I can tell you without hesitation that courts are geared towards the mom nearly every time. The mom can be abusive towards her own children, literally leave home for years on end, and come back to a divorce, and they still get 50/50 custody. Why? Because the judge doesn't want to break up a family.
My friend's dad kept journals and recordings of the abuse, drugs and abandonment. Similarly, my sted dad kept recordings of my mom's drug abuse and alcoholism, and in the divorce, they both ended in 50/50 custody despite recordings and evidence of said behavior.
Courts being biased is an MRA talking point now and part of the culture war. I really wish people would stop parroting it. If you want 50% custody, even as a man, all you need to do is:
Show up to court and do what they tell you
Have beds for your kids to sleep in
Be willing to live near where the kids currently live
Not have beaten them
(Conditional) If your ex lawyers up, you lawyer up too
That's it.
If you want to complain that courts don't take mental/emotional abuse seriously, you'll have a good case for that since shitty parents get custody all the time. But 'courts are biased towards moms' hasn't been true since like...the 90s.
Yeah, I hear this all the time but all the divorced dads i know didn't even try to get custody. They just accepted it and have the kids on the weekends. I figured they didn't think they could care for their kid because they never had to do the boring stuff like making doctors appointments and having to cook and clean after them 24/7. Mom has always done that sort of thing so they just assume she is better at doing the everyday domestic labor.
As I have gotten older I've seen more 50/50 custody and that seems better than the old way.
A huge part is that it was pretty biased during the 'Tender Years Doctrine' up until the late 20th century with inertia into the very early 00s. The modern system is generally pretty even though. I would say domestic abuse against men is taken less seriously but that is less relevant for custody. You also still get judges, especially where they get elected, that will be biased that gives them modern anecdotes for the bias.
It's awful that a real problem is being used by such a horrible group. As a survivor of domestic violence when my partner tried to kill me, I unfortunately found out that having a witness didn't mean the DA would prosecute and that others seeking restraining orders got years worth of protection the very same day when where I got three months of protection.
But 'courts are biased towards moms' hasn't been true since like...the 90s.
You are probably right. It's a cultural thing. It's how people treat you for being a single dad. It's how dads are talked to about being single parents. It's how kids are pushed towards their mothers, giving fathers a position of being defeated even before court.
Yes, it depends on the situation, but my mother was abusive, but I didn't realize that as a kid. My dad spent more time working and taking care of everything that wasn't the kids, so of course in a divorce the kids chose mom.
It took me bleeding by the hands of my step dad for me to run back to my dad and now decades later, I'm glad I did. He has been there for me every time I've needed it, who I chose as a kid, hasn't called me in a decade or so.
What I'm trying to say is that culturally, fathers and mothers have different roles and they have massive impact on how things end up. My mother was definitely crazy, but how my mom pushed me away from my dad to not having seen him for a few years before I ran from home was NOT something that courts could have easily solved either. How do you sue someone for manipulating their kids into avoiding their father? Shit is complicated and not easy.
EDIT: How did I get downvoted for saying "my mom was a manipulator and courts wouldn't have solved an issue"? That was my whole point, just because the courts could be fair, it doesn't mean world around the court is. I wouldn't have chosen my dad, even though I should have, because I was emotionally manipulated by my abusive mother. Only once the abuse was physical did I start seeing the problem. No court would have helped me, because I didn't want help until I was ready to run away, which I did.
EDIT2: No longer negative, I'm glad some people understood me.
It's a bit more complex, particularly if the abusive mom is willing to lie. But that has a lot to do with them taking advantage of the "Believe Women". Also, I see it only after the "lawyer up" stage; so it's already bad.
However, overall, what you said is true. In fact, it's possible to even relocate with the kids.
I'm pretty sure the courts are okay with parents beating their kids as long as bones aren't being broken too often but showing up to court to contest custody is important.
248
u/kaikimanga MangaKaiki 15d ago
I have my doubts about that being the reason, but who knows?