Class Action Lawsuits for Noncustodial Parents!
Sue to see kids
What is being sought?
This could have some amazing results...
Nick
What is being sought?
Quote:
The sweeping legal goals are spelled out in a press release. The main relief sought from federal court is the immediate "restoration/elevation to equal custodial status" of all current non-custodial parents against whom no allegations of abuse or neglect have been proven and who have an ongoing relationship with the child.
The establishment of equal custody embraces several other reliefs.
For example, the "prohibition of custodial move-aways of minor children [more than 60 miles] from their original physical residences with natural parents." Also, the "abolishment of forced/court-ordered child support in most cases." Support of the child would be borne by each parent during their own parenting time.
The Plaintiffs argue for restoration of equal custody not merely for the sake of non-custodial parents but also for children's welfare. The press release cites a much-touted study entitled "Child Adjustment in Joint-Custody Versus Sole-Custody Arrangements," which was published in the APA's Journal of Family Psychology. The study concluded, "Children in joint physical or legal custody were better adjusted than children in sole-custody settings, but no different from those in intact families."
The sweeping legal goals are spelled out in a press release. The main relief sought from federal court is the immediate "restoration/elevation to equal custodial status" of all current non-custodial parents against whom no allegations of abuse or neglect have been proven and who have an ongoing relationship with the child.
The establishment of equal custody embraces several other reliefs.
For example, the "prohibition of custodial move-aways of minor children [more than 60 miles] from their original physical residences with natural parents." Also, the "abolishment of forced/court-ordered child support in most cases." Support of the child would be borne by each parent during their own parenting time.
The Plaintiffs argue for restoration of equal custody not merely for the sake of non-custodial parents but also for children's welfare. The press release cites a much-touted study entitled "Child Adjustment in Joint-Custody Versus Sole-Custody Arrangements," which was published in the APA's Journal of Family Psychology. The study concluded, "Children in joint physical or legal custody were better adjusted than children in sole-custody settings, but no different from those in intact families."
This could have some amazing results...
Nick
Comments
Originally posted by trumptman
What is being sought?
Quote:
For example, the "prohibition of custodial move-aways of minor children [more than 60 miles] from their original physical residences with natural parents." Also, the "abolishment of forced/court-ordered child support in most cases." Support of the child would be borne by each parent during their own parenting time.
So ... if I move more than 60 miles away for ANY reason, I lose custody? Yeah, that's a great idea!
So ... if the other parent spends the bare minimum required to keep the child in food when in their custody while the other parent has to take on the additional responsibilities of clothing, entertaining, enriching, etc. while the child is with them, it's fair?
What are the 'amazing results' that you want to see? Let me guess ... your brother would get custody of his kid, and wouldn't have to pay child support. (At least I think it's your brother that this crusade is based on ... so if I'm wrong, correct me.)
Originally posted by audiopollution
[/B]
So ... if I move more than 60 miles away for ANY reason, I lose custody? Yeah, that's a great idea!
So ... if the other parent spends the bare minimum required to keep the child in food when in their custody while the other parent has to take on the additional responsibilities of clothing, entertaining, enriching, etc. while the child is with them, it's fair?
What are the 'amazing results' that you want to see? Let me guess ... your brother would get custody of his kid, and wouldn't have to pay child support. (At least I think it's your brother that this crusade is based on ... so if I'm wrong, correct me.) [/B][/QUOTE]
Moveaways involve custodial rights for the parent that is not moving away. If both parents have equal custody, why should one be allowed to create an undue hardship for the other? If my mother took my own children and drove away 1200 miles with them, it would be kidnapping. Why would this suddenly be permissable if I were divorced, entitled to 50% custody and it happens to be the mother? Parental rights are parental rights.
Divorce creates all sorts of incumberances with the parties involved. That's life and the nature of divorce. When you take what was previously whole and break it apart, it gets messy sometimes.
The amazing results are easy to spot. A generation of children who don't have to go without one parent.
Also about the disparity in spending on parenting styles, while I can agree that both parents ought to do their best by their children, what we have now is far from that. We have parents going to jail for earning enough to support their children, but not as much as the state declares they should give to the other spouse. That is nonsense. The state has no right to declare that a parent should by Nike vs. Payless Shoes. Worse still they have no right to toss someone in jail over that.
Nick