I'm Like, Baby, Baby, Baby: Justin Bieber Hit with Paternity Suit

Discussion in 'Off The Beaten Track' started by overedge, Nov 2, 2011.

  1. PDilemma

    PDilemma Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    4,757
    The mother of my brother's son tried to sue him for back child support for her daughter several years ago. The daughter was seven months old when my brother met the woman. The court simply ordered the DNA test. It came back that she was not my brother's child, and the woman then had to pay all the court and testing costs.
  2. Prancer

    Prancer Ray Chill Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2001
    Messages:
    38,258
    On the flip side, I can't imagine having sex with Keith Richards. He looks like a zombie. But women do.

    I can think of a lot more examples. Sexual attraction, IF there is sexual attraction, is mostly between the ears.

    For the same reason that so many other men cheat on women other people think are too pretty to cheat on? It's like adultery--men don't cheat because of the way their women look; they cheat because of the way the other women make them feel. If he gets off on quickies with strangers, Selena isn't going to do it for him all the time, no matter what.

    And if he isn't sexually active, he and Selena sure must take a lot of cold showers: http://thejustinbiebershrine.com/wp...5/justin-bieber-selena-gomez-maui-beach-9.jpg

    And I am sure Justin Bieber will have to take one, too, whether he likes it or not.
  3. milanessa

    milanessa engaged to dupa

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2002
    Messages:
    18,917
  4. Prancer

    Prancer Ray Chill Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2001
    Messages:
    38,258
  5. Angelskates

    Angelskates Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    12,791
    So would he have to pay support?

    Even if the woman raped the man?

    Again, is this true if the woman got pregnant by rape?

    Me too.
  6. milanessa

    milanessa engaged to dupa

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2002
    Messages:
    18,917
    Yes. The circumstances of a pregnancy don't matter. The law focuses on the child.
  7. Angelskates

    Angelskates Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    12,791
    Then wouldn't the law means test the rapist mother first? I think it's disgusting that a woman could get rewarded for rape - especially if she raped to get pregnant. And the law doesn't do anything to ensure child support goes to the child, so it doesn't really focus on the child, it focuses on the mother.
  8. WindSpirit

    WindSpirit OmnipresentAdmeanistrator

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    7,938
    And that's exactly why my brain malfunctions if I'm trying to think Justin Bieber might be having sex. :scream:

    True, but if that was supposed to be his "first time" according to the girl. One of the reasons why I think she's full of it. My dream first time is in a public bathroom with a weird stranger and I'm not going to wear a condom because it sounds like such a fascinating experience I was to fully feel the whole 30 seconds of it. :lol:

    Now if someone could pass me a bottle of brain bleach.
  9. Angelskates

    Angelskates Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    12,791
    :lol: She would have sounded a tiny bit less full of shit if she had left out that it was his full time. Still full of shit, but a small bit less so.
  10. Prancer

    Prancer Ray Chill Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2001
    Messages:
    38,258
    Oddly enough, I don't find it at all hard to believe that a teenage boy would have a first time like that. Or that he would claim it was his first time even if maybe it wasn't.

    Which is not to say I don't think she's full of it. Just that I don't find any of these details all that hard to believe.
  11. milanessa

    milanessa engaged to dupa

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2002
    Messages:
    18,917
    Do a lot of women rape men in China or Australia? It has happened here in the US but it's pretty rare and it's even rarer to result in pregnancy.
  12. attyfan

    attyfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Messages:
    7,417
    Two points. First, courts no longer treat statutory rape, especially involving a 17 year old, the way they treat real rape (such as cases involving force or people who are mentally incapable of consent). If the ages were switched, do you think a 20 year old male who has consensual sex with a 17 year old female should have the same sentence as a guy who forced her to have sex?

    Second, child support goes to the person with custody. If, for some reason (such as the mother is legally unfit) the child is with grandparents, then the father pays child support to the grandparents. So, if the father so desired, he could seek custody ... which would obviate child support.
  13. Angelskates

    Angelskates Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    12,791
    I have no idea. But just like with men raping women, I don't think it would be reported a lot. Probably even more so.

