# Mom Busts Dad For 15 Year Old Custodial "Kidnap" -- Now What? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 7, 2010, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280 "2010-06-07T15:17:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![Cat\_Fight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/90ced4/32.png) [@Cat\_Fight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Fight)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/281 "2010-06-10T22:28:48Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > Not everyone is as tech savvy as you, **levdrakon**. A lot of adults don’t really know about Facebook or social networking. Or maybe they weren’t on Facebook until recently. It just seems really nuts to say that the dad is a fine person for kidnapping the kids but the mother is a horrible drug addled nut because she couldn’t track them down. That’s such insane reasoning. If the police couldn’t, why do you think she would have been able to? And about [1/5 of American households don’t have internet access](http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2008/05/14/18-of-us-households-have-no-internet-access). I know we’re all on the internet right now, and not everyone here is wealthy, but this idea that every 40-something American has easy online access or computer know-how boggles the mind – and if you don’t know somethign exists, you can’t ask for it. The digital divide exists within America. ---
**Author:** ![Bootis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e8c25b/32.png) [@Bootis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bootis)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/282 "2010-06-10T22:32:44Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > But the law “up there” is in no way involved in this. If Canadian law is fairer, good for you. > > There’s little real difference. Screwed is screwed after all. And when the law clearly has an agenda against one party it isn’t so much a “3rd party” as it is an ally of the second. Screwed is screwed. Screwed is _not_ completely, irredeemably fucked. ---
**Author:** ![CRich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4af34b/32.png) [@CRich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CRich)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/283 "2010-06-10T22:35:28Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Your question is answered by your own post. It’s perceived as so “unusual” for a father to get custody that if the mother hadn’t been granted custody the assumption would be that she was some sort of monster. A father gets more sympathy because the likely reason he wasn’t given custody was because of his gender. One of the problems with the obvious bias against men in custody disputes is that that sort of bias undercuts the moral authority of the courts, and breeds both defiance of the law and tolerance for that defiance. Let me clarify–my husband’s custody was unusual because the divorce decree that gave it was granted in the early 80s when custody of young children by the father was unusual. While still not the standard, it’s not nearly as unusual now. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/284 "2010-06-10T22:36:24Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > But the law “up there” is in no way involved in this. If Canadian law is fairer, good for you. > > . . . . > > There’s little real difference. Screwed is screwed after all. And when the law clearly has an agenda against one party it isn’t so much a “3rd party” as it is an ally of the second. Here is the applicable law. Show me the gender bias in it. Show me the clause that sets out or even implies that it has an agenda against one party. > [@](#): > > [California Family Code: Division 8](http://www.divorcesource.com/CA/CODE/division5_9.shtml#8) > > . . . . > > 1. (b) The Legislature finds and declares that it is the public policy of this state to assure that children have frequent and continuing contact with both parents after the parents have separated or dissolved their marriage, or ended their relationship, and to encourage parents to share the rights and responsibilities of child rearing in order to effect this policy, except where the contact would not be in the best interest of the child, as provided in Section 3011. > > . . . . > > 1. (a) Custody should be granted in the following order of preference according to the best interest of the child as provided in Sections 3011 and 3020: > (1) To both parents jointly pursuant to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 3080) or to either parent. In making an order granting custody to either parent, the court shall consider, among other factors, which parent is more likely to allow the child frequent and continuing contact with the noncustodial parent, consistent with Section 3011 and 3020, and shall not prefer a parent as custodian because of that parent’s sex. . . . . ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/285 "2010-06-10T22:40:45Z")
> [@Bootis](#): > > Screwed is screwed. Screwed is _not_ completely, irredeemably fucked. And you think that the government can’t make you “completely, irredeemably fucked”? Consider a scenario like this; some guy does go along with the courts, and the mother is handed custody, he isn’t allowed to see them, he is required to pay child support, and she spends the next 15 years raising them to think he’s a child molesting, wife beating deadbeat dad while spending all the money on herself. He’s paying for the privilege of having his wife buy goodies while she raises neglected children he never sees to hate him. How is that less “completely, irredeemably fucked” than what happened here? ---
**Author:** ![Bootis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e8c25b/32.png) [@Bootis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bootis)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/286 "2010-06-10T22:46:07Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > And you think that the government can’t make you “completely, irredeemably fucked”? Consider a scenario like this; some guy does go along with the courts, and the mother is handed custody, he isn’t allowed to see them, he is required to pay child support, and she spends the next 15 years raising them to think he’s a child molesting, wife beating deadbeat dad while spending all the money on herself. He’s paying for the privilege of having his wife buy goodies while she raises neglected children he never sees to hate him. > > How is that less “completely, irredeemably fucked” than what happened here? What is your point? That because that situation _could_ happen to him, he is somehow justified in preemptively doing it to the other party? What?! ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/287 "2010-06-10T22:46:40Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > And you think that the government can’t make you “completely, irredeemably fucked”? Consider a scenario like this; some guy does go along with the courts, and the mother is handed custody, he isn’t allowed to see them, he is required to pay child support, and she spends the next 15 years raising them to think he’s a child molesting, wife beating deadbeat dad while spending all the money on herself. He’s paying for the privilege of having his wife buy goodies while she raises neglected children he never sees to hate him. > > How is that less “completely, irredeemably fucked” than what happened here? If your hypothetical father isn’t allowed to see his kids, then either it is because the court thought it best that he not see his kids – a decision that judges to not make lightly, do not make without evidence, and which can be appealed, or it is because the mother unilaterally refused access, in which case all he had to do was take it to a judge to either have access ordered or custody switched, unless, of course, she took off with the kids the way the dad in the extant matter did so that the court could not ensure that he gets access. ---
**Author:** ![AClockworkMelon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aclockworkmelon/32/10803_2.png) [@AClockworkMelon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AClockworkMelon)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/288 "2010-06-10T22:54:00Z")
I am completely flabbergasted that people believe the the children shouldn’t return to their mother. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/289 "2010-06-10T22:54:24Z")
> [@Bootis](#): > > What is your point? That because that situation _could_ happen to him, he is somehow justified in preemptively doing it to the other party? What?! No, my point is that screwed is screwed and the government can screw people just as hard and just as irrevocably as anyone else. > [@Muffin](#): > > If your hypothetical father isn’t allowed to see his kids, then either it is because the court thought it best that he not see his kids – a decision that judges to not make lightly, do not make without evidence, and which can be appealed, or it is because the mother unilaterally refused access, in which case all he had to do was take it to a judge to either have access ordered or custody switched, unless, of course, she took off with the kids the way the dad in the extant matter did so that the court could not ensure that he gets access. Or, because he’s a man. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/290 "2010-06-10T22:56:24Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Or, because he’s a man. Time for you to support your opinion with some evidence of systemic judicial bias. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/291 "2010-06-10T23:32:43Z")
> [@CRich](#): > > Let me clarify–my husband’s custody was unusual because the divorce decree that gave it was granted in the early 80s when custody of young children by the father was unusual. While still not the standard, it’s not nearly as unusual now. Whereas my father won custody of us in the eary 1960’s, and my coworker won custody of his kids in the early 1980’s. The situation happens more than we hear about - but usually because the mother messed up somehow. The gist of my father’s case was that my mother left us alone in the house for the night after bedtime while she went to visit her boyfriend. Very bad judgement - sounds worse now than in 1960, I suppose. But she was not evil or a drug addict, and my father could be difficult to deal with at times. The co-worker won because his wife’s parents tried to concoct a story about him being abusive. They didn’t even get the location strtaight between the two of them. I suspect the judge was sending the usual message that playing games with the court was not good. Probably also teaching the lawyer that suborning perjury or willful blindness was not acceptable in her court. My experience has been that fathers who were screwed over by the courts often were self-fulfilling prophecies. This guy - if he hadn’t disappeared, but he’d already made threats to her before he did\* - how sympathetic would the courts be to him? (\*the article said he had threatened her so that is why she did not go to Mexico City looking for him.) ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/292 "2010-06-10T23:36:27Z")
> [@Muffin](#): > > Time for you to support your opinion with some evidence of systemic judicial bias. Here’s a nice essay: [Gender Bias Still Exists.](http://deltabravo.net/custody/bias_essay.php) ---
**Author:** ![Bootis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e8c25b/32.png) [@Bootis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bootis)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/293 "2010-06-10T23:57:41Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Here’s a nice essay: [Gender Bias Still Exists.](http://deltabravo.net/custody/bias_essay.php) Whether or not there is gender bias in the courts hasn’t really concerned me in this thread, as I find it irrelevant to the judgment of the people in question. That said, I’d be willing to accept that there could be some gender bias, but that article you linked shows me nothing I’d need to see some numbers that show gender of parent granted custody % vs. Gender who is primary care giver %, and see some numbers that show % of mothers awarded custody in cases where both 1) the fathers fought for custody, and 2) the father was the parent who spent most time with the child. Straight up general percentages are meaningless. when all other things are equal, the child should go the the primary caregiver, male or female. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2010, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/294 "2010-06-11T00:02:53Z")
‘SPARC’ (formerly ‘Father’s Right to Custody’) has an article on their site saying gender bias still exists. Against dads. Quelle suprise! The statistic I found shocking was that mothers get sole custody only 72% of the time (1995 number). Even I expected the number to be much higher. 9% of dads get sole custody. That too is a lot higher than I expected from general comments, word of mouth and media. Despite stories I hear about men being screwed over, much of the experiences I’ve actually encountered were pretty straight-forward. One got custody, generally the mother; the other got to pay child support, usually the father. The kids got weekends and holidays with dad. The courts did not do stupid things to obstruct or screw dad. (Support, at least in Canada, is calculated off a table from incomes in 99% of cases). When I hear someone say they could not get anywhere with the courts over visitation, either (a) their lawyer was a waste of money and skin, or (b) they are feeling screwed no matter what the court gives them. ---
