Should Ludacris get full custody of the child he tried to have aborted?

[Yup]

@NoMayo15 I didn't know you were ludacris payroll..hope it doesn't cut down with all the lawyer fees that he will be paying.

 

[Opus]

What the hell are

Nevermind

 

[Yup]

You say Luda trying to get out of paying his BM, but, why do you forget about Luda's BM? If she wasn't so greedy by asking for more money she would still be receiving $7k in child support. Let's say there was no such thing as child support, would Luda's BM still have his baby or would she get an abortion? She would most likely have an abortion, still be with Luda and everyone would be happy. At the end of it all, its as you said no one took responsibility and theres an innocent child in the mix.

What's best for the child?I believe its best for the kid to live with her father. At the end of the day Luda has the best resources to take better care of the child. I have seen with my own eyes that single mothers aren't responsible enough to take proper care of their children.

A child needs two things financial resource and a present parent. I agree with the judge's decision if the mother doesn't straighten herself out.

What no one mentions other that money...what would make ludacris a suitable parent. The occasional photo op/child support with another daughter isn't raising her.

 

[Yup]

Non, c'est une bonne femme.

J'ai dit qu'elle est bete...etre une bonne femme n'a rien avoir

 

[mrken12]

A child needs two things financial resource and a present parent. I agree with the judge's decision if the mother doesn't straighten herself out.

What no one mentions other that money...what would make ludacris a suitable parent. The occasional photo op/child support with another daughter isn't raising her.

Both parents should be present. Money isn't a substitute parent.

 

[Yup]

Both parents should be present. Money isn't a substitute parent.

that's the point ive been making...this whole time.

 

[Y2Dre]

Since Black single mothers have failed the last 5 generations or so Id say yes let him have the child.


Time for the Black man to step up.

 

[William F. Russell]

A child needs two things financial resource and a present parent. I agree with the judge's decision if the mother doesn't straighten herself out.

What no one mentions other that money...what would make ludacris a suitable parent. The occasional photo op/child support with another daughter isn't raising her.

As far as the black letter of the law is concerned, a parent who can: remain employed, provide a stable household/family environment, provide more finances for the child's expenses, afford the best schools for the child, and provide the most resources for the child's personal development is the more suitable parent under the "best interests of the child" standard.

Ludacris is worth millions, has steady income, is in a better position to cover the child's expenses and can afford to put her in the better schools that would provide her with the best opportunities for her personal growth and future achievement. Moreover, he's married to Eudoxie and can provide a stable, two-parent family environment. Ludacris' personal situation and, consequently his ability to provide for his daughter, is vastly superior to that of the baby mama. The baby mama works as a bartender at a strip club. Given that line of employment, she is unable (or will struggle at the very least) to cover the child's expenses and place her in the best schools. As a matter of fact, she was relying mainly on Ludacris' monthly child support payments to provide for the child. She is single and cannot provide anywhere near as stable a family environment as Ludacris can. Also, the likelihood of obtaining further education and training to obtain better employment opportunities to provide for the child is seemingly unlikely. Compare to Ludacris who is an established and very successful rapper and actor and most likely will not struggle financially. Although the baby mama is the child's biological mother, she failed to maintain a strong bond between herself and the child, as evidenced by the fact that she frequently leaves the child with her family members for months at a time while she leaves time.

Discussion of Ludacris' initial offer to the baby mama to have the child aborted is irrelevant because, as others have noted, many mothers especially contemplate abortion if they feel they are unprepared to have a child. The baby mama admitted to considering the offer. Seeing as the child has been born, Ludacris' offer has no bearing as to the court's "best interests of the child" analysis. Likewise, discussion of Ludacris' motive to marry Eudoxie is irrelevant. It is not the court's duty to investigate the motive behind a couple's decision to get married. Moreover, Ludcaris and Eudoxie have had a long-standing, much publicized romantic relationship before their decision to get married.

Under the "best interests of the child" standard, the court made the correct decision with the correct analysis. Ludacris deserves to have full primary custody of his daughter. At least the baby mama can still visit the child 11 days each month.

 

[Yup]

As far as the black letter of the law is concerned, a parent who can: remain employed, provide a stable household/family environment, provide more finances for the child's expenses, afford the best schools for the child, and provide the most resources for the child's personal development is the more suitable parent under the "best interests of the child" standard.

Ludacris is worth millions, has steady income, is in a better position to cover the child's expenses and can afford to put her in the better schools that would provide her with the best opportunities for her personal growth and future achievement. Moreover, he's married to Eudoxie and can provide a stable, two-parent family environment. Ludacris' personal situation and, consequently his ability to provide for his daughter, is vastly superior to that of the baby mama. The baby mama works as a bartender at a strip club. Given that line of employment, she is unable (or will struggle at the very least) to cover the child's expenses and place her in the best schools. As a matter of fact, she was relying mainly on Ludacris' monthly child support payments to provide for the child. She is single and cannot provide anywhere near as stable a family environment as Ludacris can. Also, the likelihood of obtaining further education and training to obtain better employment opportunities to provide for the child is seemingly unlikely. Compare to Ludacris who is an established and very successful rapper and actor and most likely will not struggle financially. Although the baby mama is the child's biological mother, she failed to maintain a strong bond between herself and the child, as evidenced by the fact that she frequently leaves the child with her family members for months at a time while she leaves time.

