-
Houa Vang 01/11/2012 5:18:00 PM
Is there any real lawyer out there who would really fight for father's right? Many lawyer I have encounter or call for advice seem like they are more on the women's right..and I feel that it's unfair to gather who especially want to be there for his kids. Father always end up with lesser parenting time and it's still consider joint custody..if there's anyone knows a real lawyer who fight for fathers right please let me know. Please email me I love to hear more from information from anyone who knows about a fathers love for his kids. houavang559@hotmail.com
-
Grammawanda 01/11/2012 2:28:00 PM
As I sit here and read these comments I see this is a much bigger problem then I realized... Yet she snapps her fingers and the court system are jumping I DON'T GET IT. I'm a broken hearted Grandmother. My son and I have raised his little boy for 6plus years of his 7 year old son.. While his ex was out looking for her (worn out slipper as she called him) a man she didn't have to be in love with just comfortable with.. Well she finally found him got married got pregnant now she decideds she wants to be a Mommy so we get a letter in the mail that she was taking custody of my grandson and that my son will have his son for 32 hours a week?!?!?! THE WORST SHE IS GETTING AWAY WITH IT!!! She has told my grandsons counslor that I brain washed him because he cries and says he wants to come home!! He Sobbed and sobbed the other night and said "Gramma why doesn't jesus come down and help me? I have been praying that he will ever sense Mommy took me away. I thought I was going to die from a broken heart!! How do we tell a child to keep praying and to have hope when they don't give us much hope... She has been turned in twice by a Phycoloigist from Childrens.. Our little guy also endured Cancer.. He was two and very sick and because he told his Mom to leave him alone she put him in time out in the hospital. Who does stuff like that??? THAT IS THE KIND OF COLD HEARTED WOMAN WE ARE WORKING WITH!! It's hard to do these comments with out writting a book.. God please look down and help all these children that are in so much pain. Stuff like this is the last thing children should have to be worring about. Kids now days have no idea what it is to just be a kid..How are these kids going to learn to be a parent when this is the kind of stuff they see.. To all you woman out there that are using your kids to get back a man that ticked you off SHAME ON YOU!!! You are not looking out for your kids.. Or punishing your children because they want to be with there Daddy... SHAME ON YOU!!!! yes things need to change!!!! If a Mother is not willing to co-parent and give the Dads as much time as they want with their children then they should have to go threw what these Dads have had to go thru so they know the heartwrenching days that go by that they don't get to see there kids and then when its time to say good bye... maybe just maybe then they would know the feeling and not be so quick to use the kids to get back at their significant others, exhusband... I find that in these cases thats usually what it is.. That it doesn't have anythign to do with them being a bad Dad it's because they want them to suffer for one reason or another. Are there bad Dads out there absolutley. But the court system need to realize that just because a woman gave birth to a child does not mean they are the best parent!!! so we need to keep talking until someone listens!!!! I will keep praying for all the Dads and the children that are seperated from their Dads that something changes in the court system that someone will start listening.. As I ask all of you out there to keep praying for us that when this ugly battle is over that our Lil guy is back home where is belongs where he wants to be!!! They say that he is to young to know whats best for him.. Do they really beleive that these children do not know where they feel loved, safe, and where they are comfortable? please email me at grammawanda@live.com and let me know if anyone is intrested in getting something going in Isanti county or if there is a group here that we are not aware of.. GOD BLESS ALL OF YOU...
-
11/12/2011 1:45:00 AM
y is it that a mother can be so selfish with a child?? my fience has a child with another woman and that child is now 11yrs old, the first 5yrs were good wit visitation then after that we got her every othe wknd and alternated holidays ! now since that woman got married we have a hard time even getting the kid for a wknd! we have 3 kids together and not only are we suffering but it has took a toll on my kids !! on xmas last year we were suppose to get his daughter and after we drove 200 miles to pick her up and were almost to the house the mom text us saying the kid is not going,my kids were devistated!! as were we. now the mom wont even talk to us she has the kid ask her when she can come while we r on the phone with her. we ask the kid to ask her ma to get on the phone so we can talk to her and she responde with nope i dont have to talk! this woman has 3 DWIs and a child endangerment and still has custody of her !!! i dont get it at all!! it takes 2 ppl to make a child !! and for a child to have to deal with the battles and be put in the middle is bull!! i dont care how much i hate the father of my chiildren i would never keep them away from them!!! there should be more laws for fathers rights
-
03/25/2011 9:38:00 PM
are there any support groups for fathers in mn. also are there any petitions to sign, any rallies on the capital steps planned?
