If you were a judge in a custody matter,....
a) What would you "tell a father" that knowingly subjected his own 4 YEAR OLD son to his Grampa for care of his son when the father of the child KNEW the Grampa had HAPPATITIS A, and the child ended up getting it ?
b) Would you rule that this man should have sole custody or even primary care in joint custody.?
2006-11-26 01:45:53 · 14 answers · asked by foulweathercatcherman 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
this realy happened and is a serious Q.
2006-11-26 01:49:37 · update #1
If I was a judge I would rule that he lose sole custody of the child under the laws of child endangerment. I would also ask child protective services to do a full report on the grandfather to make sure it was not sexually transmitted, not having the child properly vaccinated, or having a unclean living surroundings.
2006-11-26 01:59:21 · answer #1 · answered by sam 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It depends. Did the father know that the child could contract Hep A? How did the child contract it?
Hep A is an enterovirus that is transmitted by erofecal routes. It is impossible to catch the virus by casual contact so I think you're barking up the wrong tree with your assertion that the father is responsible.
Also, Hep A is not chronic and will do no permanent damage to the child. He'll need some dietary restrictions and may suffer a relapse of symptoms up to a year later, but beyond that the child should be fine.
I think you'll have a tough time proving that the child contracted Hep A from the grandfather, and even a harder time proving that the father is culpable and should be denied his parental rights.
2006-11-26 09:58:41 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Since Hep A is aquired from water, improperly handled food or feces, I wouldn't be focusing on Grampa, since the child could have been exposed to it just about anywhere.
Hep A is a required vaccine, so I would in turn zoom the interest back at the parents: Was this child vaccinated to begin with?
A history of both parents is necessary before making the judgment call on who should have custody..whether joint or primary.
2006-11-26 09:59:25 · answer #3 · answered by gachickinaz 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
This is a stupid question, just because some one has a disease like that doesn't mean they should be ostracized, and plus the damage is already done, you can't get Hepatitis A twice. The grandfather should have took more care, but this is in no way the fathers fault.
2006-11-26 09:52:35 · answer #4 · answered by LONGINUS 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Would have to hear the ENTIRE case and all the facts and data, that's what a hearing is for. But my question is what does this have to do with religion or spirituality?
2006-11-26 09:50:24 · answer #5 · answered by dooder 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hepatitis is not contagious except through sexual contact or blood. That would pose some serious questions. Talk to your Dr. and then your lawyer.
2006-11-26 09:48:55 · answer #6 · answered by notyou311 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
i would rule the mother gets full custody. why did the father get it in the first place? if there is no mother you should report this to the nearest health institute in your area.
2006-11-26 09:50:53 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
it wouldn't matter because obviously father would not comply due to the fact he has his own itinerary. if you feel the need to talk to someone talk to child welfare.
2006-11-26 09:52:57 · answer #8 · answered by gene53107 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who am I to judge anyones life.
Did "the father" learn from his mistake? Is he sorry for it? Will he never do it again? Does he know God forgives him anyway?
2006-11-26 09:49:35 · answer #9 · answered by jp 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
i would have to hear the whole case. maybe hepatitis is better than the alternative. it would be better to get him vacinated first.
2006-11-26 09:49:29 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