Should a kid be allowed to choose what parent they live with?

[antiabort]

I think that once a child is 14, they should be allowed to choose the parent they live with in the event of a divorce. At age 14 you are capable of making decisions such as this. I honestly think it is ridiculous that this isn't a law already...

[StoppingTime]

And why 14 exactly? You just like the number? And you know, it isn't always just that simple. Saying I want to live with one parent. What if the parent doesn't agree to it? Then what?

[antiabort]

And why 14 exactly? You just like the number? And you know, it isn't always just that simple. Saying I want to live with one parent. What if the parent doesn't agree to it? Then what?

In my opinion age 14 is when you are mature enough to make a decision like this, as you are likely in either 8th grade or a freshman in high school. And that is a good question, I never actually thought of that. I guess if the parent does not want you, then you go to the other one.

[StoppingTime]

I never actually thought of that. I guess if the parent does not want you, then you go to the other one.

OK, but doesn't that defeat the purpose of the entire law? Nothing would then be accomplished.

[antiabort]

OK, but doesn't that defeat the purpose of the entire law? Nothing would then be accomplished.

No, because not every case would have the parent not wanting the kid.

[StoppingTime]

No, because not every case would have the parent not wanting the kid.

Then how would this be managed? Would it be a court ruling? Would he ever have contact with the opposite parent?

[antiabort]

Then how would this be managed? Would it be a court ruling? Would he ever have contact with the opposite parent?

Yes it would be a court ruling, and if the kid and the other parent want to have contact, then of course they can.

[Jess]

Yes I think the child should be able to choose.

[BFG9001]

Choose, if both parents are acceptable candidates.

[Jupiter]

In the state of Indiana, once you are 12 you can.

[Neptune]

In California, you're allowed to tell the Judge what parent you rather live with, and, most of the time, the Judge grants what the teenager wants. However, giving the full power to a teen is not a very good idea in my opinion. The father or mother may be a horrible parent but the teen wants to live with them because they let them do whatever. There are times when the court must rule against the teenager.

[Tessa]

I think kids any age that can speak should be able to pick which parent they want to live with. It's human rights, honestly. Say there's a divorce, and the two have a child, a little six year old girl, let's say. What if the divorce is because of abuse towards, let's say the mother and the child, and the child can tell Daddy is a bad person for this abuse. Let's say the Mom is unemployed and still looking for a new residence, but the Dad has a well paying job and a nice home. If the judge wants the best for the child, I have a feeling he/she would send the child with the father. Is it right for the child to have no say in this and be sent off to an abusive father? Or have the damn rights to live with her rightful mother?

[anonymous53]

I'm going to have to argue one point of this, yes I believe that the child should be able to choose, but I do not believe putting an age on maturity ever works. I believe the child should have a one on one interview with the judge before choosing which parent they wanted to live with to determine the maturity and ability of the child to make such a decision.

[User Deleted]

I'm pretty sure that is how it works in alaska.

[Amaryllis]

What makes you think the parents want the kids?

[TheMatrix]

In my opinion age 14 is when you are mature enough to make a decision like this, as you are likely in either 8th grade or a freshman in high school. And that is a good question, I never actually thought of that. I guess if the parent does not want you, then you go to the other one.
There is a fine line between best decision and personal desires. And this is where that line gets blurred. Although you may prefer your father to live with, he may not want you. That leaves your mother. Say she hates you(for whatever reason). Then what?
Or you want to live with both, or neither of the parents. That would become a complicated situation.

[Sugaree]

No, I don't think the child has a choice here. What if they choose to live with the parent who has little to no means of being able to support them from month to month? As Thomas said, there's a fine line between a decision and personal desire.

[antiabort]

I think kids any age that can speak should be able to pick which parent they want to live with. It's human rights, honestly. Say there's a divorce, and the two have a child, a little six year old girl, let's say. What if the divorce is because of abuse towards, let's say the mother and the child, and the child can tell Daddy is a bad person for this abuse. Let's say the Mom is unemployed and still looking for a new residence, but the Dad has a well paying job and a nice home. If the judge wants the best for the child, I have a feeling he/she would send the child with the father. Is it right for the child to have no say in this and be sent off to an abusive father? Or have the damn rights to live with her rightful mother?

Cuz only men can be abusive.

[kenoloor]

I'm going to have to argue one point of this, yes I believe that the child should be able to choose, but I do not believe putting an age on maturity ever works. I believe the child should have a one on one interview with the judge before choosing which parent they wanted to live with to determine the maturity and ability of the child to make such a decision.

Agreed. However I think that, in addition to the child, the parents should both be interviewed to weed out any obviously unsuitable parents, financially unstable, blah blah blah, and a decision should be made from there.

In Illinois, I'm pretty sure that once a child is 12 they can alter the custody agreement, however I couldn't find anything to confirm that, so don't hold me to that.

[Tessa]

Cuz only men can be abusive.

Did I not say it was just an example?

[dead]

Did I not say it was just an example?

A very specific example.

[FullyAlive]

I'm pretty sure in most cases here the child is required to make some form of decision. And whilst that doesn't necessarily mean that that is the parent who will win it goes a long way. After all how many people would want to send a child to live with someone that they've explicitly asked not to live with.