-
Fatherrightsofminnesota 02/26/2011 9:36:00 PM
Be apart of a network of fathers that lobby for new laws for support and custody in Minnesota and across USA. Email me at fatherrightsofminesota@yahoo.com. I believe part of the problem of reform would be Family law attorneys lobbying to keep the laws the way they are because its a huge business that stands to lose to much money if real reform thats makes since ever happens. I believe Family law has no business to get in the middle of support guildelines and custody issues. This is clearly the states job to regulate these laws in most cases if there's no family law attorneys involved between the parties support guilde lines and custody are fair. However I do believe fathers should fight for more reform. Please email this network will grow like wildfire as one were nothing as a group we are powerful.
-
jackie 11/29/2010 9:51:00 AM
You know iwas a single parent at a very young age,because i was not married and had a child I had to watch out for my child when it came to the poeple i went out with. I tried my best but you know as my grandmother would say watch out for the foxs in sheeps clothing,meaning of corse try not to be fooled,dont just see the outer look,and of corse i thought i knew every thing but I was a victem of abuse and no I did'nt like it but it took me a while to get out,now I like to think i was a good mom I did not do drugs,drink,party,I payed my bills made sure my doughter had food and clean clothes to wear,at 16 years old I was even wasing clothes in my bath tub getting blisters to make sure my child had clean clothes ,with my childs father no where in the picture. How ever I knew of lots of other girls that where single moms that thier kids would wonder if they where going to eat,if the new boy friend would hit them,if mommy was going to do drugs again or drink and leave them alone. You see I was young and had a baby and was forced to have to live in the same low rent area to servive so i was seeing what most dont see!.
Now i am older and have gotten married and had two more children witch are boy's and I am now a grandmother to five wonderful children two of witch are my sons.
I have tought my children to be resonceable and to be good to each other and to treat people as they would like to be treated.
But my worst night mare came after my son got his girlfriend pregnent, he mett a girl with family problems whom was being abused, because of her abuse it drew she and he closer together and are family closer to her, but though no fault of her own,only by what she was acostume to she had no or almost no maternail instict my son took care of her like a child and the baby wo for about 3 years till thay had another and when I say he took cars them I mean she didn't change diapers cook,clean,bath the kids nothing. He even would take care of her when she was pregnent,when her mother left her and her little brother at home alone with no food for days on end he would ask me if I had some food thst we could bring other to her house so he could feed her little brother and her.
Now she has found a nother married him and then after the kids being takien care of by thier father all their lives of their daddy taking care of them she came to his home that he bought at 21 years of age for his children to have a stable place to live with the police and had the children riped out of his arms telling the police that she has costudy and he wouldn't give them back thepolice gave her the children and she took them to california and he has seen them once and can only talk to them when she calls and lets him. All games!!!
The children want thair dad. They have been abused since being in her care and neglected and more. She has been brought to court and has made agreement saying that it's in the best intrest of the children to be with him so it was agreed and he paid for their move back to minnesota and her ticket to so see could bring them back and her fare back only for her to play games one more time and give a letter to the courts saying she did not understand couldn't hear ect... GOD HELP HIM! GOD HELP THE CHILDREN! GOD HELP ALL OF US! (THE OTHER FATHERS HAVING TO GO THOUGH THE SAME THING'S). IT'S ONE THING TO HAVE YOUR CHILDREN BE TAKEN FROM YOU AND EVERY ONE ELSE GET'S TO DECIDE FOR YOU AND THEM HOW OFTEN OR IF YOU CAN SEE EACH OTHER HOLD EACH OTHER BUT IT'S A WHOLE NOTHER TO HEAR THEIR ABUSE,SEE THEIR ABUSE AND FOR THEM TO TELL YOU AND BEG YOU TO SAVE THEM (AND EVEN THOUGH YOU SHOULD HAVE THE SAME RIGHT THEY ARE PART OF THERE FATHER AS WELL YET HAVE NO RIGHT YOU TELL ME WHAT'S WROUNG ?)
