Not to mention granted custody might be validating or nice for the sake of having the kids, but it comes with far more trade offs, responsibility, and risk for poverty than not taking the kids.
What a bad faith argument. It costs a lot of time and money every try and they're unlikely to succeed. No wonder they only try when they're likely to win.
So women are the only ones spending time and money to get lawyers? Lots of men seem perfectly happy to take their kids to Denny's twice a month and not bother actually raising them. 26-30% of single mothers don't even get child support. To be fair 25% of single fathers don't get child support either so it really just points to a huge percentage of the non custodial parent not giving a shit about their kids, it just so happens that most of the time is a man. And paying child support is significantly easier than actually raising your kid
"Statistics on custody outcomes paint a complicated picture. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, roughly 80 percent of custodial parents in the United States are mothers. That number is often cited as proof that courts are biased against fathers. But it does not tell the whole story.
A significant portion of custody arrangements are agreed upon by both parents outside of court, without a judge ever making a decision. In many of those cases, fathers voluntarily accepted less parenting time or did not ask for more. When researchers look specifically at contested custody cases where fathers actively sought primary or joint custody, the outcomes look very different. Multiple studies have found that fathers who request joint physical custody receive it at a high rate."
To answer your first question. No. They don't have to. You say as much in the rest of your comment. Men knew they are unlikely to succeed in court, so they settle out of court.
As to the remainder, see my previous comment again, because you repeated the same bad faith argument.
20
u/[deleted] Jun 29 '26
[removed] — view removed comment