It’s often said divorce brings out the worst in people. This is undoubtedly true, but in many cases well-meaning judges often inadvertently make a bad situation worse.
Two recent cases illustrate this problem. In the first case, a stay-at-home mother in a small town had an extra-marital affair, which led her husband to file for divorce. Their neighbors ostracized the mother to such an extent she decided to move 150 miles away and take the kids with her. The father, who had been an active part of the kids’ lives, understandably didn’t want this to happen since he would now see his children only infrequently.
While the judge was very troubled by the facts before the court, the mother was allowed to move and take the kids with her. Not only will the kids now see their father only infrequently, they also were uprooted from the only home they had known as well as from their schools, friends and extended family. The judge’s decision relied heavily on the fact that the mother had been a stay-at-home mother and, in the judge’s eyes, had historically been the “primary” parent.
In the second case, a military father deployed overseas returned home to discover his wife engaged in an extra-marital affair. He filed for divorce and, even though he had been an active parent, the court awarded sole custody of his children to his ex-wife. He now sees his children only every-other-weekend. The judge in this case also based his decision on the notion that the mother had historically been the “primary” parent.
