Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: FRIDAY, September 17, 1993 TAG: 9309290318
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A12 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
There are a few misconceptions not revealed in that article. Thirty-eight states have joint-custody laws, and Virginia is not one of them. It is rare in Virginia for a judge to award joint custody.
The article stated that in a majority of cases, the divorced parents decide who will take the children. This is true. The misconception is that lawyers representing fathers encourage them to make a deal with the mother outside of court because their chances of winning custody are slim.
Another misconception is that judges are increasingly awarding custody to fathers, thus turning away from the "tender years doctrine." A study of 1,000 custody cases was conducted in the past year in the counties of Henrico, Hanover, Chesterfield and Arlington concerning contested custody situations. The study investigated how often a father obtained custody without these three factors:
1. The mother consented to giving custody to the father. 2. The mother was found to be unfit by the courts. 3. The child was of legal age to request to live with the father.
The results concluded that two fathers out of 1,000 obtained custody. This leads me to believe that there are a lot of unfit fathers in these four counties and/or "the tender years" doctrine is still in effect.
MICHAEL BARRY YOUNG
SALEM
\ Jail isn't a bowl of peaches
IT'S BEEN suggested that the city should have the local jail's inmates help to tear down or clean up old buildings on Salem Avenue, instead of lying around and enjoying color television and free meals.
I'm sure that the prisoners would be more than happy to go and work on the buildings. The jail's environment and living conditions are not all peaches and cream. The food isn't worth having. You can't lie around and watch television, unless you don't mind being stepped on or over constantly. The overcrowding is terrible.
As I said, it's not as easy as some people think. If people would spend a month or two at "the Roanoke Hilton," I'm sure their outlook would be different. I just sat there for almost a year, and I know that I would have been more than glad to work and help improve the looks of Salem Avenue. Anyone who lives in Roanoke knows that it can use all the help it can get.
CHARLIE MITCHEN
PEARISBURG
\ Convictions count in politics
I WONDER what ghoulish nightmares have haunted Paxton Davis lately to warrant labeling Mike Farris a "scary" Christian (``State candidates' biggest assets: their opponents," Sept.10 column).
What about Farris makes him "scary"? Is it the fact that Farris tries to determine political policy on the basis of moral principles? Is it that he defends the superiority of parents raising and educating their children over the state? Or is it, perhaps, that Farris openly speaks of his religious convictions as an undeniable aspect of his personality and work?
It is one thing to disagree with a candidate's political views, but to use his religion as a slur sounds new depths in modern American political analysis.
Thirty-three years ago, John F. Kennedy overcame mind-sets similar to Mr. Davis' to become the first "scary" Catholic president. Today, we have the Peace Corps and the continuing effects of Kennedy's moral presence at the Berlin Wall as a tribute to his leadership abilities.
Religious convictions have long made significant contributions to the lives of great American political leaders. Let's not allow a few elitist curmudgeons to erase our memories of a nation in which religion provided yet another layer to the rich American tapestry of ideas.
REV. CHARLES T. EVANS
ROANOKE
\ When ex-wives hold grudges
I AM appalled at the way Virginia's and Roanoke city's courts handle child-support cases.
I have a boyfriend who has been to court a dozen times in five years because he can't afford to pay support every week to his ex-wife. It seems to me that the judges are allowed to call such men scum and tell them they are the lowest form of life on Earth. Why? Because they can't afford to pay? The judges really need to start looking at money-hungry ex-wives who hold grudges against their ex-husbands. Most of them know how much money their former husbands make.
I am not saying that men shouldn't have to pay a fair amount of child support; they are responsible for helping with financial support to their children. But the way it is, some courts would rather put these men in jail because they cannot afford to pay. Why not keep the jail space for crack dealers and murderers?
APRIL HURLEY
ROANOKE
\ Is nothing safe from censors?
REFERRING TO the Sept. 8 editorial, "Where's Waldo? Censored," I must ask:
Are these people mad at the world? Who in their right minds would even consider the Bible too sexually explicit? I am sad that people would even consider such things and outraged that they would actually take action against our Holy Bible. Get a life, people, and fight for something that has a real cause.
APRIL SHORT
VINTON
by CNB