Abusive Fathers Win Custody Battles More Often Than Mothers

[Plata Plomo y Sangre]

After finally figuring out what the PDF was trying to cite, I found it was citing Gender Bias Study of the court system Of Massachusetts circa 1989. Correct me if I'm wrong, but many of the sources that 64 bits and others have been citing are a bit more up to date, as well as being representative of national numbers, not one state, correct?

Furthermore, upon reading through it, I found, quote, "Specifically, we found that:
1. In most cases, mothers get primary physical custody of children following divorce. In general, this pattern does not reflect judicial gender bias, but the agreement of the parties and the fact that in most families mothers have been the primary caretakers of children. In some cases, however, perceptions of gender bias may discourage fathers from seeking custody, and stereotypes about fathers may affect case outcomes.
2. Refuting complaints that the bias in favor of mothers was pervasive, we found that fathers who actively seek custody obtain either primary or joint physical custody over 70% of the time."

The italics were in the original text to emphasize physical. I put it in bold to make it more noticeable.
Source: http://www.amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias_Study.htm

On the difference between legal and physical custody: http://californiadivorce.info/legal.children.physicalvslegalcustody.htm

"Physical custody:
Physical custody refers to that parent or parents who has the physical responsibility for the care of the child. Joint physical custody" means that each of the parents shall have significant periods of physical custody, although parents can share joint custody even if the timeshares are disproportionate, such as an alternate weekend schedule for one parent and the other parent having the rest of the time.

Sole legal custody means that one parent clearly has the lions share of time, as well as usually responsibility. Oftentimes attorneys avoid the use of either sole or joint custody and use the term "primary physical custody" to designate the parent who has day-to day care of the child. California law does not have any designation known as primary physical custody, and this may cause problems under certain circumstances, such as in a move-away case.

Legal Custody
Legal Custody refers to the parent/s who will have the decision-making authority relating to the health, education, and welfare of a child. Joint legal custody means that both parents have the authority to make decisions regarding the child’s health, education, welfare, religion, drivers license, etc. Sole legal custody means that one parent may make all of these decisions."

So in Mass., in 1989, this study found that men who actively seek custody get EITHER sole or joint PHYSICAL custody. This is not the same thing as having complete custody over a child, and includes when they get joint-custody with the mother. So it's a bit intellectually dishonest, in my opinion, to make it seem as though they are given complete custody, or that this study is up to date and representative of the nation as a whole.

Now let the "ZOMG MISOGYNIST! etc etc etc" come flying. rolleyes

[Meroko_Love]

Stygian Soleil

Well, apparently even though these fathers are supposedly 70% more likely to win custody cases when disputed, women still win the majority of disputed cases according to US census bureau information.

Source

We're talking about abusive fathers, not fathers in general. Domestic violence cases, not just your average child custody dispute. Was the OP misleading? confused

[Dreaded Jai]

Meroko_Love

Stygian Soleil

Well, apparently even though these fathers are supposedly 70% more likely to win custody cases when disputed, women still win the majority of disputed cases according to US census bureau information.

Source

We're talking about abusive fathers, not fathers in general. Domestic violence cases, not just your average child custody dispute. Was the OP misleading? confused

Very, and your posts after the fact weren't too clear either tbh.

[Meroko_Love]

el pibe tirofijo

After finally figuring out what the PDF was trying to cite, I found it was citing Gender Bias Study of the court system Of Massachusetts circa 1989. Correct me if I'm wrong, but many of the sources that 64 bits and others have been citing are a bit more up to date, as well as being representative of national numbers, not one state, correct?

Furthermore, upon reading through it, I found, quote, "Specifically, we found that:
1. In most cases, mothers get primary physical custody of children following divorce. In general, this pattern does not reflect judicial gender bias, but the agreement of the parties and the fact that in most families mothers have been the primary caretakers of children. In some cases, however, perceptions of gender bias may discourage fathers from seeking custody, and stereotypes about fathers may affect case outcomes.
2. Refuting complaints that the bias in favor of mothers was pervasive, we found that fathers who actively seek custody obtain either primary or joint physicalcustody over 70% of the time."

The italics were in the original text to emphasize physical. I put it in bold to make it more noticeable.
Source: http://www.amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias_Study.htm

On the difference between legal and physical custody: http://californiadivorce.info/legal.children.physicalvslegalcustody.htm

"Physical custody:
Physical custody refers to that parent or parents who has the physical responsibility for the care of the child. Joint physical custody" means that each of the parents shall have significant periods of physical custody, although parents can share joint custody even if the timeshares are disproportionate, such as an alternate weekend schedule for one parent and the other parent having the rest of the time.

