[lelanthran]

> If men file for custody they get 50/50. Men who ask for full custody also statistically win more often.

That's a nice statistic. Where did you get it?

> You are doing disservice to both kids and men when you tell them they cant have it.

Well I apologise for that, every lawyer I spoke to during my divorce (maybe ... 10?) said not to bother, the odds of a court deciding in favour of the mother were 3/5.

[sdenton4]

Not bothering to file because of a 3/5 chance of losing seems crazy. It's actually pretty hard to tell 60/40 apart from 50/50, especially if there's lots of covariates.

[lelanthran]

> Not bothering to file because of a 3/5 chance of losing seems crazy. It's actually pretty hard to tell 60/40 apart from 50/50, especially if there's lots of covariates.

It only seems like that because you're looking at the raw numbers. When you look at the actual stakes, it's quite different.

Let's say we play a coin-toss game: Each time I win the toss, I give you $1. Each time you win the toss, you give me $100.

Would you play? Think it's not fair? Okay, lets make it fair.

Each time you win, you win $1m. Each time you lose, you pay $1m. Would you play against me (I'm not rich)? Would you agree to play against Bill Gates/Jeff Bezos/etc?

It's not just the odds that matters, it's the fact t, even on even odds, in some cases you stand to lose much more than the opposing side.

[watwut]

> every lawyer I spoke to during my divorce (maybe ... 10?) said not to bother, the odds of a court deciding in favour of the mother were 3/5

That is completely absurd risk reward ratio to reject.

[lelanthran]

> That is completely absurd risk reward ratio to reject.

Not really. The impact of losing is "lose hundreds of thousands, be in debt for the next decade and have my work (and life in general) suffer", while still having to deal with having to then fight for access continuously.

The impact of winning was "losing hundreds of thousands, be in debt for a decade, and still have the risk of custody reversal in a future case".

The only winning move here is not to play[1] unless the odds are greatly in your favour - it's cheaper for the female so the female's impact in a win or a lose is substantially less.

Regardless of the risk/reward ratio, when 10 lawyers tell you not to bother, you'd be stupid to ignore their advice.

In any case, I still want to now where you got your statistics from.

[1] All I had to deal with after that was to enforce the contact. That took 3 court cases (luckily, all in my favour).

[watwut]

But women file for custody. Multiple states already have 50/50 being default custody.

Also, filing does not costs "hundreds of thousands". That is just not true. Poor people have those hearings and while it costs money, it costs significantly less.

[lelanthran]

Where are your stats from?

[vmception]

Where are your 10 lawyers stats from? You realize that lawyers can just be repeating the same thing they found on google? Which could simply be a quote from a forum like this one.

This discussion requires the same standards for all arguments, and no appeals to authority.

[lelanthran]

> Where are your 10 lawyers stats from?

Irrelevant - I didn't present it as stats applicable to the populate, I presented it as "10 lawyers I spoke to".

Parent presented the 50/50 statistic as a fact, I want to know where he read that.