    Statutory rape is real rape. Rape is rape, there's no real and pretend. And yes, I think the charges should stand, and the sentences should be the same, whether or not the rape was done by a man or a woman. The whole point of an age of consent is that the law doesn't believe people under a certain age are able to consent to sex, so whether or not the sex was consensual is irrelevant if a person is under the age of consent. I believe should look at the level of violence (if any) involved when sentencing.

    In your second case, would the mother have to pay the father child support? Again, the focus is not of the child, but on the guardians. There are no laws stating that money needs to ensure the child's wellbeing. I don't think the a mother who rapes in order to get pregnant should be allowed to receive child support; the mother is profiting from a crime she committed.
  14. milanessa

    milanessa engaged to dupa

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2002
    Messages:
    18,917
    Yes.

    So you're an expert on American family law?
  15. PDilemma

    PDilemma Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    4,757
    You are absolutely right. Example: my nephew spent a year plus one quarter in boarding school. My brother paid the fees, provided the money for incidentals, provided the money for transportation to and from school, paid for all the school supplies and all of the kid's clothing. The kid spent the summer at his house.

    And he still had to pay child support to the mother, who was not spending a cent on the kid, not even providing a roof over his head. And the answer to this dilemma from two family law attorneys: only suing for custody could change it. If the legal paperwork says she's the custodial parent, she gets the support and her desire to have the kid in boarding school would not be grounds for her to lose custody (Imagine the headlines--mother sued for custody for providing stellar educational opportunity--oh the horror!); and it would likely be ruled if the issue of the school costs went to court that my brother had to pay for the school, anyway, since he has a much larger income.

    Kid got kicked out of boarding school for bad grades last week. Mother's response on FB: now she has to pay to have him at home and can't afford it. We're expecting her to ask for child support to be reevaluated now that she has to spend it on the kid again.
  16. Angelskates

    Angelskates Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    12,791
    No. Where did I say I was? I know several Americans receiving child support and several giving child support. I know the money goes to the person who has custody, and they are free to spend it however they please.

    Are you an expert in American family law? Are people receiving child support supposed to be monitored to see where the money they are being given is spent? Because no one I know has ever been asked. And if they're not, then the focus is not on the child IMO, but on the guardian.
  17. Angelskates

    Angelskates Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    12,791
    Sorry to hear this, I know you have some complicated family things going on. I think the parent without custody should be allowed to pay for goods and services for the child in lieu (or at least up to a percentage of) of child support - school fees, clothes etc. That way the money really is being spent on the child.
  18. PDilemma

    PDilemma Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    4,757
    I think that is a very good idea. I also think that child support and custody agreements should be automatically reevaluated on all ends every four or five years at least. In this state, the non-custodial parent's income is reevaluated to set the amount every three years. Nothing else. But the system is set up to benefit the custodial parent and to assume the non-custodial parent will not act in good faith. The latter may be the case sometimes, but not as often as the system (and a lot of people) tends to assume.

    My brother does intend to go back to court soon, however, as his child support decree requires him to pay until his son turns 19--he will (if he gets his act together academically) be halfway through his freshman year of college when he turns 19. And the plan is for him to live with my brother who will help pay for him to go to a nearby college. So he wants to get the child support changed to cut off when he graduates from high school.
  19. overedge

    overedge Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    17,461
    I read the Star story in the loooong lineup at Safeway today.

    I don't know how accurate the Star story is on conveying the details that are in the lawsuit. But IMHO the baby-mama's description of how she and the Biebs got around to doing the nasty sounds like a description of how a naive 21-year-old thinks things happen backstage at a big concert. Not how things actually happen.

    I'm not saying that the Biebs couldn't have been the baby-daddy, but I would be really, really, really surprised if it happened the way baby-mama said it happened.
  20. numbers123

    numbers123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    30,765
    even if the mother earns the great share of the income? Just because they father the child? I am not saying that he is completely free of responsibilities, but society has a warped view of who is the primary breadwinner. Obviously if Justin is the father, then he would be the primary income, but it is not true in all cases. For the most part the courts do not take that into consideration nor do they take into account the changes in income.

