SSY 240.1949
Rachel Bianca Mallari
Prof. J. Pierre-Louis
December 14, 2004
Court Case Write-Up
From the perspective of the defendant of the Father, I very
much agree that the custody of the 3 month old child should be
granted to my client. The nature of attachment and nurture were
solely provided by my client since the child’s very first cry. Also certain
aspects makes the father fit to take good care of the child. I will lay
my arguments based on the theory of nurture, attachment, theories of
cognitive development, systems theory and parenting styles.
The child is at her critical stage where she is forming a sense of
the world. At this point, nurture is very much indispensable to the
development of the child. A psychologist by the name of Erickson
theorize that in every psychosocial stage there is a crisis that must be
resolved. In this case, the child is at the point of forming Trust vs.
Mistrust. The social environment greatly impacts on the development
personality of the child. Obviously, my client who is always around
giving the best care he could ever give should deserve to have the
child. The mother who abandon her child since birth doesn’t make her
worthy of this vulnerable child. Her absence in the child’s crucial
development takes all the reason why she ought to have the child.
In the context of attachment, the mother didn’t play any role in
this vital formation of emotional bonding between caregiver and child.
The father who clearly forms an attachment to the child should all the
more be the legal guardian of the child. My client is the one who’s
providing not only nourishment but also love and security. He is the
one who acts as the secure basis of the child. If you try to take away
this child from it’s source of security which is the father, the child
would likely be disoriented. Base on Mary Ainsworth’s strange situation
test a child with a secure caregiver exhibits confidence in exploring
his/her environment. If you give the mother which acts as the
avoidant caregiver, the child will end up insecure and resistant.
A prominent psychologist regards the cognitive development of
the child is chiefly facilitated by the social environment. Vygotsky
considers that cognitive skills is due to the sociocultural environment
of the child. In this circumstances, the child is expose to the
environment of the father. Hence, the cognitive skills of the child is
primarily enhanced by my client and not by the mother. In addition,
cognitive ability of the child is mediated by words and language. The
mother is deaf all her life. How can you entrust a child with a caregiver
who isn’t appropriate to offer the absolute cognitive maturity of a
child? The father is able to impart the ultimate cognitive growth of this
child. Thus, I firmly believe that he is the valid caregiver that is
appropriate to look after the child.
My client has two other children ages 5 and 6. They were said to
be violent but not against family members. In the system’s theory, the
child wont learn or inherit this violence because the aggression is not
directed towards the family members. In spite, this child in question of
custody would be able to relate with the other children. It won’t be
hard for this child to communicate with other children because she has
already practice to form a connection from the two other child in the
family. In the mother’s side, the child won’t be able form an
interaction with other children.
In regards to parenting style, the father uses an authoritative
kind of parenting. As a result the child is disciplined and there is a
share of control. If you give this child to the mother which promotes
an uninvolved parenting style, the child would be emotionally detach
and will form low self-esteem. Also there would be an increase
aggression, maladjustment and alcohol use, decrease in the control of
impulsive behavior and low cognitive development and creativity.
Aside from that, being a drug abuser also forms an authoritative style
which makes the child a rebel. This is not a good combination of
parenting approach because it constitutes negative effects that will
impact the child’s future.
The mother is clearly not suitable to care for this child.
Therefore, the custody of this child should be given to the father.
Although the child is the reminder of the infidelity of his wife, he treats
the child like his own flesh and blood. He loves this child dearly that’s
why he sought me and my colleague’s expertise to win custody.
The opposition implies that the reason why their client turn into
drugs is from the failure of our client to fulfill “her needs”. Well, that’s
so typical of her to prioritize her needs and fails to think about others.
This is not the kind of person you want to entrust a susceptible child
especially this three month old child that needs all the attention. Even
if we assume that our client did in case fail to satisfy his wife’s needs,
that’s not a reason to neglect her own child. The mother of this child is
clearly irresponsible to the point that she can’t even tell who is the real
biological father of the child. She is busy sleeping around with different
men that she couldn’t identify the
owner of the sperm that
impregnates her. I dispute the idea that our client isn’t able to fulfill
his wife’s needs. Why would this woman with a filthy rich parents
would be after a slightly mentally retarded, with two kids and a
mediocre life if he isn’t able to gratify this woman’s need? It all falls
down to the irresponsibility of this mother. I don’t see any reason why
the mother should earn the custody of the child. Upon the reasons I
mentioned above, my client undoubtedly deserves the custody of this
child.