, as you appear to be, that even the courts cannot ignore it.
All a woman has to do to gain custody in these kangaroo courts is claim that she cannot get along with her ex. The man is powerless to defend himself against this often-used strategy because it takes two to get along. The judge concludes, since the two of you cannot get along, 50/50 custody will not work. Therefore, by default, the mother gets custody. What about this reality is discriminatory against women?
You are right about one thing. It is all about the child support. The only reason why SOME women oppose 50/50 custody is because THEY don't want to lose those child support payments. In a 50/50 custody arrangement, fathers do not get out of paying child support. They pay there child support directly for the equally balanced time that they have with their children.
The scenario you present probably occurs once in every 100,000 cases. In 85,000 of those same 100,000 cases, it is the woman who successfully uses lies and manipulation to deceive the court into granting her sole custody.
I must clarify that I am referring to contested cases. Fortunately, MOST women possess the integrity and sense of fair play to know that children need both their parents and do not use the children as pawns to satisfy some vindictive agenda against their ex.
And "DUH", I agree that divorce is too easy these days but I also believe that if two people cannot work it out, it is the best option. I also think that too many young people jump into marriage before figuring out who they are as individuals....yes I am guilty of that myself. Life is about learning and growth in my opinion, it is unfortunate that some of its lessons seem to include hurting people we love (ex, our children). I have learned and continue to grow from my experience
A good point from "against joint custody" about parents living on opposite sides of town and the childs activities and friends.....I live on a farm, my daughter wants to be an equine eventer...that won't be a reality for her if she isn't here to take care of her horse and practice her events. And never mind that her school is a country school, 5miles from our place and they do not bus from town so not realistic to believe that her father is going to drive 40 miles a day to take her to and from school, or get her to her events or club activities. Just an example of the many reasons that I am against this measure.
For those of you who don't understand, this measure is proposed so neither parent has to 'FIGHT FOR CUSTODY' Hello?!!! Duh. Not all of us caring and compassionate fathers can avoid to 'FIGHT' a court system that favors women. At minimum it costs 15,000$ to FIGHT!! How bout if we change the roles and the woman has to fight, then how would u feel?? And to the post above me, are u assuming everyone is in an abusive relationship?? You must be crazy. Actually the part about 'punishing her for leaving' sounds like my situation where she has manipulated our custody arrangements and tried to do the same to me. This law would not automatically grant joint custody. ITS A CASE BY CASE BASIS, WITH ADEQUATE DOCUMENTATION AND PROOF. It just stops the madness of costing 15,000$$$$, so now that I think of it, it probably wont pass because all the crooked attorneys who get rich off of non-custodial parent's suffering will have all sorts of absenttee ballots and so forth. It's the American way.
No this woman will never get joint custody of "MY" boys...........It might be fine for the civil couples who divorce over nothing..... But most cases,I say no!!!!!!!!!!
What makes me sick is women who take advantage of the system...because for EVERY one woman who is working hard (and believe me, there are PLENTY of hard-working single mothers) there are four or five who enjoy living off of the money they get from their ex, and buying YES, LUXURIES, like a jet ski. As for you not having time to plan a decent meal or whatever, that my dear is your own problem. Budget your time. Do whatever it takes. Why do I make you sick, by the way? Because I can manage without my ex's friggin' money, even though I certainly could've gotten it? It's called perseverence, and everyone is capable of it. I have in NO WAY said that the custodial parent (whether male or female) should not receive and does not deserve child support. What I am saying is I don't agree with spending that money on something other than clothing, shelter, food, medical needs, and other needs of the children. No matter what sort of warped world you live in, you can't honestly tell me or anyone else posting here that the children in that situation NEEDED that jet ski.....YOU make ME sick!
#1: - when men fight for custody they win approx. %75 of cases!
#2: - a woman's standard of living decreases after a divorce, while the man's increases dramatically.
#3: - studies show that when women want full, physical custody it is because of the abuse that occurred & it is the only way she feels she can keep her children safe.
#4: - "automatically" granting joint custody is a batterers dream come true!
Exactly how does one show the other parent is unfit? Again, domestic abuse victims know all to well how the batterer can manipulate not only them but the system as well!
