In the interest of the child
Presiding Judge Dorothy T. Beasley, of the Georgia Court of Appeals, wrote an eloquent statement of children's rights after divorce:
"Although the dispute is symbolized by a 'versus' which signifies two adverse parties at opposite poles of a line, there is in fact a third party whose interests and rights make of the line a triangle. That person, the child who is not an official party to the lawsuit but whose well-being is in the eye of the controversy, has a right to shared parenting when both are equally suited to provide it. Inherent in the express public policy is a recognition of the child's right to equal access and opportunity with both parents, the right to be guided and nurtured by both parents, the right to have major decisions made by the application of both parents' wisdom, judgement and experience. The child does not forfeit these rights when the parents divorce."
["In the interest of A.R.B., a child", Georgia Court of Appeals, Case No. A93A0698, July 2, 1993. Subsesquently heard by the Supreme Court of Georgia, which upheld the Court of Appeals finding that, according to public policy of Georgia, joint custody was in the best interests of children when both parents are fit.]
2018 Mindful Pause / Proactive Mindfulness
See: Demystifying mindfulness - Mindfulness & spirituality - From mindless to mindful - One-minute mindfulness exercise - Mindful listening - Embodied relational mindfulness - Relational mindfulness - Bodyfulness - Existential mindfulness - Reactive vs Proactive quotes & thoughts - Mindfulness exercises - Secular alternative 12 steps