Ron in Houstons comments seem a little optimistic to me,put forward as optimistic thinking of the hopeful state of the law system maybe.But still we are talking about a extreme exclusive cult that (alienates itself) in many ways even from folks of the general public here.Im asking myself how does somebody really go about trying to alienate these people.

A lot of it comes down to who has the most money for drawing court cases out the longest,and if folks look right back over the case they will see its been drawn out with the use of the best of lawyers also.
The length of the case the stress and then the mother getting sick with backing of the cult indoctrination,was bound to end up in the end with the children finally feeling the father was to blame for all.

While i will agree that yes often child access cases do get a bit picky from both sides and parents are not often perfect.Folks maybe thinking there is actually nothing else going on here need to maybe start double checking matters to make certain.

…which they choose to hold…

Have been indoctrinated and coerced their entire lives in a cult from what I understand tries to limit access to the outside world as much as possible.

…doesn’t respect right to hold those beliefs…

By doing what? Nothing of the kind is mentioned in the article.

…constantly criticises them causing distress to the children…

Not mentioned at all in the article.

Without all the details, it sounds like you have a situation where the children have a given belief which they choose to hold and the Father doesn’t respect their right to hold those beliefs and constantly criticises them causing distress to the children. The ages of the children also mean that under Australian law they would have a significant say in the outcome. The decision is based on what the judge believes is in the best interest of the children, it is not based on religion.

Sorry to hear about your brother. And I’m more worried about my kids than myself. I’m an adult and can’t usually handle not being able to spend time with my kids, so I cannot even begin to understand the effect is has on a 12-year-old psyche.

I definitely can understand why a strong parental support system is necessary, but disagree that it would have to be one male and one female.

Thank you, Spurs Fan, for pointing out my own cultural bias. And I would agree with you wholeheartedly. Gender should in no way determine how good a parent one is, nor should sexual preference for that matter. 2 dads, 2 moms, 1 mom and 1 dad, doesn’t really matter. I think the concept of the traditional “nuclear” family is a goner by now, but let’s just leave it at the fact that any parent, regardless of gender, will likely love their kids very much and deserve to have protected, supportable, clearly defined parental rights.

Cheers,
~Mike

The one thing I’ll disagree with outright is

Kids need both mothers and fathers

I definitely can understand why a strong parental support system is necessary, but disagree that it would have to be one male and one female.

Still, these examples make sense and give me something to ponder. I’ve never really thought about this and not once have I heard stories like these.

I’m probably biased in that most of the relationships I have seen usually have crappy fathers and at least decent mothers. Also, I still think there is a large legacy of racism and sexism in this nation left over from most of our history, so needless to say, I’m very skeptical when I hear white folks complaining about “reverse racism” or men complaining about “reverse sexism”. Because of these biases, I require a large burden of evidence to counteract those claims.

So, while I still am examining this issue with a (now) more open mind, I want to extend my sympathies to both of you — I’m a father and a brother, and I can’t begin to understand how difficult those situations be.

He ended up committing suicide late last year as a result of the custody issues and other related issues. He and I were never that close but it still hurts deeply that I couldn’t have been there for him over this issue. So for me, it is an issue that strikes close to home as well.

Coincidentally, my brother was named Mike as well…

Good luck in getting time with your children Mike. I hope everything comes through well for you.

How much of this discrepancy can be explained by the fact that there are far more single mothers than fathers?

Perhaps there are far more single mothers than fathers because the current custody laws in the US are biased towards the mother?

As a divorced father I can personally attest to the fact that I have absolutely no legal rights when it comes to parenting. There is no system in place to enforce my parenting time, and if one carefully reads the current laws, they seem to imply that the largest contribution I can possibly make to the raising of my children is my paycheck. For example, if I don’t make my child support payments for any reason (like getting laid off last year), they suspend my drivers license, take away my ability to get a passport, and hold me in contempt of court and fine me more money that I don’t have or send me to jail. This process is automatic and requires no request or input from my ex. Compare that to what happens if my ex decides I don’t get to see my son for Christmas (yeah, I still call it that despite not believing in Christ or attending mass). I have to file paperwork with the local courts “alleging” missed parenting time, which they then have to process, and set a court date 90 to 180 days out, during which my ex gets told by the judge to stop it, after which my ex promptly denies my summer parenting time. Which means I get to go through that whole process again, walking to the court house since I still don’t have a driver’s license since I still don’t have a job but child support (in my state, anyway) is based on “earning potential”, not actual earnings.

For fathers like me, and I know there are many thousands out there, it’s a constant battle against not only the laws that make it impossible for us to have an active role in our children’s lives but against decades old, outdated ideas of what is best for the child. In some states, the laws are changing, but the hearts and minds of the judges that sit on the bench are not. So you can claim that the mother has a better case all you want, but the fact is that in more than a few cases, the mother has better laws and better social and judicial support, regardless of the strength or weakness of her case.

And the only people that are really getting hurt by this are our kids. Kids need both mothers and fathers. And in cases where one parent happens to be vindictive and petty, there need to be laws that support the non-custodial parent regardless of gender (although obviously from the statistics above, “non-custodial” is synonymous with “father”).

Anyway, my $0.02 since I couldn’t let this one alone. It’s an issue very close to my heart.

1) My brother went through a custody battle and lost in Texas and Wisconsin. That is why I know about the burden of proof in Texas. Wisconsin is slightly different with the mother being given automatic primacy in a shared custody, meaning dad gets the days the mom doesn’t want unless the dad can argue his case there as well.

2) As for the statistics, here is another one
Married: 54,493,232
Mom only: 12,900,103
Dad Only: 4,394,012

Meaning the discrepancy between 61% and 25% cannot be explained away as there being more single mothers since the vast majority of households (~78%) have both parents still.

Easy there. Calm down just a bit. I asked for specific examples (surely there are some in the media, as Hemant provided one, albeit in Australia and based on religion), because most of the statistics you quote don’t tell the entire story. In fact, as I browsed up the posts, I don’t think I ever asked for stats, but rather examples. Reason being, so that I could see some blatant examples of judges who simply went with the mother on custody, exclusively because she was female.

I think most of the stats your provide are good fodder, but they don’t tell the entire story. For example:

* 61% of all child abuse is committed by biological mothers
* 25% of all child abuse is committed by natural fathers
Statistical Source: Current DHHS report on nationwide Child Abuse

How much of this discrepancy can be explained by the fact that there are far more single mothers than fathers?

I live in Texas as well and have never heard of the precedent of the father being given the “burden of proof”. I just want to see one or two examples of court cases where the judge sided with the mother, simply because she was the mother, and not related to any other factor. I just want to see if in fact, after years of discrimination against mothers in our nation, if the pendelum has swung completely to the other side in 35 years

In the present study, judges hearing custody cases in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee were surveyed by mail.

…

When examining the “Agree” column for items 1-4, the results show far more “Agree” responses for mothers than for fathers, which is indicative of a fairly consistent tendency toward maternal preference by the judges. There is also a definite pattern showing stronger signs of maternal preference with older judges, compared to younger judges. Some of these findings are highlighted in the following paragraphs. [1]

[1] http://bit.ly/8r4bw