I don’t know why, but my heart just goes out to this 7-year-old boy who wanted to see his father so badly that he purloined his stepfather’s car and tried to drive to his dad’s place. When the cops finally pulled him over, he was crying and terrified:
The boy was stopped while driving his stepfather’s Pontiac Sunfire. He was going from his mother’s home in Sheridan Township to see his biological father in Filion, about 13 miles away, Huron County Sheriff Kelly Hanson said.
It took 20 miles before the boy would stop, Caseville Police Chief Jamie Learman said.
The boy had gone more than 20 miles in the wrong direction, authorities said.
Learman said the youngster was crying and kept saying he wanted to see his father. He needed to be calmed down before police could help him unlock the door.
The report didn’t state why the child wanted to immediately see his father, Rutkowski said.
Fox has more. The kid has been charged with unlawful use of a vehicle, and they hope to get him into counseling.
Clearly, he should not have been allowed to drive and he was most likely acting out. But what if the problem is that he just loves his dad and hates the new arrangement? Is that necessarily a form of illness?
Fortunately, I never had the experience of being separated from my father and raised by a strange man who was now with my mother. It sounds unspeakably awful, though, and it’s probably a good argument against the institution of divorce. Not that I would prohibit divorce, but as I have argued before, it would be nice to keep the state out of these things.
But how?
Comments
6 responses to “Divorce as a driving force?”
If we privatized marriage/divorce, how could it have impacted this situation? I mean, we don’t even know if the couple were married in the first place. Without marriage and/or a legal establishment of paternity, the father has no legal rights to the child (not withstanding all the emotions involved).
The courts are supposed to be neutral forums where disputes can be settled. To that end, laws are supposed to give a certain frame work of rules that all citizens know. Kind of how sporting events are conducted, with rules of play and disputes/foul calls/discipline handled by referees.
Even if we strike the vast majority of Family law, we would still have to adjudicate family disputes (inheritance when no will is made, custody issues, etc)
I’ve often wondered if we would see a dramatic shrinking in the divorce rate if (1) it can only be “for cause” if you have kids under the age of 14 (eg cruelty, adultery, etc); and (2) fathers presumptively were awarded full custody if he has the ability to support the children financially.
Without marriage and/or a legal establishment of paternity, the father has no legal rights to the child
Effectively fathers have no rights the way the law is currently administered.
DNA is no protection. You can be ordered to pay child support even if you never met the woman.
Which is to say the transition away from the current system to privatization wouldn’t change much. And what it would change would probably be for the better.
Simon, I grant you the family courts are screwed right now. But that doesn’t answer the question I raised.
and DeeG, that presumption awarding custody to fathers – due to money – was the SOP until about 60 years ago.
It is a family issue so lets allow the family to decide.
Lets get the parents, grand parents, aunts, uncles, cousins and friends involved. Place all of them in a room and talk it over.
Government is not the answer and will never be the answer.
Thomas-
So, you get everyone into one room. The mother’s family side with her, the father’s family side with him, and the two parents fundamentally disagree.
Now what?
There’s an actual child in question, and actual decisions have to be made — where will he live, what will he eat, who will pay his medical bills, where will he go to school, what sports and activities will he be involved in, and on and on endlessly.
The parents disagree.
What should we do? Chop the child in half? Let the parents fight it out with pistols at forty yards?
Yes, the increasing involvement of government in what ought to be private family matters is horrifying.
It’s also an inevitable consequence of divorce.