Replies

Why don't "father's rights" activist actively support and lobby for joint physical custody both in divorce and never married situations?

Under joint custody there is considerably less and often none at all child support payments. Of course, it does require money to support the child in your direct custody but that is to be expected.

Again, why don't activists concerned with paying less in CS enthusiastically support JPC?

I can't speak for fathers rights groups or anyone else. In Sweden, where I've been living for the past eight years, joint custody is presumed and preserved even against the objection of one parent. All of Scandinavia is a presumptive joint custody zone. Contrary to what representatives of the divorce industry in the United States say it really works quite well.

In my work on child support decision science, I've come to the definite and absolute conclusion that the labels a court puts on parents -- "custodial" and "noncustodial" have no rational relationship to deciding the appropriate amount of child support to be awarded. The ability of parents to pay, the amount of time children spend with each parent, and other aspects of the financial arrangements are important.

Come to think of it, I have read articles by reformers taking a position. "Custody," I've heard it said is that you take a prisoner into. And, now that I think about it, some reformers got the law changed in West Virginia to eliminate the labels. In one or two states people were disappointed when they simply got "custodial" replaced by "primary care" but I think some places did better than others.

Why don't "father's rights" activist actively support and lobby for joint physical custody both in divorce and never married situations?

This will be the umpteenth time that you have attempted to insert into this thread the false notion that fathers' rights groups do not lobby in favor of joint custody.

Last time I sent you a link to a prominent father's rights group that is doing exactly that. This time I will quote from the Dallas Observer:

The National Organization for Women (NOW) issued an "Action Alert on Fathers' Rights" to its state and local chapters in 1996. "These fathers' groups are fulfilling their objectives forming political alliances with conservative Republicans by working for the adoption of legislation such as the presumption of joint custody," NOW warned. "The success of these groups will be harmful to all women but especially harmful to battered women and children."

The next time you say it, I will call you a deliberate, repetitive liar. Fair enough?