Can a 16-year-old child choose not to have visitation with a parent in full custody situations?
No.What complicates this issue is enforcement. If a parent has visitation, and a 16-year old refuses to go, it isn’t the same thing as a 6-year old refusing to go. A 16-year old is capable of running away, physically resisting, etc. So, if the parent being deprived visitation files a motion for order to show cause, the judge is hesitant to enforce the order being violated. One of the defenses to being held in contempt is that you are not violating the order intentionally, i.e. the violation is happening because of events out of your control.
Do fathers have the same parental rights as mothers?
The idea that mothers get custody over fathers is really based on the model that 90% of split families (parents don't live together because of divorce or unmarried parents living apart) are households with mothers having primary custody of the children. But that 90% are cases where custody was undisputed. When parents break up, the father usually doesn't want to be saddled with the kids full-time. They may want to have the kids with them some of the time, but it's rare when they want primary custody.In the cases where custody is disputed by mother and father, however, fathers win full custody about 70% of the time. So it isn't true that fathers are less likely to gain custody of children. It's only true that about 90% of the time, mothers end up with the kids because custody is undisputed, or the fathers aren't even around. When custody is disputed, though, fathers get it more than two-thirds of the time.
Is it right that Trump says 'On behalf of our nation I want to apologise to Brett' and Kavanaugh was 'proven innocent' after a campaign of 'lies'?
Dear Nel,With many people, there are still doubts about Brett Kavanaugh, his SELF CONFESSED heavy drinking and the influence alcohol has on his behavior.And, particularly, on the way he treats women while under the influence.Also, some of his friends have stepped forward and stated, that they doubted some of his testimoney, and that he drank more than he was willing to admit.It is very debatable, that Kavanaugh was “proven innocent”.There was no court case, no jury who “proved him innocent” and no judge.And Dr. Christine Blasey Ford did not withdraw her story about being sexually harassed by Kavanaugh.This does by no means prove Kavanaugh to be guilty!But it is not a sign, or the evidence of “innocence” either.The fact, that more than sixty women witnessed that he did NOT do that to them and that they trusted him, is a very strange example of faulty reasoning.Suppose an indicted serial killer, who had killed twelve victims would state, he was innocent.It would be easy for him to get one hundred women to testify for him, stating that he was an hohorable, stand up, innocent guy of integrity.His mother. His women friends, whom he had NOT killed.His twenty five women colleagues, whom he had never treated in a violent way.Maybe he would get thirty women, whom he went to school with as character witnesses and they would tell positive stories about how he helped them with their homework.But even if one thousand women would testify for him, that would be utterly irrelevant.BECAUSE THIS IS ABOUT THE WOMEN HE DID KILL! NOT ABOUT THE WOMEN HE DID NOT KILL.Now, let me make an important statement:KAVANAUGH DID NOT AGREE TO AN EXTENSIVE FBI INVESTIGATION.DR. CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD INSISTED THAT AN EXTENSIVE FBI INVESTIGATION SHOULD TAKE PLACE.ALSO, SHE UNDERWENT A LIE DETECTOR TEST AND PASSED IT.I would never, ever accept a candidate for Justice on SCOTUS, who was not only accused of sexually improper behavior, but who refused a profound FBI investigation.Such a person is not believable as a judge in a small town. Let alone as Justice on SCOTUS!Greetings,Robert.