Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Beauty and the Banned -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (110)	12/22/2004 6:40:49 PM
From: Kevin Rose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 691

Every custody battle is tough, and the best interests of the child are rarely served. It really is the best interests of the child, given the realities and rights of the parents. For example, the 'best interests' of the child might be to force both parents to live close together, especially if neither parent has a significant other (thus, giving the child both mother and father). My opinion is that it should be treated as any other case where there is a divorce, and one parent moves out of state. I don't know how judges handle these things; that is, do they normally give the child to the mother, or the one that stays? I suppose there are a number of factors, including which will give the child a 'better' home. As far as conflicting state laws, maybe the state where the union was granted should be the 'juristiction' state?

To: one_less who wrote (110)	12/23/2004 10:44:13 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 691

Under existing law, the "other mother" has no rights Virginia is bound to recognize, which demonstrates the limits of the "states rights" approach to the issue. As a matter of equity, it seems too severe to disallow all parental rights to the "other mother" when she participated in the decisions and processes leading to the existence of the child. However, if she were a kind stranger who talked the mother out of an abortion and helped with the pregnancy, she would accrue no rights to the child. From the perspective of "best interests", who knows? Is it better to have too same sex parents? Is it better when they are antagonistic? Would it matter if they lived in separate states? Im the end, I can't see ruling on anything other than standing. The "other mother" loses. I am sad for her, but there it is. More important is the repudiation of the natural mother of her lesbianism, which is not uncommon, in my experience, and which often sticks. How predetermined is sexual orientation?