If it is a mutually agreed upon divorce, no abuse or control issues, most couples do receive joint custody with one parent having the permanent physical care if they don't reside by one another and work well together for the benefit of the child.
What exactly is child support? Isn't it based on maintaining the child's standard of living to what it was when the parents were together? Why shouldn't the custodial parent have vacations, "toys", etc? Asking for receipts to show it went to the child is ignorant of what it really costs to raise children. Is the custodial parent's time worth anything? 50/50 - it will still cost the parent who was providing the home, clothing etc the same amount of money to provide heat, water, electricity, fuel, food - so who really benefits financially from this arrangement? Percentage wise, it is the male because statistically they make a substantially higher amount of money.
Just because there are those who abuse child support funds, mess with the non-custodial parents visits etc does NOT mean ALL cases should be 50/50!
My brother's ex walked out on him & their 2 young boys, & thank goodness he had his own business & a strong work ethic which kept them financially sound. She came back 6 months later wanted full custody, and then joint custody and lost - thank goodness. She repeatedly did not pay support or visit & then tried to get money from him. So it goes both ways - there are dead beat dads & moms and then there are those dad's/mom's that do pay child support, but don't follow through with visits, play mind games with the ex, put the children in the middle, etc.
My ex constantly complained about the amount he paid me & criticized me because I had a nice home, vehicles, wage etc. Just because I was able to better my lot in life, & remarry, are my children & I not deserving of child support? Child support should be a balance of the 2 parents incomes and not have anything to do with the new spouse's ability to provide for the stepchildren.
Children deserve a place to call home, not my room at mom's home, dad's home; they deserve consistency and custody should be on a case by case. Those in favor of this measure seem to be very biased & bitter. The real issues/concerns are the children - keep them out of your bitter battles and act like the nurturing, mature adults you should be.
Vote NO
The thing is this - if none of us have enough compassion to work together to create a system where children are protected from any and all abuse, they lose. And we all lose as well.
Will this legislation protect children?
Or is it intended to supercede what's best for the children and to instead force (allow?) the courts to acquiesce to the will of at-times abusive people who have ample funding that allows them to easily buy their way out of any "difficulty" in life. Including the "difficulties" caused when they abuse their families and, too often, attempt to kill their families when things get "too difficult" for them to control.
Is this legislation in the best interests of unhappy adults? Or is this legislation the most loving thing we can do to protect and nurture our children?
This initiative is dangerous for women who are in abusive situations with their children and NEED to get out! Some moms will elect to stay in bad relationships for fear that the abusive dad will get joint custody, and she won't be there to protect the child. Don't say I'm crazyit happened to me! I've been to court several times in the past year trying to protect my child from a dad with a long history of physical and emotional battering.
Moms are right in thinking that the courts really cannot and often will not protect their children against such a person, even when there is documentation of abuse. I am still afraid of my ex, but I am even more afraid of what could have happened should he have been granted joint custody! Had this law been in effect when I made my escape and hid for a month with my kids, I probably would have stayed with the batterer to protect my child from having to live half her life with an unsupervised child abuser.
been there - read the above. If there is documentation, and protective services does their job properly, they will recommend to the court that he/she either get no custody or supervised. That is what they are there for. But it needs to be reported to social services. They do full investigations. Trust me. I was turned in several times by my ex because I had full custody, and she only had visitation rights for 1 day each week for a period of 8 months. I was visited by protective services 5 times. My kids were interviewed while at school and childcare because PS was told I was abusive and controlling of them. So they interviewed them when I wasn't around. It's not just the men are manipulative. Women are just as bad.
against joint - sometimes people just weren't meant to be married. My ex and I are better friends than we were partners. We get along great now. I sometimes think maybe we should have just lived together rather than having to go through what we did. We do agree on everything for our 2 children. They are doing great. The only problem they are having is that they don't like her husband, and they keep telling their teachers that they want to stay with me all the time because I am more fun. But, I'm not going to take her to court to get full custody. I already gave her joint, which is more than she deserves, but she isn't unfit as a parent, so I saw no reason in keeping our children from her. I will wait until the children are 12, which is the age at which the judge will let them decide if they want to live with one parent over the other. Or it was when my friends daughter went to court 3 or 4 years ago. If they still feel I am more fun to be with, then they can tell that to the judge and he can decide what is 'in the best interest of my children'. Like he lives at our houses and sees how we interact and care for our kids.