Discussion of Ludacris' initial offer to the baby mama to have the child aborted is irrelevant because, as others have noted, many mothers especially contemplate abortion if they feel they are unprepared to have a child. The baby mama admitted to considering the offer. Seeing as the child has been born, Ludacris' offer has no bearing as to the court's "best interests of the child" analysis. Likewise, discussion of Ludacris' motive to marry Eudoxie is irrelevant. It is not the court's duty to investigate the motive behind a couple's decision to get married. Moreover, Ludcaris and Eudoxie have had a long-standing, much publicized romantic relationship before their decision to get married.

Under the "best interests of the child" standard, the court made the correct decision with the correct analysis. Ludacris deserves to have full primary custody of his daughter. At least the baby mama can still visit the child 11 days each month.

From a legal perspective....from a general life standpoint...it remains to be seen seen.

Many celeb marriages are sham anyway. Wasn't he last seen with his fiancee at the time throwing money at strippers...the man is not going to change much with a new baby.

You're right the court made the best decision based on the options available to them.

 

[Yup]

As far as the black letter of the law is concerned, a parent who can: remain employed, provide a stable household/family environment, provide more finances for the child's expenses, afford the best schools for the child, and provide the most resources for the child's personal development is the more suitable parent under the "best interests of the child" standard.

Ludacris is worth millions, has steady income, is in a better position to cover the child's expenses and can afford to put her in the better schools that would provide her with the best opportunities for her personal growth and future achievement. Moreover, he's married to Eudoxie and can provide a stable, two-parent family environment. Ludacris' personal situation and, consequently his ability to provide for his daughter, is vastly superior to that of the baby mama. The baby mama works as a bartender at a strip club. Given that line of employment, she is unable (or will struggle at the very least) to cover the child's expenses and place her in the best schools. As a matter of fact, she was relying mainly on Ludacris' monthly child support payments to provide for the child. She is single and cannot provide anywhere near as stable a family environment as Ludacris can. Also, the likelihood of obtaining further education and training to obtain better employment opportunities to provide for the child is seemingly unlikely. Compare to Ludacris who is an established and very successful rapper and actor and most likely will not struggle financially. Although the baby mama is the child's biological mother, she failed to maintain a strong bond between herself and the child, as evidenced by the fact that she frequently leaves the child with her family members for months at a time while she leaves time.

Discussion of Ludacris' initial offer to the baby mama to have the child aborted is irrelevant because, as others have noted, many mothers especially contemplate abortion if they feel they are unprepared to have a child. The baby mama admitted to considering the offer. Seeing as the child has been born, Ludacris' offer has no bearing as to the court's "best interests of the child" analysis. Likewise, discussion of Ludacris' motive to marry Eudoxie is irrelevant. It is not the court's duty to investigate the motive behind a couple's decision to get married. Moreover, Ludcaris and Eudoxie have had a long-standing, much publicized romantic relationship before their decision to get married.

Under the "best interests of the child" standard, the court made the correct decision with the correct analysis. Ludacris deserves to have full primary custody of his daughter. At least the baby mama can still visit the child 11 days each month.

Having millions does not necessarily make you a suitable parent...and I doubt that largely influencd the decision to makr ludacris have full custody.

 

[William F. Russell]

Having millions does not necessarily make you a suitable parent...and I doubt that largely influencd the decision to makr ludacris have full custody.

I'm positive that it did.

And I didn't say that him having millions makes him a better parent. But it certainly a factor the court considers under the "best interests of the child" analysis. His millions + the other mentioned factors = a more suitable parent.

 

[Yup]

L

I'm positive that it did.

And I didn't say that him having millions makes him a better parent. But it certainly a factor the court considers under the "best interests of the child" analysis. His millions + the other mentioned factors = a more suitable parent.

Him being financially viable was definitely counted but whay I am saying is if the womsoman made an average income snssnd was responsible parent...the court would have more likely leaned towards her than ludacris.

 

[William F. Russell]

L

Him being financially viable was definitely counted but whay I am saying is if the womsoman made an average income snssnd was responsible parent...the court would have more likely leaned towards her than ludacris.

1. Check your grammar/spelling.

2. You're devolving into hypotheticals.

3. If she made average income and was a responsible parent, the analysis may have been different and she may have had primary custody (with Ludacris continuing to pay monthly child support). However, this was clearly not the case so you bringing up that hypo is unnecessary.

 

[Cynical Thoughts]

Why should a women get full custody of a child she cant support on her own?

Why should a women get custody/support of a kid knowing the man didnt want the kid(yet she continued on with the pregnancy)?

Why we gonna act like she isnt concerned more about the money than the kid?

Why does she want anything to do with a man(and his money)who wanted to kill her kid?

 

[KyokushinKarateMan]

Since Black single mothers have failed the last 5 generations or so Id say yes let him have the child.


Time for the Black man to step up.

You could've said that differently than "single Black mothers have "failed" for the past 5 generations"..

The things that are holding the Black community back cannot be remedied by simply changing the gender of the 'single parent' in the home

Or in other words, had it been single Black fathers raising the Black children for the past 5 generations we could easily be in the same position- hell, one could likely say we'd be in a worse position, even.. when you consider the fact that because Black men are such a target and so easily swept into the system the rate of Black children being abandoned and shuffled into the system would increase dramatically.


Makes no sense to try to blame "single Black mothers" for anything.

You sound like an out of touch c00n who has an agenda against women or something.

Mind you, that's just what you SOUND like.. may not actually be the case