    If the father loses his job for whatever reason - hello economy - he still owes child support as it was originally decreed. So, the "dead-beat dad" who doesn't own up to his obligations to his children is not always true. Sometimes they are doing the best that they can given the circumstances of the time. Sure, the father could go back to court, risk everything pay another &1800.00 or more in lawyer fees and still end up with child support and back child support payments that can not be fulfilled because there is no money coming in.

    Mothers can hid their income levels too - not reporting a second job or a recent promotion. Mothers can choose to not work because she is wanting to live off child support of more than one child from more than one baby daddy. Parents on all sides of the equation should be looked at, not just the daddies that society has predetermined by gender that they do not want their children.

    If this mother did assault the former boyfriend (and I will admit I didn't read the whole police report), she seems to be the ideal mother, right? :blah:


    Attyfan - the father can seek custody, go to court with evidence that the mother has been arrested more than once, provides alcohol to minors and still have lost. The courts don't always recognize a better living situation just the womb.
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2011
    PDilemma and (deleted member) like this.
  21. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2001
    Messages:
    17,441
    Surely there has to be some case established first, no?

    Otherwise wouldn't it open the doors to so many others demanding DNA tests of famous people on the outside shot they might be related? For that matter, how many non-famous people might start asking courts for DNA tests because they think their spouse screwed around on them or that their parents aren't their parents etc? The whole thing snowballs into as season of Maury Pauvich in a big hurry.
  22. attyfan

    attyfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Messages:
    7,417
    Statutory rape is no longer "rape" in California and many other states, simply because the idea that a 17 year old cannot give consent until a given date, is now recognized as something of a legal fiction. A state could just change the age of consent, but states cannot change the simple fact that force negates consent. Male statutory rapists should not be treated differently from female statutory rapists; but statutory rapists should be treated differently from those who use force.

    Also, if support payments are not being used to care for the child, at all, the custodial parent can be charged with various crimes (non support, child endangerment, etc.).
  23. attyfan

    attyfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Messages:
    7,417
    I agree that courts often wrongfully deny custody to father, but fathers have better chances now than in over a century. I know of many cases where mothers are paying support to custodial fathers. Also, at least in my part of California, many parents (primarily fathers, but some mothers) who keep the records proving that they paid support "in kind" (paying school fees, medical care, etc.) get credit towards their support payments .... unless there is a really gross disparity in income.
  24. Coco

    Coco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2002
    Messages:
    10,579
    So how does it actually happen, overedge :)?
  25. Angelskates

    Angelskates Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    12,791
    I'm not following. If statutory rape is not rape because the age of consent is "fiction", what is the point of having an age of consent? If an 18 year old has sex with a 12 year old, and the 12 year old says it's okay, is it ok? What about 15? 16? Are you saying the law in California, despite there being a legal age of consent, disregards the legal age as long as force isn't being used? What's the point of even having a law against statutory rape if it's not considered rape? What's the point of have a legal age of consent if it is disregarded as "fiction"? If the law thinks a 17 year old can consent, then the law needs to choose a lower age of consent.

    I said that. You're the one who said that statutory rape doesn't exist because the legal age is considered "fiction" and statutory rape doesn't involve force so isn't considered rape. What is it considered then? No force, the legal age is considered "fiction", so what's the crime?

    There is nothing to stop the guardian spending the bare minimum on the child and the rest on themselves.
  26. milanessa

    milanessa engaged to dupa

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2002
    Messages:
    18,917
    And just how would you change the world, Angelskates? Every parent I know who receives child care payments spends it for the good of the child. You must know of a lot of selfish, greedy bastards who have kids in order to live the high life. Sheesh. Part of the good of a child is housing so, yes, it might be used to make house payments or pay rent. It might be used to help pay utilities - the good of the child.
  27. michiruwater

    michiruwater Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Messages:
    9,138
    For the last two years of high school, I refused to go live with my mother. She was bipolar and an alcoholic and it was a terrible situation. She recognized that she was a total fcuk up and stopped begging us to come there at some point.

    My parents had joint custody, and she received child support. She received that child support for the entire two years during which I did not live under her roof or use her utilities, her food, or anything else. My dad paid everything I needed for school, always, bought me all my clothes, etc., the entire time they were divorced.

    Yeah, there are people who spend it on the good of the child. I'm sure that happens in the majority of cases. But I don't see the need to insult Angelskates when what she describes most certainly does occur in some situations.

