Moniker wrote:skippy the dead wrote:
Of course, it used to be that the fathers retained the children in the event of a divorce (being their property, and all). Then the "best interests of the children" test came along, and courts began to look at who performed the actual care-taking of the children. Note that parents usually do get joint legal custody of kids, it's the physical custody that gets more tricky. And I've seen enough cases to know that 50/50 physical custody can be hard on kids, especially little ones (which is why often for toddlers, physical custody simply cannot be 50/50). I have also obtained primary physical custody for fathers on many occasions, when the father has been the primary emotional parent.
PAS goes both ways (against either parent), and it's unfortunate when parents are so petty and adversely affect their kids.
Well, I'm certain you know more about this then I do. It seemed to go from men retaining custody (property) to the assumption that mother's were always better care givers. I'm glad there's been a shift in this. PAS is awful! I wonder, skippy, did you see much of that when you did family law?
Unfortunately I did see some, but thankfully not that often. Many times I would see a wounded parent arguing for PAS when none existed - mainly that parent was seeing their own fears and anger instead of reality. That could be almost as damaging. (I may not have articulated this as well as I'd like - hopefully you can understand my meaning).
I had my own test for who the actual care-giver was - I would ask my client who the child would run to if he were hurt. Usually that's a pretty good determiner for where the stronger emotional bond was, and who the child instinctively thought was more nurturing. And many times, it would be the father (for instance, I know that my sister's husband is more nurturing, and would be the better primary caregiver).
The thing that chapped my hide was when a father would seek additional custody just to reduce their child support obligation (particularly when there were no financial obstacles to paying it). They would have no interest in having the children with them - they just wanted the extra $$ for their latest conquest or car. It could be devastating for the mother (which, sadly, was sometimes also the goal).
Needless to say, I had to leave the area of family law eventually. It took too heavy a toll on me.