More coverage from the WSJ

Methodius_ · 2015-04-17T16:04:36+00:00

Critics of the bills contend that they... risk giving leverage to abusive men.

It's almost like they didn't read the bills. Just a few paragraphs up, you can read...

Some of the measures, such as those proposed in New York and Washington state, take an additional step by requiring judges to award equal time to each parent unless there is proof that such an arrangement wouldn't be in a child's best interest.

This includes if the father is abusive. That's clearly not in the interest of the child, letting the father have equal time. But the part they're not liking, I assume, is that it now requires proof. Because before, a woman could just go "My SO is abusive!" and come up with a story to go with it, or get their kid to say it's true, and that's it, case closed. The need for evidence will heavily swing things back in favor of fathers, which of course people won't like.

representativefisher · 2015-04-17T17:54:29+00:00

This is an issue we're facing in New Hampshire as well.

cylon56 · 2015-04-17T13:14:28+00:00

http://www.wsj.com/articles/big-shift-pushed-in-custody-disputes-1429204977

Title	More coverage from the WSJ
Author	cylon56
Upvotes	92
Comments	3
Date	April 17, 2015 1:13 PM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/32x401/more_coverage_from_the_wsj/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/more-coverage-from-the-wsj.982803 https://theredarchive.com/post/982803

Comments