Fathers Rights's topics - tribe.net

CHILD SUPPORT and SSDI

Joe — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:25:30 GMT

I need to vent, I know that noone really cares but here it goes

My nightmare started 11 years ago. When I decided my kids and myself needed a better life. I took my children and filed for divorce and custody. When I went to court my now ex was on the stand crying the judge started handing her tissues while she never cheated on me the guy who spent the weekend there while I was out of town, she didn't know. Just some stranger who claimed he was a friend of mine and I said he could stay there for a few days. So she let him sleep on the couch.

Then how I refused to let her work, and I kept a tight reign on her. So after I spent 4 hours on the stand, explaining the constant drugs, men, and screaming how I decided to take the kids and just leave. The judge awarded my ex custody of the children, and then set my child support at $1,400 a month. which I was shocked since at that time my take home was only $1,200 a month. The first month my check each week was N/A, in which still put me behind on my child support. My company went to their lawyers for me, and found it was illegal to take 100% of a paycheck. So I started getting $90 a week which I started getting farther behind on child support

Spent over a year living on romaine noodles fighting with landlords, light company, gas company, and the telephone company. Many times would sit at home in the dark wrapped up ina blanket and dodging the landlord. The one evening a week where I would get the kids I would try to go down to a store get 3 chili dogs for a dollar. It seem like every time I would go by and pickup the kids my ex would have a bofriend over and they would be out grilling steaks, drinking beer, and smoking cigerattes. Would go home eat my package of 10 cent noodles.

After over a year of this decided to move out to California to restart my life over, decided to try for custody one more time, This time the court assigned them thier own attorney. She came and interviewed me. Well when it came time for court the kids attorney sent in letter stating how she thinks I am a good influence on the kids, even though my ex had remarried and that her new husband just got out of prison sering 10 years in prison. An admitted alcoholic, no job or any desire to get one. Her statement word for word "is that he is still just their step dad, he is nothing more than a piece of furniture in the background and that the kids should stay with their mom".

Went 4 years without seeing my kids refusing to put them on the plane even went through several months wasn't allowed to talk to them on the phone since they were grounded, from talking to their father

So after another go around in court guess my reward was to reduce child support down to $595 a month. So now 3 years later and a bout with MS and having to go on SSDI siting in a wheelchair the state nabbed my SSDI check for $300 for back child support. Talked to the child support office last friday to see how much more do I owe.. They said I would be caught up, when the subject of getting my child support reduced, told that my daughter was already taken off when she joined the service, and since my son gets a check every month from social security for $750 a month. Then I asked when that stops because he would graduate from high school. Her reply that the state would start taking $595 a month from my SSDI check

So basically 11 years later my nightmare is still here

posted in Fathers Rights - 12 replies

The plight of divorced dads

SunflowerRae — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 05:07:43 GMT

Barbara Kay, National Post Published: Saturday, December 08, 2007

No other topics I write about so consistently provoke passionate personal response as those dealing with systemic discrimination against men. When, for example, I point out double standards for boys and girls in the health care system, or expose the use of bogus statistics around domestic violence, my inbox fills with male gratitude simply for acknowledging an obvious fact: Our culture is profoundly misandric.

Of the myriad forms of discrimination men cite, one looms over the rest: The egregious treatment meted out to fathers in the throes of contested child custody following the "no-fault" divorces most of them did not initiate or desire. My files bulge with stories of disenfranchised fathers ripped from their children's arms and lives. They have lost their homes, their careers, fortunes, friends and reputations, often on the basis of false allegations of abuse (for which their female accusers are virtually never punished). I wouldn't mention such anecdotal evidence, if the anguish in these testimonials didn't jibe with objective data confirming the shameful gender bias that dominates the family law system.

About half of all marriages end in divorce. Women are twice as likely to initiate a divorce as men, largely because they can be fairly sure they'll end up with control of the children. Where shared parenting is the default template, divorce rates plummet. Men are six times as likely as women to commit suicide within the first two years after a separation: That they kill themselves from despair rather than their ex-wives for revenge is, ironically, a tragically eloquent rebuttal to the feminist credo that men are inherently dangerous to women. Although 25% of women make more money than their spouses, 97% of support payers are men (even in cases of shared parenting). Mobility decisions favour women: The psychological comfort to a Vancouver mother of moving near her Toronto-based family will be privileged over the psychological devastation the virtual loss of his children causes the Vancouver-bound father.

Misandry in family law begins with an ideology that views children as the property of women, even though many peer-reviewed studies show children want and need both parents, and no studies show sole parenting by a mother serves children's best interests. This ideology is instilled in judges during training sessions featuring feminism-driven materials, and subsequently often plays out as unaccountable kangaroo courts. The result is that an adversarial mother who initiates a divorce against the will of the father --however indifferent her parenting skills, however superb his and even if the children spend their days with nannies or day care workers --pretty well has a lock on sole custody of the children. If she denies rightful access to the father, she will never be punished at all. Conversely, if he withholds money, he will be criminalized: His picture as a "deadbeat dad" may appear on government-sanctioned Internet sites, and if he goes to jail, as is likely, he will serve a longer sentence than cocaine dealers.

Most men think such kafkaesque scenarios can't happen to them. Happily married men parenting with equal diligence believe in their hearts that men who find themselves savaged by the family law system are congenital losers, or were demonstrably lousy husbands and fathers. Many such "winners" are in for an unpleasant surprise.

"We want to pull away from the idea that parents have rights in relation to their children," said Jennifer Cooper, chair of the Canadian Bar Association's family law section, representing 2,200 divorce lawyers. "Parents" in this statement is the hypocritical lip service feminism pays to humanism: She meant "fathers," for women's rights today are never "pulled away from," only supported or furthered. In the days when children belonged to both their parents, it used to be said that children were "hostages to fortune." Today they are hostages to feminism and the state.

In his new, cleverly titled book, Taken into Custody, Stephen Baskerville, president of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children, paints a bleak picture of the routine injustice a divorcing father can expect when a woman initiates a divorce. Baskerville baldly warns: "If I have one urgent piece of practical advice for young men today, it is this: Do not marry and do not have children." His book, like many others of the genre, makes a persuasive case. Men should read them. If the system does not become equitable, don't be surprised if men choose increasingly, and with reason, to play their trump card: Voting for equality with their condoms.

bkay@videotron.ca

posted in Fathers Rights - 1 reply

1st Annual National Fatherhood Summit - January 4th 2008 - Please attend this historic event in Grand Rapids Michigan

SunflowerRae — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 18:06:03 GMT

1st Annual National Fatherhood Summit.

January 4th, 2008

Grand Rapids, Michigan

Dec 2007

Happy and Safe Holidays from A Child's Right!

We are asking everyone to please place January 4th, 2008 in your schedule book so that you can attend the 1st Annual Fatherhood Summit in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Please help us spread the word about this historic event by forwarding this newsletter to anyone that may be interested. You can easily forward this newsletter by using the forward email link at the bottom left corner of this newsletter. THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP!!

It is very important to note that this Fatherhood Summit is a National event and NOT exclusive to just Michigan. This is the first event leading up to the 2nd Annual Family Preservation Festival which is to take place on August 15th-17th 2008 at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C.

The Fatherhood Summit will bring together husbands, wives, mothers, fathers and grandparents in an effort to begin the New Year recognizing the need for repair of fatherhood nationwide.

So...why should you attend?

This event is packed with an incredible list of speakers, elected officials and family preservation experts!

