[jnovek]

Here’s a cool fact: in America only 35% of DV survivors retain full custody of their children and only 45% retain primary custody.

If you flee domestic violence you are more likely than not to lose custody of your children to your abuser.

[lelanthran]

> Here’s a cool fact: in America only 35% of DV survivors retain full custody of their children and only 45% retain primary custody.

That's because joint custody is the default and you need to have really good evidence when you want to restrict a kids access to their father.

> If you flee domestic violence you are more likely than not to lose custody of your children to your abuser.

"Being forced to allow kids to see their father" is, to you, the same as "losing custody of your children"?

You're talking absolute horse puckey here. I'm also pretty certain you don't believe it.

[dang]

Please make your substantive points without calling names or crossing into personal attack.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[lelanthran]

Thank you dang; here's the thing, even the most charitable reading of GPs comment indicates that he feels being unable to restrict a child's right of access to their parent is unfair in some way.

No matter what you may think of parents, it is absolutely horrific that someone will argue for restricting the rights of children, and do it in a way that he feels is acceptable in society (custody is only in small part about having access to one's children; the actual right is to the child, not the parent - the child has the right to access to their parent).

I wanted to make him understand that trampling over children's rights is not acceptable.

[dang]

I'm not taking issue with your substantive points, but you need to make them in a respectful way that serves curious conversation.

When you feel like someone else is doing something outrageous (e.g. trampling over children's rights), that of course gets pretty hard to do. In such cases the better options are to (1) wait until the activation subsides before posting, or (2) just walk away.

Incidentally, the GP comment was also a provocation, I suppose mostly because of the "cool fact" snark intensifier. But it wasn't enough of a violation to clear the bar for a moderation reply, whereas your post was. That's often the case with responses to provocation - they end up being even more provocative in their own right.