Atheists and Child Custody

[JoeyKnothead]

From the blog About.com: Atheists Discriminated Against in Child Custody Cases - 2006

I dismiss personal examples at beginning and jump straight to some of the court cases...

...Carson v. Carson, 401 N.W.2d 632, 635–36
(Mich. Ct. App. 1986) (quoting trial court as opining that it “was a little bit distraught in finding that there was no particular affiliation [held by either parent] with a church,� because “[p]robably 95 percent of the criminals that I see before me come from homes where there’s no . . . established religious affiliation,�

Sharrow v. Davis, Nos. 244043, 245117, 2003 WL 21699876, at *3
(Mich. Ct. App. July 22, 2003) (noting that “[father] never attended church and his older children were not baptized,� that “[father] felt [the children] should experience many religions and choose one when they were older,� and that though “[mother] did not attend church regularly, she attended periodically and would take all of the children with her�);

Goodrich v. Jex, No. 243455, 2003 WL 21362971, at *1
(Mich. Ct. App. June 12, 2003) (noting “that [father] has a greater capacity and willingness to continue to take the parties’ daughters to church and related activities,� and that trial court had been “concerned with [mother’s] belief that her minor daughters are capable of making their own decisions whether to attend church�);

Other examples at the link.

Topic for debate:

Should a religious parent have greater rights to custody than a non-religious or atheist parent?

[Coyotero]

I can't believe it's the twenty-first century and we still have to discuss this.

What about an Atheist would make them any less equipped to raise a child?

The kid'll have plenty of chances to hear and absorb religiosity when they're ready to, if they wish it.

[ConfinedIX]

Topic for debate:

Should a religious parent have greater rights to custody than a non-religious or atheist parent?

I do not believe that a Religious parent(s) is in any way more qualified than a non-religious or Atheist parent(s), so no they should not have more rights to custody.

Children eventually come to the age when they want to make decisions for themselves such as who they want to date, who they want to hang out with, whether or not to get a tattoo, what they choose to believe in, whether they want to smoke, drink or do drugs. The only thing a parent can do is help encourage or discourage things that their children do. Everything is based on situational circumstances.

What can a Religious parent(s) offer that an Atheist parent(s) cannot?

[Homicidal_Cherry53]

This one is a no-brainer. A parent's religious affiliation, or lack there of should not affect whether or not they get custody of a child.

By the way Joey, that link just takes you to "Post a new topic" on this site.

[micatala]

From the blog About.com: Atheists Discriminated Against in Child Custody Cases - 2006

I dismiss personal examples at beginning and jump straight to some of the court cases...

...Carson v. Carson, 401 N.W.2d 632, 635–36
(Mich. Ct. App. 1986) (quoting trial court as opining that it “was a little bit distraught in finding that there was no particular affiliation [held by either parent] with a church,� because “[p]robably 95 percent of the criminals that I see before me come from homes where there’s no . . . established religious affiliation,�

Sharrow v. Davis, Nos. 244043, 245117, 2003 WL 21699876, at *3
(Mich. Ct. App. July 22, 2003) (noting that “[father] never attended church and his older children were not baptized,� that “[father] felt [the children] should experience many religions and choose one when they were older,� and that though “[mother] did not attend church regularly, she attended periodically and would take all of the children with her�);

Goodrich v. Jex, No. 243455, 2003 WL 21362971, at *1
(Mich. Ct. App. June 12, 2003) (noting “that [father] has a greater capacity and willingness to continue to take the parties’ daughters to church and related activities,� and that trial court had been “concerned with [mother’s] belief that her minor daughters are capable of making their own decisions whether to attend church�);

Other examples at the link.

Topic for debate:

Should a religious parent have greater rights to custody than a non-religious or atheist parent?

I am a Christian and do believe Christian beliefs can help inform good child-rearing.

However, having said that I really can't see why a court should make religious affiliation or the lack of one an issue in a custody case.

One judge cites his own anecdotal evidence. I don't see that this should be relevant. Now, I could possibly see a case for making a lack of regular church attendance (or replace this with any other characteristic or behavior pattern) an issue if there was well-supported unbiased studies which indicated the children would be better off with the other parent who did not have said characteristic or behavior pattern.