Sole legal custody means that one parent clearly has the lions share of time, as well as usually responsibility. Oftentimes attorneys avoid the use of either sole or joint custody and use the term "primary physical custody" to designate the parent who has day-to day care of the child. California law does not have any designation known as primary physical custody, and this may cause problems under certain circumstances, such as in a move-away case.

Legal Custody
Legal Custody refers to the parent/s who will have the decision-making authority relating to the health, education, and welfare of a child. Joint legal custody means that both parents have the authority to make decisions regarding the child’s health, education, welfare, religion, drivers license, etc. Sole legal custody means that one parent may make all of these decisions."

So in Mass., in 1989, this study found that men who actively seek custody get EITHER sole or joint PHYSICAL custody. This is not the same thing as having complete custody over a child, and includes when they get joint-custody with the mother. So it's a bit intellectually dishonest, in my opinion, to make it seem as though they are given complete custody, or that this study is up to date and representative of the nation as a whole.

Now let the "ZOMG MISOGYNIST! etc etc etc" come flying. rolleyes

Yes, this is one study for one state I cited. The emboldened is the important part. There were certainly other research studies that I cited for you though. That would be stupid to present this case as applying to the whole country. There were a whole bunch cited at the bottom of the article I just linked you.

Stop being mean. crying

[Stygian Soleil]

Meroko_Love

We're talking about abusive fathers, not fathers in general. Domestic violence cases, not just your average child custody dispute. Was the OP misleading? confused

Well, you pretty much stated outright that women having an advantage in sole custody cases is a myth, and the statistics don't paint that picture at all. Women were more than three times more likely to gain sole custody in the case of a dispute.

[Meroko_Love]

64 bits

Meroko_Love

Stygian Soleil

Well, apparently even though these fathers are supposedly 70% more likely to win custody cases when disputed, women still win the majority of disputed cases according to US census bureau information.

Source

We're talking about abusive fathers, not fathers in general. Domestic violence cases, not just your average child custody dispute. Was the OP misleading? confused

Very, and your posts after the fact weren't too clear either tbh.

I guess I haven't been paying as much attention to the thread. Been multitasking with schoolwork; or at least trying to.

Heh. Heh. I'm a woman and I can't multitask. So much for that stereotype. xp

[Plata Plomo y Sangre]

Meroko_Love

el pibe tirofijo

After finally figuring out what the PDF was trying to cite, I found it was citing Gender Bias Study of the court system Of Massachusetts circa 1989. Correct me if I'm wrong, but many of the sources that 64 bits and others have been citing are a bit more up to date, as well as being representative of national numbers, not one state, correct?

Furthermore, upon reading through it, I found, quote, "Specifically, we found that:
1. In most cases, mothers get primary physical custody of children following divorce. In general, this pattern does not reflect judicial gender bias, but the agreement of the parties and the fact that in most families mothers have been the primary caretakers of children. In some cases, however, perceptions of gender bias may discourage fathers from seeking custody, and stereotypes about fathers may affect case outcomes.
2. Refuting complaints that the bias in favor of mothers was pervasive, we found that fathers who actively seek custody obtain either primary or joint physicalcustody over 70% of the time."

The italics were in the original text to emphasize physical. I put it in bold to make it more noticeable.
Source: http://www.amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias_Study.htm

On the difference between legal and physical custody: http://californiadivorce.info/legal.children.physicalvslegalcustody.htm

"Physical custody:
Physical custody refers to that parent or parents who has the physical responsibility for the care of the child. Joint physical custody" means that each of the parents shall have significant periods of physical custody, although parents can share joint custody even if the timeshares are disproportionate, such as an alternate weekend schedule for one parent and the other parent having the rest of the time.

Sole legal custody means that one parent clearly has the lions share of time, as well as usually responsibility. Oftentimes attorneys avoid the use of either sole or joint custody and use the term "primary physical custody" to designate the parent who has day-to day care of the child. California law does not have any designation known as primary physical custody, and this may cause problems under certain circumstances, such as in a move-away case.

Legal Custody
Legal Custody refers to the parent/s who will have the decision-making authority relating to the health, education, and welfare of a child. Joint legal custody means that both parents have the authority to make decisions regarding the child’s health, education, welfare, religion, drivers license, etc. Sole legal custody means that one parent may make all of these decisions."

So in Mass., in 1989, this study found that men who actively seek custody get EITHER sole or joint PHYSICAL custody. This is not the same thing as having complete custody over a child, and includes when they get joint-custody with the mother. So it's a bit intellectually dishonest, in my opinion, to make it seem as though they are given complete custody, or that this study is up to date and representative of the nation as a whole.

