 Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher  Not at all.
Legal custody of a living child is a far different scenario from deciding whether it should live or die. | The ruling had nothing to do with 'custody' except for the fact that it removed the non-custodial parents 'right' to file suit on the child's behalf. FOR ANY REASON!
After this decision, non-custodial parents have no more legal standing to file suit on the child's behalf than does their next door neighbor.
So if YOUR child, in the custody of your ex-whatever develops a life threatening disease, your ex has the right to decide whether or not to continue treatment, or let the child die, and YOU have no legal standing to object.
This decision came about regarding a First Amendment challenge by a father who objected to the school that his child, in the custody of the mother, was attending. The USSC ruled that he, since he didn't have 'majority custody', didn't have legal standing to file suit. The legal ramifications of this decision, as relates to abortion, went right over the heads of most people. After all, who has 'majority custody' of a fetus?
Bother not the cat. For they are sneaky and will piss on thy keyboard. |