mothers are favoured by the courts? Think again.

Salma - posted on 01/13/2013 ( 14 moms have responded )

2

0

0

You are all living in la la land. The courts are giving primary custody to the father on a regular basis. Do not divorce, because once courts are involved, you will never see your children. Just take your kids and run as far away as possible, change your names, ssn, disappear. Imagine a loving, caring mother, who has done nothing wrong in her life, never been in trouble with the law, being given supervised visitation of her newborn for one hour a week on the unproven lies of her partner. Judges are unable to see lies, and best interests of the child are not looked at, so don't fall for that dribble. Take my advice. Mother's rights have been legally removed, and we have currently reverted back to the 1700's.

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

Dove - posted on 01/13/2013

6,024

0

1337

That's what I thought, but I keep 'trying' to give the op the benefit of the doubt.... at least a little on some level cuz I can't imagine any judge taking a newborn away from his/her mother. Heck, my friend is fostering to adopt a little boy and DHS didn't take the baby brother away when he was born even though the whole family tested positive for drugs at the birth. :(

♫ Shawnn ♪♫♫ - posted on 01/13/2013

8,847

21

1999

considering that the US is the only country that I know of that has SSN's...I'm sure that all other countries have some sort of identification that is similar, though...at least my Canadian friends have told me that they have something similar...but that's heresay, don't quote me!

♫ Shawnn ♪♫♫ - posted on 01/13/2013

8,847

21

1999

Yep, lacye's got a point...Advising illegal actions isn't very, well...advisable!

The quickest way to change that "never been in jail" status to "my new address is cellblock C" is to kidnap your kids away and try to illegally change their names, ssn's, and leave the country.

Lacye - posted on 01/13/2013

889

0

221

If a newborn infant is taken away from their mother at that young of age, there is something wrong in that picture. It is extremely rare for a child that age to be taken away unless it can be proven that the child's life is in danger. No judge is going to do that.

As for advising women to just run off with their kids and change their names, you should be ashamed of yourself. Not only is that illegal, but it is immoral as well. To steal a child away from their father is not fair to the child.

Dove - posted on 01/13/2013

6,024

0

1337

Actually, I 'believe' that most courts these days automatically go with 50/50 custody unless there is a really good reason not to do that.

MOST judges don't go for the he said/she said nonsense, but look at the facts.... and they know how important it is for a newborn to be with his/her mother most of the time..... If you only have an hour a week with your newborn... either the judge had a very good, legitimate reason for it... or you got a really bad judge and your lawyer should seek to have your case heard by someone else.

If you see this, leave this form field blank.
Powered by RESPECT not THUMPS

14 Comments

View replies by

Denikka - posted on 01/13/2013

2,160

5

748

I'm going to totally agree with the other ladies here.
As for the SSN thing, in Canada it's a SIN-Social Insurance Number. But same basic thing as the SSN in the states as far as I'm aware.

Evelyn - posted on 01/13/2013

3,198

7

872

I have to agree. Now maybe back in the 1700's men got the children as women did not have as many or no rights. But now adays, in the USA as far as I know, custody is granted either 50/50, or full to one or the other with generous visitation unless one parent or the other is proven to be unfit.

♫ Shawnn ♪♫♫ - posted on 01/13/2013

8,847

21

1999

Me too, Dove, I do try to give them the benefit of the doubt, but...

Then, too, my mental state sucks today, so I probably shouldn't even be here...

Dove - posted on 01/13/2013

6,024

0

1337

I wonder what country the op lives in. I could imagine something like that possibly happening in one of those countries that think women are lower class than the men.... but I don't think those other countries HAVE social security numbers, so... doubtful.

Firebird - posted on 01/13/2013

2,660

30

521

That all depends on where you live. That would never fly in most places in this world, unless abuse could be factually proven.

♫ Shawnn ♪♫♫ - posted on 01/13/2013

8,847

21

1999

Your ex would have had to have factual evidence in order to have a newborn removed completely from your custody.

You would have had to provide the same evidence to move against him.

If there has been a proven reason that the infant would be in danger, only then is the infant removed. No one, again, I say NO ONE will arbitrarily remove a newborn from the custody of the mother without that proof.

So, I agree with Jodi and Michelle...Welcome back from la la land...

Michelle - posted on 01/13/2013

8,253

8

3223

I agree with Jodi. None of what you have said makes sense.

Newborns do not get taken away from their mothers without a very good reason e.g. drug abuse.

The other party also needs evidence, not just saying what has happened.

Jodi - posted on 01/13/2013

26,171

36

3891

They don't just take one week old babies from their mothers and never allow visitation based on someone's word for it. What evidence did he present?

If you see this, leave this form field blank.
Powered by RESPECT not THUMPS

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms