uh huh yeah. great idear. Unless you can prove someone "unfit" ina court of law, they can micro-manage, intefere, and thwart everything you want tto do with your kid. wanna go to Disneyland? If the other parent gets word of it, they can raise all sorts of hassle.
this is a real dumb idea.
I was threatened when I took my daughter to Maine and my ex wanted to give me a hard time. she threatened to call the police saying that I was taking her across state lines without permission.
I agree it's a dumb idea. That's ALL the courts need is more reason to give mothers (and some fathers) the ability to give each other a harder time and make things more difficult than they already are. Especially those who are the vindictive type.
I speak from experience, but there are some mothers (and fathers) out there, that don't think about the best interest of the children (and neither do the courts), they just want to get at their ex and use the children to do so.
What I don't get, is with this "Shared Parenting" idea, where the children spend equal time in each parents home, how does that work when the parents live in two different states (500+ miles) apart? Equal time in each home would create problems with school, friends, etc and be more troublesome, I would think, to the child, than living the majority in one home and visits to the other.
I do agree though, that the current system is WAY TOO biased and not enough evaluation is done on BOTH parents to determine WHO is best suited for majority/sole custody. They should divide the time equally among those that live in the same town, but for those that live more than 50 miles apart, I would think a better way of dividing parenting time should be made. Just because one parent had more time with the child before the custody issue began, that shouldn't be the deciding factor that they get sole custody, imo.