Worried about my children

deniselep wrote:I have a custody case pending in Santa Rosa County and while I was Googling the courts and judges, particularly Judge Marci Goodman, I ran across this:

http://www.fightingfathersofdistrict1.com

What I read sort of scared me...does anyone know anything about this ? My kids mean everything to me.

Dreamsglore wrote:

deniselep wrote:I have a custody case pending in Santa Rosa County and while I was Googling the courts and judges, particularly Judge Marci Goodman, I ran across this:

http://www.fightingfathersofdistrict1.com

What I read sort of scared me...does anyone know anything about this ? My kids mean everything to me.

I feel sorry for you having a custody case in Santa Rosa County. Marci Goodman is renowned for her poor rulings. She is especially hard on substance abuse and poor mothers. I remember years ago they did an article on how many poor people lost their children to adoption really simply because they were poor and didn't have the means to fight the system,namely, Children & Families in SRC. You couldn't have a worse county for custody cases.

deniselep wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

deniselep wrote:I have a custody case pending in Santa Rosa County and while I was Googling the courts and judges, particularly Judge Marci Goodman, I ran across this:

http://www.fightingfathersofdistrict1.com

What I read sort of scared me...does anyone know anything about this ? My kids mean everything to me.

I feel sorry for you having a custody case in Santa Rosa County. Marci Goodman is renowned for her poor rulings. She is especially hard on substance abuse and poor mothers. I remember years ago they did an article on how many poor people lost their children to adoption really simply because they were poor and didn't have the means to fight the system,namely, Children & Families in SRC. You couldn't have a worse county for custody cases.

That's what I was afraid of - I don't have any substance abuse issues, but I am poor and can't afford an attorney...on the other hand , my ex always shows up with an attorney in tow.

Dreamsglore wrote:

deniselep wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

deniselep wrote:I have a custody case pending in Santa Rosa County and while I was Googling the courts and judges, particularly Judge Marci Goodman, I ran across this:

http://www.fightingfathersofdistrict1.com

What I read sort of scared me...does anyone know anything about this ? My kids mean everything to me.

I feel sorry for you having a custody case in Santa Rosa County. Marci Goodman is renowned for her poor rulings. She is especially hard on substance abuse and poor mothers. I remember years ago they did an article on how many poor people lost their children to adoption really simply because they were poor and didn't have the means to fight the system,namely, Children & Families in SRC. You couldn't have a worse county for custody cases.

That's what I was afraid of - I don't have any substance abuse issues, but I am poor and can't afford an attorney...on the other hand , my ex always shows up with an attorney in tow.

I
He is fightng you for custody? Does he have any issues on you that could affect it?

gulfbeachbandit wrote:If he has the money to provide a good home with two adults to raise the children and you have neither of those, why would you want custody?
Think about what's best for the children.

deniselep wrote:

gulfbeachbandit wrote:If he has the money to provide a good home with two adults to raise the children and you have neither of those, why would you want custody?
Think about what's best for the children.

What's "best" for the children is to have "both" parents in their lives, and I never said that I did not have a good home. Perhaps we should auction YOUR kids off to the highest bidder who makes more money than you do ...wouldn't that be 'best' for THEM ?

And, I don't want full custody, just for it to remain as it is , equal joint rotating.

Your comment was hurtful, uninformed and shallow.

deniselep wrote:

gulfbeachbandit wrote:If he has the money to provide a good home with two adults to raise the children and you have neither of those, why would you want custody?
Think about what's best for the children.

What's "best" for the children is to have "both" parents in their lives, and I never said that I did not have a good home. Perhaps we should auction YOUR kids off to the highest bidder who makes more money than you do ...wouldn't that be 'best' for THEM ?

And, I don't want full custody, just for it to remain as it is , equal joint rotating.

Your comment was hurtful, uninformed and shallow.

deniselep wrote:

gulfbeachbandit wrote:If he has the money to provide a good home with two adults to raise the children and you have neither of those, why would you want custody?
Think about what's best for the children.

What's "best" for the children is to have "both" parents in their lives, and I never said that I did not have a good home. Perhaps we should auction YOUR kids off to the highest bidder who makes more money than you do ...wouldn't that be 'best' for THEM ?

And, I don't want full custody, just for it to remain as it is , equal joint rotating.

Your comment was hurtful, uninformed and shallow.

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

deniselep wrote:

gulfbeachbandit wrote:If he has the money to provide a good home with two adults to raise the children and you have neither of those, why would you want custody?
Think about what's best for the children.

What's "best" for the children is to have "both" parents in their lives, and I never said that I did not have a good home. Perhaps we should auction YOUR kids off to the highest bidder who makes more money than you do ...wouldn't that be 'best' for THEM ?

And, I don't want full custody, just for it to remain as it is , equal joint rotating.

Your comment was hurtful, uninformed and shallow.

He is a troll. Always has been on this forum. Your best bet is just to ignore him.

gulfbeachbandit wrote:If he has the money to provide a good home with two adults to raise the children and you have neither of those, why would you want custody?
Think about what's best for the children.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

gulfbeachbandit wrote:If he has the money to provide a good home with two adults to raise the children and you have neither of those, why would you want custody?
Think about what's best for the children.

That's BS, what makes you think MONEY solves everything? I think it should always be 50/50 unless there is an issue that makes it not allowable. Kids need constant contact with both of their biological parents.

deniselep wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

deniselep wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

deniselep wrote:I have a custody case pending in Santa Rosa County and while I was Googling the courts and judges, particularly Judge Marci Goodman, I ran across this:

http://www.fightingfathersofdistrict1.com

What I read sort of scared me...does anyone know anything about this ? My kids mean everything to me.