CONFIRMED SPEAKERS

Judge Willie Lipscomb 36th District Court Detroit

Edward Bartlett - RADAR
Carol Rhodes - Author "FOC Enemy of the Family"
Cmdr. James Semerad - Dads and Moms of Michigan

Apostle Arthur Bailey - Abundant Life Ministries
Bishop W. Durham - Families for Justice and Equality
Robert Pedersen - A Child's Right, DaddyBlogger & Equal Parenting Bike Trek Cyclist

Mike McCormick - ACFC
Dr. Stephen Walker - ACFC
Rev. Edward Pinkney - BANCO
Lary Holland - Get off the Bench
Tony Taylor - Dads Custody Support Group
Bessie Hudgins - Three Sides to Every Story, Inc
Minister Ronald Smith - Children Need Both Parents, Inc
Mr. Sal Frasca
Representative Rick Jones Judicial Committee
Representative Tom Pearce - Child and Family Services Committee

Representative Jack Hoogendyk Child and Family Services Committee
Senator Mark Jansen

Representative Glenn Steil Child and Family Services Committee
Representative Robert Dean Co Chair Child and Family Services Committee
Dr. Michael Ross - Family Rights Coalition
Representative John Stahl
Robin Denison - Parental Alienation Awareness Organization

Torm Howse - United Civil Rights Councils of America

Alicia Crowe, Esq. & Author "Real Dads Stand Up"

TENTATIVE SPEAKERS

Dr. Olu Shabazz

"Possible Address Via Taped Interview"
Dr. Linda Neilsen - President of ACFC & Author "Embracing your Father"

AGENDA

January 3rd Registration and Fellowship 3:00 PM - 8:00 PM

January 4th Agenda:

8:30 AM - 9:30 AM - Prayer Breakfast

10:00 AM - 12:00 PM - SPEAKERS

12:00 PM - 1:00 PM Lunch - Book Signing

1:00 PM - 3:00 PM

BREAKOUT SESSIONS

Domestic Violence Law Reform
501(c)(3) instructions - Organizing
Medication of Children
Spiritual Aspect of Fatherhood
Title IV-D
Parental Alienation
Family Preservation and Reconciliation Act

3:00 - 4:30 PM

PRAYER - FELLOWSHIP - UNITY

--------------------------------------------------------

Who is Invited

This Event is for Wives, Husbands, Mothers and Fathers, and Grandparents...All Family Support Units.

We are Beginning the Year on One Accord and Interjecting the Spiritual Aspect of Fatherhood Combined with Activism.

Bring Your Planners and Let's Get Busy.

This is the First of a Series of Events Leading to DCRally2008.

Sponsored By

Children Need Both Parents - an ACFC affiliate
Dads and Moms of Michigan - an ACFC affiliate
And Abundant Life Ministries

FOR MORE INFO CONTACT:
Minister Ronald Smith
Children Need Both Parents, Inc.
616-301-1515

or visit the National Fatherhood Summit Webpage

WHERE: Abundant Life Ministries
1725 Division SE
Grand Rapids, MI 49503

PRICE: $20.00 Advance - $25.00 at the Door

Register/Pay in Advance

------------------------------------------------------------------------

*** Fall 2007 Issue of "The Liberator" by ACFC***

John Maguire and the editing staff of "The Liberator" did an incredible job documenting the Family Preservation Rally and the 758 Mile Equal Parenting Bike Trek with Robert Pedersen and Robb MacKenzie. This is truly one of their best issues to date!! For ordering information of the Fall 2007 issue please visit the ACFC Liberator homepage.

Thank you for registering for the 1st Annual Fatherhood Summit in advance. January 4th 2008 - Grand Rapids, MI

Sincerely,

Angela Pedersen, R.N.
A Child's Right

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Its time for the 2007 Vancouver Anual "Santa March for Family Justice" accross the Lions Gate Bridge Saturday Dec 22

SunflowerRae — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 02:20:24 GMT

Dear Friends

It's time for the National 2007 "Santa March for Family Justice"

F4J.ca is hosting its 5th annual Vancouver 6km Parade across the Lions Gate Bridge on Saturday Dec 22 starting at 10am at the White Spot parking lot located at the north end of the Lions Gate Bridge.

Last year, Vancouver families were kind enough to financially assist us by helping us get the Parade message out... "Children Need Both Parents"

Their much appreciated contribution helped deliver twenty-five CKNW, and fifteen, 730 Traffic Station radio advertisements to thousands of Greater Vancouver residents in 2006. We believe positive campaigns such as this will inevitably "burst the bubble" of parental discrimination and restore "Family Law" to a more equitable future.

Although many fathers especially at Christmas time are unable to assist us financially, we invite each and every one of you to participate the Parade Dec 22 Truly this is the best gift you can give, is to come out and and participate in the Parade on Dec 22.

We also hope that thoes that can, "the gift of giving" is within your heart this Christmas.

F4J.ca will be donating $500 towards adfvertizing and will be sending out updated Santa March information later this week.

A new 2007 Radio Jingle is currently in the works and we hope to once again fill the airwaves with loving Christmas messages for our Children.

Please forward this message to your various Vancouver contact groups by having them respond to this email with their intended commitment

.

We wish all other participating Provinces and Countries a very Merry Christmas.

Please Note:

F4J.ca website currently being updated with additional 2007 Parade information

Paternally

F4J.ca

John Hummell

johnhummell@shaw.ca

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Anti Misandry

MRA — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 16:55:54 GMT

Hi,

I'm a men's rights activist, and I run this site: www.myspace.com/mensmovement

I urge you all to check out Anti Misandry, as it is a fantastic men's rights message board: http://antimisandry.com/forums.php

Thanks

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Fathers Resources Meeting Tonight in Hamilton

SunflowerRae — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 19:54:03 GMT

>>>> HAMILTON MEETING TONIGHT <<<<
>>>>TORONTO MEETING TOMORROW EVENING <<<<

We are almost ready to begin our teleseminars, our system is almost
ready! Watch for an announcement SOON...

I've just produced 33, one minute podcasts known as Divorced Dad
Minute which will be launching possibly next week, and DADcast is
Season 2 is approaching, plus work on the new web site is underway...
LOTS is going on at FRI.

PLEASE make sure to be at the Toronto meeting next week in FULL
FORCE as we have a film maker coming...

COME TELL YOUR STORY:

Fed up with Family Court?
Fed up with the FRO?
Fed up with your ex and her lawyer?
Fed up with your Judge?

Here's your chance to tell your side of the story - BE THERE!

Our monthly Hamilton meeting is tonight from 7:00 to 9:00pm
and our weekly Toronto meeting is tomorrow evening, Wednesday
August 21, 2007 from 7:00 to 9:00pm Stacy.

Need help????

At our meetings, I will do my very best to give you an easy to implement
strategy to begin turning your situation around TONIGHT. You will leave
the meeting with a game plan and you will have learned how to BE A
WINNER.

We've helped a lot of dads get FAIR COURT ORDERS here are some recent
examples of how we have helped fathers:

* Custody in five cases;

* Joint-Custody in two cases;

* Returned their child from Alberta;

* Returned their child from the CAS;

* Had inadequate investigations reviewed and repudiated by the Court

* Had improperly conducted child custody assessments thrown out by the Court;

* Ensured a child was returned to Dad after the Judge at first said no;

* Ensured the Police did their job fairly & without bias;

* Ensured two "Moms" were arrested for assault of two different "Dads";

* Provided support services to fathers cleared of false criminal allegations.

* Persuaded Police to issue an Amber Alert if necessary to return a child to a Dad;

* Protected fathers from overly aggressive FRO enforcement;

* Prevented the FRO from sending several Dads from going to jail;

* Obtained better access orders in several cases.

* Run support meetings across Southern Ontario

That's because all I do is work with Dads...so we know how to
get it done. If we can't do it, it most likely can't be done. WE are
the EXPERTS in this field, and have trained more Dads to win
in Family Court, even when they don't have a lawyer, because
they can't afford one. We will educate you on what you need
to do in order to properly manage your Family Law matter.

After all - you are the one who is paying for services, you need
to know how to best spend you're hard earned dollars, and what
not to waste them on.

