In a recent court decision, a mother making $6 an hour working less than 30 hours a week ($8,600/year), was granted physical custody of her son, yet the father, making $45,000 a year, was denied. Knowing the details of this case, how did the courts ever decide that this mother could provide a financially stable home for her son? Cases such as these prove that United States Courts discriminate against fathers obtaining physical custody of their children, which suggests that many child custody laws are out dated and should be revised. Three reasons fathers are discriminated against in child custody cases involve: (1) The broad factors that are suppose to define the custody standard used by courts when deciding on physical custody, (2) The stereotype of women as caretakers, which defines their role as more important and influential than the role of the father, and (3) All fathers are prejudged as "deadbeat" dads, diminishing their chances to receive physical custody of their children.
             One would think that decisions relating to physical custody of a child would be a very involved process. However, this is not the case. Courts use an "in the best interests of the child" custody standard when deciding which parent should be granted physical custody of their children. This custody standard is extremely broad in its specifics regarding how "the best interests of a child" is determined. For example, the factors considered under this standard include, the needs of the child, the role each parent plays in the upbringing of the child, the mental condition of each parent and the financial stability of each parent. Clearly, the mother described above cannot adequately support her son. Yet, the father can. So, why was this mother granted physical custody? The reason for this decision is that the factors under this standard are subject to interpretation. Therefore, the decisions made from case to case vary based...