English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

For those of you who don't know what that is it is a doctrine that was abolished because it was sexist against men regarding child custody.
On the issue of Gender Biasedness in family law they claim it is agaisnt the mom. There is a reason that the majority of moms have primary custody and dads have every other weekend and that is because it is the exact opposite of what NOW claims.
NOW also says: 'Despite the perception that mothers always win custody cases, studies show that fathers who contest custody win sole or joint custody in 40 to 70 percent of cases.'
I thought that the majority of cases were settled without court ruling, so this small percentage of cases in which dad contests and win 50/50 or full custody must have been contested for a good reason. Maybe mom is a psycho. I guess NOW will not be satified until the Tender Years Doctrine is placed back in effect which give mom full custody 100% ofthe time.
http://canow.org/issues/family.php

2007-10-12 17:49:57 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science Gender Studies

7 answers

N.O.W. (really all of feminism) wants custody (and as much child support as if feasible) to go to the mother *except* when she can do better otherwise.
The problem is that feminism has no regard for children but only the mother.

2007-10-14 15:12:29 · answer #1 · answered by Phil #3 5 · 1 0

Do you mean negative? Well it all definitely turned from making neglectful abandoning fathers accountable, to a politically correct standard that back fired on many decent father's. I am conflicted on this subject because theres plenty of guys who abandoned their families which was why the policies were implemented but I do think its a shame when a decent guy doing the right thing gets fvcked cuz of loop holes & legalities. ADD Metal head my furture ex husband went thru a brutal custody battle with a one nite stand that got preggo who DID manipulate the system & tried using the child & laws for leverage after over 10,000$ he was finally insured his rights as a parent. So trust me when I say I know what you speak of. I wasn't condoning that, I acknowledged that end of things I was saying it is a double stick tho theres douches too. Lets not sweep that under the rug. I agree with you. Right now we are settling our divorce outta court. Keeping all assets each had previous to marriage, splitting custody half half for our daughter, & no child support. Truly equal. Point I am not promoting the ill side I was saying theres ugly from both genders the ones who manipulate the system & the ones that do abandon and neglect their parental responsibility & both ends give the issue a bad name. I do agree & acknowledge your point theres court bias tho, as I said I seen it first hand.

2016-05-22 04:39:33 · answer #2 · answered by velda 3 · 0 0

I agree with the answerer who pointed out the lumping of "sole" and "joint". I'd also note that 40-70% is a pretty big range. can they not provide more precise statistics?

I'd look it up, but as someone who will never have kids, I confess I am not really focused on this issue.

EDIT

RoVale makes a good point.

I mean, I called my dad once 12 years ago and he changed his number.

Some dads love their kids and get screwed. Some dads have to be forced to show any concern at all.

I guess having a totally irresponsible dad and not wanting kids myself makes it hard for me to see the men's side on this. But I do know some loving fathers, so I try to see that too.

2007-10-12 18:00:07 · answer #3 · answered by Gnu Diddy! 5 · 1 2

I dont like how sole and joint are lumped into one category.

But besides that, 100% of the time? Yeah, In real life the mother is never a psycho, junkie, abusive, etc. (sarcasm)

2007-10-12 17:54:19 · answer #4 · answered by vtff 3 · 1 1

It should be pointed out that a major reason the women got custody unless it could be proved that she was unfit was because many men did not want custody of their children. Like it or not, I come from a time when men did not even try to get custody of their children. Sometimes, they would not even want to be involved in their children's lives at all. I knew people whose fathers disappeared after their parents got divorced and their mothers had to struggle to raise their children by themselves.

2007-10-12 19:32:14 · answer #5 · answered by RoVale 7 · 1 3

Did you really expect the NOW gang to use statistics properly?.

Rovale, why must we prove that a mother is unfit, but then have to prove that a father is fit to have custody.

2007-10-13 02:44:28 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

NOW shows what feminism really is. Sexist.

2007-10-12 18:27:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 6 0

fedest.com, questions and answers