I feel sorry for you having a custody case in Santa Rosa County. Marci Goodman is renowned for her poor rulings. She is especially hard on substance abuse and poor mothers. I remember years ago they did an article on how many poor people lost their children to adoption really simply because they were poor and didn't have the means to fight the system,namely, Children & Families in SRC. You couldn't have a worse county for custody cases.

That's what I was afraid of - I don't have any substance abuse issues, but I am poor and can't afford an attorney...on the other hand , my ex always shows up with an attorney in tow.

I
He is fightng you for custody? Does he have any issues on you that could affect it?

Just money...he makes a lot more than I do. He has remarried and I have remained single. This was never an issue before he remarried but now he says that he wants the kids full time because he can provide a 'more stable home' with 'two parents' in it. I suspect the new wife has a has a good bit to do with this.

gulfbeachbandit wrote:

deniselep wrote:

gulfbeachbandit wrote:If he has the money to provide a good home with two adults to raise the children and you have neither of those, why would you want custody?
Think about what's best for the children.

What's "best" for the children is to have "both" parents in their lives, and I never said that I did not have a good home. Perhaps we should auction YOUR kids off to the highest bidder who makes more money than you do ...wouldn't that be 'best' for THEM ?

And, I don't want full custody, just for it to remain as it is , equal joint rotating.

Your comment was hurtful, uninformed and shallow.

Ain't nobody trying to take my kids away though.  I must have done something right.

Floridatexan wrote:If you're providing for your kids and you up to the present time have had an equitable arrangement, why should that arrangement be changed?  Has anything changed in your ability to care for your kids as you have been?  It seems to me that your husband is NOT considering the welfare of the kids in his decision to deprive them of their mother's time, attention, and love.

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

deniselep wrote:

gulfbeachbandit wrote:If he has the money to provide a good home with two adults to raise the children and you have neither of those, why would you want custody?
Think about what's best for the children.

What's "best" for the children is to have "both" parents in their lives, and I never said that I did not have a good home. Perhaps we should auction YOUR kids off to the highest bidder who makes more money than you do ...wouldn't that be 'best' for THEM ?

And, I don't want full custody, just for it to remain as it is , equal joint rotating.

Your comment was hurtful, uninformed and shallow.

He is a troll. Always has been on this forum. Your best bet is just to ignore him.

Joanimaroni wrote:

deniselep wrote:

gulfbeachbandit wrote:If he has the money to provide a good home with two adults to raise the children and you have neither of those, why would you want custody?
Think about what's best for the children.

What's "best" for the children is to have "both" parents in their lives, and I never said that I did not have a good home. Perhaps we should auction YOUR kids off to the highest bidder who makes more money than you do ...wouldn't that be 'best' for THEM ?

And, I don't want full custody, just for it to remain as it is , equal joint rotating.

Your comment was hurtful, uninformed and shallow.

When dealing with Judge Goodman...talk to her and let her know your feelings.

Dreamsglore wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

deniselep wrote:

gulfbeachbandit wrote:If he has the money to provide a good home with two adults to raise the children and you have neither of those, why would you want custody?
Think about what's best for the children.

What's "best" for the children is to have "both" parents in their lives, and I never said that I did not have a good home. Perhaps we should auction YOUR kids off to the highest bidder who makes more money than you do ...wouldn't that be 'best' for THEM ?

And, I don't want full custody, just for it to remain as it is , equal joint rotating.

Your comment was hurtful, uninformed and shallow.

When dealing with Judge Goodman...talk to her and let her know your feelings.

I don't think she can. You can't talk to judge w/ a case pending.

Joanimaroni wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

deniselep wrote:

gulfbeachbandit wrote:If he has the money to provide a good home with two adults to raise the children and you have neither of those, why would you want custody?
Think about what's best for the children.

What's "best" for the children is to have "both" parents in their lives, and I never said that I did not have a good home. Perhaps we should auction YOUR kids off to the highest bidder who makes more money than you do ...wouldn't that be 'best' for THEM ?

And, I don't want full custody, just for it to remain as it is , equal joint rotating.

Your comment was hurtful, uninformed and shallow.

When dealing with Judge Goodman...talk to her and let her know your feelings.

I don't think she can. You can't talk to judge w/ a case pending.

You can talk to her during the proceedings.

Dreamsglore wrote:

gulfbeachbandit wrote:

deniselep wrote:

gulfbeachbandit wrote:If he has the money to provide a good home with two adults to raise the children and you have neither of those, why would you want custody?
Think about what's best for the children.

What's "best" for the children is to have "both" parents in their lives, and I never said that I did not have a good home. Perhaps we should auction YOUR kids off to the highest bidder who makes more money than you do ...wouldn't that be 'best' for THEM ?

And, I don't want full custody, just for it to remain as it is , equal joint rotating.

Your comment was hurtful, uninformed and shallow.

Ain't nobody trying to take my kids away though.  I must have done something right.

You should have never had kids. You're not fit.

gulfbeachbandit wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

gulfbeachbandit wrote:

deniselep wrote:

gulfbeachbandit wrote:If he has the money to provide a good home with two adults to raise the children and you have neither of those, why would you want custody?
Think about what's best for the children.

What's "best" for the children is to have "both" parents in their lives, and I never said that I did not have a good home. Perhaps we should auction YOUR kids off to the highest bidder who makes more money than you do ...wouldn't that be 'best' for THEM ?

And, I don't want full custody, just for it to remain as it is , equal joint rotating.

Your comment was hurtful, uninformed and shallow.

Ain't nobody trying to take my kids away though.  I must have done something right.

You should have never had kids. You're not fit.

Shut up.  Your idiot offspring is a part time walmart employee.  Nice job raising that one.
And I hear that the other one is a drunk.  0 for 2.