Texas Judge Forbids Lesbian Woman From Living With Her Partner

[freshwest]

66. Leaving the state with kids is how my mother lost custody in the fifties. And the morality clause

because of her other behaviors came into play, as well. There is nothing new about it, unless those things were changed since then and reinstated.

But this case stinks. With the former spouse having stalked the woman, the judge should not be using this clause as if the mother's association with the other woman is a danger to the children. That is what the clause is about, and it's generally applied to 'boyfriends.'

The mother and even her children may need protection from her ex and a witness to what that man will do. Without a person in the home to witness, it's his word against hers. That's what is so bad for all in this case, the lack of protection that another adult can provide the household.

The real issue is marriage. If she was involved with a man and was married, there would be no case here, although she might lose out on child support and the new man would have to try to adopt the children. The former spouse could lose his parental rights over his stalking, but maybe not.

I have an transgendered family member who had to fight off a court appointed attorney who did not believe he should maintain custody because the attorney and former wife playing a convoluted game against him. She eventually lost in the courts as she was fully proven to be an unfit parent, yet her rights to supervised visitation were not taken away. It cost him tens of thousands of dollars to defend himself in court and get the goods on what the mother had been doing to the child in question.

This may end up the same way, since the danger is the stalking by the ex. He might decide to kill his former wife, or anything else. They need to bring him to court and get him prosecuted, and reset the terms of the divorce and custody, IMHO.