The rights go to the party that has the lawyer and that’s usually the father. Every divorced dad I’ve heard whine about his ill-treatment at the hands of the court has been a narcissist and a paranoid. Alec Baldwin is a classic case. I don’t know a single divorced mom who wouldn’t welcome a break from her children if she thought they were generally safe, physically and emotionally, in their dad’s care. Significant numbers of fathers are too damaging emotionally to have unsupervised time with their children. I call these men Alcoholics Without the Chemicals. They need the children to constantly reassure them of their love, admiration, and exclusive attachment. Children of such fathers will carry the same psychological time bombs as children of chemical addicts. Since narcissists only respond to boundaries set by authority figures—like judges—the courts are the really the only means of enforcing the child’s right to competent parenting. I see no persecution of fathers in the law or the courts, merely a statutory bias in favor of the primary caregiver and the children. If that’s unfair then we need more bias of this kind.
You’re terribly misinformed and seem to have a chip on your shoulder. If you examine your feelings - that everyone is bad except you - perhaps you’ll see signs that you need to more carefully consider your own emotional health.
Since we know that women are perfect and have no issues either. Its nice to know that Munchausen only affects men. I know the courts will find that Brittany Spears will be the perfect mother.
I've never heard of a divorce situation where both parties didn't have a lawyer. (Except where it was very amicable and they were able to work things out just using an arbiter, in which case, neither party had an attorney.)
I read your post several times. You must be a slimy divorce lawyer or a divorced woman. The only right a divorcing man has in most courts is to bend over and grab his ankles.