From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights
Subject: Re: Fight for sole custody or joint?
Date: 6 Nov 92 13:55:09 GMT


In article <1992Nov5.162839.2742@vicorp.com> mc@vicorp.com (Mark Charalambous) writes:

>My ex has moved 50 miles away in an attempt to make joint custody that
>much more difficult. We're in Mass, in the beginning phases of the divorce. 

(My opinions, take them with the usual grain of salt.)

Liberal state = pro-woman, anti-male.

>I filed for divorce, and asked for custody. My new expensive lawyer puts my 
>chances of getting custody around 10%. I've pretty much decided to forget about 
>going for sole custody and just go for joint, which is what he advises.

I'm amazed it's as much as 10%.  That is "encouraging."


>He says there won't be any benefit in trying for sole custody with the
>real intention being joint, ie it won't help my chances of getting joint
>if I seek sole custody. 

That's what I've heard.


>Her irrationality
>includes episodes of violence (towards me and perhaps herself). I "could make
>a case" for unfit parenting based on some of her actions that impacted the
>children directly, but certainly not a real strong one.

Judges don't like to referee mudfights.


>I'm not sure if I should go along with my lawyers advice, who says that 
>besaically we're fighting for 30% (ie, 70% of the 'situation` is already
>determined, all we can fight for is the remaining 30%). He says the court
>won't make a decision forcing her to move back to within the last place
>of domicile (where I remain), despite the fact that I moved from California
>to this area precisely to accomodate her a year and a half ago.

"Best interests of the children."  Hmm.


>My lawyer is very expensive. I will be going into debt very shortly and
>haven't even made a child support payment yet (separation happenned Sep 1).
>Obviously, going for sole custody is going to be very expensive, and from
>everything I've heard, probably futile.

It depends on whether you're always going to have second thoughts,
"should I have tried anyway?"

(Sometimes I wonder what would happen if every father in this situation
gave his $10,000-$30,000 to a PAC instead of to the lawyers.)


>My lawyer is telling me that we have to get into a cooperative mode in order
>to get the best settlement from the court. Ie, the court is more likely to
>grant joint custody when there is a measure of cooperation between the
>parents. I will concievanly be throwing away my chances for joint custody
>if I go for sole custody and fail, if this argument is correct.

From what I've heard, your lawyer is right.  But if your wife is
already saying, "Absolutely not!  I cannot deal with this man!"
then it will be more difficult.  Perhaps your 70%-30% deal is the
best:  try to get entire summers, plus holidays.  Then you won't
have to follow your ex wherever she moves, and you'll have the
children for a long enough time to continue a real bond.  What a 
raw deal, but we are in a sexist society.

If your wife were to rail against this, she might come across as
the unreasonable one, which could put you in the 10% chance of success.
In PA, a judge can consider which parent would maintain the children's
contact with the other parent.  You might be able to use that to
help a little.


>I'm resigned to the fact that I'm not going to get justice for the abuses
>I sufferred at the hands of my ex, my concern now is for what kind of 
>relationship I'm going to have with my children in the future.

Join the lost generation(s) of men.  In a hundred years people will say,
"back in the old days, when men couldn't be fathers" like they now
say, "back in the old days, when women couldn't vote."  Not much
consolation, sorry.

Don
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights