Do you think family court should be forced to include a jury as a rule at the federal level, i. e. UCCJEA (US based question)?

[CalmMind]

Updates

+1 y

So apologies for this, I've got a lot going on upstairs in my head so this came off really disjointed and confusing. My question is for child custody, child support, asset dispensation, and everything not related to specifically two people no longer being married. Man and woman walk in and want a divorce and ALL other factors aside judge says "Cool you're no longer married", that part isn't what I meant by a jury. But as to where the kids live and who the better parent is, is more of my concern.

[IAteTwoFullHams]

I think if you had to convene a jury for that, we'd all have jury duty like five times a year.

Which is... pretty fucking tough for a lot of people. Not sure what the hell I'd do with my autistic kid if I even had to show up to court five times a year to explain I have an autistic kid.

[CalmMind]

I've never understood why courts don't have a simple registrar of people who are incapable of jury duty for reasons like this. Doesn't even have to be specific in the database just have someone look into it and then make that determination.

[Philyouup]

i think all
lawyers should free in family court

[Philyouup]

be free that is.

[Philyouup]

and thank you

[Subarugirl]

Uh no… if they are going to have a jury for divorces then they should have a jury for getting married

[CalmMind]

I'd actually be fine with that. My issue isn't in the dissolution of the marriage. Either party should be able to leave. My question, and yes I should have clarified this better, is the division of assets and child custody in particular. I, in a haphazard way, thought that was implied with the mention of UCCJEA which is the Uniform Child Custody and Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act which governs the jurisdictional dispensation of child custody cases. Apologies and I'll update the question with clarification.

[Subarugirl]

No I don’t think that there should be a jury for divorce proceedings

[CalmMind]

Why not? Could you elaborate?

[Subarugirl]

Because a marriage or resolving a marriage is not a public choice it’s a personal choice. What would you do if a jury refused to approve your marriage… it just doesn’t make any sense

[CalmMind]

You said you didn't think a jury should be involved in divorce proceedings after I clarified that I was talking about child custody and assets. Could you elaborate on that and not getting married, that was an off hand comment more about that most people that get married have no clue what marriage is. Like I said my original question was poorly worded.

[Subarugirl]

Child custody and asset division are not a public issue it is a personal or civil court issue. The public has no place in child custody or divisions of assets in a divorce.

[CalmMind]

I respectfully disagree. It is a public issue when the courts have demonstrated a widespread bias towards women/mothers in how child custody is determined. And with it being a favorite forum for false rape accusations, and yes objectively they happen A LOT, I don't think it makes sense for a single person to render judgement when their biases are so clearly demonstrated.

[Subarugirl]

That’s funny because that majority of judges are men…

[CalmMind]

I don't dispute that. What's your point? This isn't a man vs women argument I'm making here. This is simply that our family court judicial system is broken and in need of serious reforms of oversight to avoid things like "benevolent" sexism.

[Subarugirl]

Then do something about it… become a lawyer

[Guy13]

Can you out that in Simpleton language please underneath in update?

[Iron_Man]

It’s not necessary to have to have a big jury

[CalmMind]

I can agree with that. My issue is the general misconception that family court judges are unbiased. Parental statistics would beg to differ.