SO HERE IT IS 1)THE LAW NEEDS TO BE CHANGED THEY ARE BOTH THERE CHILDREN THEY SHOULD BOTH HAVE EQAUL RIGHT'S AND MAKE IT AGENST THE LAW FOR THE MOTHERS TO USE THE CHILDREN AGEANST THE FATHER'S (IF THEY DONT GIVE HER WHAT SHE WANT'S HE WONT SEE THE KID'S AND IF ONE OF THE PARENTS ARE ACUSED OF IT TAKE A LIE DETECTOR TEST....2)I HAVE ONE BETTER THEN THAT THE CHILDREN SHOULD HAVE EQAUL RIGHT'S TO BOTH PARENT'S 3)MAYBE THE FOOD STAMPS AND MONEY THE MOTHERS ARE GETTING /CHILD SUPPORT SHOULD BE MONATORED TO SEE IF THE CHILDERN ARE REALLY THE ONES GETTING IT!.
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ME AND I KNOW THAT THERE ARE ALOT OF MISS SPELLED WORDS PLEASE FOR GIVE ME I AM THE WORST AND I HAVE TRIED !
-
Ron Flaherty 10/28/2010 11:36:00 PM
Way to go Tim. You are so correct. Unmarried fathers have to fight even harder, even though the woman signs beside you on the recognition of parentage. Why does anybody even ask why fathers refuse to pay support, when the system pushes them out of the childrens lives. And in my case, while I called Social Services from day one and tried to give her money and pay the mortgage for the best interest of the children in the homestead, Social Services sent a letter that they don't recognize paying the mortgage as support, only as gifts. Way to go Social Services. I believe custody to your children should be covered by the constituion, and judges and legislatures should be sued for violating our civil rights. Unfortunately, most fathers don't have $30,000 to fight the fight, while the woman gets the kids and pays nothing, because she already has it. I am disappointed in Melissa Froehle (I may have spelled the name wrong, but you know who). She should not be able to say she is an advocate for father's rights when her group states on their website that they decided not to advocate for 50/50. Put a man in charge of men's right's group, just as women always do. Where in the **** is equality in America. Go Tim. Get it on the ballot. Let us put it to the vote. Fathers are as good as, and often better, than the Mothers, as caretakers. Remember the woman who ran the kids into the lake? Start at 50/50, and then if there are problems, address it to take the time away or require some type of supervised visits. But don't keep this archaic law in effect. It may have been good when women were stay at home moms and Leave it to Beaver was on, but Andy of Mayberry should have changed that. This law makes me rethink equality for all, and sours me on ......
Ron
-
thia 08/20/2010 10:04:00 PM
This bill would be very good it would a lot of father, my husband as a child with a mother who drank while pregnant and now she is pregnant again and post pictures of herself on myspace and facebook when we took this pictures to court they we'er threw out she dictates his time and it doesn't matter what the court says, i have a father who pays child support but doesn't care when or if he sees his boys its sad at least step dad is great fathers need to be in their kids lives!!!
-
Terry Thornberg 08/13/2010 8:32:00 PM
I find it hard to fathom that there is no data to look at. All one would have to do is to pick up a pile of court cases involving custody battles and the bias would show. I imagine there are also studies out there that back up the need for both parents to be involved in raising children. So why is this backup evidence not being aquired. I would like to know specificaly what evidence would be required. I have never hit my kids or my wife and there have never been any charges in 18 years of marriage yet my wife wrote a letter for OFP She coached my 14 year old daughter into writing a letter also and she got it with absoultly no evidence of abuse just a letter with a bunch of lies written in it. I have not seen my 5 children in 10 months. I just recently was allowed under supervision to see my children 2 hours twice a month for the cost of $320/month. What I have experienced is a witch hunt and you are guilty until you can spend $40 to $50 thousand proving your inocence. This is money that the family could be using. I know this bill is about Joint phys custody but there are a plethera of issues to be looked at. Right now if you are a man going into family court you are looking at 10s of thousands of dollars over children that should be used for the family and not to feed the court system. What is apparent now is the huge amount of government agency's being fed by the family court system. Although I am not saying that some of these agency's are needed it is far to one sided and not even close to being fair.