All in all, if your ex or soon-to-be ex is abusive, it needs to be reported and investigated. If there is a history, it will weigh heavily in your favor of getting custody. Just because you are in a bad situation, doesn't mean everyone else is. Read my other posts - you'll see that I know exactly what I am talking about, and that the other laws are not changing. You just need to know what is available and what all of the laws are. I happened to have an excellent lawyer that explained everything in great detail to me, so I knew exactly what was going on at all times. I knew things that had happened while she had the children, and I let my lawyer know about it. When we went to court, he questioned her about it, and her lawyer knew absolutely nothing about it, so he had nothing to object over, and it helped me get the full custody my children needed for the period of time where she didn't know her head from her ass.
It would change state law to require judges to award joint legal and physical custody of children if either parent requests it in a divorce case, IF NEITHER PARENT IS CONSIDERED UNFIT OR DANGEROUS TO THE CHILD.
Therefore, as long as neither parent is unfit, or if they are not dangerous to the child, they will get joint custody. And they probably deserve it. This would also cut down on child support, because they are with both parents 50% of the time. Child support is still figured by one parents wages vs. the other parents wages. Yes, if you make $60k and the other only makes $20k, the higher wage earner will most likely have some sort of child support payment to make.
I see a lot of comments regarding child support in here too. If you have joint custody, and the kids are with each parent 50% of the time, why should one parent have to pay the other any amount of child support? If you have custody of your children 50% of the time, you should pay for 50% of their costs. This would include school tuition, medical bills, glasses, etc... The kids don't have to pack a suitcase each time they go to the other parents house because they should have clothes at both places that they can wear. Why should one parent have to provide everything for the other parents house. I remember seeing one comment about sending diapers to the other parents house. It's not your responsibility to supply those items when they are not in your care, except for at a childcare facility.
My ex also wanted joint custodyit took thousands of dollars that I had to borrow from the bank ($5000 so far plus more bills are coming) just to protect my child from this abusive man, and it's not done yet. A lot of people just going through a divorce could not possibly afford this added expense, and so, as I said before, they will stay with a batterer before they divorce and let the ******* have joint custody.
Those of you in support, for goodness sakes, if people are good parents there is absolutely no need for this measure.
Don't generalize all women into the greedy, withholding children from their dad, etc.; or all dads into the dead beat dad categories. There are great parents - both moms & dads.
To try to pass a measure that mandates custody is not in the best interest of the children. Courts no longer favor one gender over the other.
Look up the statistics: when father's fight for custody, they win 75% of the cases. This should show you something. If the father's who are in favor of this measure fought for custody & lost, why? To the women posting, don't use your views of his ex-wife against all women. Again, deal with your own issues of bitterness without putting the children in the middle. This measure does nothing for what your ex has or is still doing to you or the kids.
This measure MANDATES JOINT CUSTODY. The court has to follow it. Nothing less!
This measure DOES NOT state that it is only for parents considered FIT, it is for ALL divorce/custody cases & ONLY if one parent can PROVE the other parent unfit, will the court "CONSIDER" anything else.
As it is now, if a dad wants joint custody, the courts will give it unless the mother objects & Vice Versa! At that point, there would be a custody investigator, if the parent opposing the joint custody can afford it which is usually the woman & is in an abusive marriage & cannot afford to fight him.
This is not about letting dads see/have their kids. You don't seem to understand what a person has to go through to prove the other parent unfit. Even if you can "prove" domestic abuse, that does not give the court substantial proof that he/she is an unfit parent. Talk to anyone who works in domestic abuse or has been in an abusive or is in an abusive marriage. This measure benefits abusive spouses, & those who don't want to pay child support, period. Again, the courts will award joint custody, without this measure.
I am not against dad's - I have a brother who was alienated from his kids by his abusive ex and a brother-in-law who has full custody, & a sister with a dead beat dad who should be an ex but won't be because he's abusive to her & she fears what the kids will be exposed to when she is not there to protect them.
Please people, Research this measure - it is not all fluff & good. It is very DANGEROUS.
Say NO to this proposal!