Ex-Gay Watch

This is silly. Either she takes the post-gay route and removes Janet from her daughter’s life (seeing as she has no biological connection whatsoever) or she keeps her in her life (which in some sense validates the previous existence of the Civil Union). But this seems to be a case of having the best of both worlds.

Peter+

I think your comment about “having the best of both worlds” is a bit insensitive, however your comment is based on a faulty premise. At least in the US, a spouse need not have a biological connection to a child in order to be held responsible for it’s welfare after the marriage is dissolved. Child support is for the benefit of the child as the term implies. That support is being ordered here simply treats the civil union as seriously as a marriage bond, with all the responsibilities that come with.

To do otherwise would come closer to your “best of both worlds” description in my opinion.

Regardless of how the courts rule, I can’t even imagine what kind of dysfunctional horror this poor kid is going to go through. Not only is this woman robbing her child of having her other mother, it is likely that she will have to put up with mommy and her friends’ constant character-assassination of her other closest family member. Just another unfortunate mishap which occurred in the name of religious politics. Pray for this young one.

This is a very young little one. And child support and monetary comfort are one thing.

But the parent child bond…to hear the same factions tell it, is what is MOST sacred.
The ability for both the parent and child to continue to see each other for the sake of emotional security and affection.

The reason why it’s a lot stickier and more difficult, is that an advocate group like Liberty doesn’t respect the GAY parent child bond.
They don’t want to recognize that gay parents would have the same affection, sense of duty, need for socializing and application of their duty to their child they went to a LOT of trouble to have.

They work hard to destroy exclusively, gay parent/child bonds.
That the former lover is now ‘ex gay’ gives weight to the suspicion that she IS denigrating the other parent to the child.
That the other parent is less desirable, as caring or loving as the now supposedly straight parent.

And isolating this child from the other, would make the child feel that this is so, without revealing of course, that the law and social network is making this happen, and not the co parent.

This is cruel, not only to the little one, but to her other parent.
And a clear example of not what’s best for the child, but how to be detrimental and destructive to gay people.

As nonseq speculates, and I can attest to from personal experience, if the Religious Reich has its way, the child will suffer the most. In my case, as I have stated before, the custodial parent absconded to Missouri, filed for divorce and attempted to keep me from having even phone and letter contact with my two boys. She lost in court, but defied the court and got away with it until money ran out for me, and she had succeeded in alienating both of the boys.

The effect on both boys was dramatic. My eldest became suicidally depressed, and the custodial parent, with fundy doc assistance, started stuffing psychotropic medications down his throat since he was six years old (rather than re-unite him with the non-custodial parent). Today, after dropping out of high school his senior year, he is still not functional, still unstable over ten years later.

The younger boy was similarly “medicated” and has deep anger issues; ten years later he is in danger of failing out from school and has substance abuse issues.

I was never able to gain phone contact and letters were routinely intercepted. PArents who are have physically abused their children often get at least supervised visitation. I got nothing.

Oh, and for all this, I had to pay tens of thousands of dollars for child support (not to mention the legal fees). The ADF aided the custodial parent.

So yes, pray for the child, and for the non-custodial PARENT. The custodial parent sounds like she is willing to destroy the child in order to score points in this divorce war. The fundies aiding her care nothing for the best interests of the child, they just want to use this case to punish other GLBT parents. Anti-christians.

Sharon, haven’t we had a discussion about using terms such as “Religious Reich” and “fundies” before? I understand that you are relaying painful events, but they have more impact when not associated with slurs.  If we let terms like that start flying, there will be little useful debate and fewer people to participate.  Thanks for your help, and I’m very sorry for your pain.

Sorry, forgot
Feel free to edit.

Got carried away with concern for those involved.

“So yes, pray for the child, and for the non-custodial PARENT. The custodial parent sounds like she is willing to destroy the child in order to score points in this divorce war.”

