Comparison Paper

Best Interest of the Child(ren)
Tender year doctrine or best interest of the child, is it used and is it fair? I read two articles, “Equal Protection Under the Law?” by Anne P. Mitchell; and “Against Presumptive Joint Custody: A Custodial Father Explains the Issues” by Derek Dahlsad. Anne is arguing that men are not getting equal right by law. She is against how the 14th Amendment says one thing and judges are doing oppose. Derek is arguing against the Shared Parenting Initiative in his state. He is stating that he is not for the change because it is unfair to custodial parents. The authors disagree with custody decisions and provide emotional and logical arguments, although they have different ways of expressing their opinions and have different backgrounds.
In the article, “Equal Protection Under the Law?” it shows judicial bias, maternal bias, professional bias, and even the author shows bias about the subject of child custody. I read how the author truly felt about the 14th Amendment. She is upset because it is not being used properly. Men are not getting the same rights as women. Men were getting custody of the children since the early 19th century then it changed to the tender year doctrine. The tender year doctrine was started because people were getting upset about how the mothers were being treated. Now the laws have changed again to the best interest of the child, but still people are supporting the tender year doctrine. People are assuming that all young children should be placed with the mother. This article keeps mentioning the unfairness of fathers in custody now. The author, Anne P. Mitchell, is a Stanford Law School graduate and attorney. She is in charge of the Fathers’ Rights and Equality Exchange. Her writing is found on the internet.
“Against Presumptive Joint Custody: A Custodial Father Explains the Issues”, is written with an emotional bias. I read the first sentence and how it is written tells it all. The article is about how absent parents feel about not being there to make decisions for the children on a daily basis. North Dakota is trying to start a Shared Parenting Initiative, to help the absent parents. Many parents have custodial rights more than the other but the other wants a say in it now. With this new Shared Parenting Initiative, both parents make the decision and if they disagree with each other than they have to go to court to settle it. The absent parent will deal with the kids day to day like the other custodial parent does, no matter what. The custodial parent will not get child support since the other absent parent is now participating. Meaning that the custodial parent will pay for all and the absent parent can just help by being there for the child. How is that fair? Derek Dahlsad is a parent in the state of North Dakota and is a concerned parent. His article reflects how he sees things and shows his emotions on the Shared Parenting Initiative.
“Equal Protection Under the Law?” Mitchell mentions the tender year doctrine. It states, that this doctrine suggests that custody of a child could be awarded to its mother if the child were of “tender years.” “Against Presumptive Joint Custody: A Custodial Father Explains the Issues” Dahlsad, states that the court assigns physical custody to one parent or the other; for better or worse, it often goes to the mother. Both articles see the tender year doctrine as a problem, and each article are fighting to help. Each article shows bias on the topic of tender year doctrine. Mitchell asks, “Are those men, in fact afforded such equal treatment?” She answers, “No.” Vast majority of disputed custody cases are resolved with custody going to the mother. Even in courts which have found the tender years doctrine to be repugnant, there is still a judicial bias towards giving custody to the mother. The article states that one can certainly see that this doctrine seems to mark the beginning of maternal bias in the courts which has persisted to this day. “The mother is the softest and safest nurse of infancy” cast this maternal preference in a most humanitarian light: this is for the good and nurturing of the child. Dahlsad, agrees that current child custody laws are insufficient, possibly destructive in some cases. Parents that aren’t custodial in North Dakota and feel that they don’t participate enough are fighting for rights, called Shared Parenting Initiative. Dahlsad disagrees with these rights. I agree with both authors, why are fathers not getting full rights. I agree that parents that aren’t custodial should not get more rights. So, why are men treated differently? Mitchell is a law graduate from and fathers right attorney. She is founder and director of the Father’s Rights & Equality Exchange. Her credibility and knowledge of this topic is a reliable source. Dahlsad is a father that has custody of his child, so his credibility and knowledge is useful as a source. (Mitchell, page 1-2) (Dahlsad, page 1-3)
These two articles were in agreement on how the tender year doctrine was being used still when it shouldn’t be. Each author had different views to point out on how it was being used or abused. We looked at how Mitchell showed the bias on the judicial, maternal, and emotional part, where as Dahlsad showed his emotional bias. Both authors are credible because one is law graduate and founder of a Father’s Rights group. The emotional and logical arguments provide us with information, their different ways of expressing their opinions and backgrounds are resourceful. So how do other people feel about this? Only time will tell?

Works Cited

Mitchell, Anne P. “Equal Protection Under the Law?” www.parentingplan.net
Dahlsad, David “Against Presumptive Joint Custody: A Custodial Father Explains the Issues” www.thelizlibrary.com