Family court took me out of my business of 25 years and put in a reciever the business lasted 3 months after that all because the opposing attorney stated to the Judge that we could not come to a decision as to how to split the company. The power of a family court Judge is out of control. What happened to the right to be tried by your piers before actions are taken. This is a completly out of control system. In conclusion if more data is needed then lets get going and start collecting any and all data to back up our position. This must be a priority. Thank you
-
Jon 02/18/2010 8:38:00 AM
We should not be leaving the fate of children up to a single judge who cannot possibly know or understand the dynamics of case in such a short period of time. This is completely unfair to children of Minnesota. It is the children that are the big losers in our current system and the only chance the children have is for a panel of individuals (aka legislators) to force the hand of individual judges to prevent bias. I truly hope our legislators understand the power they have before them.
Until you have been through the system you have no idea as to how bias and unfair the divorce process is. My judge said straight outright in court and is on the record "I not a big fan of joint custody". It is completely insane that your children's lives ultimately depend on the judge assigned to your case the day of your trial.
-
phillip 01/27/2010 3:19:00 AM
the entire system as stated to me is supposed to be about the child and in the best interst of the child. Its about lawyers and bad ones at that. Its about self inflaiting judge. Not children.
I have sole custody and I am still at it 13 years later/ Wait till I finish my book with names of corrupt psycological evaluators and judges who protect them not to mention law gardians just looking for a check
-
phillip 01/27/2010 3:19:00 AM
the entire system as stated to me is supposed to be about the child and in the best interst of the child. Its about lawyers and bad ones at that. Its about self inflaiting judge. Not children.
I have sole custody and I am still at it 13 years later/ Wait till I finish my book with names of corrupt psycological evaluators and judges who protect them not to mention law gardians just looking for a check
-
phillip 01/27/2010 3:19:00 AM
the entire system as stated to me is supposed to be about the child and in the best interst of the child. Its about lawyers and bad ones at that. Its about self inflaiting judge. Not children.
I have sole custody and I am still at it 13 years later/ Wait till I finish my book with names of corrupt psycological evaluators and judges who protect them not to mention law gardians just looking for a check
-
Mike 08/13/2009 1:16:00 AM
I am a 33 year old father of four. After 12 years of marriage my now x wife "fell in love" with her boss. Not long after she filed for separation and subsequent divorce. I was devastated, but knew I had to do everything in my power to fight for joint physical custody. After hearing arguments the judge clearly was torn on what to do. He put together a lengthy and to the point "visitation schedule" that offered me the "maximum amount of visitation" he could give. He also noted that he could not "break" with previous rulings and award me joint physical custody. He could not "break" with previous rulings? If no judge has the guts to do so how will it ever happen? The really funny thing is now that my ex wife divorced me she remarried the man she cheated on me with and is now moving my children 150 miles away! I am heartbroken and disappointed with our judicial climate that not even a reasonable judge can "break" with previous judicial rulings. Since when did our justice system become about following policy instead of deciding what is right for the set of circumstaces they are faced with?
So, to recap, in the state of Minnesota a woman can cheat on her husband, marry the sleaze, collect ungodly amounts of child support from the poor putz who trusted her, and take the kids as far away as she wants from a GREAT DAD and our judicial system and our society is fine with that?! It is no wonder we have kids lying dead in the street, high in school, pregnant at 14, and living at home when they are 27 with no job and no prospects. Dad's are the reason our kids stay out of these things! Ask any mom who the kids listen to more, mom or dad? The answer will be very clear..... Our children need their dads, my children need their dad.
