Child Custody And Divorce: Free Legal Advice
Child Custody And Divorce: Free Legal Advice
Child Custody And Divorce: Free Legal Advice
- - - - - - - - - -
The third factor in the statute is as follows:
(c) The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to provide the child with food, clothing, medical care or other remedial care recognized and permitted under the laws of this State in place of medical care, and other material needs.
Now let's do a little editing, and take the confusing part out: " ...medical care [or other remedial care recognized and permitted under the laws of this State in place of medical care]..." confuses everyone, but it means basically this: if you are of a religion that doesn't recognize medical care (such as the Christian Scientist folks, and there may be others, who believe its better to just pray for healing, etc.) then the state will not dictate medical care: you can just practice your religion without any state interference. Very nice. It also doesn't apply to 99.9% of the population, and it's confusing language, if you're new to this stuff. So here, we are taking that language out, just for illustration.
Here's the custody factor with that language gone:
(c) The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to provide the child with food, clothing, medical care...and other material needs.
Now it's fairly simple to understand, isn't it? This is the "money" factor. Is money a factor in this custody battle? Well, it might be, and it might not be. If both parents are of the same economic circumstances, well and good. If one parent has significantly more money, it's going to count, and here is the factor where it counts. Kids are better off, goes the reasoning of the lawmakers, with money around, than they are without money around. If the princess and the pauper are going to argue over their child, the princess is going to win this one factor, because the assumption is (and rightly so) that the child will be better off in the palace than in the hovel of the pauper. Don't start that email: it's true that "money isn't everything", and "money can't buy me love", as the Beatles proved, but it DOES count. Oh, and don't forget the big picture: it only counts ONCE. There are eleven other factors, aren't there? The uninvolved princess, with all her money, cannot overcome a pauper who is involved with the child, because the pauper will win on the other eleven factors, right? Yes, right. The uninvolved princess may win on the "money" factor, and not win the custody case, because that is just one of twelve factors that the judge is obligated to look at.
Note this very carefully: the law does not dictate that "rich people win over poor people". The law dictates that the judge will examine, will compare,
(c) The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to provide the child with food, clothing, medical care ...and other material needs.
We've looked at CAPACITY, the financial wherewithal to provide the food, clothing, medical care, and other material needs. What about this party's DISPOSITION? Does the parent have a lot of money, but won't let go of any of it?
"Mr Jones, I'm advised that you own that red Corvette parked in front of the courthouse, is that right? What does a car like that cost? Forty six thousand, thank you. What do the shoes cost that your child wears? You don't know? Yes, I understand that your support is paid in full, on time, every week sir. That's not what I asked. Let me ask you this: what SIZE are your child's shoes, what size is the child supposed to wear now? You don't know that? All right, let's talk about how many. Two? Very good sir. But we all wear two shoes at a time, don't we? That's not really what I meant. When you picked the child up for visitation last weekend, what kind of shoes was he wearing? Tennis shoes, yes. When were they purchased, how many months ago? You don't know? Yes sir, I understand that your support is paid up. That's not what I asked you. Now, this is the end of September, right? When the child started the new school year, three weeks ago, did the child get new shoes? You don't know. Well, if the child DID get new shoes, you didn't buy them, is that right? What about boots? Does the child own a set of boots, rubber boots, to wear over his shoes in bad weather? You don't know. Well, if the child DOES own a set of boots, you didn't buy them, is that right? What about dress shoes? Does the child own some dress shoes, to wear to church, or a wedding, something like that? You don't know. All right. Let's talk for a minute about the child's bicycle. Does your child even own a bicycle? You didn't purchase any bicycle for your child, ever, did you sir? Do you know whether or not your child can ride a bicycle without training wheels?
There is a pattern here, isn't there? The judge will certainly be able to figure out which parent has the capacity AND THE DISPOSITION to provide for that child.