PLEASE NOTE: This blog is a bigotry free zone open to all persons, regardless of age, race, religion, color, national origin, sex, political affiliations, marital status, physical or mental disability, age, or sexual orientation. Further, this blog is open to the broad variety of opinions out there and will not delete any comments based upon point of view. However, comments will be deleted if they are worded in an abusive manner and show disrespect for the intellectual process.
States have presumptions against sole custody to abusers. Connecticut needs to follow suit and get with the times. They are lagging way behind other states in this area. The current laws on,y serve the attorneys, vendors and GALs...not the people, not the children. When the government is no longer serving the people that's a real BIG problem.
ReplyDeleteI understand what you are saying here. Connecticut's attitude towards women is hostile, angry, suspicious, and condemnatory. When I spoke of my abuse, the GAL said, "All women say they are abused." That says it all in a nutshell. No matter what my ex husband did--the economic and physical abuse--the attorneys and GAL in my case said I was imagining it all, that I was exaggerating, that I was oversensitive, if not mentally ill, no matter how clearcut the evidence. The worst of it I think if you come from a middle class background is the presumption that you are a spoiled, kept woman who is just complaining that you had your toys taken away from you. These kinds of misogynistic attitudes infiltrate every level of the legal system. Frequently, when DV occurred, the judges will set the woman up to end up charged with a criminal offense based on something minor, like sending emails or something like that. Meanwhile, the guy who broke your ribs get's off scott free. Don't even begin to talk to me about the corruption in the State of Connecticut, and they will do anything, break laws, lie, anything to protect their little sexist system, right at the same time that they post cautions on the walls of the courthouse decrying DV and human trafficking. If you have an abuser as an ex husband here in CT, it is highly likely they will end up with sole or joint custody of your children. And don't even start to talk to me about the abusers who can nolle off their DV crimes. That is another story altogether.
DeleteSo a reporter from the CT Law Tribune is trying to report on a custody case. He's interested in how the process is working for the people (it's not). The judge restrained him from reporting about it. There is a First Amendment violation appeal....Don't the people deserve transparency, accountability? What's the legislature going to do about it all?
ReplyDeleteHow many more women have to die before we look at the way family court does business? The qualified protective order actually issues a day after she's murdered in this case: HHD-FA10-4050934-S. See http://www.courant.com/community/simsbury/hc-simsbury-homicide-investigation-1125-20141124-story.html
ReplyDeleteThe order is actually a QDRO which has to do with a financial order, nothing to do with a restraining order. Of course, we will see what the outcome of the investigation is.
Delete