Why is it acceptable for someone who doesn't know you decide whether you're allowed to see your own children if sufficient proof of the incapabilities of raising children of the other parent is proven?
Knowing that one parent is more capable than the other should account for something. Wouldn't the best for the children be to be raised by the parent that is the least threat to the well being of their future and mental stability seem the logical choice? So why does it seem like the courts side with the unstable parent? I've been through it all and am going through it by my boyfriend's side while the mother of his children, though incredibly unstable gets what she wants with no regard to the kids well being therefore denying them a voice. Is that fair? Far from it. She does in no circumstance deserve any respect or the right to rear innocent children as she has pretty much taken all their innocence away. Is that fair? All accusations against him have been all misguided and unfounded, yet he has to fight just to see his children. I will continue this in a while.