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

To: right2parent
Since I don't believe in no fault divorce, and believe divorce should be legal, but rare, it's hard for me to discuss this matter. Kids need to LIVE with two parents.
41 posted on 04/02/2002 12:13:26 PM PST by joathome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]


To: joathome
Since I don't believe in no fault divorce, and believe divorce should be legal, but rare, it's hard for me to discuss this matter. Kids need to LIVE with two parents.
Custody, and the dissolution of the marriage itself are individual subjects with unique standards for review.

When the court evaluates whether a licensed marriage should be dissolved, the determination is based on an irreconsilable breakdown of such marriage (this would assume there has been an attempt). "No-fault" means fault is not considered in adjudicating such a breakdown. Is it irreconsilable? What is an objective finding here?

Custody is another matter entirely. In order for the issue to be a justicable question, it must first be shown a natural parent has, or must surrender this right. "No-fault" has no application here. This is an adjudication of a right. Not so with a marriage approved by application to the state.

Are you starting to see the difference? Best interest standards are criteria to assure the state is careful in the placement of it's wards. There is no connection until the state takes control from a natural parent. The subject is placement, not fitness, in this case. Has this doctrine been mis-applied? It most certainly has! Can we fix it? I think we should try. What do you think?

56 posted on 04/03/2002 8:21:30 AM PST by right2parent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | 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