Anyway as for what you're saying, again why 14? Surely everyone is different one fourteen year old may by fully capable of a decision of this magnitude whilst another may not be. Why not instead of an age, have a competency test, those who are competent have a say in the decision those who aren't don't. However no child should have the final decision there's a reason that they need a responsible adult after all, because they aren't necessarily capable of looking after their own interests.

[Tyler12]

I know how you fell im constantly telling people I don't want to see or Have a relationship with my dad

[danny7]

i think that is correct. But why 14??

in the case of divorce, a kid should be allowed to decide, but only if that parent he/she chooses is capable of handling a kid, and has no extreme criminal records that restrain him from being a good parent. But besides that, it should be left to decide between the kid and the parents, ppshh, the government getss wayyyy too involved in our personal lives

[dead]

i think that is correct. But why 14??

in the case of divorce, a kid should be allowed to decide, but only if that parent he/she chooses is capable of handling a kid, and has no extreme criminal records that restrain him from being a good parent. But besides that, it should be left to decide between the kid and the parents, ppshh, the government getss wayyyy too involved in our personal lives

Way too involved? Why do I feel as if you don't even completely understand. However I could easily be wrong, I'd just like to have you reinforce why you think that.

[Desuetude]

At 14 my step sister chose to go live with her dad but step brother stayed with his mum. I think that when a kid turns 14 they should be able to make their own desicion about who to live with especially if it's going to affect their life. I hope to live with my dad as i do alternate weeks at the moment and i hate it. It's nicer just to have somewhere where you feel safe whichever parent it is with.

[Stronger]

I would imagin the kid would go with there mom and if she can not take care of the child for whatever, then the child would go to the dad.(IMO)

[ImCoolBeans]

I live with my mom, which would be my personal choice - so I'm happy with that. But i have to agree with Thomas, if personal desire conflicts with the well being of the child then the child should not have the choice. You have to do what is best for the kid.

[mrmooers]

I live in Alabama and my parents divorced when i was 3 im 14 now and not once have i had the choice to choose who i live with and the reason is that the judge decided who i should live with based on who could take care of me the best and even though i sometimes wish i lived with my other parent i know that the judge chose the right parent.

[Efflorescence]

I think that the judge shouldn't base his decision solely upon the desire of the child but it should definitely be taken into consideration.

Which, as far as I'm concerned does not always take place. I've met many children who have been given over to the mother who is deeply unstable and their fathers had to pay a lot of money to gain custody of them. Sometimes, mothers are at an advantage because there's this stupid idea that the mother always knows what's best for her children which IS NOT the case.

[georgiamay]

At 14 my step sister chose to go live with her dad but step brother stayed with his mum. I think that when a kid turns 14 they should be able to make their own desicion about who to live with especially if it's going to affect their life. I hope to live with my dad as i do alternate weeks at the moment and i hate it. It's nicer just to have somewhere where you feel safe whichever parent it is with.

Well, I was 12 when I made the decision to live with my dad instead of my mum, and not once have I regretted that decision. You can't say that only when a child reaches 14 are they capable of making their own decisions. During childhood, we develop at such different rates, especially mentally. Some 14 year olds are extremely mature, whereas others are immature and wouldn't understand they decisions they're making. If I could make the decision when I was 12, there are others that could do that too, and some people might be ready even younger, but some might not be ready until they're 15 or 16. With things like this, there can't be an absolute age restriction, as the maturity of the individual can vary greatly.

I would imagin the kid would go with there mom and if she can not take care of the child for whatever, then the child would go to the dad.(IMO)

Are you saying that this is what should happen, or what the child is more likely to want? This is most certainly what shouldn't happen. Fathers have the same rights as the mother once a child is born, and saying that the dad doesn't have as many rights to the child as the mother is inconsiderate and almost cruel in my opinion.

I think that the judge shouldn't base his decision solely upon the desire of the child but it should definitely be taken into consideration.

Which, as far as I'm concerned does not always take place. I've met many children who have been given over to the mother who is deeply unstable and their fathers had to pay a lot of money to gain custody of them. Sometimes, mothers are at an advantage because there's this stupid idea that the mother always knows what's best for her children which IS NOT the case.

Quick question: Why does there always have to be a judge involved? I don't want to keep bringing personal experience into this, but my parents divorced when I was 3/4, and they decided without a judge that they would split custody 50/50. I was with my dad 50% of the time, and my mum 50% of the time. My mum wasn't stable after the divorce, so I lived with my dad after her suicide attempt until she was better, which again, was a decision that was made without a judge. When I decided that I didn't want to spent 50% of the time with each parent and I wanted to live with my dad, although my mum wasn't happy with this decision and there was a lot of argueing, everyone decided that I was ready to make the decision, and I've been living with my dad for 4 years now. Again, throughout all of this, we didn't need to go to court.

My question is why does a judge always have to decide where a child lives? Surely the family can decide on their own what's best. I know family court sometimes is the best solution if the family can't come to decision themselves, but if they can why would going to court be used as anything other than a last resort? Surely a court would be a lot more stressful on the child.