When I came out, my wife hired an attorney to try to get severe limitations on my contact with my daughter. My wife had her entire church praying 24/7 that I would lose. Eventually, the judge felt if he ordered such restrictions our daughter would be the one to “lose” — and (praise God)threw out the restrictions.

These are truly sad stories. That’s all I can say.

My heart goes out truly, to you parents that lost the best years of your lives with your children.
I never had them. But I am still going through a protracted and painful divorce.
I have lost the relationship I had with nieces and nephews on my ex husband’s side…neither me, nor my two other siblings has any children.

It pains me to see human beings who were once a couple, or parents to children treat each other with about as much tenacity as they would an old pair of shoes.
Not even sentimental value registers as much sometimes in such instances.

But children AREN’T a matter of sentiment, they are a temporary relationship in the best of times, that is the nature of the short time you have to form them as adults.

Now, I’m glad I never had children with my ex husband.

The damage to have been done that to a child would have plagued me all the rest of my years, as I see it’s done to you here, my friends.

The only situation in which it makes sense to require child support from a parent who is not allowed visitation rights is if the parent in question is/was abusive. Since this doesn’t seem to be the case (we’d've probably heard about it by now if it was), how *is* the custodial mother legally justifying her case? The Virginia court– the court the plaintiffs seem to want this fought in– doesn’t recognize the Vermont civil union, nor is Janet M-J a biological parent, so on what legal basis would she be required to pay child support?

It almost seems designed as a punitive action filed to make the non-custodial mother literally have to “pay” for her basic rights as a parent, or even give up altogether out of inability to pay the ongoing legal costs.

You are all misunderstanding the logic of the situation. You seem to think that this has something to do with what is in the best interest of the child and that the custodial mother is equating parenting (and thus visitation) with parenting (and thus child support).

You think there’s some inconsistency. There isn’t. You just have to think like this:

“We have to fight the evil homosexual militant activist agenda. She’s a homo, a homo I tell ya and so she should be kept far far away from children.

And she’s a homo, a homo I tell ya and so she should have to pay everything she has and ever will make to our client.

We’re fighting that evil militant extremist radical socialist godless homosexual agenda on behalf of this good Christian former lesbian (she ain’t no homo no more) so send your checks today. Dig deep. We need your support. Cash your social security, drain your retirement fund, send it all today so we can keep fighting for good Christians against the evil homosexual agenda.

ps. she’s a homo and we’re gunna take every cent she has

pps. God says dig deeper and give more. Remember she’s a homo and we’re afightin her.”

See. If you understand the logic, it’s all consistent and very easy. You simply look at anything at anytime involving anyone gay and take the opposite position.

I understand what you are saying Timothy (and Mike). I agree that in this instance the child support is probably punishment for the spouse’s efforts to retain rights.  And definitely, the anti-gay crowd has latched on hard.  However, my point is that gay marriages, or in this case civil unions, should carry with them all the rights and responsibilities of traditional marriages, even the unpleasant ones. If indeed this is punitive and not for the support of the child, then I hope the court rules against it. But this could very well happen in similar fashion to a husband and wife heading for divorce.

Whatever the outcome, it should not be decided on the basis of the type of union they had, but on the welfare of the child as with any other marriage. It just so happens that this is a crummy example, but how many similar scenes play out day in and day out in family court all over this country as a result of the nearly 50% of traditional marriages which fail every year?

This is a divorce/custody battle. They can be notoriously ugly, particulary if one or both of the parents involved can’t see beyond their own interests to the best interests of the child.

There is also the well known tactic of trying to go from one juristiction to another that might be more friendly to one of the parents interest. This tactic has been tried for years and courts are pretty consistent that the original state court has juristiction. It is interesting in that it is a lesbian couple, where the custodial parent has fled the state that has juristiction to an anti-gay state, but so far Virginia has decided that they are going to stick with well established precedent and defer to Vermont in the matter.

