The Case for Father Custody
“It is fatherhood that makes childhood possible.” ~ Daniel Amneus
A judge will try a divorce case in the morning and place the children in the mother’s custody. He will try a criminal case in the afternoon and send a man to prison for robbing a liquor store. 
The chances are three out of four that the criminal he sends to prison grew up in a female headed household just like the one he himself created that morning when he tried the divorce case.[1] He can’t see any connection between the two cases. The time lag prevents him: the kids he placed in the mother’s custody were toddlers and the criminal he sent to prison was in his teens or twenties. Toddlers don’t rob liquor stores.
Besides, most fatherless boys don’t grow up to rob liquor stores and most fatherless girls don’t grow up to breed illegitimate children. Therefore what? Therefore the legal policy of giving custody to mothers is OK? Therefore we can ignore the increased probability that fatherlessness will create delinquency?
This is the “safe drunk driver argument.” Most drunk drivers don’t get in accidents. They get home safely and sleep it off. Therefore drunk driving is OK.
It’s not OK.
And exiling fathers from families is not OK. The fact that will not go away is stated by sociologist David Popenoe in his book Life Without Father:
The negative consequences of fatherlessness are all around us. They affect children, women, and men.
Evidence indicating damage to children has accumulated in near tidal-wave proportions. Fatherless children experience significantly more physical, emotional, and behavioral problems than do children growing up in intact families.
Why do Judges routinely award custody of children to mothers when they try a divorce case?
American Fathers 