If you work with me, you'll know that the team of legal and other
professionals at Fathers' Resources have the #1 track record in
Ontario for the last 12 years in helping dads win in Family Court or
at very least, improve their situation immeasurably.

I work with some of the finest and most experienced lawyers in
Southern Ontario when it comes to helping Dads. When you come to
us, you will get the truth, what can be done, what's realistic and an
honest appraisal of what costs you are facing, plus what you can do
if you can't afford much in the way of services.

There are countless examples of those who have never ever hired us,
but simply came to our FREE MEETINGS and learned enough to turn
their entire miserable situations around, because they learned new
ways to think, plan, strategize and employ OUR time tested tactics
that focus on "WAGING PEACE" instead of "WAGING WAR" in
Family Court.

Be there tonight in Hamilton and tomorrow in Toronto - Come change you
life for the better, and more importantly, come change your children's future
for the better. You are a Good Dad and its time for your kids to absolutely
know that.

So are you ready to WIN? Then you've got to TAKE MASSIVE
ACTION we've put your action plan together. All it is missing is YOU.

With gratitude,

Danny Guspie
Executive Director
Fathers' Resources International

=========================================================

______________________________________________________________

Toronto Local: (416) 861-0626

Toll-Free North America: 1-888-54-Daddy

E-MAIL: info@fathers-resources.com

Fathers Resources Web Site http://www.fathers-resources.com

Divorced-Dad-Daily Blog http://www.divorced-dad-daily.com/

RSS Feed Divorced-Dad-Daily Blog

http://www.fathers-resources.com/Blog/tabid/581/rssid/6/Default.aspx

Audio Newsletter - DadCast
http://www.fathers-resources.com/DadCast/tabid/621/Default.aspx

RSS Feed Audio Newsletter - DadCast
http://doppler.audioblog.com/rss/divorced_dads_rights_dadcast.xml

iTunes Audio Newsletter - DadCast

http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=136898024&s=143455

COME TO OUR FREE WEEKLY CLINICS
THROUGHOUT SOUTHERN ONTRAIO

Toronto - Every Wednesday 7-9 pm

Cambridge - 3rd Monday of the Month 7-9 pm

Hamilton - 3rd Tuesday of the Month 7-9 pm

Woodstock - 4th Tuesday of the Month 7-9 pm

See the Web Site for full details, free resources, new ideas and
positive solutions to the difficulties children, men and
families face in Family Court.

Learn how to "wage peace" in order to end war in Family Court.

http://www.fathers-resources.com

-------------------------------------------------------------
"War is over (if you want it)" John Lennon 1970

"World Peace starts at home..." Danny Guspie 2004

WHAT IT TAKES TO WIN:

I've missed more than 9000 shots in my career I've lost almost
300 games. Twenty six times, I've been trusted to take the
game-winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over again in
my life. AND THAT IS WHY I SUCCEED. Michael Jordan NBA
Basketball Star

"I've learned 5000 ways how not to invent the light bulb"
Edison

"You do not have to win every battle, only the decisive one..."
Winston Churchill

"There is no Rock without the Roll"
Keith Richards

______________________________________________________________

Copyright 2007 - All rights reserved worldwide

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Vancouver lawyer Carey Linde stirs custody debate

SunflowerRae — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 22:10:10 GMT

Vancouver lawyer Carey Linde is one of the city's foremost crusaders for fathers' rights. So it shouldn't be a big surprise that he wants Attorney General Wally Oppal to amend the Family Relations Act to recognize that fathers have equal rights as parents in custody, access, and guardianship.

In an interview in his Howe Street office, Linde said this could be accomplished by introducing a new section in the law stating that there is a "rebuttable presumption of shared parenting". "If one parent says I want 50-50 access, it's going to have to be the other parent to prove it shouldn't be the case," Linde said. "Now it's the complete reverse."

The attorney general's ministry is reviewing the Family Relations Act. Linde noted that there is already a legal presumption that property acquired after marriage should be divided equally. But Linde suggested that the onus is still on men to prove why they should have an equal right to parenting. "Where the time and money and energy is being spent now is on children, because there is no presumption," Linde said.

He added that he doesn't think the courts should be allowed to rebut shared parenting if one parent makes allegations about the other's treatment of the children without corroborating evidence or without a report from a doctor or registered psychologist. Linde also said that the past and present conduct of the parents toward one another should also be irrelevant after they've separated.

Divorce, Canadian style

> Approximate number of children from 0 to 19 who experienced separation and divorce in Canada in 2001: 2.1 million

> Median total income for single fathers in Vancouver in 2005: $45,500

> Median total income for single mothers in Vancouver in 2005: $27,700

> Men who had divorced or separated were six times more likely to report an

episode of depression over the next two years compared with married men.

> Women who underwent a marital breakup were 3.5 times more likely to report a bout of depression than their counterparts who were still in a relationship.

> Divorces in Canada in 2003 involving husbands who had previously been divorced: 16.2 percent

> Divorces in Canada in 2003 involving wives who had previously been divorced: 15.7 percent

Source: Statistics Canada

Grace Choi, chair of the Vancouver family-law section of the B.C. branch of the Canadian Bar Association, told the Straight that she doesn't think the B.C. legislature will adopt Linde's recommendation. "Basically, what he is trying to do is limit the scope of the evidence that a court should hear when considering what to do with custody, access, guardianship–all those things–when the best interests of the child is paramount," Choi said.

UBC law professor Susan Boyd, who specializes in family law, told the Straight she doesn't think that a legal presumption of shared parenting is always appropriate, because not all biological fathers and biological mothers end up sharing a household or sharing parenting. She also wondered how it would apply with lesbian parents or in cases in which three or four people are involved in parenting a child.

"Do we want to have a rebuttable presumption of shared parenting or joint custody in all of those scenarios?" Boyd asked. She also said that spousal abuse "often accelerates when parents split up".

Linde said that 15 percent of his firm's clients are women who are dealing with a "control-freak ex-husband" or with a "legitimate abuser". However, he also said that there are lots of men who end up in trials against female spouses with borderline personality disorder, which causes havoc in the family and for the children.

"The judges are too quick to think if there is a problem, it must be caused equally by both of the parties," he said. "The judges are not strong enough to call a spade a spade. They'll do it more frequently if they think the man has done something wrong."

Linde claimed that if the Family Relations Act was amended to incorporate a "rebuttable presumption of shared parenting", many women in custody fights would stop playing "head games" with former spouses.

Alison Brewin, executive director of West Coast Women's Legal Education Action Fund, told the Straight that it's a "myth" that women act out their bitterness in the court system. She added that women often can't get their story across in court because it's too expensive. "The court still has not grasped the impact of violence against women and what that means for the children," Brewin said.

Linde said that he used to be a commercial and corporate litigator but took a two-year hiatus in the early 1990s. During this period, he learned more about the importance of fathers in the raising of children.

"One of the most interesting studies ever done was done in Sweden, with thousands of people," Linde said. "The results were the children who scored best across the board were those children raised by their fathers."

He said that the study found that intact families scored second-best, and children raised by single mothers ranked third in such areas as the lack of juvenile delinquency, staying out of prison, maintaining job skills, and empathy. He said it's an interesting statistic, but he also recognizes that the sample was probably skewed because it's the motivated fathers who are more likely to seek and gain custody of their children.

"The sample of fathers who have taken the trouble to fight the system–to become the custodial prime [parent]–are not your average parent or your average father," Linde said. "They're probably better off financially, intellectually, et cetera, and they've made the effort."

He claimed that the legal system has historic gender bias that deems mothers to be more compassionate and better at rearing children. But he said the idea of equal-time shared parenting is catching on among judges. The National Association of Women and the Law, on the other hand, has claimed that women's "systemic inequality in society is also reflected in family law contexts".

