Slate: "Why Bristol Palin Shouldn't Get Sole Custody"

Submitted by fibtastic on Thu, 2009-12-31 19:34

Interesting article on shared parenting in Alaska, driven by the Palin case. Excerpt:

Bristol Palin wants sole custody of her 1-year-old son, Tripp, we learned when a judge refused her request to keep the proceedings closed. Judge Kari C. Kristiansen made the court filings public after Tripp's father, Levi Johnston, opposed closure, saying that Bristol's mother, who is of course Sarah Palin, "has a reputation for being extremely vindictive." ("Not that Bristol would ever be that way, nor that I would," he demurely added.)
...
That probably won't happen, because Alaska has a statutory preference for joint custody. As in most states, the legislature has instructed the courts to err on the side of shared parenting as long as doing so doesn't undermine the best interests of the child. This idea has become well-entrenched in a relatively short time. Until the end of the 19th century, courts favored fathers, who had the money and the power and the property rights. Then, for much of the 20th century, mothers had the upper hand because of the presumption that children needed them more during what courts called their "tender years." For a child under the age of 5, custody almost always went to the mother.
...
Denying Levi Johnston's shared legal custody of his son, at this point, would be premature and out of step with the idea of encouraging dads to play a real part in their kids' lives. If he doesn't come through for his son and joint custody in fact devolves into maternal custody, Bristol can go back to court later. But for now Levi deserves the chance to keep his promises to the judge and to Tripp.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

I thought everyone knew that child custody was given to the fathers when most men were working for land owners, the father needed the children to work the landowners property. Then due to the industrial revolution men were needed in factories, so children were then given to the mothers as a matter of convenience for the system. We are naught but wage slaves being discounted as human beings to ensure that we can serve our masters. It is about time we took steps to be our own masters.

David A. DeLong

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by David A. DeLong on Fri, 2010-01-01 01:17

Great comment David!

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by the_captain on Fri, 2010-01-01 20:01

i can testify that when one person gets full custody,
the other loses their God given rights to his/her children. joint custody insures that
the children's rights to equal time with each parent are protected.
unless something is wrong with one of the parents, (and not just false or unproven accusations), this is a no-brainer. however, since today's judiciary appears unable to
follow simple guideines laid out by our forefathers, like equality
under the law, no brainers appear very common, and easy to spot,
what with the robes and uppity acting, and all.

personally, i want sarah palin to be an up and coming star for conservative ideals,
like justice, fairness, truth, equality, and all those things that made this
country great. she is the only conservative star material out there. however, on the surface this smells of expectations of favoritism, based on her daughter's sex,
and, as the boy said, the appearance of special treatment due.

i will be following this case w/ interest. it should tell us a lot about just
what this so called new feminism is all about. i hope my gut feeling here is wrong.
expecting to get favorable treatment is what we have now, in spades.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by daveinga on Sat, 2010-01-02 01:45

I just want clarification especially for those that might be unfamiliar with terminology....

'Legal' custody is not the same as 'physical' custody. Often times at this site people comment on shared parenting which is vague and can refer to physical custody (where the child lives) and/or it can also refer to legal custody which is the decision making aspect of parenting (education, medical, religion).

Parenting plans signed by judges are broken down to the different aspects of parenting.

One parent can have more physical custody, but at the same time both parents can have equal legal custody. Even legal custody is broken down to several categories such as medical, education, etc.

I believe Bristol is asking for sole legal custody (decision making), and it appears that Levi does not want to give up his rights. I do NOT think Levi is asking for 50/50 shared physical custody, as in asking that the child live with him, but he wants reasonable and fair access to the child. (I am not even sure Levi still lives in Alaska).

I can only think of extreme situations which would motivate a parent to request sole legal custody and a judge to grant it. I don't believe Bristol has any basis for her request.

PS- I am only writing based on my experience and how things are done in my state. But I assume all states are similar. I think Bristol is only asking for 'legal' custody because the article refers to her legal custody request towards the end.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Kris on Sat, 2010-01-02 21:51

Amen David. Well said.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Tom on Sun, 2010-01-03 11:46