In a message dated 96-12-09 16:33:46 EST, you write:

> RE: Legal Rights
>  Fathers are supposed to have them in custody cases too.

Hi All,
Frank does have a point, and I agree that Fathers rights must be protected
too.
However, what about the child's rights?  I get so tired of mothers and
fathers arguing over their rights to the children.  What about the childrens
rights to security, stability?  One of the reasons I did not list the birth
fathers name on my oldest son bieth certificate was because I didn't want my
son to go thru the hell I went through withh visitation and 2 parents who
couldn't agree. The other reason was that the birth father made it clear he
wasn't interested at that time in being a father.  Therefore, I made sure
that he lost his "rights" permanently.  My son is 11 yrs old, and birth dad
hasn't even tried to make contact.
So, to finalize this, the child MUST be considered more important than both
the mother and the father in every situation.  Children aren't even allowed a
choice in visitation cases until they are at least 12 yrs old.  (At least
here in CA)  I think that this is ridiculous.  Have a personal friend whose
young daughter is forced to go on visitationwith her dad.  She hates her
father (He is abusive, but no one can prove it because it is all emotional,
and he lies so well) and doesn't want to stay with him at all, but she is
forced to by the court.  Judge told her if she didn't obey the orders then
her mother would go to jail.  Nice guilt trip, huh?
SO my question is, what does this 4 yr old want?  Has anyone asked the child
if s/he wants to go away from mom for a week or more?  Nevermind that s/he is
still BF, that is not the issue.  The issue is the emotional stability of the
child to be away from the primary caregiver.  The issue should not be the
Fathers or Mohters rights.  It should be the childs rights.

My .02+

Jay