Sure. Step fathers shouldn't get custody. Ok. That is like your opinion man. You don't think step fathers are real fathers, and thus shouldn't have rights. I get you.
Many disagree though.
No she volunteered to.
The court simply agreed to their arrangement.
You're reading too much here. For legal purposes, step fathers ARE NOT real fathers. My husband, while he is my oldest's father in every way, would not really count for much in the court system because he has no legal ties to my oldest. I had to make it clear in my will that if something happened to me before he came of age, that I wanted guardianship granted to my husband. And even then, if his biological dad had pitched a fit (thankfully he's not in the picture at all) there would've been a court fight.
It's usually the court that makes the arrangements and then the parties really have no choice over it.
You've never been divorced, have you?
Which agreement becomes the court order.What you say is true in a contested divorce. Not one where parties form an agreement between themselves and their lawyers. Also, a step parent can certainly get custody.
Which agreement becomes the court order.
Who would have thought that the rising Democrat Texas star was anything but truthful? Here's the sugar-coated version: Wendy Davis admits to fuzzy facts in bioAccording to the paper, Davis was not a divorced working mother living in a mobile home at age 19. Instead, she was 21, and lived in a trailer for a short time. Then after a stint living with her mother, Davis moved into her own apartment.Here's a less varnished narrative: Wendy Davis is not Wendy Davis and gets away with it - Hartford Conservative | Examiner.com
At 24, she married Jeff Davis, a lawyer who, according to the report, helped pay for her final two years of college and cashed out his 401(k) and took out loans to help finance her Harvard law degree.
The marriage eventually ended in divorce, with Jeff Davis getting custody of the couples youngest daughter and Wendy Davis paying monthly child support.
Just like stellar Democratic figures before her, she has lied about her past stating that she was a teenage single mom rising up from poverty and putting herself through school. It turns out none of this is true, also she seems to have lost custody of her children because of adultery ...
In most, if not allstates, divorce cannot be contested. Only the terms of the the divorce can be contested.Once the judge signs the agreement both sides have worked out amongst themselves, it becomes the courts order.
If the divorce was contested along with custody, the judge would rule on all the pertinent issues based on the evidence (and state law) and a dissolution agreement would be written by the court and signed by the judge.
Thats what I meant by contested, the terms, both financial and custody.
And even if the two parties agree to something, the judge is not bound in any way to accept it.
And the fact remains, none of this stuff even matters, as long as she is doing her job well.
Of course it matters to you! It scares the dickens out of you that she's doing her job well and can out fund-raise the Attny General!It doesn't matter to some people, obviously
Behavior like JFK's has never been greatly admired in women.I would agree. Track record on the job is an important gauge. I mean, look at guys like JFK, he was married, in the white house and living the life of a playboy, but many thought he was a pretty good president, right.
Times have changed and politicians are more open to character examination, especially the higher up they go in office.
And the fact remains, none of this stuff even matters, as long as she is doing her job well.
I would agree. Track record on the job is an important gauge. I mean, look at guys like JFK, he was married, in the white house and living the life of a playboy, but many thought he was a pretty good president, right.
Times have changed and politicians are more open to character examination, especially the higher up they go in office.
Behavior like JFK's has never been greatly admired in women.
It's not that they want to be more open. You just can't hide your past and present secrets very easily anymore. The higher a politician goes, the more digging the opponent does. Everything is fair game now.
Independent voters are more likely concerned about things that the candidate has done in recent years rather than what they did 25-30 years ago.