Vancouver family lawyer Georgialee Lang told the Straight that Linde's advocacy is a major reason why more fathers are receiving joint custody. However, Lang added that she doesn't expect the B.C. or federal governments to grant a legal presumption of shared parenting.

"I think there would be a lot of backlash from the Canadian Bar Association," Lang predicted. "I think there will be a huge backlash from judges across Canada."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source URL:
http://www.straight.com/article-95239/vancouver-lawyer-carey-linde-stirs-custody-debate

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Adultery and lack of legal repercussions

EdgarC — Tue, 01 May 2007 22:36:55 GMT

My ex committed adultery yet she gets to keep our children. I was outraged when I found out there aren't any legal repercussions for people who commit adultery. I feel that losing the rights to half of everything and even custody rights would be a fair consequence.

Or am I misinformed? Is there something I'm not aware of?

-Edgar

posted in Fathers Rights - 2 replies

father's get fucked in custody battles

Mon, 03 Jan 2005 09:10:35 GMT

an extremely sexist travesty.

read these:
archive.salon.com/mwt/featu...000/07/06/crusade/

www.metroactive.com/papers/m.../05.16.96/master-9620.html

www.dadsrights.org/testimony/test.html

seriously, read/skim them.

you'd be way, way surpised at how many women deceitfully pull the abuse and child molestation card against dads in custody battles. it's a mud-slinging contest for the sick entertainment of the system. and it's part of the corporate/population-increase/matriarchal conspiracy.

in contested custody cases, 80% of the time, women get primary custody, 5% men, and 15% is split, w/ a real 50-50 split happening less than 2% of the time, and the other split structures heavily favoring time w/ mom.

add that to the divorce rate (50-90%, depending on age and whether you got kids or not; w/kids is higher, younger is higher), and add in unmarried kid-makers and the skyrocketing separation stats for them, and that's why single mother households are the most common household structure in the usa.

result: "mom gets the kids, dad pays"
response from society: zilch, a non-issue, until it happens to you - and it likely will (again, check the stats, brother)

posted in Fathers Rights - 4 replies

jaded about women?

Mon, 03 Jan 2005 09:40:25 GMT

don't you wonder how a guy, after such a bitter custody experience, could have any further interest in women?
with all those stats re: custody and divorce?
comments?

posted in Fathers Rights - 1 reply

When did you last see your kids?

SunflowerRae — Mon, 04 Dec 2006 05:38:27 GMT

My husband has a court order to see his daughter no less than one weekend a month - we agreed to this only because we had a court order for two weekends per month and we were only getting one anyway and we wanted to avoid the stress of court.

So....we last saw Kali in September for what amounts to 1 1/2 days, before that August for 1 1/2 days. We've seen her 3 days in six months.

For some unknown reason his ex won't let Kali return my husbands phone messages. Is she even receiving them? It's been 8 years of this for us - Kali is 9. Will it ever end?

How is it for the other parents out there?

posted in Fathers Rights - 8 replies

Feud between Alec Baldwin, Kim Basinger flares up with angry voicemail topic posted

SunflowerRae — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 04:45:34 GMT

Any thoughts on this...?

****************************************

LOS ANGELES (AP) - Festering bad blood between movie-star exes Alec Baldwin and Kim Basinger erupted Thursday when an angry phone message from Baldwin to his daughter was made public.
On the recording, Baldwin can be heard admonishing 11-year-old Ireland: "You are a rude, thoughtless little pig." "You don't have the brains or the decency as a human being," he says, apparently upset she did not answer her phone for a planned call.

"I don't give a damn that you're 12 years old, or 11 years old, or that you're a child, or that your mother is a thoughtless pain in the ass who doesn't care about what you do as far as I'm concerned. You have humiliated me for the last time with this phone."

He goes on to say he plans to fly from New York City to Los Angeles "for the day just to straighten you out on this issue."

The recording was published by celebrity news site TMZ.com, which said the call was placed April 11.

Baldwin's spokesman said in a statement Thursday the 49-year-old actor will be "keeping his mouth shut and obeying court orders" in the best interest of the child.

"The mother and her lawyer leaked this sealed material in violation of a court order," he continued.

"Although Alec acknowledges that he should have used different language in parenting his child, everyone who knows him privately knows what he has been put through for the past six years."

Calls to Basinger's lawyers were not returned. Her spokeswoman also did not return calls. Baldwin's lawyer also did not return a call seeking comment.

Baldwin and Basinger, 53, were married in 1993. They have been involved in prolonged legal disputes over custody and other issues since she filed for divorce in 2001, which was granted in 2002. The couple's differences have been aired several times in public.

Basinger was charged with contempt of court in October for violating terms of a 2004 custody agreement. A motion by her lawyers to dismiss the charges was denied Wednesday in Los Angeles Superior Court.

posted in Fathers Rights - 1 reply

All dads have a NEED to see this video

Leslee — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 02:21:17 GMT

Hi every one

Watch the important documentary "DRUGGING OF OUR CHILDREN" here....

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3609599239524875493&q=The+Drugging+Of+Our+Children&hl=en

(102 minutes long)
EXCELLENT DOCUMENTARY, GREAT WORK

Here's the movies site:
http://www.ostrowandcompany.com/film_detail.php?film=The%20Drugging%20Of%20Our%20Children
THE DRUGGING OF OUR CHILDREN

OVERVIEW

Genre: Feature Documentary
Language: English
Country of Origin: USA
Running Time: 102 minutes

CAST & CREW

Director: Gary Null
Co-Directed by: Producer: Manette Loudon, David Chmura
Associate Producer & Legal Affairs: David Slater
Editor: David Chmura
Cinematographer: Derek Ramsey, David Chmura
Writer: Gary Null
Producer's Representative: Ostrow and Company

SYNOPSIS

How are large drug companies benefiting from the latest trend of selling powerful psychoactive drugs to America's children? Do these drugs really help our children cure symptoms of supposed mental illness, or do they tend to increase depression, violence, and suicide? Are we really treating the root causes of mental illness, or are we just eliminating annoying symptoms?

This feature-length documentary examines the alarming growth in the prescription of powerful psychotropic drugs for adolescents and children. Leading experts, as well as Neil Bush, Michael Moore and Gary Null, provide insightful commentary about the growing trend to pathologize the behavior of children, and then require them to take mind-altering pharmaceutical drugs as a "cure." The documentary recounts the national tragedy of Columbine and focuses on the largely unknown fact that teenage shooter Eric Harris was on the psychotropic drug Luvox at the time he and Dylan Klebold took the lives of 13 other students at their high school. Violence and aggression, precipitated by prescribed drug use, is also explored in an unprecedented discussion between Mark Taylor, the first shooting victim in the Columbine tragedy, and Cory Baadsgard, a teenager on Paxil and Effexor who, in another violent incident, took his teacher and 23 students hostage at gunpoint in his Washington high school. The film proceeds to show the dangerous links between psychotropic drugs like Paxil, Luvox, Effexor and Prozac ñ commonly prescribed to adolescents for anxiety, depression and Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) - and the increased incidents of violence, suicide and psychotic behavior often observed in those children and adolescents who are taking the drugs. The film also provides compelling personal accounts, including a mother going to prison and losing her son to government authorities because she refused to give her son psychiatric drugs. Leading medical authorities and mental health professionals speak the unvarnished truth about current increased diagnoses of recently devised mental illnesses and the unprecedented prescription of a host of very powerful psychoactive drugs to "treat" them. Finally, this documentary explores safer, alternative methods for treating childhood mental illness. "

When you've watched it, please sign the TEENSCREEN Petition, here...
http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html
Unless you've already done so of course

Then see this mind bending site.

http://www.ssristories.com

Please tell others about the film.

Thanks
Leslee

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

What rights?

