Should Mary Winkler Get Custody?
September 12, 2007 – 5:06 pmI wanted to ask you a quick question because I might have a chance to be called on as a legal expert on one of those TV talk shows.
I haven’t made up my mind yet about the issue and would appreciate your input.
Here’s what I know:
Mary Winkler killed her husband. She claims, and a jury believes, he abused her.
They might have been fighting about finances before she killed him. Mary was ripped off in one of those Nigerian check scams you see in your email.
Mary served the sentence handed down by the Court. Mary is now seeking custody of her three girls, ages 9, 7 & 2.
Do you know any facts that would help me take a position here?
Any strong opinions you believe could influence my thinking?
If so, please share what you know or think on my blog at http://www.familywealthmatters.com.
If you’ve never posted on a blog before, just click on the link and go to the post titled “Should Mary Winkler Have Custody.”
Then, scroll down to the bottom of the post and click on comments.
Let me know your thoughts.
Thanks, Alexis
PS - Avoid getting scammed like Mary did by the Nigerian check scam by talking to your Personal Family Lawyer before any business/money transaction involving more money than you could stand to lose.
Don’t have one? http://www.personalfamilylawyer.com
PPS - please post any comments you were going to email me on the blog so you can make sure I see it. My assistants are now getting overloaded checking my email and have begged me to use the blog for discussion.
PPPS - new look coming tomorrow!
14 Responses to “Should Mary Winkler Get Custody?”
About Mary Winkler and myself- I thought I knew everything (about parenting) before I had children… what a parent should and shouldn’t do, what kinds of things affect one’s ability to parent, etc. I was full of judgement and had a “know-it-all” attitude.
After becoming a mother, divorcing my abusive husband, and living a somewhat eccentric life, I realize that we are ALL doing the best we can on any given day. I know for SURE that people judge me by the way I parent, my counter-culture belief system, and the way I look. Some of these people would even argue that I’m a bad mother, and should have my children removed from my care.
But I love my children, tend to their needs, keep them safe, and demonstrate loving relationships. If Mary does this despite her mistakes, bad judgment, or past abusive relationship, she should be allowed to parent her children.
I strongly believe in empowering Mary to be a confident and wise mother, rather than punishing her. I know from experience that abuse can build up and become intolerable, leading to the worst imaginable.
Let her be. Allow her to grow and become healthy. Give her the resources to break old patterns and become self-aware. This will allow her to make better choices and therefore provide a better life for her and her children.
By Amanda Yang on Sep 12, 2007
This is a tough, especially with the age range of the children. I think that, given her psychiatric problems, any custody of the children would need to be closely monitored. I also think and hope that the opinion of the older children will be evaluated, although I suspect that they may have contributed to the jury’s original findings.
If she’s stable enough, and monitored, I think the children need her.
By John on Sep 12, 2007
There are several issues here that I would think come into play as regardign fitness for custody but there really isn;t enough information to make a decision or recommendation. The fact that Mary may have committed a large sum of money without discussing it with her spouse makes you question her judgement, but if she was doing it in an attempt to get out (have enough money in hand so she could walk out with the kids) that might be understandable. But there should be police records and other information to support her claim of abuse. If those records support her claims, and the court decision does as well, then the next thing to look at would be her economic fitness. Are the kids better off where they are, or would they be better off with her? Or should she have “visitation rights” while the children remain in a foster care situation? The courts often pay too much atention to biology rather than the well being of the subjects at hand IMO. That said, I realize the foster care system is could be a nightmare for any child in it, so that should be considered too. Bottom line, the children and their situation should be weighed more heavily in the decision than Mary’s wants.
By Bob Friend on Sep 12, 2007
There is no justification for killing your spouse… unless it is clearly in selfdefness and you believe your life is in imminent danger (e.g. someone is physically attacking you). This was not the case. Regardless of any abuse that may have occured or how rotten a person he may have been (no one really knows) it is not justified. There are other ways to end a relationship.
The question as to whether she should get custody seems obvious. First, I don’t think there is any reasonable Judge that would grant custody. Second, she killed the children’s Father! Stop for a moment and put yourself in the children’s shoe’s. How would you feel? What would you be teaching the kid’s? Would you assume someone with the rationale to kill because the situation was intolerable is fit to be a parent?
By Sean on Sep 12, 2007
I don’t know if she was abused or not but I have a huge amount of sympathy for those that are because I have been both as a child by parents (physical and mental) and in relationships and it can really make a person do things that they should not. So I think she should absolutely get custody of her children as long as she is a fit mother.
