Custody decisions based partly on one parent's having had "three
children out of wedlock, all with different [partners]"
Bob Sheridan
bobsheridan at earthlink.net
Mon Oct 23 19:04:24 PDT 2006
Earl Maltz wrote:
I believe that a person who has had children out of wedlock with three
different partners has made decisions that have bad social consequences
and that we would not want their children to replicate.
***
Let me get this straight: Momma has three kids by three daddies, so
let's prevent the /kids/ from reproducing.
What am I missing here? Some kind of Darwinian gene, or Dawkinsian meme
that makes the kids suspect because someone doesn't like Momma making
friends? What's Momma to do, remain alone in order to satisfy some
Maltzian notion of propriety?
I hadn't thought that kids were "bad social consequences" in themselves,
but rather the failure to support them. I thought we loved kids. I've
heard of illegitimate parents, but that we abandoned the notion of
"illegitimate children."
Educate me.
rs
> Custodial parents are by definition role models for their children. I
> believe that a person who has had children out of wedlock with three
> different partners has made decisions that have bad social
> consequences and that we would not want their children to replicate.
> Thus, constitutional objections aside, such behavior is appropriately
> considered in child custody decisions.
>
> At 08:11 PM 10/23/2006 -0500, Kathleen Bergin wrote:
>> What exactly makes her "morally unfit"?
>>
>> Is it the "three" kids?
>> Is it the "out of wedlock?"
>> Is it the "different fathers?"
>>
>> Would it have made a difference if she had aborted the three prior
>> children? If she had miscarried? If she had surrendered them for
>> adoption? Is it the sex or the decisions made in response thereto?
>>
>> Surely the dad's had sex with more than three women.
>>
>> The decision does not mention how the mom's child-bearing history
>> will impact, or has impacted, the child at issue; nor whether her
>> relationship with the men who fathered her previous children will
>> have an impact. It does not even tell us whether or not there is a
>> continuing relationship.
>>
>> In the end, I am suspicious of the motives behind any custody
>> decision that defers to the father because he "involved the child in
>> church," and took a wife who was a "stay-at-home mom" able to look
>> after the child during day. There may be other perfectly sound
>> reasons for denying custody to the Mom - but the lack of church
>> involvement or a "stay at home" parenting arrangement should not be
>> among them.
>>
>> Didn't the Court somewhere, at some point, say something about
>> "outmoded stereotypes?" Hmmm . . .
>>
>> davidebernstein at aol.com wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not a family law expert by any means, but I understand that most
>>> courts use a "best interests of the child" standard for custody.
>>> It's certainly in a child's best interest to have a stable home
>>> environment, and besides the general moral environment, having
>>> various men coming around to visit one's half-siblings (or simply to
>>> hook up with the mother) not only isn't conducive to that, it
>>> significantly raises the risk of child abuse. One has a
>>> constitutional right to stay out all night and party, or to drink to
>>> excess in the privacy of one's home, or to live in a commune without
>>> electricity or running water, but I don't see why a judge couldn't
>>> take such lifestyle considerations into effect when determining the
>>> best interests of the child. -----Original Message-----
>>> From: hendersl at ix.netcom.com
>>> To: VOLOKH at law.ucla.edu; Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu;
>>> emaltz at camden.rutgers.edu
>>> Sent: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 6:16 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Custody decisions based partly on one parent's having
>>> had "three children out of wedlock, all with different [partners]"
>>> Why is it "eminently sensible?" we don't know enough, do we? Flip
>>> the question as Eugene suggested, would it be unfair to deny the
>>> father custody? Lynne Henderson ----- Original Message ----- From:
>>> "Earl Maltz" <emaltz at camden.rutgers.edu
>>> <mailto:emaltz%40camden.rutgers.edu>> To: "Volokh, Eugene"
>>> <VOLOKH at law.ucla.edu <mailto:VOLOKH%40law.ucla.edu>>;
>>> <Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu <mailto:Conlawprof%40lists.ucla.edu>>
>>> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 3:03 PM Subject: Re: Custody
>>> decisions based partly on one parent's having had "three children
>>> out of wedlock, all with different [partners]" > Clearly
>>> unconstitutional (although eminently sensible.) > > At 02:33 PM
>>> 10/23/2006 -0700, Volokh, Eugene wrote: >> Romans v. Fulgham, 2006
>>> WL 2868314 (Miss. App. Oct. 10), upholds >>a lower court decision
>>> awarding custody to father Fulgham rather than >>mother Romans; the
>>> lower court decision was based partly on the "moral >>fitness"
>>> factor, as to which the lower court "found this factor to weigh
>>> >>in favor of [the father], pointing to the fact that [the mother]
>>> had >>given birth to three children out of wedlock, all with
>>> different >>fathers." Is this constitutionally permissible, or does
>>> it >>impermissibly count against the mother her having exercised
>>> her >>constitutional rights? (Let's assume that the courts would
>>> likewise >>hold against a father his having fathered three children
>>> out of wedlock, >>all with different mothers.) >> >> Eugene
>>> >>_______________________________________________ >>To post, send
>>> message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
>>> <mailto:Conlawprof%40lists.ucla.edu> >>To subscribe, unsubscribe,
>>> change options, or get password, see
>>> >>http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof >>
>>> >>Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be
>>> viewed as >>private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read
>>> messages that are >>posted; people can read the Web archives; and
>>> list members can (rightly or >>wrongly) forward the messages to
>>> others. > > _______________________________________________ > To
>>> post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
>>> <mailto:Conlawprof%40lists.ucla.edu> > To subscribe, unsubscribe,
>>> change options, or get password, see >
>>> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof > >
>>> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed
>>> as > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages
>>> that are > posted; people can read the Web archives; and list
>>> members can (rightly or > wrongly) forward the messages to others. >
>>> _______________________________________________ To post, send
>>> message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
>>> <mailto:Conlawprof%40lists.ucla.edu> To subscribe, unsubscribe,
>>> change options, or get password, see
>>> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof Please
>>> note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
>>> private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
>>> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can
>>> (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Check out the new AOL
>>> <http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/1615326657x4311227241x4298082137/aol?redir=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaol%2Ecom%2Fnewaol>.
>>> Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free
>>> access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free
>>> AOL Mail and more.
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
>>> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
>>> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed
>>> as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that
>>> are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can
>>> (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>>
>> --
>> Kathleen A. Bergin
>> Assistant Professor of Law
>> South Texas College of Law
>> 1303 San Jacinto Street
>> Houston, TX 77002
>> (713)646-1829
>
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
> private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can
> (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: bobsheridan.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 73 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/conlawprof/attachments/20061023/7e693f6c/bobsheridan.vcf
More information about the Conlawprof
mailing list