Custody: (n) the right to provide residence, protection, care, and education of a minor child or children, especially in a divorce
We think we’re wiser than Solomon.
It was this King, who was embroiled in a battle between two mothers who claimed the same baby, who decided to determine which mother loved the child and which woman just loved being dubbed “a mother.”
He dramatically threatened to cut the baby in half and give an equal share to each Mommy.
Unbelievable as it may seem, one of the women agreed to it, while the other immediately abandoned her claim to ensure the safety of the little one.
Not in today’s courts.
We are thoroughly convinced that a child can be emotionally and even physically divided between two households, and benefit by having “even more people to love him or her.”
How audacious we are.
How arrogant our reasoning.
It’s all based upon the fact we haven’t learned how to pick a good mate nor how to reside with one another. Therefore, the children must suffer our childishness, while we whisper to them, “Both Mommy and Daddy love you.” Then we fight like cats and dogs in court to prove that we are the better parent.
I have no intention of offering a solution which can be shot down by the cynical pundits of the present fiasco.
I’m just stating aloud that joint custody of a child will teach him or her that a certain amount of hypocrisy is permitted, or maybe even necessary, to prolong human relationships.