Jump to content
JWTalk - Jehovah's Witnesses Online Community

Child Custody Cases

We lock topics that are over 365 days old, and the last reply made in this topic was 1374 days ago. If you want to discuss this subject, we prefer that you start a new topic.

Recommended Posts

Hi,  I'm not sure where to post this so it might get moved.  I just thought that it would be nice to post cases where the courts have ruled that our religion cannot be used against a parent in a child custody case.  I know that this can still be an issue sometimes.  I know a sister who lost her daughter due to being a Witness and two other sisters lost their children because of the same Judge in the 2000's.  They lost them to their ex's.  Most courts in countries like the United States including the US have ruled in our favor in some cases on appeal.


Please post if you know of cases where a court said that a non-custodial parent has the right to share his or her beliefs with the child/children or if you want to share other cases involving child custody.


I have posted some information on cases from our publications as well as links to some court decisions. 




Stone v Stone this case dates back to 1943 in the Washington State Supreme Court.  In fact, I know one the children, of course, she's not a child anymore.   It's mentioned in the above article.



Waites v Waites Supreme Court of Missouri 1978 https://casetext.com/case/waites-v-waites-1 


Smith v Smith 1961 Supreme Court of Arizona https://law.justia.com/cases/arizona/supreme-court/1961/6876-0.html


In the Petition of Deierling Iowa Court of Appeals 1988 https://law.justia.com/cases/iowa/court-of-appeals/1988/87-200-0.html









These are just some of the cases that I know of.


Edited by JW2017
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know of any cases myself, and while I do believe these cases are relatively rare, the arguments against us are flawed, prejudiced, and remain basically the same; that children of Jehovah's Witnesses are somehow deprived of a "normal" life or are in some imagined danger.


Well, when someone wants to make a claims like that, they should always have the burden of proving HARM. Just being different and not doing things the way most people do things is not inherently harmful.





Edited by Bob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

About JWTalk.net - Jehovah's Witnesses Online Community

Since 2006, JWTalk has proved to be a well-moderated online community for real Jehovah's Witnesses on the web. However, our community is not an official website of Jehovah's Witnesses. It is not endorsed, sponsored, or maintained by any legal entity used by Jehovah's Witnesses. We are a pro-JW community maintained by brothers and sisters around the world. We expect all community members to be active publishers in their congregations, therefore, please do not apply for membership if you are not currently one of Jehovah's Witnesses.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

JWTalk 22.12.4 (changelog)