IndexWhat is gender bias in terms of custody cases? Misconceptions About Gender Bias in Custody CasesWomen May Not Be Biased in Custody CasesWhy might courts not be the reason for gender biases in custody cases? Custody Cases Effects and Consequences of Gender Biases in Custody Cases Conclusion “Born to Natural Parent” – how do you decide who is a “natural” parent and who is not? Many people immediately assume that women are “natural born parents,” but how do they know that this is not the case for men? Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay What is gender bias in terms of custody cases? Gender bias is when there is favor towards one parent over the other and the goal of winning custody cases is to provide the child with the best and most stable home life. Gender bias can occur in the justice system when laws, processes, and decisions advantage one gender over the other. When making a custody and access order under the Guardianship Act 1968, a judge must put the child's welfare first. (Commission, 2018). Children are not materialistic objects to be passed back and forth or something to be divided between hungry parents. They need stability, security and routine. Gender bias is a problem within the courts as there may be “pro-feminist and anti-male bias” in the courts (Commission, 2018). This may show that perhaps the courts have already decided who will take custody before the cases are even heard. However, this may change as cases are heard, as courts may hear new evidence that they had not previously heard. Gender equality means considering men and women of equal status and value. It means judging a person based on their value and not considering them inferior or superior solely based on their gender (Alba, 2018). This is demonstrated in many custody cases. Gender bias in custody cases usually occurs when conciliators and decision makers inappropriately refer to gender during judicial processes and base their actions on stereotypes about the nature and roles of men and women (Commission, 2018). This shows that gender biases in custody cases are more lenient towards women due to their stereotypical role in society. Most laws guaranteeing and regulating civil rights (including laws related to gender discrimination) originate at the federal level, through federal legislation (such as the Equal Pay Act) (Find Law, 2019). This essay will be “a critical examination of whether women have a bias in custody cases compared to men.” This will be explored in subsections: the background of gender bias, what the effects and consequences are, the history behind gender bias, the primary effects and why there may not have been a solution, the limits of gender bias . Misconceptions about gender bias in custody cases A common misconception is that mothers are primarily responsible for caring for young children, however in some cases men are the only ones caring for their children while women go out with friends and party . This can then be shown to be unfair to men as these same women continue to receive custody of their children without showing any stability in the child's life previously. Acase study from a single father's perspective states that ONS data from 2012 shows that of the four hundred thousand single parent families in the UK, only thirteen and a half percent (fifty-four thousand) are single fathers (Parfitt, 2017). This could show how unfair and biased judges are towards men as they may immediately believe that a woman is the best primary carer for the child, however it could also show that not many men apply to receive custody, which could be the Because of the custody statistics, cases won by men are very low. However, men may not apply for custody because they believe that men always lose and therefore they may not care so they don't feel the disappointment of losing custody of their children and give up. A BBC report also suggested that in 2011 men made up just 8% of single parents in the UK. However, there is conflicting evidence. A 2015 study from the University of Warwick concluded that family courts do not discriminate against fathers (Parfitt, 2017). It is also proven that in family law there are some studies on which fathers pay exorbitant child support and yet rarely get to see their children. Evidence for this is found in a case study where a father had lost custody of his children but was still allowed to spend time with them (Chapin, 2016). However, this happened at a certain price for a certain period of time. Jones anxiously told the judge that all he wanted was equal time with his children. The next month, he received a letter from the court saying he owed thirteen hundred dollars a month in child support – a payment that would be a big strain on his salary of twenty-six dollars an hour. He had already liquidated his savings to pay off his and his wife's debts, so to keep up with the payments Jones sold his truck, four thousand dollars worth of tools, and stopped eating out or having a social life. This shows how many men give up almost everything for their children and yet have only a little time with them. Jones was allowed to see his children eight days out of the month. The most common problem, he says, is that men rarely have equal access to their children and are often victims of false accusations of abuse. 82% of mothers have primary custody of their children (Chapin, 2016). Could this be a coincidence or due to gender bias against women? Throughout history, gender stereotypes have played a key role in child custody arrangements. It was once assumed that children should always remain with their mother after a divorce (Guerin, 2018), this may mean that some judges and lawyers may still believe this presumption, and that this may be why there is a bias gender, due to outdated and antiquated beliefs. The fact that women have shown bias in custody cases has been a major issue around the world, particularly in the United Kingdom and North America. Men have long lacked equal rights to child custody under English common law. Under English common law, women had a natural right to custody of children they had outside of marriage. A celibate, single father, unlike married fathers, had no right to custody of his child. The unmarried father only had the legal obligation to provide periodic payments to the mother (Galbi, 2019). Poor mothers could retain custody of their children and receive financial support from the father or others. This could show that men were seen as the figure she providedonly money and was not involved in the child's life. Poor fathers were much less likely to receive financial support and