    For what it's worth, I don't think my mother is a selfish, greedy bastard. I think she was screwed up and desperate. And I don't think hyperbole is necessary.
  28. Angelskates

    Angelskates Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    12,791
    What's with the insult and condescending tone? I've already said what I would change.
    dbell1 and (deleted member) like this.
  29. numbers123

    numbers123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    30,765
    I think that the greater good for the child is subjective too. If you use the child support money to buy say $30.00 designer jeans for a toddler and $10.00 puma socks and complain that child support doesn't cover your housing, food, diapers, the $400 car payment for a new car and your girls' night Friday beer party (because you deserve a girl's party night) is that the greater good of the child? Even if you work at a place where you are allowed to bring home free food and your mother brings you free food (healthy since she works for a large corporation food service where perishables like fruits/vegs and some meats are given to the staff on an every other day or weekly basis)?

    If 80% of the time the father has court ordered visitation that the mother must comply with, the child has new clothing some with the tags still attached so that everyone knows there is new clothing, is that for the greater good of the child? That's two times a week and every other weekend? If the father is driving an older car which paid for, still requires repairs and the father buys clothing for his child at the goodwill. Slightly worn, but in good shape. An entire winter wardrobe including coat and snow pants for $25.00 vs. the $30.00 pair of jeans?

    I am sure that there are many cases child support is not being paid in order to punish the mother. I am sure that there are many cases where child support does not cover the costs of raising a child, but then there are many cases where parents who are together can not cover the costs of raising children. I am also sure that there are many cases where the mother is neglecting her children and spending the child support money on other things.
  30. MacMadame

    MacMadame Internet Beyotch

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    15,897
    Apparently he didn't start dating her until after this encounter. ;)

    She's right though. There is no auditing system in place and definitely no laws or even rules for how child support is spent.

    Do you know anyone that has happened to? Because I sure don't.

    Like my dad. And all the dads I saw in court every time my mom took him to court. The number of men I know who see child support as a moral duty is actually pretty small. Even the decent men who pay it often pay it grudgingly and with lots of carping about how the wife spends it.

    There are some but, your own experiences aside, this is very much the minority case. Statistics show that the children's living situations go down in quality with divorce the vast majority of the time. The income at the custodial house (including child support) is usually much less than half of what it was when the household was intact.
  31. numbers123

    numbers123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    30,765
    I think that everyone's living situations go down in quality with the divorces. I have seen it from both sides - my sister and her kids, my brothers and their kids and now of course my grandson.

    In each case, each family financial situation was impacted by the loss of a two income family lifestyle. In my sister's case the standard and quality of their lives increased 10 fold since he made good money, but gambled and was never home. My brothers paid their child support as ordered and more. For the most part, my nieces and nephews only had to ask for something reasonable and it was taken care of - for example college educations. My one brother lived on the west coast and his children lived in the midwest. He made certain he was part of their lives for everything.

    All I am saying is that there are many situations - several of them described here, that indicates that the father is not always the deadbeat or the vindictive one which has been displayed by the media and child support laws.

    Can I ask why your mom took you to court to see the proceedings?
  32. Louise

    Louise Banned Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2003
    Messages:
    560
    We're talking about a 17 y/o multi-millionaire. Of course this is a minority case

    I live in Texas, and family case law is not 'perfect' here to put it mildly. So I can see these scenarios happening, even if they are the minority. Texas favors the mother at all costs. Mother may take the $2400 per month in child support and blow half or all of it on crack or meth. Father knows what's going on, demands the custody agreement be changed. Judge does NOT even order a simple thing like a Utox to test for drugs. I figure, just test an inch of her 24" length hair one by one, and you will see she is a chronic cocaine addict. NOTHING. So father has to continue paying that amount knowing that hardly any of it is going to his kids.

    It's not simple. One of my friends left Texas (she did family law) because it was sooooo harmful and she could not ever see a helpful change in the situation.
  33. PDilemma

    PDilemma Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    4,757
    ^^This.

