The problem is the elimination of “fault” and the use of the term “no fault.” We all know that in many, many cases, where the best interests of all parties concerned would be best served by the establishment of “fault,” it is not, and jurisdictions use the cop-out “we’re only concerned with the well-being of the children.” That is absolutely absurd. If you place the children in the hands of the parent who demonstrated to those very children a complete lack of morality, loyalty, honor, dignity, or any other worthwhile human virtue, you are doing an absolutely devastating disservice to them. I won’t even mention the lesson you are teaching them by your incompetence and inaction, nor the humiliation and injustice you put the parent through who maintained his/her moral compass and kept the moral “high-ground.
We have to re-establish “fault,” so that those deserving of support, get it. Should a husband who commits adultery on his wife and kids have to give her a large portion of his retirement? Hell yes. When roles are reversed, and she is the disloyal and dishonorable one, should she benefit from the fruits of her husband’s labor? Hell no. Are there extenuating circumstances and other considerations that make it necessary to treat these things case-by-case? Yes. Is giving custody to the one who commits immoral acts just? No, but it happens every day.
What does all this spell? F-A-U-L-T. We have to go back to the days of establishing fault, or else we will never be able to use the word “fair” again.
No comments:
Post a Comment