There is also the alleged ex-gay status of the parent in Virginia. However, her status as ex-gay in Virginia is just too self serving in her appearance before Virginia courts and getting a rabidly anti-gay law firm to take on the costs of her legal battle. Her personal and economic interests benefit so much from this claim that it would be hard to believe she has truely undergone any change other that losing her attraction for her former partner in Vermont.

Ugly custody battles are notorious for lies, dirty tactics, and vindictiveness, making one skeptical of all the parties involved. This one just has the lesbian/ex-gay twist.

It’s just sad. So sad. Here is a person doing everything in her power to hurt someone that she once loved. And not just to hurt. She obviously wants to disembowel her ex. But in the long run, it’s the child who will suffer. My lover’s ex wife is a drug addict, schitzophrenic. We are raising their only daughter. Brooke’s mother hasn’t contacted her in 5 years. Brooke is nearly nine. Scott and I decided that for Brooke’s sake, the only thing we will tell her about her mother is that she is sick. That’s why she hasn’t contacted her. That’s why she hasn’t visited. Until she gets older and can comprehend addiction. I wonder what this woman is telling her child about her ex. It’s just sad. You should always put the child above your own need for vengence.

Never thought I would write this sentence, but…

I agree with Peter O. *and* Regan DuCasse.

SharonB, I am *so* sorry you’ve dealt with something similar. Love gone sour is awful no matter what genders are involved, and shame on the Liberty Counsel for taking advantage of this. I believe in my heart the LC would be tempted to take the case of a straight man who mugged a gay one!

Incidentally, for more on the LC’s kind of “morality”, see what they think of Gardasil for young women.

Thanks, Jayelle.

Regan, I feel your pain, no joke for real. No winners in divorce wars.

Mike, it seems then the support order was for spite, but then on second thought, they didn’t want to legitimize the relationship. Just a litigation tactic to rattle the other party (aka, torture).

You can see why I pray daily that the ADF and LC and other hate groups go bankrupt so they can’t destroy any more people.

It is bad enough that this couple broke up with a young child in the mix.
But ONLY the anti gay would exploit it, turn it into a crusade and slam on gay relationships and exact the harshest of their judgement on the gay person who doesn’t become conveniently ex gay.

There was a time when a mixed couple like me and my husband made a statement. But insensitivity on any level can sink something that was likely fragile to begin with.

We didn’t marry to make a statement. I was in love, and for the first time in my life.
But the anti gay don’t believe in gay love. It’s discouraged and destroyed at every opportunity…even the love of a child.

I submit that mixed couples and gay couples certainly have similar slings and arrows to endure.
And there are some who do a dance when what love they say isn’t there, truly dies.

I have to wonder at the quality of people who can do that. Express the intent to do what they can to hurt love, and work harder to create a war like divorce, than a peaceful and supportive marriage.
LC and groups they support, aren’t perfect in their wisdom.
But are SO arrogant to never believe that they do MORE HARM than good.

Do they see something good in this tug of war over a child?
Are they pleased to see the non custodial lesbian mother in pain?
For WHAT PURPOSE is this? For whose favor do they think this will better THEIR lives?

Do they have a roster of whose children benefitted from hurting the gay parents?
Did they think THEY could do a BETTER job of raising the child as if she had no memory of her other mother?
Or shouldn’t have any?

This is mind blowing cruelty, exacted for nothing of tangibility and positive reinforcement.
Yeah, when those who interfered with this family and made it harder for these women to stay together and be with their little one…are they looking for medals and accolades and ‘well done’?

When I was four, my mother was stricken with an aneurysm. I remember vividly when it happened. How the adults acted around me. And the last time I saw my mother alive in the hospital.

If these people think this little girl won’t or shouldn’t remember her other mother…and work to erase what she had with her from her life.
That is perfect in it’s absolute evil intent.
And obviously they care not, nor will they be around for the consequences of such a thing.