Is this a religious case, a state case, a federal case, multiple, or other?

I am curious what everyone's opinion of this is;
NH mom says her parental and religious rights violated by court-ordered public schooling

Is freedom of religion the over-riding issue or not even an issue?
The daughter "lives primarily with the mother". Should her wishes over-rule the others?
The parents have shared custody. Should the father's wishes be granted? Is that is, in essence, what happens if the daughter goes to public school?

FWIW, I would rule for the mother since the daughter "lives primarily with the mother". I cannot see others telling the primary custodial parent how she is to raise her family. However, that only begs the question if the parents actually had equal shared custody.

 

Just to be contrary, I'd rule in favor of the father because he has as much right in his daughter's educational decisions as his ex-wife does. Courts often give more custody time to the parent that is not working because they have more time to devote to the raising of the children. Men often pay child support to supplement the lack of earning power their ex-wives have due to their child care responsibilities. So saying that the wife has the child more often really isn't a valid argument.

When a couple marries and decides to have children and then gets divorced, they must make sacrifices, concessions, and compromises that married couples wouldn't necessarily have to make. It comes with the territory. The problem comes in when one or both parents think that they have to only say in what is best for the children involved in their messy lives. Often, the children are put squarely in the middle of these fights and used as bargaining chips after they have already had to endure the break up of their families. In my opinion, divorce is for selfish people especially when kids are involved. When you have kids, you really need to kiss your selfishness goodbye.

 

Gee, dr moen, I thought you were an advocate for a women's right to choose? If a mother can decide to end a child's life why can't she decide on the kid's schooling?

 

Apparently you are saying it has nothing to do with religion.

In you first paragraph, you say you would rule for the father because he has as much right. By ruling FOR the father, though, you are saying he has MORE right.

I will not comment on your last line, but I actually basically agree with the rest of your second paragraph except I would change a couple words. I stead of "[the] only say in", I would say "a different opinion of".

 

'Joint Custody' is a vague term. It can apply to joint decision making but does not have to. It can simply mean that the child can stay with both parents equally or one as a primary and the other not.

This is merely a family care dispute if they have actual joint legal custody and should be treated as such if schooling is not in the divorce decree. They have to come to an agreement or the court will impose whatever it wants to impose, I imagine. If schooling is already addressed in their divorce decree then that is what should be followed. Or, if the father does not have actual joint legal custody, then the mom decides.

I do not see it as any religious freedom issue. She can instill whatever religion she wants to in the kid the other 16 hours a day no matter what happens./