'The court determined that there was no evidence that a one-year-old child could bond with a father...'

VoodooIdol · 2008-09-19T14:22:23+00:00

No evidence? Really? Why then were my daughters first words (before she could even walk, which she learned to do at a mere 10 months) were "Da-da!"

Explain that, fuckers.

hopeless_case · 2008-09-19T11:18:35+00:00

he parents were married in ’99, but in ’03, Mother filed for a PFA, claiming that Father had told her that he had ‘thoughts about killing her’, which led to a divorce – she requested joint legal and primary physical custody, as well as a request for relocation. As a result of the PFA filing, Father consented to a PFA being issued, resulting in his removal from his child, his home and the loss of his job as a mobile therapist, and a prohibition against Father contacting Mother for 18 months, despite a PFA court finding that no abuse occurred. Part of the reason for this was that Father bought and sold weapons on e-Bay.

While the court's statement is a clear bias against men, there is more to this case than meets the eye.

What does PFA stand for, BTW?

2008-09-19T18:46:32+00:00

What the holy hell?

BinaryShadow · 2008-09-22T21:36:05+00:00

AKA: "The family courts take pride in their ability to appear fair and balanced while openly siding with the mother 99% of the time. Such ideas that children could actually bond to their fathers could ruin the gravy train"

Title	'The court determined that there was no evidence that a one-year-old child could bond with a father...'
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	30
Comments	5
Date	September 19, 2008 2:51 AM UTC (17 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/729xr/the_court_determined_that_there_was_no_evidence/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/the-court-determined-that-there-was-no-evidence.1056607 https://theredarchive.com/post/1056607

Comments