Now let the "ZOMG MISOGYNIST! etc etc etc" come flying. rolleyes

Yes, this is one study for one state I cited. The emboldened is the important part. There were certainly other research studies that I cited for you though. That would be stupid to present this case as applying to the whole country. There were a whole bunch cited at the bottom of the article I just linked you.

Stop being mean. crying

I'm not being mean. I'm trying to facilitate and better understand the discussion you wanted to have. If I seem mean, it's just how I come off. It isn't personal (not until someone makes it personal with me at least). I curse a lot, and take a gruff attitude with things. I'm a smart-a** at times, I'll fully admit. Don't think I'm mean though.

I'll look at it in a bit. I'm sick right now and I'm trying to get rid of my body chills, which may have contributed to me being more on edge than usual. If that's the case then I apologize for my jerky (more than usual) behavior.

[Riviera de la Mancha]

I got to say, I am somewhat hesitant to buy your claim.

Someone at the top of this page has noted that your studies are specific to one state, and dated from the year 1989. Those two are some pretty big holes that need to be filled, assuming they are true.

On the whole though, I too find myself suspicious of the 'father's rights' movement based on the issues that they target and their reasoning behind doing so. I dont like their logic or their desire to allow men for example to opt out of child support without so much as even presenting a case in court as to why. I also get the sense that there is more to their objective to combat female preference in particular family law cases.

[Meroko_Love]

Stygian Soleil

Meroko_Love

We're talking about abusive fathers, not fathers in general. Domestic violence cases, not just your average child custody dispute. Was the OP misleading? confused

Well, you pretty much stated outright that women having an advantage in sole custody cases is a myth, and the statistics don't paint that picture at all. Women were more than three times more likely to gain sole custody in the case of a dispute.

Well, just to clear that up, I'm talking about how abusive fathers many times are able to convince authorities that the victim is unfit or undeserving of sole custody in a significant portion of challenged custody cases.

[Meroko_Love]

Another scholarly source that I hope everyone can open: http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:Svt6_P_WjqAJ:www.dvleap.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=o9qaxp3D8kM%3D&tabid=173+batterers+convince+authorities&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgpsdkdT5MeX0iF8fdpGTeI7QoEXuZRlKnkX1T8eQ3o8SC_CX791JcJpchiKsGyjrbJ5WDKdq4ZH7CtZMMYNKb3Fj-MmCsKlUyjy4-gOWS-sX-qU4eKpdxbiV9RE4OlzKIfyX38&sig=AHIEtbQYJ6wbGgGElYE5yWQ2V66EHJEXSA

[Meroko_Love]

el pibe tirofijo

Meroko_Love

el pibe tirofijo

After finally figuring out what the PDF was trying to cite, I found it was citing Gender Bias Study of the court system Of Massachusetts circa 1989. Correct me if I'm wrong, but many of the sources that 64 bits and others have been citing are a bit more up to date, as well as being representative of national numbers, not one state, correct?

Furthermore, upon reading through it, I found, quote, "Specifically, we found that:
1. In most cases, mothers get primary physical custody of children following divorce. In general, this pattern does not reflect judicial gender bias, but the agreement of the parties and the fact that in most families mothers have been the primary caretakers of children. In some cases, however, perceptions of gender bias may discourage fathers from seeking custody, and stereotypes about fathers may affect case outcomes.
2. Refuting complaints that the bias in favor of mothers was pervasive, we found that fathers who actively seek custody obtain either primary or joint physicalcustody over 70% of the time."

The italics were in the original text to emphasize physical. I put it in bold to make it more noticeable.
Source: http://www.amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias_Study.htm

On the difference between legal and physical custody: http://californiadivorce.info/legal.children.physicalvslegalcustody.htm

"Physical custody:
Physical custody refers to that parent or parents who has the physical responsibility for the care of the child. Joint physical custody" means that each of the parents shall have significant periods of physical custody, although parents can share joint custody even if the timeshares are disproportionate, such as an alternate weekend schedule for one parent and the other parent having the rest of the time.

Sole legal custody means that one parent clearly has the lions share of time, as well as usually responsibility. Oftentimes attorneys avoid the use of either sole or joint custody and use the term "primary physical custody" to designate the parent who has day-to day care of the child. California law does not have any designation known as primary physical custody, and this may cause problems under certain circumstances, such as in a move-away case.

