3-year-old boy had been on park swing for 2 days when he was found dead, officials say

Quote:The death of a 3-year-old boy found dead on a Maryland park swing has been ruled a homicide.

According to WUSA, Ji’Aire Lee was found on a park swing on May 22. He died of dehydration and hypothermia, according to the Charles County Sheriff’s Office.

Officials discovered the boy’s body after his mother, Romechia Simms, was observed pushing the boy on the swing for an “unusually long period of time.”

The Washington Post reports that Simms, who had previously experienced a mental breakdown, stayed at the park nearly 44 hours pushing the boy on the swing.

Romechia had been hospitalized on more than one occasion for erratic behavior before her son’s death.

The boy’s father, James Lee, petitioned for custody of the child just weeks before his death.

The county’s state’s attorney’s office will decide whether to file charges against Simms.

http://wtkr.com/2015/07/01/3-year-old-bo...cials-say/

Another example of how the court system works against men. Despite this woman's history, they refused to give the father custody. Kudos to dad for looking out for the child's best interest and at least trying to do something about it. The judge, the mother, and the mother's attorney are to blame.

Unfortunately, the court systems are so slanted in favor of the woman, it doesn't matter. Hopefully, over time, gay marriage can bring out the positive change in the judicial system to look at these cases rationally instead of through knee-jerk reactionism. Afterall, they can't use gender bias for custody and divorce settlement rulings when both parties are the same sex. They'll have to change their methods.

Which do you want, big govt sticking it's nose into everyone's business, or small govt?...seems your opinion changes article to article.

(07-01-2015 09:20 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  Which do you want, big govt sticking it's nose into everyone's business, or small govt?...seems your opinion changes article to article.

Wut? The post is about the family court system and their biases. Family court system is not going away and due to the fact that their job is to make judgements, they are sticking their nose into your business no matter the outcome. My opinion is that perhaps the custody and divorce award determination process will have to change given the bias cannot be implemented when the parties either both have a va-gina or neither have a va-gina. This thread has nothing to do with the size of government.

An interesting take with links, though I would guess what will happen is judges will simply apply a double standard ruling fairly in gay cases while continuing the bias against men in heterosexual cases:

Quote:Same sax marriage is a good idea that heterosexual men have a vested interest in supporting, because it will be followed rapidly by same sex divorce, and possibly offer a solution to unfair marriage, divorce and child custody laws, which currently discriminate harshly against men in favor of women. Same sex divorce strips gender out of the equation, long used to justify legal discrimination against men. Feminist organizations in particularoppose equality when it comes to parenting after divorce, casting men as likely abusers of children, despite evidence that demonstrates women perpetrate most domestic violence against children, and children are more likely to be murdered by their mothers.

When children have two mothers or two fathers, it will be increasingly difficult, if not impossible, to cast one parent as negligent, abusive or undeserving on the basis of gender alone. A case will have to be made to prove allegations to justify reduced custody or access to the couple’s children, which would be the default under shared parenting as a legal standard. Currently, men must engage in expensive and time-consuming litigation to prove they are deserving of equal or primary custody, a situation that results in poor and working class men accepting unequal parenting because they cannot afford to litigate. Feminist writers advocate for poor mothers to remain single for the precise reason that the courts will refuse access to the fathers of their children on the basis of gender. Access to children under marriage is difficult; when men remain unmarried, it becomes almost impossible.

Courts are slowly evolving to enforce child custody arrangements and punish parents who refuse to abide by court orders, although it is not unusual for men to go years never seeing their children, while paying court mandated child support. Parental alienation has received attention in the press recently after Bill Hudson disowned his children with actress Goldie Hawn, whom he accuses of deliberately ‘poisoning’ his children against him. Parental alienation is made easier when mothers engage damaging and false stereotypes about fathers, a situation that will not exist for same sex parents. Courts may treat parental alienation more seriously when there are no sexist stereotypes to engage, and instead see alienation as the controlling and abusive behavior it is.

Same sex marriages also provide an opportunity to examine domestic violence laws that legally discriminate against men by assuming they are perpetrators on the basis of their gender alone. Same sex partnerships are more violent in general than heterosexual relationships, with lesbians reporting the highest rates of intimate violence. When violent spouses are both women, or both men, it becomes necessary to examine evidence to determine which spouse is legally responsible for the violence, and may increasingly lead to domestic violence being understood as a problem that is perpetrated and experienced by both spouses equally.

Same sex marriages have the potential to challenge laws and customs surrounding marriage, divorce, child custody and domestic violence that currently discriminate against men on the basis of gender. Straight men have much to gain from these relationships, which may provide a legal foundation to challenge laws that unfairly target and punish men, and their children.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/...-marriage/

(07-01-2015 09:20 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  Which do you want, big govt sticking it's nose into everyone's business, or small govt?...seems your opinion changes article to article.

I'm not even sure you actually read anything.

When They legally "marry" do one of Them take the others last name ? And do the parents of those call Them Son or Daughter in law ? And what about kids.........................?

(07-01-2015 10:54 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  When They legally "marry" do one of Them take the others last name ? And do the parents of those call Them Son or Daughter in law ? And what about kids.........................?

Stop with your patriarchal shitlordness.

(07-01-2015 10:54 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  When They legally "marry" do one of Them take the others last name ? And do the parents of those call Them Son or Daughter in law ? And what about kids.........................?

Well, when Brittney Griner married Glory Johnson their names were Glory Johnson-Griner and Brittney Griner-Johnson.

So my guess is, they'll go with the dual hyphenated names.

I was divorced many years ago and can verify the system is slanted against men. Guilty until proven innocent.

A family member of mine got divorced in Baton Rouge, LA and he faced two choices:

1) pay 50% of his income to his ex-wife for child support (two kids), or
2) sign away all parental rights and not see the kids until they turned 18

Sadly, he chose #2.