LowPhreak

I think if you explain to the Air Force recruiter all of the facts of what it appears she failed to disclose while filling out her enlistment contract she will not be allowed to enlist. The AF doesn't care about that right now, they're desperate for bodies. Whatever is not exactly great about her they can get waived.

But seriously, fathers can win significant custody rights. ...We're living in the age of child custody reform, believe it or not:freak: Yep, dads can get significant custody rights alright. In less than 10% of cases does Dad get full custody, but then it depends on what you call "significant". Look up the stats, although it varies from state to state. Yes, it IS possible to find a lawyer who isn't trying to take everything of value you have left (and then some) to fight your case. Good luck with that. Even IF you do find one, the end result will be determined by the judge, no matter what $$ you spend or who the lawyer is. The simple but harsh fact is that the vast, vast majority of fam. court judges are leaning towards the mother's side, if not outright hostile to men in general before you even get in the starting line. I have seen guys walk in with the "best" divorce lawyer in a 100 mile radius, spending 10's of thousands of $$, only to get rammed by the judge. All they're looking for is one tiny excuse to hang their hat on and that's all they need. I've seen judges ignore mothers who violated visitation orders 15-20 times in a row that were well documented, and those were not unusual or rare cases. Yes, a lawyer who happens to give a {censored} can help, but don't expect one to save the day.

pay a hitman. problem solved. If I thought I coulda gotten away with it, I would have.

Thankfully, the totally one-siding siding with mothers getting custody is waning. ... I often think you can get the best treatment if you can get a reference to a lawyer from a friend. ... ...and then he went to court, and reality hit him right square in the nuts. Some of you guys must be living in Disneyland.

...talk to her about it, if she's anything short of a decent parent she'll work it out so that you can still see your kid without him flying out to see you. A very naive way to look at it. You're depending on the decency and grace of a woman that (in all likelihood) at some point will want to "move on with her life" and take her kids with her -- which doesn't include the father's OR the kid's feelings. I'm telling you, when women get this {censored} in their heads that's it. I know that sounds sexist but you know what? It's the truth so I don't care what it sounds like. It is what it is. To a lot of women, all you are is a sperm donor and a paycheck. Your "feelings" and what you want from life they couldn't care less about. All they need to do is offer up some {censored} and they'll generally get what they want from dumb assed men. Once they have the kids, they can always find another guy for a paycheck and that new guy won't have any say over those kids at all. So she gets the love & companionship of her kids, a pretty good living, control of the situation, AND sex. And you get what -- a piece of ass every few nights, and the minute you're not throwing in the bucks you're out on your ear? Sure, not all women are like that, but the vast majority are.

If you can provide for your children and have a stable job, kids have family and friends no judge will force children to travel the country every 3 ys with an AF Mom. This should be a no brainer custody win for you. Don't let yourself be fooled. That's exactly what a lawyer will want you to believe, to get you to spend the money to keep the fight going. The harsh reality is that in family court in most states, judges have a very wide latitude to do or allow almost anything they want. Very little is mandatory law that the judge actually has to strictly follow. I know of many cases where the father had a job and was stable, and the mother moved away just to make it nearly impossible for the father to have his parenting time, and the mother's got away with it totally scott-free. Some of those fathers moved to where the mother was and still the mothers got away with all kinds of violations of the court orders. It can go on for years and years. TU BE just better hope he comes across a decent judge. Hey, I don't like being all 'gloom & doom' and pissing on someone's Cheerios, but I'm just clueing him on what he's in for.

Sounds like she is thinking 100% about herself and no one else. Kids included. She doesn't have the right to keep them away from their father. If she has any heart at all she'll see that she must compromise. I'll tell you something else too: most mothers at this point don't care about how much it hurts the kids either. They're sure to have people around them that will somehow justify what they're doing, and will be told that "hey, lots of kids grow up without Dads. They'll be OK." To mothers in this state of mind it becomes a mixture of revenge/getting their rocks off from effing up a guy's life, and the fact that they really believe keeping the kids away from this "awful man" is best for them. In the courts, if a judge starts meting out too much fairness to the fathers, they'll soon have a horde of women's rights groups breathing down their necks (like the National Organization of Women) who have vastly more political pull than do the very few, small men's groups to advocate for us. So a lot of judges are scared off even if they aren't self-serving assholes to begin with. It's not about fairness, justice, or how it impacts a kid's childhood in the long run. It's about money & power, ie politics, because "politics" = "who gets what". Believe me, I've been through this whole wringer so I know from what I speak.

Good luck, TU BE. You're going to need it with the new asshole you'll get ripped in Fam. Court. Here's the way it is: you can hire a lawyer and he/she will make you think they're out to help you, and promise in court they'll get you this, that, and the other. The FACT is however that they're out to extract maximum profit from your grieving, emotionally distraught carcass. They'll do the same to your wife but at least she'll probably have the kids in the end to show for it. The court, the law guardians, the therapists, child psychologists, etc. are all along for the ride because after all, it's their livelihood too and they don't want peeps actually working out their differences in a timely & fair manner. The family courts would have only maybe 1/3 the caseloads they have now if we all did that, and lots of these parasites might not have jobs very long. The unfortunate stats are that in about 93% of cases the mother ends up with full or controlling custody of the kids. You have to be just about an axe murderer as a mother to lose the kids. And getting joint or shared custody means the mom has to want to - and most of them don't once they discover they can shove it up your ass and break it off. There's a slight chance that you'd get a judge that isn't a self-important, sadistic Nazi. Good luck with that too. It's a big money-making industry, just like locking peeps up for years over a few joints or rocks or DWI. It's got very little to do with "what's best for the kids", because the system doesn't give a goddamn about YOUR kids - they're just another snot-nosed offspring of the hoi polloi and you're not members of The Big Club - so here's a hearty "{censored} You" coz it ain't THEIR kids. Unless it's going to somehow make them some money then they'll drag it out for as long as possible.