In my recent blog post If there were ever a guy in a no-win situation, it’s James Rhoades, I discussed the James Rhoades case. Ned Holstein tackles this difficult case in his new blog post Sanctity of Marriage, or Discrimination Against Dads? Holstein writes:
“James Rhoades had an affair with a married woman, from which a child resulted. For three months, the married mother allowed Rhoades to visit the child secretly, and he wanted to help raise the child. Then she cut him off, and he went to court. Near the end of April, the Kentucky Supreme Court decided that he had no parental rights, despite DNA proof of his fatherhood. Thus, he will have no custody rights, or visitation, or even knowledge about the child, nor will he have to pay child support. To read the full news article, click here.
“The Court struggled with this case, deciding it by a mere 4 to 3 vote in which 5 of the 7 justices wrote separate opinions. That’s not surprising, as the case will fracture the opinions of readers here as well.
“This case is like a hologram, which looks entirely different depending on the angle from which you view it.
“One way to look at gender-related law is to ask yourself, ‘How would this decision look if the sexes were reversed?’
Read Holstein’s answer and the full blog post here. Rhoades is pictured with his son above.
|
Rate this post:
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Stumble It!