SunflowerRae — Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:42:17 GMT

Eight years ago I became stepmom to a little 18 month old girl. One of the reasons I was drawn to my husband was because of the visible bond his had with his baby. They were so close and it was beautiful. For the next 2 ½ years we parented her halftime and I became a second mom to her. She went with us everywhere and when her first little brother was born they became the best of friends.

When she was 4 her mother moved about 2 hours away. We arranged for regular visitation – the standard every other weekend, 4 weeks in the summer, etc. The Court Order was never followed. My husband had to fight and argue over every single scheduled visit to insure that it would happen which it seldom did. My husband’s visitation has steadily deteriorated and now we see his 9 ½ year old girl two days a month – tops. Out of the past 365 days we have seen her 22.

My husband was his daughter’s primary caregiver for the first four years of her life. It's so sad to see my stepdaughter lying for her mother and becoming so disconnected from her dad, brothers and extended family. Why are some parents like this? I could never put my children through what my stepdaughter is being put through - being told that we are "bad", "angry", "abusive". And we are powerless. My husband is only the father after all and we live and operate in a society that doesn't value fatherhood or the father/child relationship.

One problem is that in Canada, the US and other countries access orders are not enforceable by law – child support payments are though. We pay our money every month without fail yet there is no recourse for parent/child estrangement.

The second problem is that there are some parents who simply refuse to put aside their bitterness, jealousy and hatred for the sake of their kids.

***

A few years ago I created a petition to try to make access orders enforceable by law. You can find it here:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/329879114

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Dads Fighting in New Zealand

SunflowerRae — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 17:48:45 GMT

Breaking into the silence

· FATHERS need FAMILIES **Petition**

· Please sign gather other signatures and return before 1st June 07

· A meeting with the Families Commissioner and a delegation of fathers is planned for Wednesday 21st February at 12pm. The delegation led by Dr Viv Roberts will present to the Commissioner six fathers stories who they present have suffered from an ante – male gender bias of the Family Court. Dr Roberts has done extension work on male suicides with their consistency for the Family Court and protection orders. Among the stories are highlighted some of the extreme injustices which are held under the wraps of the court’s suppressive powers such as Christchurch father of two, Peter Burns and now Wellington father of two Benjamin Easton.

· The meeting has been coordinated and arranged by Craig Jackson who has worked diligently in Wellington to bring such stories out into the open without the fear of prosecution from the courts for breaching its rules in privacy. Dr Viv Roberts and the others in the delegation plan to ensure that there is an end put to the myth that the Family Court has not been biased or discriminatory against fathers. As a representative of the Fathers’ Coalition, Benjamin Easton will distribute leaflets at the entrance to the Families Commission building of a petition aimed to repeal all laws breaching the association of a son or daughter with their mother or father.

The Petition can be found at (LINK) or simply go http://www.handsonequalparent.org.nz/87741.html

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Out of State Warrents and custody

tydye — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 17:32:31 GMT

So I have been assured that my warrent in California for possession of ecstacy will play a minimal part in the custody battle for my daughter. I live in the State of Oregon.. The charge is over a year old, but I do have a non-servicable warrent. Has anybody else been in this position? Outcomes??

posted in Fathers Rights - 1 reply

Santa March-4-Family Justice

SunflowerRae — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 18:22:26 GMT

FAMILIES-4-JUSTICE (CANADA)

WWW.f4j.ca

PRESS RELEASE

3rd ANNUAL SANTA MARCH FOR EQUAL PARENTING

Families-4-Justice (Canada) in partnership with Fathers-4-Justice wish to announce their support for this Annual initiative.

On Saturday, Dec. 23, 2006, F4J Canada will once again initiate the Santa's March for Family Justice.

The march begins at 10:00am, proceeding from the White Spot parking lot in the south mall of the Park Royal Shopping Centre. The route will cross the Lion's Gate Bridge, the Stanley Park Causeway, and proceed along Georgia St. to the Vancouver Art Gallery at Hornby Street.

The marchers will rally with other concerned citizens, parents and children alike, at the Robson Street staircase of the Vancouver Art Gallery.

The anticipated marching time is 90 minutes from West Vancouver to the Art Gallery, and we will proceed the final block south to the Supreme Court building 800 Smithe Street, for a final ceremony to leave our message where it needs to be heard.

The theme for this year's march is the Grinch Who Stole Christmas, which seems fitting to the hundreds of thousands of BC children over recent years who have had to suffer their holiday without both their parents, because court orders have unlawfully disenfranchised one of these children's parents.

Children need and want both their parents throughout their lives, and it is appalling that the courts of BC claim to act in the best interests of the child by removing a parent.

Notwithstanding constitutional guarantees of the security of the person in Canada, citizens of BC find themselves increasingly under threat against their children.

Children are routinely removed from the care and custody of their parents, and even where they're not, their education and nurture are increasingly being commandeered by the state in directions that are against the natural purview of the children's own parentage.

The courts of BC are being used not to protect the rights and freedoms of the people of BC, nor Canada, but rather to give political advantage and the power of the state to a small group of people who wish to exert undue influence on the future and shape of our society.

The devastation that the courts bring to the lives of the parents they orphan violates at least four clauses of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Nevertheless, the unlawful abuse and exploitation of our children is a career for some government employees, and these demonstrations must continue until justice is returned to our children.

Children deserve the right to both parents

Children deserve truth, justice, and equality

Contact: John Hummell

Coordinator

Families-4-Justice (Canada)

(604) 729 3260

WWW.f4j.ca

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Preliminary Research Results

SunflowerRae — Sun, 10 Dec 2006 02:30:05 GMT

My husband took part in a research study on noncustodial dad's two years ago. We just got some of the results. Here they are:

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS:

A. OVERVIEW

Fathering is both a right and a responsibility.
But it isn't so much about entitlement as it is
about responsibility. Parenting is more about
giving than taking. Most important, children need
their fathers. Somehow it seems inadequate to
say, "I'm entitled to be your father;" rather, as
parents, it is up to us to say, "I am responsible
for you, as I best know your needs (along with
mothers). I am entitled to the support of social
institutions (such as the courts) in the
fulfillment of my parental responsibilities."
This is different than "I'm entitled to my
entitlements" and "the state should provide these
for me." Do not dishonour the father; honour the
father: children need to see their fathers and
mothers honoured by society to an equal degree.
My main recommendation is thus 50-50 shared
parenting when parents cannot agree on parenting
arrangements after separation, rebuttable only
when there is an investigated finding of child
abuse. Only then can a court make the decision to
remove a parent from the child's life, and even
then it is to act with great caution. At present
there is an epidemic of child removals via sole
custody judgments; rather than supporting
fathers, we take them away from their children's
lives--and this is a form of child abuse.

B. BACKGROUND TO PROJECT

A total of 82 separated and divorced fathers were
interviewed as part of a study utilizing
narrative analysis to examine fathers' stories
about their divorces, particularly in regard to
their relationship with their children, and
grounded theory analysis to uncover core themes
related to fathers' perceptions of their
children's needs during the divorce transition,
and their paternal responsibilities vis-à-vis
these needs. Fathers were recruited via divorced
father associations and word of mouth, after
attempts at recruitment via professional service
organizations failed. Over 150 fathers from
southwestern British Columbia, mainly Greater
Vancouver and South Vancouver Island, volunteered
to participate in the project. For many, this was
their first opportunity to tell their story,
despite lengthy histories of involvement with the
legal system, and to reflect on their experiences.

