Child Custody Battles

* Re “Custody Wars’ New Front Line,” Sept. 11: I am disappointed that there was no mention made of the role the process of divorce plays in the intense hatred that develops between divorcing parties. The intent of the no-fault divorce laws is to equalize and divide property and to see that the kids are taken care of. Too often, one of the divorcing parties and/or the attorneys take an action that is seen as unfair by the other side. In the adversarial environment that is built into the process, you either “turn the other cheek” or retaliate. Too often, attorneys encourage retaliation. Unless the parties have agreed to mediate their divorce, there is no one involved whose goal is consistent with the intent of the law. In an adversarial situation, it is the attorney’s job to protect the client by getting more than half, where property or money are concerned, and to achieve the client’s objective where custody is concerned.

State Sen. Newton Russell (R-Glendale) is attempting to get a bill through the Legislature which will set up a process which will produce many more mediated divorces and fewer adversarial ones.

VINCE KATES

Pasadena

* Your article will ring true to the ear of every pediatrician. On a regular basis we will see a parent bring in some hapless child with some minor illness after the ex-spouse’s custodial weekend. The allegations of parental neglect flow freely, subjecting the child to even more vulnerability, confusion and sadness. The message: “Daddy (or Mommy) let me get sick.”

Child custody battles often seem to degenerate into a form of institutionalized child abuse. These poor children are used as emotional battering rams to hurt the ex-spouse. Just as often, the child’s need for the love and companionship of both parents is callously sold for more child support. The demand for sole physical custody becomes more desirable when more child support accompanies it. The child’s need for contact with both parents becomes secondary.

From a financial standpoint the only real winners are the lawyers. At $200-plus an hour it hardly seems to be in their interest to consider the needs of the child. The more discord they sow the longer they can prolong the litigation. We need to keep in mind the primacy of the child’s interests in custody battles. Surely a Family Court mediation panel of experts in family law and child care can do this better than two battling lawyers whose concern is lining their pockets. Finally, I would like to appeal to parents. You only cheapen your love for your children by sacrificing their happiness for money or spitefulness.

THOMAS LEE MD

Torrance