much more likely to be deprived of custody of their children. Men have historically been treated as socially disposable people (Galbi, 2019). Many men, most of the time, seem to view caring for young children as boring, unrewarding, low status and do not want to do it (Phillimore, 2017). This could also show how men are perceived as uncaring and unloving. Men have long lacked equal rights to child custody under English common law. Under English common law, women had a natural right to custody of children they had outside of marriage (Galbi, 2019). This may suggest that women have always been the go-to people for everything and may be one of the reasons why women are shown prejudice because children may not feel comfortable seeking help and feel emotional towards men. Previously, if the maternal grandfather was wealthier than the father, then the father could legally be reduced to a visitor in his child's life (Galbi, 2019). This may show how fathers were perceived to only provide money and not really care for the child or take care of him. However, this can be a good idea, as some fathers do not have a good influence on their children, especially if it involves crime, drugs or negative factors that can affect the child. Women cannot be prejudiced in custody cases. In 1998, the Office of the Children's Commissioner reported that 41% of family court clients interviewed believed that fathers were discriminated against in proceedings, while 34% were unsure and 25% were unsure. agreement (Commission, 2018). However, women, on the other hand, argue that they are disadvantaged by gender stereotypes. This is because there is a perception that women's behavior is evaluated differently from that of men (Commission, 2018). Some women may believe that they have to act upper class and behave very well to gain custody of their children, and they may also believe that men do not have to behave this way and yet still have a chance of gaining custody. this may be a reason why women become so enraged and passionate about gaining custody and may be why most women win custody cases. A common view is that judges sometimes apply double standards when evaluating the behavior and contribution of men and women to the care of children (Commission, 2018). According to the report “We must stop turning children against divorced fathers”, in 96% of cases in the UK, parents who go to court for “access” to their children are men (Poole, 2015). This may show that men ask for custody, but are not supportive. Could it be due to gender bias? This may also show how men should not be perceived as less caring or less involved than women in raising their children, as they are usually the ones who apply for custody cases to ensure a better and more stable life. The fact is that we live in a society where it is the accepted norm that women should demand equality in the public sphere while maintaining special privileges in the private sphere (Poole, 2015). An example of where women may have been shown bias would be in California, where a group of women filed a lawsuit in federal court accusing the state courts of discrimination against foster mothers (Schafran,1995). Women fought for custody of their children against their apparently physically abusive husbands. However, the courts have awarded custody to the men, and the women say they have failed to protect their children from harm. This may be a clear case where women may have been shown the right to gain custody because their husbands were described as violent and aggressive, however, the courts may have other evidence showing that these husbands were not aggressive or violent and therefore they could demonstrate that the women could lie to obtain custody of their children. If women had lied about their husbands, that might have given courts more reason to award custody to fathers because they were not trustworthy enough. One limitation may be that many judges are unable to take their personal beliefs into account while they are considering court cases, even when they have the best possible intentions. In the divorce case, the father and mother had both requested primary custody of their two children. Both spouses worked full time and sometimes had conflicts with child care. Judges and laypeople who supported traditional gender roles awarded more custody time to the mother than to the equally qualified father, but judges were even more biased in favoring the mother than they were (Miller, 2018). Only 3% of judges in the case The sample gave the father more custody time than the mother: one limitation would be that the judges were biased. This may be due to old and outdated beliefs that the mother is better suited to care for the child. It can also be said that another factor used by courts in making decisions on custody cases is the relationship between parent and child. The younger the child, the more likely the bond between mother and child is greater than the bond between father and child (Guerin, 2018). This may demonstrate that the bond between mother and child or between father and child can be taken into consideration in custody cases. Judges and lawyers can then analyze and deduce which parent is best suited and able to care for the child. You might say that the reason fathers so rarely get custody or meaningful time with their children is that they don't deserve it because they only earned the money to keep the family housed, fed, and clothed (Franklin, 2015). also be shown as stereotypical as judges are led to believe that men do not actually interact with the child, but only provide money. 69% of male lawyers concluded that judges always or often assume from the outset (i.e. before any evidence is presented) that children belong to their mothers (Franklin, 2015). This may show clear bias and favoritism towards women, as lawyers have already agreed on the assumption that the child is better suited to the mother. Forty percent of women lawyers agreed with that assessment, and nearly all lawyers (94% of male lawyers and 84% of women) said that all judges showed bias against fathers at least some of the time (Franklin , 2015). Judges and lawyers may show bias against fathers because they may believe that fathers are not willing and able to provide what a mother could provide: love and care. Judges and lawyers may believe that fathers provide for the child only because they have to and that they are not actually caring for the child; ​​this could influence the decisions of judges and lawyers and therefore make them believe that women are the best caregivers for thechild. instead of men. Why might courts not be the