The data are rich and the themes that have
emerged from the analysis extremely varied, yet
certain core constructs are common to almost all
fathers. In particular, both the concepts of
paternal rights and paternal responsibilities are
important to fathers, and for the majority, each
has been violated within the present legal or
adversarial structure of child custody
determination in Canada. The divorce industry as
a whole is regarded as a system that oppresses
men as fathers, in addition to oppressing women
as mothers, extended family members, and most
importantly, children from separated and divorced
families whose parents cannot agree on parenting
arrangements and the court has become involved in
determining what these shall be. Specifically,
two central issues stand out for fathers: the
need to replace legal sole custody with legal
shared parenting; and the need for access
enforcement. Although fathers are divided with
respect to the salience of each of the latter two
concepts, the great majority consider both as
critical issues affecting separated and divorced
fathers in Canada today.

C. PRELIMINARY RESULTS

Quantitative data

Results show a sharp discontinuity between pre-
and post-divorce parent-child living
arrangements, more marked than reported in
earlier studies, in the direction of equal or
shared parenting shifting to primary maternal
custody. Whereas 38 of 82 fathers reported shared
parenting arrangements before divorce (defined as
the point of physical parental separation), only
10 of 82 reported shared parenting arrangements
after divorce. Whereas 20 of 82 fathers reported
primary maternal care arrangements before
divorce, 62 of 82 reported primary maternal care
arrangements after divorce. Second, inasmuch as
it addresses the core needs of children, the most
salutary post-divorce living arrangement for
children, according to 70 of the 82 fathers, is
equal or shared parenting. Only 4 fathers
identified primary paternal care, and 4 primary
maternal care, in this regard. Third, insofar as
it addresses the core needs of children, fathers
believe that the most responsible legal approach
to child custody determination is that of shared
parenting as a presumption, rebuttable in cases
of established family violence or child abuse;
sixty four of 82 fathers identified the need for
such a presumption, while only 4 identified the
approximation standard (as endorsed by the
American Law Institute) and 2 a maternal
caregiver presumption. Sixty nine of 82 fathers
were in favour of some form of mandatory family
mediation. Finally, divorced fathers are quite
diverse in regard to their attitudes and opinions
about fathering: for some a shared parenting
presumption is the priority, for others access
enforcement; some see one dominant unfulfilled
need in their children resulting from father
absence, others see many; some are focused on
fathers' rights, others simply on being supported
to fulfill their parental responsibilities. On
certain key points, however, fathers agree: both
rights and responsibilities are important, and
must be in balance; both shared parenting and
access enforcement are important and related
issues; and, most important, the "best interests
of the child" is equivalent to the child's needs,
and certain needs stick out-and crucially require
father involvement for need fulfillment.

The participants were a diverse and
representative group demographically, ranging in
age from their 20's to 70's, with most in their
40's and 50's, most working full-time and
parenting their kids full-time (or working to
restore their parenting). Although joint custody
fathers may have been under-represented in our
sample and non-custodial fathers
over-represented, the 82 participants spanned a
broad range: there were 58 de facto non-custodial
fathers, 11 in joint custody (shared parenting)
arrangements, 5 with sole custody, and 8 in some
form of mixed arrangement (with 4 of these 8
having shifted from being non-custodial dads in
the earlier post-divorce period to being joint
custodians of their children at interview-a small
but encouraging sign).

A significant number of fathers had little or no
contact with their children, even despite the
granting of legal "joint custody," a largely
meaningless legal term for fathers, as it is not
equivalent to shared parental responsibility
(40-60% of time with kids) in the majority of
cases. Further, fathers experience challenges
restoring a ruptured relationship even after the
child becomes an adult. Yet more than anything
else, fathers value their relationship with their
children; and as such, access denial is regarded
as a form of parent abuse, and for some fathers,
a gendered form of systemic father abuse,
although most fathers recognize that
non-custodial mothers experience the same kind of
grief resulting from their estrangement from
their children. Some fathers felt that access
denial may also be a form of child abuse.

Qualitative data

Results reveal one key finding previously
unreported in the father involvement literature:
fathers define the "best interests" of their
children in terms of their children's needs, and
these needs can be roughly divided into physical
and "metaphysical" needs. Both are important, as
in some cases physical needs prevail, and in
others emotional, psychological, social, moral
and spiritual needs are of paramount importance.
What children most need, say fathers, is a stable
parental (not "access" or visiting) relationship
with both their fathers and their mothers
("children need both parents"); they need to be
loved, and in no way felt to blame for their
parents' divorce; they need a sense of security,
safety and protection in often traumatizing
situations; they need food, shelter, clothing and
financial provision. Parental cooperation and
respect were also core themes discussed by
fathers; as were the needs for order; autonomy;
equality; truth and justice; play and physical
affection; encouragement, respect and
understanding; physical health and development;
and education. Interestingly, a number of fathers
identified the need for roots as central,
reflecting the view that this need of children is
most under threat in modern Western society. As
far as paternal responsibilities are concerned,
most fathers cited the responsibility to be there
for your kids, in some form of loving parental
capacity; followed closely by the notion that
fathers basically have only one responsibility:
respect for their children's needs, as "for every
need there is a corresponding obligation; for
every obligation a corresponding need." The
responsibilities of social institutions, as
predicted, focused on the responsibility to
support fathers in the fulfillment of their
parenting responsibilities, by means of equality
and fairness in court-determined post-divorce
parenting arrangements, with fathers recognized
as having equal rights to mothers vis-a-vis their
children.

In sum, fathers identified a wide variety of core
issues, focused mainly on child contact and
access, equality in parenting, and being valued
and supported as fathers and parents by social
institutions, but they also stressed the
financial costs of divorce and unfair child
support regulations, in the context of a
significantly lower standard of living than they
and their children could have. The findings are
extensive and this summary captures only a
fraction of the many themes explicated by the men
themselves.

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Fighting for NCP Equal Rights in Texas

James — Sun, 16 Jan 2005 18:27:15 GMT

I need your help to spread the word. We have a class action lawsuit we are pursuing in Federal District Court against the AG of Texas. Our claim is that parenting is a fundamental right and that the sections of the Texas Family Code which creates NCP's and establishes NCP possession schedules is unconstitutional.

We can win this! We have the right legal arguments. We have experts who can testify on our behalf. We have a database of NCP's who will also testify. We have a donor who is willing to match contributions.

Read about us and our class action lawsuit at www.pepintexas.org. Please send donations of $50 or $100 to
People for Equal Parenting
c/o Jim O'Connor
7206 Duffield Drive
Dallas, Texas 75248

I know how hard it is not to see your children. Please sow seed into this effort for the sake of future generations. Anyone who would like to know more may write me at jtoconnor@sbcglobal.net.

Thank you and bless you,
Jim

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

this tribe is dead.

Tue, 04 Jan 2005 20:01:20 GMT

resurrect it or it's time to call it.

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

get a lawyer or not?

Mon, 03 Jan 2005 09:12:27 GMT

do they help or just steal from you?
pro per or representation?
what's your opinion on family lawyers in custody cases?

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Court asked to 'depublish' child-support ruling

sean1234 — Mon, 20 Sep 2004 02:33:58 GMT

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040818-111309-3555r.htm

A child-support agency is asking the California Supreme Court to stop a ruling in which DNA tests voided a man's obligation to pay child support from becoming a legal precedent.

Fathers' rights groups cheered a state appeals court ruling for Manuel Navarro as a victory for "paternity fraud" victims, but their celebrations may be short-lived. The Los Angeles County child-support agency has asked for the appellate court ruling to be "depublished," or omitted from official records, so no other man can use it to overturn his child-support order.

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

What I have learned the hard way

Rich — Tue, 15 Jun 2004 09:57:34 GMT

Sometimes you can negotiate a divorce and child custody arrangement; Sometimes you can't. Some people will honor the agreement; Some won't. In a PAS situation, a welfare case or a false allegations case, face it. YOU HAVE NO CHANCE. The only one you can save is yourself.