By Dennis Sanders on Sep 12, 2007
I do not know her motive or if the motive has ever been determined. If a history of domestic violence was presented and the jury accepted it, consider where thousands of women have and now stand who are living in the same scenario: controlled by the threat of death to their own lives and lives of their children if they report the domestic abuse. Now refresh your memory with the 2005 ruling of Castle Rock v Gonzales, which states the local law enforcement is *not* responsible for enforcing restraining orders. In the Gonzales case, 3 small children were found dead in their father’s car after repeated calls by the mother who pleaded with law enforcement to uphold the restraining order.
Women living under this nightmare often feel there is only one way to stop it and to save the lives of their children.
By R. Ergazoa on Sep 12, 2007
Depending on what the facts and evidence were behind the killing, the relevant factors bearing on a custody decision will have to take into consideration:
what is in the best interest of the children?
is the mother mentally, emotionally and financially able to care for her children?
what weight will a court give to the fact that she is the biological parent? Perhaps the law favors the surviving parent (ala O.J. Simpson).
Thanks.
By Roberta on Sep 12, 2007
I only know what I read in the paper and if they facts are true,i.e., that she was being abused by her husband and felt under additional pressure with finances, then in fact she could have been considered “temporarily insane when she killed him” She has served her sentence. From all indications, she was a loving and devoted mother and I would think that she should absolutely retain custody. I have real concerns that the little girls would be raised by his parents who would clearly try to “poison” their minds about their mother and this would be a psychologically very unhealthy situation. Children love their parents and unless there is any indication that she was an unfit parent, she would be able to have the children. Perhaps for the first year she would have to have some court supervision.
Lee
By Lee Hausner on Sep 13, 2007
If you believe in the justice system and consider that she has paid her debt to society, then she should get custody of the children.
However,society has a double standard. Pedofiles go to jail do there time, but hounded by society for ever.
Society either needs to adhere to the rule of law or change the laws to make the penalties more severe.
As this case stands, I believe she should get complete and unrestricted custody.
But then what the hell do I know, I’m a Canadian.
By Gerry on Sep 13, 2007
No I do not believe that Mary Winkler should have custody of her children. She has proven that she has very poor judgment in choosing to kill rather than to walk away. By Mary’s own admission, her oldest daughter walked in,and saw her father on the floor, bleeding to death and begging for help. Mary said that she told her daughter to go and get the other 2 children up as they were going to the beach. Who would want her to have custody? She was not thinking of her children at any time. If she had thought of her children and still wanted to kill her husband would she have killed him with the children in the house? She did plan it as she says she unplugged the phone before she shot him so he could not call for help.
I do not know if he committed abuse or not, but her decision to kill him makes her judgment poor at the very least.
What did she think would happen to her children when she went to jail? Would it have been better to have no parent versus a divorced parent?
Her choice to go on the Oprah show today and talk about the abuse shows that she still chooses herself first.
Her children have been through enough and should be able to heal without their mom telling the world how sad she is and how abused she was and what a creep their father was to her…
By Trisha on Sep 13, 2007
This was a tough one! I grew up in a household of abuse, receiving it and watching my mother on the receiving end as well. Having said that, I have to agree with Trisha’s comments above. I don’t know all the facts in this case and I only watched a brief snippet of the Oprah Winfrey interview. It seems that this was not really a case of self-defense but rather a premeditated act! That’s a whole different ball game in my opinion. Mary could have chosen a different path at any time rather than taking a life. She COULD have fled in the middle of the night, as my mother did…arriving with two kids in tow after another abusive event (towards me), on her lawyer’s doorstep. She could have sought an escape from friends, family, or the community. She could have sought counseling, police intervention, etc. It seems to me that if Mary indeed had the welfare of her children at the heart of things she would have made a DIFFERENT choice long before things reached this catastrophic point. And, what kind of role model is she being to her children? Is she teaching her children that when life deals you an excessively stressful situation you must resort to killing and then hiding out from the law?
The bottom line is the needs and wants of the children and those must supersede Mary’s wants; she made a fateful choice. While I believe Mary may be a truly loving mother, she should only be allowed supervised access to her children at this time. There is much more healing necessary for everyone involved; It is certainly too soon, in my view, to simply allow things to proceed as if nothing ever happened.
By Cristina on Sep 13, 2007