SPARC Forums

Main Forums => General Issues => Topic started by: Bolivar OH on Jul 13, 2004, 07:31:24 AM

Title: Nagging Question
Post by: Bolivar OH on Jul 13, 2004, 07:31:24 AM
Why do courts continue to allow one parent to have all the physical and legal command of child(ren)?  Why do the courts make such a big deal about joint physical and legal custody with our child(ren)?  

It seems perfectly natural that both parents would be apart of the child(ren) life.

Why-Oh-Why can you please tell me why?

Thought I would drum up a philosophical and historical discuss.  My brain is going numb from all my legal research into my case. All posts welcome!!  I am an equal opportunity poster.  I am sure we all have an opinion on this subject.  Don’t be shy.  let'er rip.
Title: RE: Nagging Question
Post by: Kitty C. on Jul 13, 2004, 08:18:34 AM
This gives you an idea just how prevalent NOW is with the judicial system.  It all started with women's rights and went from there.  Of course, most of these bimbos (thinking along the lines of NOW) are just taking back what is due to them (that 'entitlement' issue again!), since prior to the movement, men had final say with the family.

So we've seen the pendulum swing both ways.........let's hope and pray that it finds a happy medium somewhere in the middle....for the sake of the children.
Title: One reason...
Post by: tulip on Jul 14, 2004, 06:54:14 PM
Courts don't like joint custody because former spouses can't get along. They keep taking each other back to court instead of communicating with each other to work things out. If two people could be mature and agreeable and generally interested only in the children's best interests, rather than revenge and control, the courts wouldn't have to be involved.