Is it better to place a child with a parent who is constantly moving around w/ military, which keeps other parent from seeing or spending time with the child. This parent is also gone on tours all the time.Or os it better to place child w/ the parent that is not moving around? I ask because it seems that many in military people are complaining because they lose custody when get divorced due to there constant moving. My ex left state with our son w/o notifying me or courts of his move and got away with it just because he's in military. Why is this? any one in my shoes? I know these soldiers are fighting for our country, but they chose to do so. Why should the other parent be punished?
2007-05-22 07:45:29 · 6 answers · asked by LISA R 1 in Family & Relationships ➔ Marriage & Divorce
a social study that was ordered by the court even ruled in my favor. Judges are not wanting to make decision for best interest of child, but rather what's in best interest of their career polically. Even if the child is better off with the parent that doesn't move around, judges are ruling for the military soldier because they don't want to seem like they are taking a child away from a soldier just because of their career. IS THIS RIGHT?
2007-05-22 07:58:54 · update #1
No I have no substance abuse problems or financial for that matter. I don't abuse my son. The purpose of social studies is to fins out about each parent, criminal background, education ect.. The judge in my case just didn't want to look bad so he let ex have custody. Ex leaves son w/ current illegal spanish wife when he leaves. My ex put article in our local paper when he deployed to Iraq, b/c judge did finally let son be w/ me during this time. Ex gone over a year, returned and we went back to court, my ex told the judge our son could live w/ me. 1yr later, he goes back wanting him again, and the judge gave him back stating he changed custody just b/c ex was back in the country, disregarding the prior hearing a yr ago where ex said son could stay w/ me. IS THIS RIGHT?
2007-05-22 08:15:37 · update #2
Actually I did not choose to marry him, got preg at 16, and parents made us marry. He joined army after we married. We were only together for 2yrs, he was abusive (have reports filed w/ police) adultress, and controlling.
2007-05-22 08:19:43 · update #3
More details if you look at my profile page and scroll down to the 1st 3 ?'s I ever asked. There is more info there, check it out then respond.
2007-05-22 08:21:22 · update #4
I understand your frustration,however did anyone ask the child what the child wanted? As a former military child, I enjoyed living in all the different countries that I did growing up. But from a Mother's perspective, your husband is a jerk for not trying to stay as close to you as possible so that your child can see you.
2007-05-22 08:00:52 · answer #1 · answered by lily_shaine 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it should depend on the Parent.
There is nothing wrong with moving around. And not all military get deployed. But if they are constantly gone then I dont see why the child shouldnt be with the parent who will be there more often. I guess the courts see it as the Military parent does not have a choice to move. If they get orders they have to go.
And yes he chose to join the Military. But you also chose to marry him knowing about his Military career. So, maybe you should have thought about that before.
2007-05-22 15:16:33 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
where does the child stay when the father can't be around?? who is with the child then since you cant be there? some random stranger?? I think it is in the best interest of the child to be with the parent that does not move around frequently. However, are there other matters that you are leaving out: do you have substance abuse problems, financial problems, or unsteady home life? If so, that may be the reason a court would rule in favor of the military parent.
2007-05-22 15:07:09 · answer #3 · answered by cat 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Press charges of spousal kidnapping against him if you seriously want your child back. The Judges usually look at the parent who will give the child a stabilized and nourishing environment in which to grow up in when deciding custody. The military is a choice and losing custody in a consequence of that choice and makes sense if that person is deployed to a foreign country involved in war. This is why its not always so easy being a Judge when it comes to the hard choices.
2007-05-22 15:01:19 · answer #4 · answered by Arthur W 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it would depend on how the parents are...in general case, the child would be best with someone who doesn't move around...but in some cases, the child may be better off with that parent than the other one if it is abused in anyway or not cared for and support financially...so I really think it depends on the circumstances, each case is different...
2007-05-22 15:09:15 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
For the child's best interest, he or she should be placed with the parent who doesn't move around alot.
Children need stability and a life that revolves around routine. I can't see how your child is getting this through constantly having to move so often.
2007-05-22 14:54:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