Topic :: VT Judge Awards Custody to Non-Biological Mom
-
-
VT Judge Awards Custody to Non-Biological Mom
BB, Nov 30, 2009"But to Christian pundits, the case represents a precedent in which the state takes a child from her biological mother in favor of a non-biological former same-sex partner." That what it looks like to a non-"Christian pundit" as well. What the hell else is it?
-
VT Judge Awards Custody to Non-Biological Mom
Anonymous, Nov 30, 2009^^^ I think Melloy was merely making the point that the Christian "pundits" were making hay with the fact that this sets precedent - a dangerous one, to them.
-
VT Judge Awards Custody to Non-Biological Mom
Anonymous, Nov 30, 2009This is the second such case where the bio lesbian mom has been re-born as a hetero and marries a man and got the religious right onside. Another occured in Montana. I always thought they said same sex preference was genetic? Lesbians seem to be more flexible. If we had shared equal parenting as a presumption for same sex and hetero couples this might be avoided.
-
VT Judge Awards Custody to Non-Biological Mom
Anonymous, Dec 1, 2009This is a dangerous precedent. Historically, so-called "parental alienation syndrome" was invented by a renegade psychologist, Richard Gardner, as a way of helping defense attorneys in cases of fathers accused on abuse and incest. The "alienation" that the child felt towards the offending parent became the target of attention, so as to shift the focus away from the actual evidence supporting guilt. "Parental alienation" has become the favorite pet theory of right-wing, anti-woman, anti-feminist fathers rights groups, who now basically claim that if a child shows any distress at all it's "alienation." In other words the so-called "alienated" parent is absolved of any personal responsibility. And in many cases (as that theory is applied here), the other parent is stripped of custody as a result. Be careful of the company you keep. In this case, you see PAS as helping a "sister" against a woman who is now, as it turns out, a conservative fundamentalist and rather an anethema to our values. But it very dangerous precedent to support the removal of children from their mothers, the only caretakers they have ever known, caretakers with no history of proven abuse or neglect (and not the mushy badmouthing stuff). Note also that we are TOTALLY IGNORING the wishes of this child, which is to stay with her mommy. I have to see this child exploited for political gain by the LGBT movement. It's horribly distateful. Let the girl stay with her mother. And in reality, the ex-girlfriend's status is like that of a ex-boyfriend who is not the genetic father. Was once (vaguely) in the child's life, but with no genetic relationship. And apparently not much of caretaking relationship either. A boyfriend in this case would have no legal status. So it seems ridiculous that this other woman does. Frankly, I think that with all the custody hassles that moms are facing these days, you're better off going to a sperm bank and involving no one else as a legal parent. It's too complicated, expensive, and exhausting. And it's horrible that your kids are targeted by anybody with an agenda. Frankly, I don't think the ex-lover really cares about this kid as a human being at all. If she did, she wouldn't be insistent on uprooting her, destroying the only life she has ever known, and separating her from her mother. Anybody remember the cases from the 90s, where the authorities stripped the adoptive parents of a screaming, crying child, only to be handed over to a biological father he didn't know (and who later abandoned him)? You want the movement associated with that? Leave me out.
VT Judge Awards Custody to Non-Biological Mom
Larry Roberts, Nov 30, 2009
Sarah Schulman addresses these sorts of custody disputes in her recent book "Ties That Bind: Familial Homophobia And Its consequences" in a chapter where she discusses the topic with Kate Kendall of the NCLR.