However, not only would the information have to be pretty irrefutable, we would also have to apply the same standard to all characteristics and behavior patterns, not just selected ones.

For example, if we're going to say that custody goes to A over B if A attends church and B does not because we can back this up with data, then if we also have data that says children of non-church attendees do better than children of Catholics, we would have to give non-church attendees preference. Same for Catholics over Lutherans, Buddhists over CHristians, Muslims over Hindus, or blacks over whites, piano players over non-piano players, non-smokers over smokers, liberals over conservatives, or whatever.

Of course, this then opens up a whole can of worms because you'd have to consider all kinds of characteristics or behavior patterns in combination. Clearly, we don't want to be going down this road.


Not being a student of such cases, I would be interested in what general procedures judges do use to make such decisions, other than obvious things like employment status, observed living conditions, etc.

[Homicidal_Cherry53]

From the blog About.com: Atheists Discriminated Against in Child Custody Cases - 2006

I dismiss personal examples at beginning and jump straight to some of the court cases...

...Carson v. Carson, 401 N.W.2d 632, 635–36
(Mich. Ct. App. 1986) (quoting trial court as opining that it “was a little bit distraught in finding that there was no particular affiliation [held by either parent] with a church,� because “[p]robably 95 percent of the criminals that I see before me come from homes where there’s no . . . established religious affiliation,�

Sharrow v. Davis, Nos. 244043, 245117, 2003 WL 21699876, at *3
(Mich. Ct. App. July 22, 2003) (noting that “[father] never attended church and his older children were not baptized,� that “[father] felt [the children] should experience many religions and choose one when they were older,� and that though “[mother] did not attend church regularly, she attended periodically and would take all of the children with her�);

Goodrich v. Jex, No. 243455, 2003 WL 21362971, at *1
(Mich. Ct. App. June 12, 2003) (noting “that [father] has a greater capacity and willingness to continue to take the parties’ daughters to church and related activities,� and that trial court had been “concerned with [mother’s] belief that her minor daughters are capable of making their own decisions whether to attend church�);

Other examples at the link.

Topic for debate:

Should a religious parent have greater rights to custody than a non-religious or atheist parent?

I am a Christian and do believe Christian beliefs can help inform good child-rearing.

However, having said that I really can't see why a court should make religious affiliation or the lack of one an issue in a custody case.

One judge cites his own anecdotal evidence. I don't see that this should be relevant. Now, I could possibly see a case for making a lack of regular church attendance (or replace this with any other characteristic or behavior pattern) an issue if there was well-supported unbiased studies which indicated the children would be better off with the other parent who did not have said characteristic or behavior pattern.

However, not only would the information have to be pretty irrefutable, we would also have to apply the same standard to all characteristics and behavior patterns, not just selected ones.

For example, if we're going to say that custody goes to A over B if A attends church and B does not because we can back this up with data, then if we also have data that says children of non-church attendees do better than children of Catholics, we would have to give non-church attendees preference. Same for Catholics over Lutherans, Buddhists over CHristians, Muslims over Hindus, or blacks over whites, piano players over non-piano players, non-smokers over smokers, liberals over conservatives, or whatever.

Of course, this then opens up a whole can of worms because you'd have to consider all kinds of characteristics or behavior patterns in combination. Clearly, we don't want to be going down this road.


Not being a student of such cases, I would be interested in what general procedures judges do use to make such decisions, other than obvious things like employment status, observed living conditions, etc.

Beyond the practical difficulties of considering every behavioral pattern and characteristic in child custody, there is the fact that "better" is not easily defined. What would determine whether a Christian is a better parent than an atheist, or a smoker than a non-smoker, or a golfer than a tennis player? There is simply no objective measurement that can determine whether a parent produces a "good" child and what contributed to this "good" child. Different people have different standards of "good", each child is different, meaning that what is "good" for one might be terrible for another, and there is no way to actually tell whether it is the parents or outside influences that contribute to a child being "good". Like you said, we really don't want to go down that road. It is simply too difficult to actually identify what "good" is and what makes a child "good".

[JoeyKnothead]

Updated Link:

About.com: Atheists Discriminated Against in Child Custody Cases

Verified link on Firefox web browser.

If a moderator can repair the OP link I'd 'preciate it. Elsewise folks can use the above link.