    Also:

    "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to numbers123 again" :D

    My nephew's mother took trips to Vegas, Nashville and Florida while the kid was in boarding school and admitted to a friend on her FB wall that it was all funded by child support since the kid wasn't home to support. My brother kept paying. His visit to a lawyer wasn't intended to stop paying but to get the amount reduced to reflect his payment of school fees and her not having the kid at home. It would have been difficult so he didn't pursue it and she kept getting the money. And, fwiw, he had to go to court to claim paternity, get visitation and arrange child support in the first place because she intended to keep him entirely out his son's life.
  34. overedge

    overedge Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    17,461
    Well, for one thing, it's more common than not after the show ends for there to be a car or bus with its engine running, waiting for the "talent". And the "talent" gets hustled offstage, right into the car or bus which then takes off. This is for security reasons, but also because tours run on really tight schedules, and usually the tour has to start moving on to the place of the next show almost immediately.

    If there is any kind of partying or whatever, it takes place in the car/bus, or back at the hotel, or on the transportation to the next show. If there is any kind of event at the venue involving people who are not part of the tour (e.g. meet-and-greet with contest winners) it happens *before* the show - if nothing else, that lets the tour managers control the schedule (as in "sorry, you'll have to leave now, Mr. Talent has to get ready for the show".) So baby-mama's claim that everything happened after the show doesn't ring true.

    Also, it is very rare for the "talent" to be anywhere without supervision, even grown-up talent. You might not realize the supervision is there, but it is. And they are really good at stepping in and defusing whatever trouble they see coming. So, again, for baby-mama to claim that the Biebs took her away to a quiet place backstage to make out without anyone noticing is suspicious. I would imagine that for an underage person with fanatical fans, and with a squeaky-clean image to preserve - and in the days of Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, etc. - the supervision would be even more close, and the minders would be even more cautious than they might be otherwise.
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2011
  35. agalisgv

    agalisgv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Messages:
    23,890
    I know a few years ago stats showed in the majority of cases where the father sought custody, the father was granted it. The issue was relatively few fathers sought custody. Apparently now in cases where the father has sought custody, the stat is now closer to fathers being awarded custody 50% of the time:
    http://knowledgebase.findlaw.com/kb/2010/Feb/59220.html

    Also stats showed following a divorce, the custodial parent's standard of living usually decreased while the non-custodial standard increased. Now, that was a few years ago, but typically men had better standards of living following divorce than did women.

    The reason why it's not sufficient to substitute supplies for support is bc a child needs a safe home, heat, safe dishes to eat off of, reliable transportation, dental check-ups, etc. Anecdotally, I've heard a *lot* of baby daddies think they should be able to substitute diapers for child support bc they don't want one penny of their money going to benefit the mom. [And no, not all men are alike]. So they're ok with buying diapers and some baby clothes. Problem is the child needs a lot more than that to thrive. Children need safe fully-furnished homes to live in, and those homes will necessarily house the custodial parent. The impulse to keep the custodial parent away from any possible benefit of child support is generally rooted in vindictiveness rather than care over a child's well-being. And that's why courts don't allow non-custodial parents to furnish diapers in lieu of actual support.

    In pdilemma's case, I assume the reason the support order continued is bc should anything cause the child to not be able to attend school, the mom has to have a home ready and waiting for the son to return. Iow, she has to continue maintaining a suitable family home whether the son is boarding there or not. And indeed, when the sin got kicked out of school, she had to house him again without much notice.

    The real issue is the dad apparently hasn't sought custody for whatever reason, and in that case there really shouldn't be griping about the support then.

    I realize people like to take the side of family members in custody cases, but I think far too many times family members only nurse a sense of grievance and stoke animosities between the parents to a very damaging degree.
    mag and (deleted member) like this.
  36. attyfan

    attyfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Messages:
    7,417
    In California, sex with someone between the ages of 16 and 18 is called "illegal sex", and, it is not considered to be a "serious felony" (i.e., someone convicted is eligible for probation, etc.). Sex with someone under 14 is child molestation -- a serious felony. Sex with someone between 14 and 16 is only child molestation (serious felony) if there is a certain age gap; otherwise, it is illegal sex. The law tries to adjust to reality in setting age limits. On the one hand, minors need a certain amount of protection, and the younger the child means the more protection needed. As applied to the near-adults (like 17 year olds) there is nothing happens on one's 18th birthday, that magically enables one better able to make decisions than on the day before.

