Why does today's divorce law say that the mother is the better parent?

In what way is the mother the better parent?Why does today's divorce law say that the mother is the better parent?
The woman probably used to be the best parent simply due to the fact that it was her social role to do much more of the parenting than men. These days anything goes, and stressed out working mums are not a safe bet as the better parent. Maybe one day soon the courts will move with the times and be more reasonable in issues involving custody and access.





Edit


Not wanting to put a negative slant on things, but men have often been criticized by feminists for being too much of a threat to children to be the sole parent (this was a view also expressed by my tutor in a gender studies seminar group). However this focuses on sexual abuse of children but totally ignores the fact that women physically abuse children more than men do http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/鈥?/a>


Why do feminists not shout about the abuse of children by women? Pure politics, spin, and hype that is designed to create a general societal prejudice against men and sympathy for women, and these generally accepted views can be drawn upon very powerfully in courtroom situations.Why does today's divorce law say that the mother is the better parent?
The law is written gender neutral. The problem is in sexist judges and anti-male prejudice in the courts, which is rampant.





There used to be a legal standing called the ';tender years doctrine'; that supposed younger children ~ 0-12 did better with and needed the mother more than the father and between ~ 12-18, the father. (They rarely managed to get around to the father custody, by the way).


This incorrect thinking was carried over when the doctrine was eliminated, resulting in exactly the same problem which was that of disallowing fathers as caring and competent parents.





This sexist tripe was replaced with ';better parent';, which for all practical purposes is still the mother, based not on fact, but on continued prejudice. As another poster pointed out, thanks in large part to the sexism of feminism through baseless, falsified and non-existent ';studies';, lies, half-truths and innuendo. (Some feminist groups have ';watch groups'; that oversee judges and are quick to let them know how ';wrong'; they are when they don't favor women).





The truth is, the safest and best place for a child is in the home with mother and father (not father figure); second is father, third is mother only or mother and new boyfriend or husband.





Children are far more likely to be abused and/or neglected in single-mother headed households or in a home with mother and new boyfriend (or husband) who is unrelated to the child.


(61% of all child abuse is committed by biological mothers: Current DHHS report on nationwide Child Abuse)





Children are far more likely to be raised in poverty in the custody of the mother and far less in the custody of the father.


(46.2% of single custodial mothers receive public assistance


20.8% of single custodial fathers receive public assistance


Statistical Source: Technical Analysis Paper No. 42 - U.S. Dept. of Health %26amp; Human Services - Office of Income Security Policy).
Where does it say in American law that the mother is the better parent? Interesting that anti-feminists say that feminists created this myth, when feminists are trying to promote equality, so both parents can get custody. Maybe if anti-feminists fought sexism, instead of feminists, we wouldn't have sexist judges and juries that still believe women are better parents, just because they are female. I don't think either males or females are better parents. But I'm not a judge and I don't appoint judges.
...because the first words that a baby utters is : MaMa.


...because in the whole animal kingdom there is very few species that actually co-raise the offspring.


...because no matter how great a father is he will never, ever have the Maternal Something that mothers provide (granted: not all of them)


...because throught out centuries it was women that stayed home with children, man hardly caring how many and where and with whom they seeded children.


...because of all the abandonded young women that loose their lovers the minute they say: I'm pregnant, it was always a woman's ';problem';.


...because of simple ratio of fmale parents to male parents out there for centuries.





Granted the world has changed and there is more and more fathers that love their children and want to partake in their lives, but I still believe that those fathers are rare and it drives me nuts when a few ';Masculinists'; are trying to change the whole history of motherhood in Courts just because they are not granted custody. I do think that good fathers should have equall rights to raise the children, but don't atack the whole motherhood in the process.
Best intersts of the child of course, determined by wise and scholarly state judges who know what's best; who, thanks to feminist advocacy, conveniently ignore the fact that Department of Human Services studies show that a mother is 50% more likely to abuse and murder the kid(s). The most often used phrase when dealing with these situations is ';err on the side of caution.'; There may not be a specific law that states women are better parents, but existing feminist doctrine seems to suit family law courts well. In contested custody cases mothers ';win'; custody over 85% of the time. Family court also ignores stats that say 7 of 10 juvenile delinquents ( criminals in training) come from single parent homes, the vast majority headed by mothers.
I looked and looked and was unable to find a ';divorce law'; that says ';the mother is the better parent';. If the couple can't come to an agreement about physical custody of the child (legal custody is usually joint) then the courts must intervene:





';Before you reach the point of court intervention to decide custody think long and hard. A custody battle puts the child right smack in the middle of your battle. Why are you fighting for custody? Are you fighting FOR custody or fighting so that your ex-spouse DOESN'T HAVE custody? Is it in the best interest of the child? If you've determined that it's the right thing to do for the children to go forward, what can you expect when the court intervenes?





The court will take into consideration the best interest of the child when making the decision.





IIf the court feels that neither parent is acting in the best interest of the child a guardian ad litem may be appointed to help in making decisions on the behalf of the child.





Depending on the age of the child, their wishes may or may not be taken into consideration. Some states strongly take into consideration the wishes of the child depending on their age; some states do not consider the child's wishes at all, without regard to age.





