Deborah wrote in
news:01ds45p0tsqbtnjsiffddpi631cieobgpv@4ax.com:
> On Thu, 02 Jul 2009 16:26:37 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying
> Sissy wrote:
>
>>Did the children's mother formally give up her parental rights?
>>(Not give him custody, mind you, but voluntarily terminate her
>>parental rights.) If not, she's got the firmest legal claim,
>>very difficult to challenge unless there's damned good proof
>>she's unfit. (And perhaps there is, I have no idea.)
>
> The trouble is the kids don't even know Debbie Rowe. It's hard
> to see any court believing it's in the best interests of the
> children tobe handed over to a stranger.
>
The court is specifically required toume, barring evidence to
the contrary (which may well exist in this case) that a biological
parent is better than any other relative. In other words, the
mother needs to be proven unfit, which is not easy, to be denied
custody. It's a difficult situation for everyone (especially when
so much money is involved), but there are historical reasons for
the law being the way it is, and most of those reasons are horror
stories.
--
Terry Austin
"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with morehole."
-- David Bilek
Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals. |
