Here's 3 stories of divorce and custody battles. These all happened within the past year-18 months, in the same jurisdiction, same court house (San Diego, CA).
First, a mom has custody of her two children. Dad's got a documented history of spousal abuse, including convictions. There is limited, supervised visitation with Dad. Dad decides he's tired of paying child support, so he sues for more custody. Both are under 12, so the court doesn't take their opinions into consideration. Mom brings up issues of past abuse and the fact that Dad currently misses most of his visits anyway, and the fact he's just looking for reduced child support. After the mediator tells her, "Well the abuse was a long time ago, so it's not really a factor anymore" he recommends Dad receive 30% custody, which the judge grants. Dad takes his visits for about two months, then gets injured on the job and goes on work comp and doesn't visit or pay child support. Mom goes back to court because of the child support being in arrears, wins wage garnishment, which isn't currently being enforced due to the workman's comp.
Next, mom and dad have 50-50 custody. They live about 20 miles from each other, Dad lives 5 miles from the child's school, Mom lives about 15. Mom decides "San Diego's too expensive" and decides to move to Mexico, but commute across the border everyday. Dad says, "I don't want our child living in a third-world country with unsafe water, high crime, unreliable healthcare, and a corrupt government." They go to court, and mediation, where the mediator won't even try to mediate a solution. (Mom wants 50-50 to remain the same and be allowed to move to TJ. Dad wants 70-30 if there's a move, no move, or at least some reduction to minimize the impact to the child. Both sides bring up evidence for/against the move. (My personal favorite, Dad cites a recent incident at the local hospital where drug lords took hostages in the ER. Mom says "My husband and I aren't into drugs, so it won't be a problem." Yeah, because the first thing the drug lords do when they take over a hospital is let the non-drug involved people go.) The judge says, in court, "The only issue I have with the move away is that of the border wait and the child getting to school on time. I don't see any health and safety issues." and allows 50-50 and the mother to move away. (3 months later, I hear she's looking for an apartment back in the States because the border wait is too long.)
Third, mom and dad are divorcing. Dad, who really hadn't been part of the child's life when the parents were together decides that now he wants 50-50 custody, and he's not paying child support. Mom doesn't argue with Dad directly, but files for 70-30 custody, and a support order. Dad fails to show up for mediation 3 times, and then fails to show up for court. Mom is awarded 70-30, spousal support and child support including daycare costs totaling over $1000/month. (In CA, support is based on a fixed scale, depending on the relative incomes, unless both parties agree to more.) Since Dad works for the Government, it's an automatic deduction from his check.
What's the point? In all three of these cases, the judge and mediator failed in their duty to look out for the best interest of the child/ren. Thankfully in the third case it did work out for the child. As long as Mom or Dad aren't abusing the child or do in drugs in front of the child, Mom and Dad's "rights" are more important than the child's. I would think that this is what mediation is for, but it seems like the mediators are either overworked, or don't care about their jobs (or a combination of both!), or maybe even unexperienced.
But really, we just need Judge Judy to go back to working family court. She'd tell them what for!
Next, mom and dad have 50-50 custody. They live about 20 miles from each other, Dad lives 5 miles from the child's school, Mom lives about 15. Mom decides "San Diego's too expensive" and decides to move to Mexico, but commute across the border everyday. Dad says, "I don't want our child living in a third-world country with unsafe water, high crime, unreliable healthcare, and a corrupt government." They go to court, and mediation, where the mediator won't even try to mediate a solution. (Mom wants 50-50 to remain the same and be allowed to move to TJ. Dad wants 70-30 if there's a move, no move, or at least some reduction to minimize the impact to the child. Both sides bring up evidence for/against the move. (My personal favorite, Dad cites a recent incident at the local hospital where drug lords took hostages in the ER. Mom says "My husband and I aren't into drugs, so it won't be a problem." Yeah, because the first thing the drug lords do when they take over a hospital is let the non-drug involved people go.) The judge says, in court, "The only issue I have with the move away is that of the border wait and the child getting to school on time. I don't see any health and safety issues." and allows 50-50 and the mother to move away. (3 months later, I hear she's looking for an apartment back in the States because the border wait is too long.)
Third, mom and dad are divorcing. Dad, who really hadn't been part of the child's life when the parents were together decides that now he wants 50-50 custody, and he's not paying child support. Mom doesn't argue with Dad directly, but files for 70-30 custody, and a support order. Dad fails to show up for mediation 3 times, and then fails to show up for court. Mom is awarded 70-30, spousal support and child support including daycare costs totaling over $1000/month. (In CA, support is based on a fixed scale, depending on the relative incomes, unless both parties agree to more.) Since Dad works for the Government, it's an automatic deduction from his check.
What's the point? In all three of these cases, the judge and mediator failed in their duty to look out for the best interest of the child/ren. Thankfully in the third case it did work out for the child. As long as Mom or Dad aren't abusing the child or do in drugs in front of the child, Mom and Dad's "rights" are more important than the child's. I would think that this is what mediation is for, but it seems like the mediators are either overworked, or don't care about their jobs (or a combination of both!), or maybe even unexperienced.
But really, we just need Judge Judy to go back to working family court. She'd tell them what for!
No comments:
Post a Comment