Traditionally, the judicial system leans towards deciding in favor of the mother in custody cases. However, with more women pursuing full time careers this trend may be changing. It is no longer assumed that the mother is the primary caregiver.





Unless the situation is so obvious that one parent should have custodial rights over the other (such as in drug abuse or physical abuse) a court ordered independent evaluation will probably be ordered. The evaluation is usually done by a court appointed mental health professional such as a psychologist or a social worker. A thorough evaluation can include the following: interviews with all the parties involved (individually and possibly with the parent and child together); psychological testing of both parents and the child; review of school records and or conversations with teachers; review of medical records and developmental history; review of legal records, such as the papers filed regarding the divorce, any possible domestic disputes and any criminal records of either party involved. Be prepared for the evaluation to take at least four to six weeks if not longer. Be prepared for a time consuming and costly battle.





No matter how strongly you believe you would be the better parent and should have custody of the children be prepared for the court to decide against you. Be ready to accept the courts decision and move forward to work with your ex-spouse to raise your children in a way that is best for them.';
This has come about based on endless lies by feminist groups that have spent ernormous resources %26amp; vast amounts of time bashing men and fathers, painting us as abusers and marginalzing women's abuses, despite the fact that single mothers make up the vast majority of child-abusers as proven by repeated studies from unbias sources.
they're better at abusing their children, apparently
Mother's are not automatically the better parent, good parenting skills aren't biologically engineered. However, the the custody laws aren't written in a gendered biased way, either.





Custody laws are about due for a simplification and overhaul. The norm should become 50/50 custody until the child is 18 unless the child brings proceedings to alter the custody arrangement. Abuse and neglect would certainly be taken into account to ensure the child's safety.





It is also time to re-examine the laws concerning child-support because those laws would also have to be changed in accordance with new custody laws. Child support should be kept relatively low for day to day maintenance of the child's needs, while all large expenditures for the child (medical costs, sports related activities, braces, ect.) should be split evenly be each parent.





The inherent simplicity in structure allows for less time and energy to be wasted in family court by everyday families who simply tried to make it work but for whatever reason could not. There will always be more difficult cases where simplicity simply can't cover the circumstances but the majority would be fine.





In cases where either parent has broken the unspoken contract with their child, cases of abuse, neglect, or abandonment than that parent forfeits any rights to that child until and unless that child wishes to see that parent. They should have to pay the maximum amount of support without any of the benefits.
Its time for the law to have an overhaul when it comes to deciding on whom is the better parent. Until my separation from my first wife (who cheated on me) I had practically raised our daughter for 6 years single handedly while my wife partied, lazed around and spent my salary. Only after we separated did she bother with our daughter who now thinks the sun shines out of her rear end! I am currently going through the UK courts to stop my ex wife forcing a residence order which could effectively give her sole custody and prevent me from seeing my daughter again. How can a court decide that she is the better parent, she is a lazy lying cheat and hardly a fitting role model for our daughter who is now 11 years old. I have since re married, have a stable job and home life and two more children, surely it would make sense to decide in my favour? Not according to the man/woman that sits behind a desk and simply decides upon what he/she hears in one day... absolutely ridiculous. I know this doesn't really answer you're question but aaaarrrrggghhh!!!





Thank You Asker.





Peanut: My point exactly... you base your opinions on what I said in a small piece of text. My daughter is also not with her mother, that was your assumption, her mother and I have a joint and equal care so she spends as much time with me as her mother. I love my daughter very much and for that reason alone I will fight to the death via my lawyer (factual without personal attacks or dragging her infidelity into it). And just for information... my daughter knows nothing of what is going on in the background so she is protected from what you you call putting her bang in the middle. I also spend an equal amount of time and give as much care to my children as my wife in my current marriage so your other assumption that my wife is primary care giver is also misguided.





Note: To your second edit Peanut. Because my wife is now pursuing full custody... Line 7 of original posting above. ';I am currently...';
maybe they've found it to be true in the past
because mOther knOws best!!...
She invested so very much more not to mention estrogen.
Today's divorce law doesn't actually SAY that; that's just the way it turns out much of the time. It's offensive to men and it generalizes about women in the worst way.
The laws are set up the way they have been for the past 100 years. Most men do not want custody of their children in divorces so that's why they often go to the mothers. In the 1800s, women and children were considered property so the children automatically went to the fathers. Of course, that didn't stop a lot of men from abandoning their children or farming them out to relatives when they couldn't cope with the stress of caring for them. Perhaps that's one of the major reasons divorce laws were changed.
The mom is not always the better parent. Case #1 - true story in my family. My mom and her new husband were in the kitchen talking they heard crying - mom went up stairs to check on my wee sister who was 2 nigh high to 3 - no cryin from her. They heard it again - her new husband then heard it from the back door - opened the door - there were his 3 kids from his prior marriage - 2 sons and a daughter - she was crying.**What their mom did was coast the car down the driveway - drop them off and coast her way back up the driveway - no one would have been the wiser. Why did she do it? She wanted to please her new man.**Case #2 This guy woke up one morning to find his wife completely moved out leaving him with their 2 kids - she moved in with her boy friend - the one she'd been cheating with.


Real bad when I have to knock my own kind down - no one is free from blame.