Legal Custody
Legal Custody refers to the parent/s who will have the decision-making authority relating to the health, education, and welfare of a child. Joint legal custody means that both parents have the authority to make decisions regarding the child’s health, education, welfare, religion, drivers license, etc. Sole legal custody means that one parent may make all of these decisions."

So in Mass., in 1989, this study found that men who actively seek custody get EITHER sole or joint PHYSICAL custody. This is not the same thing as having complete custody over a child, and includes when they get joint-custody with the mother. So it's a bit intellectually dishonest, in my opinion, to make it seem as though they are given complete custody, or that this study is up to date and representative of the nation as a whole.

Now let the "ZOMG MISOGYNIST! etc etc etc" come flying. rolleyes

Yes, this is one study for one state I cited. The emboldened is the important part. There were certainly other research studies that I cited for you though. That would be stupid to present this case as applying to the whole country. There were a whole bunch cited at the bottom of the article I just linked you.

Stop being mean. crying

I'm not being mean. I'm trying to facilitate and better understand the discussion you wanted to have. If I seem mean, it's just how I come off. It isn't personal (not until someone makes it personal with me at least). I curse a lot, and take a gruff attitude with things. I'm a smart-a** at times, I'll fully admit. Don't think I'm mean though.

I'll look at it in a bit. I'm sick right now and I'm trying to get rid of my body chills, which may have contributed to me being more on edge than usual. If that's the case then I apologize for my jerky (more than usual) behavior.

That's okay then. I hope you feel better. Take your time with reading it and also I posted another source near the bottom of the page.

[Meroko_Love]

Riviera de la Mancha

I got to say, I am somewhat hesitant to buy your claim.

Someone at the top of this page has noted that your studies are specific to one state, and dated from the year 1989. Those two are some pretty big holes that need to be filled, assuming they are true.

On the whole though, I too find myself suspicious of the 'father's rights' movement based on the issues that they target and their reasoning behind doing so. I dont like their logic or their desire to allow men for example to opt out of child support without so much as even presenting a case in court as to why. I also get the sense that there is more to their objective to combat female preference in particular family law cases.

It sucks because a lot of the good sources I only have the abstract for because you can't access them on the one site.

Dunno if this helps you at all: http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:Svt6_P_WjqAJ:www.dvleap.org/LinkClick.aspx%3Ffileticket%3Do9qaxp3D8kM%253D%26tabid%3D173+batterers+convince+authorities&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgpsdkdT5MeX0iF8fdpGTeI7QoEXuZRlKnkX1T8eQ3o8SC_CX791JcJpchiKsGyjrbJ5WDKdq4ZH7CtZMMYNKb3Fj-MmCsKlUyjy4-gOWS-sX-qU4eKpdxbiV9RE4OlzKIfyX38&sig=AHIEtbQYJ6wbGgGElYE5yWQ2V66EHJEXSA

[Oni no Tenshi]

My coworker's exhusband (who she divorced because he was addicted to meth and refused to go into rehab, and then physically abused her), has not paid a cent of child support since the court ordered him to do so.

He was given partial custody, but never wants to see his children or even sends them a birthday card/calls them.

Then he tried to take her to court to "lower" his child support obligations (even though he had not paid anything to begin with) and outright lied to the court about how he was spending lots of time with the children and wanted to stop paying child support.

She brought in her daughter and son and they testified that they hadn't heard from their father in over 10 years.

He then tried to argue that just because one of the children was over 18, that he shouldn't have to pay back child support.

The court disagreed, especially after hearing the children's testimonies.

Now this piece of s**t douchebag has quit his job and is doing "under the table" work in an attempt to try and keep himself from having to pay anything towards his child support and child support services is basically saying that they don't have time to do anything about this for awhile.

Both of her children are going to school and still living at home while going to school and the father hasn't paid a cent to help with any of their care for YEARS. Living expenses are huge and getting bigger and yet he's living with his girlfriend rent free and she's forced to pay for her children and herself all by herself.

It's ******** up that the system basically allows the worst of the worst to get away basically scott-free without consequences for their behaviors.

I don't believe half of the s**t that guys say when they go on about how men are "so oppressed".

[deadguy]

How come abusive fathers get kids exactly as often as non-abusive ones? Like, down to the percent? Something seems off with that. You'd think they'd get them more, with all the advantages you say they have. Or less, with all the abuse and everything. But exactly the same?

[Plata Plomo y Sangre]

Quote:

I don't believe half of the s**t that guys girls say when they go on about how men women are "so oppressed".

In the hypothetical situation that someone posted this, it would be the cue for Oni to start bawing.

Yep. No double standard at all. rolleyes