Michel Dufault
-
kevin braend 04/15/2009 9:51:00 PM
I have followed the Fathers Rights movement in the State of Minnesota for quite some time. if you contact people pot of Minnesota you will learn that Minnesota is "The Woman's State". All services in Minnesota are geared to assist woman. In Fact many of the web site for these state funded organizations state that family in Minnesota is " Woman and There Children.
Until there is a revolution in Minnesota very little will change. Woman in Minnesota can file an Order for protection and recieve custody of the children. Once this ex-parte order is signed by a Judge, your rights with the children are in effect terminated. Once a woman recieves help from the battered womans system, you can forget about ever having a relationship with your children.
In Minnesota the Laws simply do not apply, as the Courts have wide discreation.
In fact and woman makeing 15.00 per hour at her job fulltime. Reveiving 900.00 a month in child support and haveing in excess of 200,000.00 in the bank can recieve free legal aid from Southern Minnesota Regional Legal Services.
The facts in Minnesota are clear. Fathers have no rights at all. This is why Minnesota now leads the nation in deaths of family member in divorce. C.D.C. study June 2008
Perhaps when fathers have a shelter to go to when they are victums, perhaps when a system of Mens advoctates can assist in the same manner as the feminist womans groups do. Then we can have a relationship with our former children.
Feel free to e-mail Snowrunner51@yahoo.com for more information.
-
John 03/22/2009 6:56:00 AM
In theory 50-50 sounds good, but the reality is that family law judges still favor the mother regardless of the circumstances. I filed a paternity and custody complaint against my son's mother. She recently was arrested for domestic assault when she struck the father of her two older sons while intoxicated. She was on probation for a DUI at the time. This was her second domestic assault charge, has a history of bipolar, and verbally and emotionally abused me throughout our relationship. Foolishly I thought I could help her stop drinking but that wasn't the case. Despite this, after her recent domestic assault when she was drunk in front of her two older children, and arrested by the police, the judge not only denied my motion for temporary custody but awarded her sole legal and physical custody and attorneys fees even though she was represented for free by an attorney. It has cost me $25,000 and went through a full evaluation, and eventually settled where now I am the primary care giver of my 19 month old son, but the Judge still hasn't awarded me child support and now she is claiming I should pay her even though our son lives with me. She is also seeking attorneys fees because her attorney could not recall correctly the parenting time during the settlement hearing and had to spend time and money to realize he was wrong. Tell me what kind of judicial system would award a 6 month old baby to a drunk who struck the father of her two kids in front of them, thrown in jail, and a history of being drunk and violent. The Courts claim they do what is in the best interest of the child, but what they mean is what is in the best interest of the child as long as the father isn't involved. I have two sons, both of which are the most important people in the world to me. Some people think that it is great that I am involved in my children, but some don't understand why I would spend $25,000 to get custody of my son. They don't understand just how important my kids are to me. To some extent the biased attitude towards men in the courts is our fault because we just sit by and let it happen and don't fight for our children. Some admittedly should not have custody, but that also is the same for women. According to a study by the US Department of Health and Human Services, of the reported abused and neglected children, %40 were abused by their mothers, versus 17% by their fathers. (Child Maltreatment 2006, US Department of Health and Human Services) Yet, the courts continue to contribute to these statistics by almost always automatically awardng children to their mothers. This doesn't take into account my son's mothers history of violence, abuse, and chemical dependancy.
