re: lawyers of the OT...dating and divorce

Why would a judge be upset toward someone who is seeing a new woman, after he has filed and is not bringing said woman around his kid? I mean is it against the law or not?....the guy seeing a new woman will not affect the kid if he isnt seeing her during his custodial times...doesnt make sense

quote:

---

When a man, for example, has filed for divorce but not divorced yet in louisiana, can he begin to see other women or date another woman during his none custodial days?

---

Only if you were dating here before you split up with your wife

He isn't seeing anyone to my knowledge, I was just trying to prove a point to him...in the event he starts to...

quote:

---

Was told that seeing other people doesnt affect custody, only alimony

---

I wouldn't know if that's the case or not, my experience is with Missouri law and up here, that's the way it works. Unfortunately I can't offer further insight with that, but you probably realized that the O-T is not a legitimate source of legal advice.

To put it bluntly, seeing another woman cannot possibly be a benefit, and likely will harm the divorce proceedings, the father-child relationship, the spousal relationship, and quite possibly the relationship with the new woman.

Unless the woman in question is Selma Hayek, the potential for reward involved is certainly not worth the potential for harm.

That's the best I can offer. It's neither illegal nor ethical.

Just going to leave this here and hope your friend makes the right decision.

quote:

---

The court shall consider all relevant factors in determining the best interest of the child. Such factors may include:
(1) The love, affection, and other emotional ties between each party and the child.
(2) The capacity and disposition of each party to give the child love, affection, and spiritual guidance and to continue the education and rearing of the child.
(3) The capacity and disposition of each party to provide the child with food, clothing, medical care, and other material needs.
(4) The length of time the child has lived in a stable, adequate environment, and the desirability of maintaining continuity of that environment.
(5) The permanence, as a family unit, of the existing or proposed custodial home or homes.
(6) The moral fitness of each party, insofar as it affects the welfare of the child.
(7) The mental and physical health of each party.
(8) The home, school, and community history of the child.
(9) The reasonable preference of the child, if the court deems the child to be of sufficient age to express a preference.
(10) The willingness and ability of each party to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing relationship between the child and the other party.
(11) The distance between the respective residences of the parties.
(12) The responsibility for the care and rearing of the child previously exercised by each party. Acts 1988, No. 817, §2, eff. July 18, 1988; Acts 1990, No. 361, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1991; Acts 1993, No. 261, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1994.

---

Article 134

I'm not a lawyer but have been thru a divorce and discussed this with my attorney. In my case, the ex wife is the one who filed and we had 50/50 custody until our divorce hearing, which came 9 months after we split. At the time, a couple had to live apart 6 months before divorce was final. What my attorney told me was to not bring another woman around my kids under any circumstances but that I could not be held legally responsible for adultery after papers were filed by the ex seeking divorce. My kids were young at the time so it wasn't hard to keep them away from anyone I was romantically involved with. And I kept things on the DL so the ex never even knew if I was seeing anyone. The only risk would be an ultra conservative judge who would hold you morally responsible because in the eyes of God, you are still married until the divorce is final. It all worked out well for me though because my ex was such a psychotic bitch that she kept the judge pissed off at her. The biggest thing to consider is the welfare of the kids. Don't be bringing a bunch of women (or even one woman) around them while they're going thru an emotionally trying time. It will confuse them and could breed resentment.

Yeah he's better off gettin a prostitute for an evening than having some strange woman hanging around the house all day.

quote:

---

odd on how attorneys have differing opinions...

---

Not that odd. Hell, Judges have differing opinions. That's why appeals happen.

Glad he's making the right decision for himself and his child. Not considering the effect on the child, he'll be happier in a new relationship without the pending divorce hanging over his head.

No chance for reconciliation? Maybe if he puts the effort into pursuing his soon to be ex wife he can save it?

quote:

---

That said if he's worried about adverse pub he shouldn't because that's often used in settlement negotiations against him

---

really doesn't factor in, in "no fault," (bullshite term if I've ever heard one,) none of that shite matters, the court is biased in favor of the one possessing a vag, but getting laid not only helps clear a man's head(s), but helps him start moving forward, Lord knows the about to be ex has turned into the village bicycle by this point, just be cool around the kids with it, but you don't necessarily have to hide it, just don't flaunt it