Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Gabz

I agree that defying a court order is generally wrong, however I also agree that the interest of the children was never even the intent of the court order. Proven by throwing her in jail, further harming the children, the court has proven our case that it is about control. They don't even pretend it is about health any more, they just step up and admit it is all about behaviour control.

And it is celebrated and promoted by supposed "conservatives."


320 posted on 08/16/2004 11:29:49 AM PDT by CSM (To spread the wealth the liberal is willing, he'll take YOUR dollar and keep his shilling. -albertp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies ]


To: CSM

Divorce situations, particularly involving children and the ensuing custody battles, are always ugly. The articles here don't give enough information as to why this particular issue was in the custody agreement to begin with.

If the children have a health condition that is exacerbated by certain pollutants, then fine. If it's just because the father is a jerk, then I question the competency of the mother's attorney (if she had one at all) in allowing her to agree to what seems to be an extremely vague prohibition of smoking around the children.

There are always 3 sides to every divore: his, hers, and the truth. And that gets further complicated if there are chidlren in the mixture. I know all of this because I divorced a man who who had children from a previous ex-wife.

As to the support of this nonsense by supposed conservative - I'm at a loss.


325 posted on 08/16/2004 11:52:31 AM PDT by Gabz (BTW - have I mentioned lately I'm tired of rain?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 320 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson