|
Ostensibly an article on the shortcomings of child relocation litigation in
divorce cases, I’m hard pressed to find any aspect of the process where
Judge Duggan’s experience and advise wouldn’t immediately apply.
To
wit: His “... 10 reasons why a custody case should never be tried and why
this conflict resolution method should be condemned.”
1.
No one can afford a trial.
2.
You can’t prove a positive.
3.
Parents are at their worst when you must determine their best.
4.
You can’t put your foot in the same river twice. This one “… speaks of the
constantly changing aspects of every person’s life. The adversarial
litigation system, with it’s well-established rules of evidence, is very
good at resolving disputes that have been fixed about a point in time: a car
accident, a bank robbery, a note unpaid. In a custody dispute, the judge is
asked to review an extended timeline of a family and then predict, sometimes
for the next 18 years, which parent will do best by the child.”
5.
Trials destroy all good will.
6.
Contested custody proceedings addict parents to controversy.
7.
They’re their kids — the parents should decide what’s best.
8.
Kids want their parents to be in charge.
9.
Judges always know less than parents.
10.
You reap what you sow. In this case, “... the day in and day out exhibition
by the parents of incivility toward each other. The kids soak these lessons
up like sponges.”
The
Family Court Review article attempts to summarize some 36
“Relocation Factors.”
But
the saddest part of this reading for me was the observation of Judge Duggan
that a process has yet to be created that “... encourages, empowers, and
commands parents to reach joint decisions ...,” and that there needs to be
added “... some predictability to the process.”
Is
it any wonder why some parents insist on their day in court, unbridled by
reality checks?
—posted by Dell Deaton @8:32 PM EST 4/1/2008
RSD 16610
|