NEVER...
GO TO DIVORCE COURT for any reason. -- You are always worse off when you leave the building. The only time being in court is okay is when they bring you in cuffs; and make them work for that.
HIRE A LAWYER -- You are throwing good money after bad.
RESPOND TO A PETITION OR MOTION -- Nobody wants to hear your side and you give yourself away too easily.
FALL INTO THE HANDS OF THE POLICE -- Don't drive. Take the bus whenever possible. Don't get drunk. Don't do dope. Don't do anything stupid that will put you at risk.

ALWAYS...
GO INTO BUSINESS FOR YOURSELF -- don't let them get you at work. Avoid the new hire registry.
MOVE -- If you are tossed out on your ass then the sooner you get the hell away the better.
OWN NOTHING -- the more you possess the more you are possessed. All of your money and property should be held in trust or in the name of your business.
BE READY LEGALLY -- Your friends and family should have several legal documents ready as soon as possible(fill in the details as needed): Writ of Habeus Corpus ; Generic federal complaints for violation of civil rights, civil conspiracy, torture, fraud, false arrest and state complaints on the same issues.
BE YOUR OWN LAWYER -- study and research the law. KNOW ALL of your civil rights. A trained Pro Se litigant can get away with much more than a member of the bar. Jury Nullification, Nasty Voire Dire, Introduction of key evidence at exactly the right time. What are they going to do? Disbar you?
EMIGRATE if you need to -- international borders are the best shields.

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Where is the outrage?

sean1234 — Fri, 26 Mar 2004 11:17:40 GMT

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3566777.stm

Troubled singer Bobby Brown has been handed a 90-day jail sentence for failing to pay child support to the mother of two of his children.

Brown will have to serve the term until he pays the $63,500 (£34,815) he owes to former partner Kim Ward, which he told a the court he could not afford.

----------

So they are jailing this one-hit wonder based on an unproven assumption that he is still earning an income worthy of such huge child support payments? Are we essentially setting a precedent that if your income changes or falls off and you do not keep up with a constant rate of child support payments that you are, in effect, a criminal?

This is pure madness.

posted in Fathers Rights - 2 replies

Speeding Father Arrested

Fri, 23 Apr 2004 16:12:43 GMT

From the Associated Press:

RANLO, N.C. -- A Gaston County man almost missed the birth of his own child Monday morning because he was arrested after dropping his wife off at the hospital.

http://www.news14charlotte.com/content/local_news/?ArID=60844&SecID=2

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I like to think that I would've been a bit more rational. But thinking back to the birth of my son, I can certainly sympathize with Mr. Fisher's actions.

I'm very mild-mannered and very uncomfortable with confrontation. But my social dysfunctions didn't mean squat when my son was born. He and my wife were everything at that moment. Absolutely nothing else mattered.

I can't imagine Mr. Fisher's emotions when he saw the flashing lights in his rearview mirror.

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Fatherhood

Fri, 23 Apr 2004 15:12:23 GMT

Before my son was born, I started a site for our family. Since then it's really become just a place for me to write about Ian and fatherhood:

http://www.gilbertsrus.com

I didn't know how strongly I felt about a father's rights until I became one.

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Child Custody At Crossroads

InSoMnIa2oo1 — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 00:53:16 GMT

All separating couples with children would have to lodge "parenting plans" before a new tribunal under proposals to reduce the trauma of custody disputes.

Unless violence or abuse was at issue, custody disputes would be removed from the Family Court and dealt with by tribunals or even an administrative agency.

A federal parliamentary committee is reviewing the proposals, but the Chief Justice of the Family Court, Alastair Nicholson, yesterday called them unconstitutional, impractical and naive.

The chairwoman of the inquiry into child custody, the National Party MP Kay Hull, is "very keenly" examining the idea, but could not confirm that it would be recommended in the report, due by the end of the year.

Mrs Hull told the Herald there was consistent feedback to the committee that a tribunal would "take the heat out" of determining what is best for children after couples separate.

The Prime Minister, John Howard, has asked the inquiry to consider whether there should be a "rebuttable presumption" that children will spend equal time with each parent after divorce.

advertisement

advertisement

Peter Dutton, a committee member and Liberal MP, said the tribunal would comprise a child psychologist, a mediator and a family law expert who would be able to draft the conditions of any binding agreements.

Mr Dutton said the tribunal, which may exclude lawyers, would be cheaper, faster and better able to cope with a family's changing circumstances - as new partners were introduced, or as children grew older and their demands change.

But Justice Nicholson said decisions relating to the status of children involved exercise of the Commonwealth's judicial power. Under the Constitution, such decisions could not be exercised by an administrative body.

"There is not one lawyer on that committee, and they don't seem to have any understanding of that proposition," he said. "If you had a tribunal - leaving out the constitutional difficulties - it would be quickly under the same sorts of pressures as the Family Court is.

"Because people just don't like the decisions in family matters. Many people don't like the way they go if it goes against them, so you're going to get the same. It's no solution." Instead, "It is merely substituting one decision-making body for another upon the basis that somehow the new decision-making body is better".

The federal director of the Shared Parenting Council of Australia, Geoff Greene, said the tribunal would be better - with a starting point that "ultimately we're going to carve it down the middle unless you find something to suit you both".

The idea of a tribunal under the Department of Family and Community Services was "beyond what we would have recommended and what we thought they would have accepted", he said. Mr Greene believed both parents could file their ideal parenting plan and that the tribunal could "pick the best".

National Legal Aid's chairman, Norman Reaburn, told the committee that if the tribunal could make what are now specific interim or final orders about child contact, "the lawyers would have you, hip and thigh".

"If it made orders of that kind, that people had to obey, then somebody would run it up to the bloody High Court. The High Court would tell you . . . the tribunal had to be a court."

Asked by Mr Dutton whether he would support the proposal if the constitutional problems could be settled, Mr Reaburn said that he would, because "it might bring greater elements of expertise and choice to what is happening."

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Custody case ends; dad wins Boy, 5, had been living in N. Ireland with mom

InSoMnIa2oo1 — Mon, 09 Feb 2004 22:39:06 GMT

Published December 12. 2003 8:30AM

RICK CUNDIFF
Staff Writer

OCALA - Dylan Gunn, the 5-year-old at the center of an international custody battle between his divorced parents, will remain in Dunnellon with his father as his mother flies back to Northern Ireland next week.

Circuit Judge Carven D. Angel ruled Thursday that Robert A. Gunn should have primary residential custody of Dylan, the child he and Cara Gunn had together.

"I can't even describe my reaction. I just burst into tears," Robert Gunn said Thursday evening. "There's no word that can describe the emotion that I felt."

Cara Gunn could not be reached for comment Thursday. Her lawyer, Robert Appleget, did not return a telephone call to his office seeking comment.

The Gunns divorced last year, after Cara Gunn took Dylan and her daughter from a previous relationship and left the United States to return to her native country. Angel awarded residential custody of Dylan at the time of the divorce to 30-year-old Robert Gunn.

Dylan, born in 1998 in Northern Ireland, is legally a citizen of both the United States and Northern Ireland. His father is Protestant, his mother Catholic.

Citing a treaty known as the Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, a Belfast court ruled in August that Cara Gunn, 29, had to return to Florida with Dylan for a custody hearing.

"It's been devastating," Robert Gunn said of the bitter fight for his son. "When it first happened, I thought I'd never see my son again."

The case has drawn international attention ranging from Northern Ireland newspapers to the British Broadcasting Corp., which sent a film crew to Ocala.

Lawyers for both parents spent a significant amount of time in court arguing whether Dylan would be in a safer environment in Dunnellon or in the Northern Ireland city known to Catholics as Derry and to Protestants as Londonderry. Angel's ruling never mentioned the differences between the two cities.

The four-page ruling does chastise both parents.