**Author:** ![Bootis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e8c25b/32.png) [@Bootis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bootis)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2010, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/295 "2010-06-11T00:07:26Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > The statistic I found shocking was that mothers get sole custody only 72% of the time (1995 number). Even I expected the number to be much higher. 9% of dads get sole custody. That too is a lot higher than I expected from general comments, word of mouth and media. And probably reasonable close, in 1995, to percentages of mothers who were primary caregivers vs. fathers. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2010, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/296 "2010-06-11T00:25:18Z")
And even that SPARC site claims that you can with proper documentation and a good lawyer, go after a spouse who denies you visitation. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2010, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/297 "2010-06-11T00:25:48Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Here’s a nice essay: [Gender Bias Still Exists.](http://deltabravo.net/custody/bias_essay.php) Only one problem: it fails to substantiate the existance of gender bias, for it fails to compare rates of primary parenting by gender prior to separation with rates of primary parenting by gender following judicial decision. In other words, it claims that there is gender bias, but does not provide any evidence of gender bias. What makes me chuckle is that it notes that “we see more and more being granted the physical custody of their children,” for this leads us to one of two logical conclusions once we recall that there are proportionally far more women on the bench these days than a couple of decades ago: either (1) rates of men winning custody are unrelated to judicial bias but are related to primary parenting roles prior to separation, or (2) male judges are biased against men, whereas female judges are not biased against men. Apply Occam’s razor, and you come up with a correlation between pre-separation parenting and post judgment parenting, rather than nonsense about judges being biased against their own genders. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2010, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/298 "2010-06-11T00:33:10Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Double gods sake. Do you know what he said? You are speculating. Well, we were speculating. The second article makes it clearer that the “poisoning” speculation was probably correct: “her daughter broke it off, saying in an e-mail that she was happy with her family and that\*\* she’d heard bad things about her.\*\*” (bolding mine) > [@Kearsen](#): > > Why is the default not a 50-50 arrangement? American Psychological Association, Report to the U.S. Commission on Child and Family Welfare, June 14, 1995 recommends against a presumption for joint custody because they’ve found that, unless the parents can get along, joint custody isn’t best for the child. That’s not to say that courts _can’t_ award joint custody (and they do generally award joint \*legal \*custody, although not always joint \*physical \*custody), but that their recommendation was that it not be the default because it’s not the default best interests of the child(ren). ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2010, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/299 "2010-06-11T00:58:35Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > And even that SPARC site claims that you can with proper documentation and a good lawyer, go after a spouse who denies you visitation. When access is withheld, it is usually very easy to figure out why, and get the problem rectified by a court. Either one party or the other (or both) is bat shit crazy / extremely immature / abusive. Make sure your client is not the nutty one, put your case together, take it to a judge, and turn the crank on the wheels of justice. That’s all there is to it for most cases. From what I have seen over the years, a lot of parents in custody litigation insist on taking unrealistic positions that do not recognize the needs of their children and their own limitations as a parent – they tend to take positions based on trying to defeat their ex-spouse, rather than identifying the needs of the family and working at meeting these needs. When they lose, they blame the judge, the lawyers, and their ex-spouses, rather than take a hard look at the parenting needs of their children and their own inability to meet these needs. Unfortunately, you can seldom get them to think and act more rationally, for they are true believers in their own cause. (For an example of this in a non-custodial family matter, have a look at the recent thread in the Pit concerning a matrimonial home and a family business.) Lest you think that I am blindly supporting women and ignoring the plight of men, please note that I am male, I’m 2 for 2 in winning custody for fathers this month, both before female judges, and 1 for 1 this month in settling access for a father (an American in the USA actually) on the terms that he wanted. ---
**Author:** ![DadWagonDriver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/edb3f5/32.png) [@DadWagonDriver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DadWagonDriver)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2010, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280/300 "2010-06-11T01:14:51Z")
> [@AClockworkMelon](#): > > I am completely flabbergasted that people believe the the children shouldn’t return to their mother. I think the right thing has happened in this case. From the updated article, the “kids” (I think “young adults” is a better term at their age) are staying with friends now. I’d agree with you if they were 8 and 9, but it would _destroy_ a 16 and a 17 year old to have to go through that transition at that age. At 8 or 9, the kids can be put into therapy to get through everything, which I would assume would take _years_. At 16 and 17, there simply isn’t enough time before they can legally say, “Screw this, screw you, I’m outta here!” I don’t see what the benefit to making them move 3000 miles would be. They are no longer with the father, which is a good thing. However, they also aren’t being forced to completely uproot and go live with someone who is a stranger to them. This is also a good thing. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mom-busts-dad-for-15-year-old-custodial-kidnap-now-what/542280.md?page=16)