Thread: How should the child custody be decided?

Seeing the rising number of cases in divorce I have created this thread to know from you all people on how the child custody be determined?

PS: i know a thread like this is available on a forum but it had not got that much hits..

Child custody is a very emotional sensitive important issue..

i am ok with the Justice done by the laws and human touch in India.. because we cannot go inside someone's house and see whats happening.. at last its just the court which decides and i think thats quite fairly done in India..

There are more problems that are severe than this.. child abuse, child made as small peasants.. laborers..

harsh truth is that its not Govt. but some people amongst us, who manage to break the law and smile off.

You are right. But in urban areas it is becoming common.

in urban areas its most common because we see it so.. when they are in village they still have to work like that(no studies etc) but at last who sees/cares??

ideally no child should ever have to face a custody battle.
a child needs both parents. who so ever may win custody, the child is always the loser.

It's a sad situation. Idally both parents should be present. But in the
case where it is absolutely necessary, the interests of the child alone
should be taken into consideration.

I voted 'decide by a judge' but I see a lot of problems in that due
to the corrupt judicial system in India. whoever has money can
buy the judgement and it might not be the best for the kid.

Unless the mother is totally incompetent and abuses the child
my preference would be for the mother to have primary custody
and the father will have frequent visitation rights and he pays his
share for child support.

-PF

If this becomes the necessity, the custody of the child is best handled by the mother (unless she is physically or menatlly unfit). A child definitely needs both parents but needs the mother more than the father, especially true with lesser ages.

Originally Posted by just4kix

If this becomes the necessity, the custody of the child is best handled by the mother (unless she is physically or menatlly unfit). A child definitely needs both parents but needs the mother more than the father, especially true with lesser ages.

@j4k btw who is just4nix????

he is same bossy like you.. but i feel that its Saurav Da,,, dont know why...

Child should be in mother's custody. Nobody but your mother can take the best care of her children. It can be father only if mother is not capable of this duty.

Originally Posted by meetdilip

Child should be in mother's custody. Nobody but your mother can take the best care of her children. It can be father only if mother is not capable of this duty.

i have seen many women in urban areas who waste time in kitty parties and even spoil their kids... that cannot be given any mercy.. if a woman does work for her family than its good... but how will you term this??

men drinking and abusing kids is the same theme(than we say oh see this man, he doesnt care for his kids)

in the 21st century both the words "Matritva- Motherhood" and "Pitritva-Fatherhood" have lost their whole meanings...


we cannot wholly term men as bad, women have started to spoil up too..


Its all Ram bharose..

Mickey, what are "kitty parties" ?

^^ i think you know better...

Originally Posted by Punch Farce

Mickey, what are "kitty parties" ?

Originally Posted by mickey

^^ i think you know better...

Sorry, I am not as hip as you are ;-) we don't have those parties
in our village, here the only parties are DMK, ADMK, Congress etc.

-Punch

no BJP there ??

I think sometime a father is more better parent than a mother or vice versa. Of course if child is much smaller then he/she will need mother but if he is older than he need both equally. So I think it must be done after taking into performance of both parents.



PS: Of course not in poker.

A Father maybe able to play Mother(though not in very small age) but a Mother may not be able to play Father...
but i also don't oppose the vice-versa..

A Father maybe able to play Mother(though not in very small age) but a Mother may not be able to play Father...
but i also don't oppose the vice-versa..

Why can't a mother play father?

If the parents are sensible, a dispute of such kind should not arise.. They should be able to resolve it themselves..

I think the following procedure is to be followed-
1. Parents should decide. (problem solved).. Else, If there is a dispute:3: then,

2. Child should decide, but the decision should not be finalized on this as the child can be lured and he is not matured enough.. :36:

3. Their common relatives and neighbors who are familiar to the family's well-being and problems could think of the well being of the child and cast their decision.. :44::44::44::44:

4. Lastly, the court should take initiative for a complete checkup and enquire the status of each parent. (We surely dont want a brutal drunk parent..):devil2:

By averaging out all of the above mentioned, the judge should make a sensible decision.... :red_indian:

^^Thats ideal..

we want practicle answers... that are possible..

WHAT IS IMPRACTICAL ABOUT IT....?

do you think, Humans can do this??

if they did it? why will such problems arrive?? i want the world to end.. there is no way to peace.. everyones fighting and i hope the world will end so that God can sleep nicely..

Mickey, There is still 'good' alive.. Dont amplify the 'bad'..

yeah... lol..but how can we do for this??

I have nothing else to say, i have stated my thoughts and i think they are practical and possible..

A girl child in particular should be left to the mother's care since a father will not be aware of the needs of a girl when she reaches adolescence (puberty to be more specific) or give proper counseling. Similarly, if the child is a boy, he should be left to the father's care. In either case, the other parent should be alloed to visit the child as frequently as possible. This is my opinion.