Mandatory pregnancy, abortion adoption thread

[momotobananaoishii]

yeah and if you don't get married or you do get married and divorce you certainly won't get the kid from J gov anyway so what's the diff?

Isn't that the same as 1/2 an abortion? I mean you'll never see the kid again.

[kamome]

The problem with women (in the North America at least) is that when it comes to rights, they want to have their cake and eat it too.

How about this for having your cake and eating it too?

New York Lawyer: Mother convicted of killing child in alcoholic rage can still get alimony under New Jersey law

You might have to register to get the article, so here it is in full:

Mother Convicted of Kicking Son to Death Can Still Seek Alimony From Bereaved Father

New York Lawyer
November 29, 2007
Reprints & Permissions

By Charles Toutant
New Jersey Law Journal

Fatally beating a child in an alcoholic rage does not reach the level of fault that would justify ineligibility for alimony under New Jersey law, a state appeals court has ruled.

"Nothing . . . prevents the Legislature from amending the alimony statute to specify that a former spouse's criminal act in taking the life of one of the parties' children per se disqualifies the ex-spouse from receiving alimony. But we do not read the present statute nor the analogous case law to create that automatic disqualification," a three-judge panel said in Calbi v. Calbi, A-5053-05.

The ruling permits Linda Calbi, who pleaded guilty to second-degree aggravated assault for a violent altercation that caused the death of her son, to reapply for alimony after her anticipated release from prison in November 2008.

However, the decision also allows Christopher Calbi, the child's father, to introduce evidence that the impact of the death resulted in an economic change of circumstances such that his ability to pay alimony was prevented or hindered.

The ruling clarifies and extends a 2005 state Supreme Court holding that New Jersey will not let noneconomic fault affect alimony except in "egregious circumstances": such as a spouse arranging for the other's killing or deliberately infecting the other with a deadly disease. Such conduct "by its very nature is so outrageous that it can be said to violate the social contract, such that society would not abide continuing the economic bonds between the parties," the Court said in Mani v. Mani, 183 N.J. 70.

Calbi is the first reported appellate case to apply the Mani doctrine to a situation of domestic violence against a child of the marriage. "We hold that in the factual complex of this case Linda's conduct, dreadful as it was, does not fit the Mani standard for non-economic 'egregious circumstances' sufficient to deprive her of needed support," said Judges Donald Collester Jr., Edwin Stern and Jack Sabatino in their Nov. 21 opinion.

Christopher and Linda Calbi were divorced in 2001 after 15 years of marriage. According to the opinion, Linda was an active and violent alcoholic who also abused prescription drugs. Following an overdose on both substances in April 2003, she entered rehabilitation and her two children, aged 14 and 9, were put in the custody of their father, Christopher. When she was released, the children visited her on weekends.

On a weekend visit in August 2003, Matthew, 14, and Linda got into an argument after she drank an entire bottle of brandy. It became a physical fight and Matthew was hospitalized with kick-inflicted wounds to the head and neck. The neck wound was discovered to be internal bleeding from the right subclavian artery. Emergency surgery showed bleeding in the internal jugular and subclavian veins and a tear in the mid-subclavian artery. Matthew bled to death.

To quote AK, this is BULLSHIT.

[james]

Christopher and Linda Calbi were divorced in 2001 after 15 years of marriage. According to the opinion, Linda was an active and violent alcoholic who also abused prescription drugs. Following an overdose on both substances in April 2003, she entered rehabilitation and her two children, aged 14 and 9, were put in the custody of their father, Christopher. When she was released, the children visited her on weekends.

did no one anywhere think that perhaps unsupervised visitations with someone who has a known and prolonged history of substance abuse and violence might not be a good idea? rehab or not, she was a danger to the well-being of her kids.

i feel really bad for the kids and father; imagine losing your brother or son like that. that he has to pay this child-beating whore addict alimony is yet another slap in the face by a so-called "justice" system grossly biased against men in divorce and custody cases.

[kamome]

[quote="james"]did no one anywhere think that perhaps unsupervised visitations with someone who has a known and prolonged history of substance abuse and violence might not be a good idea? rehab or not, she was a danger to the well-being of her kids.

i feel really bad for the kids and father]

Yeah, I don't know why she still had visitation rights. It's a horrible outcome at all levels.