    I didn't say that statutory rape doesn't exist; I did say that it isn't "rape" in the true sense of the word because of consent. That the law may deem the consent invalid because of the age is a different matter than saying that the consent didn't exist.

    The child will share the guardian's shelter (purchased or rented with child support); otherwise, someone else (who is sheltering the child) will get the support. I haven't seen too many cases (outside of the Harry Potter books) of guardians buying food and not letting the child eat enough, although I did read of one case, where a parent was convicted of abuse for failing to feed the children adequately.
  37. PDilemma

    PDilemma Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    4,757
    You missed the part about her maintaining a home by taking expensive vacations, then?

    He did not seek custody at the time the boarding school issue came up because the school is technically a public school and he lives in a different state. If he had obtained custody, the kid would not have been eligible to attend the school. In spite of it being a public school, he had to pay about $3000 a year in fees for room and board (this year's is non-refundable) plus he was providing about $200 a month in incidental school and personal expenses for the kid. His desire was not to deprive the mother of child support but to at least get the amount reduced to reflect that she was not providing room and board to the child nor was she providing for any of the child's expenses out of the support she was receiving. She, in fact, repeatedly took my nephew's spending money for her own use when he was home on breaks. This did not go to court as the costs of getting a new child support decree were prohibitive and the likelihood of any change small according to the lawyers he spoke to, even though one of them felt that a reduced amount was in order unless the kid ceased to attend boarding school.

    As for her providing a home, she is living in someone else's home for free.

    As for seeking custody...my brother has the misfortune of working for the railroad which means he works unpredictable hours--no set shifts or days and trips away from home overnight at times. Because of this my parents and I have assisted greatly with child care when my nephew was too young to be home alone. Family law practice's take on his getting custody: very small chance due to the nature of his job. The unemployed mother (she has not even attempted to find a job for over five years) who lives in someone else's house is considered a more stable parent by the fine system we have.
  38. numbers123

    numbers123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    30,765
    my son did seek custody - had 50% until the final decree when the Iowa courts said that it is better to live with mom. Despite things that were documented and best left unsaid.

    I don't believe that the courts or the public have changed their minds about the custody issues - that for whatever reason believe that the mother is the better parent and that dads are deadbeats.


    But I concede to all of you who know better.
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2011
    skatemomaz and (deleted member) like this.
  39. Prancer

    Prancer Ray Chill Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2001
    Messages:
    38,258
    There are several men in my family who have gotten custody of their kids and in only one case was it a protracted, drama-filled affair in which the mother was definitively proven unfit. I've also known a lot of custodial dads just in my day-to-day life. I've been familiar with those stats for years, thanks to reading lots of family research, and have always been a little puzzled at how many people are convinced that the mother always gets custody.

    However, I think a lot of men are advised that seeking custody is a waste of their time, and so don't even try. I'd like to see some stats on how many men are told not to bother before I assume that men don't ask for custody because they don't want it--although I will say that many men I have known haven't wanted custody, especially if the children are young. Another thing is that in divorces and breakups, the man often leaves and the woman has physical custody in the family home at that point. That makes it very difficult to for the parent who does not have the children at the home (regardless of sex of parent) to get custody because of the disruption the children will face by the time the hearings roll around.

    So while the above stats are useful, I'd like to know how many fathers who do not seek custody have been advised by lawyers to not seek custody, as I suspect that would affect at least some percentage of the group that doesn't ask for custody.

    When I took a Family Law class many eons ago, we were told that child support is not intended to provide a child with basic necessities, but is designed to allow the child to enjoy the standard of living that child would have if the parents had stayed together. If anyone knows of a way that the child can enjoy such a standard of living while the custodial parent can't, you should write a paper about it for the family courts.

    You know, when someone cites statistics or other information that contradicts personal experience, it's not denial of that personal experience. It's just a way of providing some perspective on how common or not that personal experience is and how aptly it can be applied across the board. It's not an attack on a poster's honesty.
  40. skatemommy

    skatemommy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,214
    Bieber has reportedly ordered the lab work and will be counter-suing said baby-mama. Her lawyers won't return calls and reportedly have gone underground, running scared.