"The parents have prevented the court from acting in the best interest of the child," Angel wrote. "The parents' decision to divorce leaves the court with nothing better than the second best interest of the child . . . If you asked any child after a divorce, 'Who won?' the only answer he could give would be: 'I don't know, it wasn't me.' "

Angel's ruling criticizes Cara Gunn on several points, including the fact that her daughter had little or no contact with that child's biological father before the Gunns' marriage broke up and Cara Gunn moved back to Northern Ireland. The father provided no financial or emotional support, Angel noted.

"This indicates some, if not a total, lack of concern for the ideals of shared parenting by (Dylan's) Mother," he wrote.

The ruling also notes that Cara Gunn complained that Robert Gunn, an information technology officer, worked excessive hours and was never home.

"With only a high school diploma and seven years experience in the Navy, the Father obtained what would have to be described as an excellent job, making over $70,000 a year and home every night. Yet the Mother complained that he worked long hours and too late," Angel wrote. "This does not indicate an attitude focused on establishing a family, but an attitude more self-centered than family-centered. What should have been an asset to the family was an irritation to the Mother."

Cara Gunn testified in November that she had no way to get a job, and often had to stay at home because her husband drove the family's only vehicle. She also said Robert Gunn controlled the family's money.

"It was not shown that these were items of necessity for this family, or that the Mother, or child, were denied any necessities. This indicates a Mother more concerned about matters of self than matters of family," Angel responded in Thursday's ruling.

Angel also regarded Cara Gunn's decision in August 2002 to leave the United States without telling her husband as an example of her "lack of commitment to shared parenting."

The judge found both Cara and Robert Gunn to be competent parents, and that both have a "loving and caring relationship with their son."

For Robert Gunn, that relationship has been strengthened through visits with Dylan over the last three months.

"It's been steadily growing," he said. "For anybody that really knows me, Dylan's my world. He's a mini-me. We have this unbelievably fascinating relationship."

Cara Gunn had temporary custody of Dylan through the hearings, and while awaiting Angel's ruling.

Cara Gunn has 10 days to request a rehearing, and 30 days to appeal Angel's ruling to the 5th District Court of Appeal.

Because Cara Gunn lived for a time in the United States without a proper visa when the couple were married, she had to get special permission to return to Florida for the hearing held in November. She must leave the country by Dec. 19, and is forbidden from returning for 10 years.

Robert Gunn's lawyer, Ron Cole, said he believed Cara Gunn might challenge those restrictions in court in order to live near her son.

"I predict that Cara will find a way to stay here, to come back here," Cole said. "That's the best solution — for all of them to be here in Ocala."

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Study: Joint custody best for kids after divorce

InSoMnIa2oo1 — Mon, 09 Feb 2004 19:58:06 GMT

By Karen S. Peterson, USA TODAY

Children in divorced families tend to do better in joint custody — either physical or legal — than those who live and interact with just one parent, says a major new study.

Children in joint-custody settings have fewer behavioral and emotional problems, have higher self-esteem, better family relations and better school performance than children in sole custody, usually with the mother, says the report in the March issue of the Journal of Family Psychology, published by the American Psychological Association.

That does not mean that those in sole custody are "clinically maladjusted or need some kind of therapy," says researcher and psychologist Robert Bauserman of the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. "It just means they don't do as well on average."

The newest findings are the latest salvo in an ongoing dispute over what is the best arrangement for the children of divorce. This meta-analysis, or scientific study of studies, comes down solidly in favor of both parents sharing all aspects of a child's life, as long as both are capable parents.

The study defines joint custody as either physical custody, in which the youngster spends time with each parent, or shared legal custody, in which the child lives with one parent but both share decision-making and stay involved. This keeps the father in the loop, which helps a child adjust to parental divorce, experts say.

Bauserman examined 33 studies that looked at 1,846 sole-custody and 814 joint-custody children, as well as kids in 251 intact families.

He found that the bulk of the studies show that children in joint-custody arrangements are virtually as well adjusted as those in the intact families, "probably because joint custody provides the child with an opportunity to have ongoing contact with both parents."

These findings contradict experts who believe that joint custody disrupts the stability of a child's life, shifting back and forth between parents, or that it exposes the child to two parents who endlessly bicker.

To the contrary, Bauserman speculates that parents who contain their anger at the time of the divorce may self-select into joint custody.

They are quite capable of continuing to parent together without a lot of rancor, Bauserman says. It is the sole-custody parents who report continued high levels of conflict over parenting decisions with ex-partners.

Almost all states offer a joint-custody option, Bauserman says, although many judges still favor maternal custody and oppose joint physical custody.

Alan Booth, a sociologist and researcher at Pennsylvania State University, says Bauserman's research is solid. "This is very consistent with the things we find. If couples are able to cooperate in joint custody, we would expect the children to do better," Booth says.

Although joint custody may sound good, it does not automatically mean parents won't be in continued conflict, warns Lynne Gold-Bikin, past chairman of the American Bar Association Family Law section. "It is a no-brainer" that children will do well if their parents both continue to parent well after divorce, she says. But we are talking about parents who, when married, "couldn't decide on the toothpaste. Why will they get along now?"

posted in Fathers Rights - 0 replies

Thanks

R.J. — Mon, 09 Feb 2004 19:34:17 GMT

Thanks for inviting me to this group of disgrunted dads. We all need a place to vent! Most of the time I feel that my hands are tied like the rest of you. Sad isn't it? My sincere hope is that we will be able with God's help to have some things turned around for us in the very near future. Our kids need us as much as we need them! The pain is almost unbearable at times as you well know. My heart goes out to you as I hope yours does toward me. Best wishes & strength as you continue in your battle towards the love you have for those who belong to you. Signed, R.J.

posted in Fathers Rights - 1 reply

Mission Statement

InSoMnIa2oo1 — Sun, 08 Feb 2004 14:56:05 GMT

We are a web-based organization dedicated to sharing information on the rights and responsibilities of fathers. Whether you are married, divorced, a single parent, a part time parent, or a father who has been denied the right to be a dad, the bottom line is what is best for your children.

We are not about choosing sides. We are however about putting differences aside for the betterment of our children. We may not have been the best husbands or boy friends but it should have no bearing on our abilities to be a good parent. FATHERS UNITED is about change, changing the hearts and minds of those who hold little regards to a fathers role in the rearing of his children.

We believe there is a real bias in the courts today. A father should not have to go to court an average of 9 times and spend thousands of dollars just to get minimal visitation with his children. Fathers all over live with denied access, restraining orders, allegations of abuse, and child support payments that average 38% of their gross pay. These examples are only a few of the issues that we face daily.

HOMEPAGE:
WWW.FATHERSUNITE.COM
WWW.DADDYSRIGHTS.NET

Fathers Rights's topics - tribe.net

CHILD SUPPORT and SSDI

The plight of divorced dads

1st Annual National Fatherhood Summit - January 4th 2008 - Please attend this historic event in Grand Rapids Michigan

Its time for the 2007 Vancouver Anual "Santa March for Family Justice" accross the Lions Gate Bridge Saturday Dec 22

Anti Misandry

Fathers Resources Meeting Tonight in Hamilton

Vancouver lawyer Carey Linde stirs custody debate

Adultery and lack of legal repercussions

father's get fucked in custody battles

jaded about women?

When did you last see your kids?

Feud between Alec Baldwin, Kim Basinger flares up with angry voicemail topic posted

All dads have a NEED to see this video

What rights?

Dads Fighting in New Zealand

Out of State Warrents and custody

Santa March-4-Family Justice

Preliminary Research Results

Fighting for NCP Equal Rights in Texas

this tribe is dead.

get a lawyer or not?

Court asked to 'depublish' child-support ruling

What I have learned the hard way

Where is the outrage?

Speeding Father Arrested

Fatherhood

Child Custody At Crossroads

Custody case ends; dad wins Boy, 5, had been living in N. Ireland with mom

Study: Joint custody best for kids after divorce

Thanks

Mission Statement

Online Petition