Now That’s Telling
Earlier today Rob did a post on the political activities of the North Dakota Human Services Department in their untrue campaign against the Shared Parenting Initiative. Rob linked to an brochure that, we the taxpayers of North Dakota paid for, that they put out to discourage us from reforming the family law in North Dakota. One passage in their campaign sheet caught my eye:
“A parent would be entitled to have custody of a child 50% of the time even if parent is a STRANGER to the child.”
Does the Department of Human Services want that parent to forever be a stranger to their child?
Let’s think of an example. Suppose the mother suffers from postpartum depression. When the child’s born she declares that she can’t handle it. Is she to be shut out of the child’s life forever after she gets her life back in order? That seems very unfair to both the mother and the baby. Why does Human Services want to split kids away from their parents?
If that mother still has issues the other parent can claim to the court that she is still unfit to be a custodial parent. Of course there will have to be some proof that this is the case otherwise both parents have an equal say in the child rearing plan.
