Top of the News

Chosen and ranked by Crosscut editors. Click date for previous days.

Mouse over headline for description.

more top of the news

Advertisement

Advertisement

The Crosscut Blog »

Dec 7, 2007 4:00 AM | last updated Dec 10, 2007 9:15 AM
Advertisement
Advertisement

In divorce, money trumps care-giving

By Carolyn McConnell

The Washington Supreme Court ruled Thursday, Dec. 6, that there is no right to a state-funded attorney during divorce. Brenda King couldn't afford a lawyer, but her husband, Michael King, could. No surprise: He got custody of the couple's children, even though she had provided the majority of care up to that point.

King's case is typical. "The person who can afford an attorney, and a good attorney, in a custody case is much more likely to win," says Ken Saukas, founder of Divorce Attorneys for Women. And having more money itself makes a parent more attractive to a judge.

The result? Because of the wage gap between men and women — and the much wider wage gap between mothers and fathers — when a man asks for custody, the majority of the time he receives it.

Ominously, as the Northwest Women's Law Center wrote in its amicus brief supporting King's case, studies have found that men who have committed domestic violence are particularly likely to contest custody — and therefore to receive it. King claimed that her husband was abusive. (He, in turn, claimed she was mentally unfit.) This made another strike against her: Ragen Rasnic, a partner at the Seattle law firm Skellenger Bender, who wrote the amicus brief, says that lawyers typically advise women not to allege abuse in their divorces, because it tends to bias judges against them.

King may have lost not only her kids but her claim to Social Security. King had been married for 10 years. Unless it was at least 10 years, she gets no Social Security benefits based on her marriage, and if she was out of the workforce while caring for those children, she wasn't accruing any Social Security benefits in her own right.

State Supreme Court: majority opinion, concurrence, dissenting opinion

  • Carolyn McConnell is a former magazine editor whose writing has been published in Seattle Metropolitan, Yes! magazine, the Iowa Review, Orion, and elsewhere. She is working on a book about the politics of motherhood. You can reach her in care of editor@crosscut.com.
Comments
income and care giving
Report a violationPosted by: PJS on Dec 7, 2007 10:21 AM
Your post would be more compelling if you presented some data re income levels and care giving. You assert, without backup data, that "having more money itself makes a parent more attractive to a judge."

While I have no data, it is intuitive to me that a single parent with more economic resources is likely to be able to provide his/her children with better resources --- educational, health, etc. --- than a poorer single parent. If this is true, one could make a policy argument that a court in a custody proceeding should have a preference to award custody to the parent with greater economic resources, as this is more likely than not to be in the best interests of the child.

If you disagree with this policy argument, it would be great to hear why, and to see some data supporting your argument.
RE: income and care giving
Report a violationPosted by: oreodog on Dec 9, 2007 6:55 AM
while it makes sense to assume that a parent with greater financial means to raise a child will look better to a judge faced with a custody decision, it takes a lot more than money to raise a child, as everyone knows. that's why judges look at all relevant factors, such as the emotional ties existing between the parent and the child, parenting skills, etc. the problem is that without a good attorney, even a clearly competent mom can (and often does) lose out to a clearly controlling and abusive dad. my experience as a divorce attorney strongly suggests that abusive men are much more likely to seek custody than other men, and when they do so, are more likely to win, particularly when the woman is at an economic disadvantage. I've also seen plenty of cases where the cost of litigation simply wears the woman down over time. having the state pay attorneys to represent disadvantaged women in custody cases would help judges make better decisions. it would also save the parties and court system a lot of money over time by discouraging abusive men from seeking custody in the first place.
RE: income and care giving
Report a violationPosted by: PJS on Dec 10, 2007 12:04 PM
I understand your point re income and other factors relating to child rearing, even though I may not agree.

I fundamentally disagree that the government should bail people out of circumstances that they create. A couple chooses to get married, chooses to have children and chooses to divorce. Yet you want me (a taxpayer) to pay one (or both) of them some of my hard earned dollars because these choices of theirs did not work out?

The Wash Supreme Court said there is no existing right to such funding, but left the door open for the legislature to fund such a program. That is the proper role of the courts --- not to make policy while purporting to search around for "rights" in the state constitution. This taxpayer will implore his legislators to not spend tax dollars by funding such a program, particularly when such necessary things as the new 520 bridge and Alaskan Way viaduct are unfunded and/or unbuilt.
AFFORD A LAWYER
Report a violationPosted by: kieth on Dec 9, 2007 5:37 PM
"Brenda King couldn't afford a lawyer, but her husband, Michael King, could. "

From what I saw on Channel 23 that assertion was not "part of the record". It was discussed and left unresolved because there was no evidence or recorded claim that Mrs. King could not afford a lawyer. So I am wondering.... are you speculating or do you know something that was not in evidence?
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign up for Crosscut's free weekday newsletter e-mail.
About Crosscut
Advertising Info
Crosscut's list of RSS feeds.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement


About Crosscut »
Crosscut Seattle is an online newspaper for the Pacific Northwest, including Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and British Columbia. It's a guide to local and regional news, a place to report and discuss news, and a platform for new tools to convey news.

• More about Crosscut

Contact Crosscut

Tools

Sign up for Crosscut's daily newsletter
About Crosscut
Advertising Info
Crosscut's list of RSS feeds.
Advertisement