reason for gender bias in custody cases? However, it can be said that the courts are not the reason mothers gain custody in most divorces. A married father spends, on average, six and a half hours a week participating in primary care activities with his children. The married mother spends almost thirteen hours on average, almost double what the father does. Since dual-income families are now the norm, not the exception, the information above indicates that not only are mothers working, but they are also caring for twice as many children as fathers (Meyer, 2017). Therefore it stands to reason that mothers who have a closer bond due to time spent caring for a child are the ones most likely to gain custody during a divorce. Also according to the Pew Research study, when fathers and children live apart, 22% of fathers see their children more than once a week. However, the most shocking thing would be that twenty-seven fathers have no contact with their children (Meyer, 2017). This may be a reason why people may believe that there is no bias in custody cases, as many men do not make an effort to see or have contact with their children, however there may be unknown circumstances such as the father's non-presence allowed to see his children, which can demonstrate that 27% of fathers have no contact. However, in 83% of these custody cases, the mother ended up winning the custody case because the father chose to give her custody (Meyer, 2017). This could be another reason why, some believe that there is no gender bias, as men willingly give custody to the woman: it can be shown that they do not care about their child, so all men are generalized to be shown as not protective and not caring. It can be shown that fathers are not as caring and loving as mothers and it can be shown that they do not have enough time for the child, which could be another reason why the judge awards custody to the mothers. Fathers go to court with the idea that their cases will be treated fairly, but often find a legal system that they say doesn't want them to be too involved in caring for their children. As a result, they too often get limited access rights (Courtney, 2016). This could mean that fathers have the misconception that they have already lost and may give up immediately because they believe they will not get custody. However, some men may want to try to prove this source wrong and fight harder to try to gain custody to prove that men can also gain custody of their children without there being any gender bias. There should be no gender bias during these custody cases, however there should be gender parity. Many people believe that gender equality is about people, however it is also about men having the same value as women, in this case, in custody cases (Kimmel, 2018). Gender equality is valuable for everyone. Gender equality helps break the stereotypes of patriarchal/matrilineal society. An example of a patriarchal/matrilineal society would be that men are only useful for finances and work, while women are only useful for taking care of children and staying at home. These need to be broken so that men can also be loving and caring towards the child and that women should not be seen as the sole caretaker for the child. Both men and women should be represented at thesame level in caring for their children, but this may not be proven as there may be bias in the courts. Sole custody is where one parent takes on most of the responsibility for the children (Anzilotti, 2017). This is the norm in the United States, and eighty percent of the time women are awarded sole custody. Despite current gender-neutral statutes, men's advocacy groups argue that custody decisions continue to discriminate against fathers. Women's advocacy groups and the media counter that custody decisions discriminate against mothers (Warshak, 1996). The law is clear in nearly every state in North America, and ongoing efforts to enforce the absence of gender bias are progressing in several states: the gender of the women the parent should not matter in determining the best interests of the child. Unfortunately, there is precious little guidance for judges on what “best interests” actually means – which opens the courtroom to opinions from a wide variety of expert witnesses who may or may not have their own agendas (The Gucciardo Law Firm, PLLC, 2016). This highlights how judges infer that the mother is always the best option to gain custody without hearing any evidence of how the father may be better or the mother may be the worse option. Custody Cases One custody case that may seem familiar will be the Blac Chyna and Robert Kardashian case. Rob Kardashian pays Chyna $20,000 a month in child support (Erikson, 2018). This is an exorbitant amount of money to pay per month: this can demonstrate how men are used only for money and expenses. While Rob Kardashian doesn't mind paying this amount of money, it may show that there is a bias against women and it may be unfair to men. Women often don't pay this amount of money per month for their baby, so what makes it okay for a male to pay such an exorbitant amount of money? Even in high-profile cases, women are shown bias and receive an outrageous amount of money regardless of their net worth: Chyna also has a lot of money but demands $20,000 more a month from Rob Kardashian. Tokyo (Chyna's mother) said she believes Chyna's personal life is currently a "mess" and that Dream Kardashian [daughter] should stay with Rob until things are sorted out (Lawrence, 2019). Chyna's mother believes Blac Chyna is unfit to care for the two-year-old, yet judges still awarded custody to Blac Chyna instead of Rob Kardashian. This may also show bias against the mother as Blac Chyna's mother feels that Chyna is unfit to take care of her two-year-old daughter Dream Kardashian. However, Rob Kardashian was also seen doing actions to spite Blac Chyna, such as showing her nudes, so this could be a reason why Blac Chyna received custody and it may not be due to gender bias aall.Another custody case would be the Marcia Clark custody case. Marcia Clark is an American prosecutor, her most famous case was the OJ Simpson murder case. Marcia Clark (the prosecutor) and her second husband Gordon were going through a bitter custody battle over their two children, and she was trying to balance prosecuting the biggest case in the country at the time while raising the two young boys (Spargo, 2016) . The father was a full-time working parent who still had to juggle caring for his children. Marcia Clark often had to rush to work leaving Gordon Tolls Clark to take care of the children. Marcia Clark