Most people take time and review the fine print when making a big purchase in life. Whether that is a car, house or college education they don’t just rush into a purchase of such importance without ample time to review and ponder. Yet that’s what many parents are pressured, and at times threatened, to do in the hallways of courthouses throughout our country on decisions that impact the lives of our children and our own future well-being. In the hallways of justice dealing with custody and divorce, judges and lawyers apply pressure towards parents to settle cases based on the “wheeling and dealing” done between court players via the hallway shuttling process. All of this while folks are rushed to meet the timetable and schedule of a judge waiting to proceed through a busy docket.
On the surface, these situations seem to unfold smoothly when observed by an outside viewer or entity. Whereby what plays out before the court, on record, is an aesthetically pleasing image that conforms to a neatly scripted resolution.
This is done by design and intentionally keeps everything that transpires, both leading up to and in the hallways of the court, in obscurity. Too often fathers, as well as mothers, endure a far different reality. It is the details within the “obscurity” that illustrate the culpability of the court environment in creating situations where good parents are hurt, and a child’s well-being and best interest come second to that of the court and its players “appearance” and “conduct” looking picturesque.
In reality, many parents experience disingenuous and fraudulent motion practice for months and even years prior to a hearing or court hallway encounter. All while being subjected to financial hardship as a direct result of court actions and, many times, disingenuous litigation playing out.
When a parent is sometimes dealing with an opposing party with deep pockets, compromised ethics, and a lot of skin in the game put into false allegations they often use money and litigation as weapons to pressure and force situations to procure outcomes favorable for themselves but adverse to the child and other parent. When this becomes clear, the picture becomes more in focus as to how an “agreement” is reached, or rather procured, and under what type of conditions, or rather threats, it happens.
A parent then finds themselves in front of the Judge where the true irony unfolds when they are made to swear things before the court in the vior dire process, most notably uttering the phrase that one is not under threat in agreeing to the settlement presented before the court. Thus what is structured in a hallway, and given a “wink and nod” by a system that values appearance over truth, many parents and children become victims of a system as opposed to having it protect basic rights.
While justice is said to be blind in its courts, it certainly is not when inside the realm of custody and divorce cases….and in its hallways it is altogether void.
RELATED ARTICLES BY STEPHEN KRASNER