In my state, an unmarried father has no custody rights until he goes to court and files for custody. So if he and the mother break up, he has to go to court to get visitation rights established. The mother is considered to have full legal and physical custody unless and until he takes her to court. Thus he is dependent upon her whims as to whether or not he gets to see his kid. If he demands to see his kid, she can call the cops on him.
Do you think this is right, and why or why not?
(Also keep in mind that he is obligated from day one to pay child support!)
2007-01-10 04:52:46 · 8 answers · asked by 12879 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
In my husband's case, his ex moved out of state with his daughter and he had no legal recourse, as he had not yet filed for custody! So now we live in a different city, in a different state!
2007-01-10 05:53:25 · update #1
The mother should have legal custody. It's the woman who felt the pain and misery of carrying the child and the woman who went through the horror of child birth. It's the woman who risks her life bringing that child into the world. The man does nothing. I don't agree that he should have to go to court for visitation if he's paying child support but I suppose that's a legal measure put in place to show he accepts responsibility for and claims the child as his which makes sense.
2007-01-10 05:04:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
No it is not right, but it is the law here. It's a lot like taxation without representation.
That being said, I do believe the father is responsible for 50% of the child's support; however he should have equal rights to see his child. So often the father pays way more than 50% of the child's support, and has scarce if any visitation.
If either the mother or father are abusive, of course they should not have custody nor visitation. What I see happen so often is a double standard, father's lose rights to their child by hearsay and the mother's word (sorry, but it's often not true), but a mother can physically abuse a child, not feed them, bath them, etc. and nothing is done to her. She maintains custody, or liberal visitation right.
Our system truly has swung too far the other direction. Decades ago it favored the father, now it is extremely unfair to the father. I hope some reason comes to it soon.
2007-01-10 13:08:12 · answer #2 · answered by Joy K 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I believe it is important to establish the conduct on how to proceed with his custody rights and that can only be done through the court system. That way he and the mother are protected from harrasment from the other.
2007-01-10 13:06:13 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is gender discrimination! This should be a violation to the Civil Rights laws! Sounds like drastic changes should be made by the state's legislation!
2007-01-10 13:09:29 · answer #4 · answered by Erica, AKA Stretch 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That sounds unfair. But, if that is the case, he is not at her whim if he can sue to establish rights.
2007-01-10 12:56:39 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
So what? If you're going to have children, then there is the institution of marriage. Actions have consequences, and so do inactions. To gripe about it being unfair or some such claptrap is simply to prove that children can have children, and some people take a long time to grow up.
2007-01-10 13:06:33 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
The court system is hugely biased towards women. It is really sad....
2007-01-11 21:28:23 · answer #7 · answered by Jacie 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The law is not as fair to fathers as it could be.
2007-01-10 13:50:01 · answer #8 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