always hasput his work before his children, while Gordon Clark put his children before his work. Even though it seemed like the father cared more for the child, Marcia Clark was the one who was given custody of her children. Marcia, however, was usually never home to feed or care for her children, so this may give connotations to the judge, and the lawyers gave her custody for another reason. This may be because judges and lawyers believed that because the mother should be the primary caregiver, she should automatically be better prepared to care for the children and therefore bias may have been shown. This specific custody case shows a clear sign of bias because both parents had full-time jobs and cared for the children. Neither parent had a bad situation in life such as being an alcoholic or drug addict, so both parents were on the same playing field, except it seemed like the father cared more for the children, but this was not taken into consideration since it is Marcia Clark was granted full custody. There are still very few solutions to gender bias because deciding who receives full custody of the children is a subjective statement. A subjective statement is an opinionated statement, so it depends on the opinions of judges and lawyers to award custody to a parent. Using a subjective statement can be a bad decision because the decision is up to someone who doesn't necessarily know you personally to give full custody of a child to a parent who might misrepresent their attitudes and beliefs in court. This can affect the child in a negative way because it can affect him in later life if given to the wrong parent. One solution to gender bias may be to give joint custody to both parents instead of full custody to one parent. This would allow both mother and father to be equally involved in the child's life. This would also show that there would be no bias against the mother as both the mother and father have a say in the child's life. However, a disadvantage would be that one parent may deserve to have full custody over the other because they are fitter and more stable while the other parent is unstable. Another solution might be to listen to the child's point of view on who would be a better parent for him. them and who should therefore have full custody of them. The child should be able to give input on who would be a better parent, and this is due to several reasons. One reason could be because the child would be the one who will have to live with the parent who receives full custody and will therefore affect him or her the most. Another reason could be that the child is probably the only person who knows each parent best, to find out who could give him or her the most caring and loving life. The child knowing each parent better would then allow judges and lawyers to get a better picture of how each parent's character is built. However there are also some disadvantages. A disadvantage would be that the child may be biased and prefer one parent over the other and therefore may provide better insight than a parent who may not be able to give the child a good enough and stable life. Another disadvantage would be that parents could be involved in the child's opinion. This would mean that the parents could talk to the child and influence what the child might say in order to gain full custody, therefore making this solution unreliable and dangerous. This can be shownas unreliable and dangerous because extraneous variables, such as parents, will influence the child and may do so in a threatening way, which would demonstrate that the parent is not fit and stable enough to care for a child. Effects and Consequences of Gender Bias in Custody Cases One effect of gender bias in custody cases would be that it could increase conflicts and tensions between families (Quain, 2019). This is because when one family gets custody, the other may feel hatred towards the family who got custody because they may believe they should have received custody of the child. However, this may not happen, as in some cases families may band together to try to provide the child with an easy life and stability, which would be the purpose of child custody. One consequence of gender bias in custody cases would be that other men may feel that there is no point in seeking custody due to repeated refusals to gain custody of their child. In New York, a group of fathers filed a report accusing the state courts of discriminating against men in foster care (Schafran, 1995). Fathers stated that courts award custody to mothers because of the custom and myth that mothers are natural parents (Schafran, 1995). This may discourage men from seeking custody because they are regularly and repeatedly shown to lose the custody battle to the mother because they are “natural born parents.” However, this may also lead some fathers to prove that previous statistics won't get in the way and then fight for custody to try to prove that men are also just as good at parenting as women. Another such effect or consequence Injury in custody cases would be that the child may be placed with the wrong parent/guardian due to lies. Some mothers or fathers may lie to judges and lawyers to gain custody of their children. This will later affect the child in his future if given to someone who is less able to provide for him due to lies or due to stereotypes that mothers are the best gender to care for and take care of their children. However, in most of the cases, the child is placed with a parent who can give him or her a stable and happy life as the judges hear both cases and do thorough checks, so there is a very small chance that the child will be placed with the parent wrong. .Many men also feel like they are unable to trust women ever again as some women may lie during the court case, so they are unable to trust women as they believe that other women will also do the same acts. Please note: This is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Conclusion Overall, it has been proven that there is some gender bias in custody cases due to stereotypes and that women are labeled as “natural born parents” which can be seen as being as unfair to men as they should be equal towards women in raising a child and providing him with a stable and happy life. However, in some cases, including the Robert Kardashian and Blac Chyna case, where the man had made as good a claim as the women, yet the women were still given full custody instead of sharing custody. However, there are also some cases where it is not gender bias why the mother got custody and the woman sincerely made a good plea, while the father has a.