-
John 03/22/2009 6:56:00 AM
In theory 50-50 sounds good, but the reality is that family law judges still favor the mother regardless of the circumstances. I filed a paternity and custody complaint against my son's mother. She recently was arrested for domestic assault when she struck the father of her two older sons while intoxicated. She was on probation for a DUI at the time. This was her second domestic assault charge, has a history of bipolar, and verbally and emotionally abused me throughout our relationship. Foolishly I thought I could help her stop drinking but that wasn't the case. Despite this, after her recent domestic assault when she was drunk in front of her two older children, and arrested by the police, the judge not only denied my motion for temporary custody but awarded her sole legal and physical custody and attorneys fees even though she was represented for free by an attorney. It has cost me $25,000 and went through a full evaluation, and eventually settled where now I am the primary care giver of my 19 month old son, but the Judge still hasn't awarded me child support and now she is claiming I should pay her even though our son lives with me. She is also seeking attorneys fees because her attorney could not recall correctly the parenting time during the settlement hearing and had to spend time and money to realize he was wrong. Tell me what kind of judicial system would award a 6 month old baby to a drunk who struck the father of her two kids in front of them, thrown in jail, and a history of being drunk and violent. The Courts claim they do what is in the best interest of the child, but what they mean is what is in the best interest of the child as long as the father isn't involved. I have two sons, both of which are the most important people in the world to me. Some people think that it is great that I am involved in my children, but some don't understand why I would spend $25,000 to get custody of my son. They don't understand just how important my kids are to me. To some extent the biased attitude towards men in the courts is our fault because we just sit by and let it happen and don't fight for our children. Some admittedly should not have custody, but that also is the same for women. According to a study by the US Department of Health and Human Services, of the reported abused and neglected children, %40 were abused by their mothers, versus 17% by their fathers. (Child Maltreatment 2006, US Department of Health and Human Services) Yet, the courts continue to contribute to these statistics by almost always automatically awardng children to their mothers. This doesn't take into account my son's mothers history of violence, abuse, and chemical dependancy.
-
Mike Murphy 02/26/2009 9:44:00 PM
I note some references here to a web site called Family Law Courts. This is not a judicial site but a propaganda site used by feminists and the DV industry to support their entitlements to "ownership" of children and fattening their money supply at the expense of dads.
The stats which have been provided on mother abuse and mother killings far in excess of dads are consistent over many years. 2006 is the most recent year. Follow the links given by previous posters. All studies of repute show children do better in a two parent relationship and in shared and equal custody. It is a myth their lives are in turmoil by changing residences. Two parents whose agenda is to help their children can manage this well.
What I find to be unequivocally corrupt is the notion by these posters with personal agendas that offer opinions and information that are complete unadulterated lies. It is beyond contempt they would abuse children and an innocent spouse for no other reason than selfish, narcissistic purposes. If they are currently parents - pity the children.
-
Mike Murphy 02/26/2009 9:32:00 PM
I note some references here to a web site called Family Law Courts. This is not a judicial site but a propaganda site used by feminists and the DV industry to support their entitlements to "ownership" of children and fattening their money supply at the expense of dads.
The stats which have been provided on mother abuse and mother killings far in excess of dads are consistent over many years. 2006 is the most recent year. Follow the links given by previous posters. All studies of repute show children do better in a two parent relationship and in shared and equal custody. It is a myth their lives are in turmoil by changing residences. Two parents whose agenda is to help their children can manage this well.
What I find to be unequivocally corrupt is the notion by these posters with personal agendas that offer opinions and information that are complete unadulterated lies. It is beyond contempt they would abuse children and an innocent spouse for no other reason than selfish, narcissistic purposes. If they are currently parents - pity the children.
-
WriteNow 02/18/2009 3:59:00 AM
Shared custody doesn't seem to work at all. See www.FamilyLawCourts.com and in particular, the number of men who kill their kids, at www.FamilyLawCourts.com/kids.html
-
Roger Thompson 02/13/2009 5:42:00 AM
Thank You for printing this article this problem needs more attention and definately needs to be addressed with a presumption of joint custody. I am a great father who is being denied a frequent relationship with our children. I just want to be the loving and involved father my children need and deserve. This injustice is hurting our childrens well being.How can any body not want to stop hurting our children when the courts take away either parent. This problem effects millions of people and families and hurts our great nation. Please help stop this injustice. Thank you sincerely a concerned Father
-
Michael Fry 02/11/2009 12:30:00 AM
Thank you for publishing the article "New law could make fathers' rights come smoother" I actually know Joel Lombard because he and I attended Early Childhood Family Education classes with our children. Joel is a great dad. We were the only dads in the class and were praised by staff and moms for taking the time to be there for our kids.
Being a great Dad like Joel is strangely a detriment it seems in Washington County family court. They system is motivated to discount and discriminate against one parent so that is can maximize its child support collections, enabling the county to apply for funds through the Federal Child support enforcement act. Then double dip by putting mom and the kids on welfare and applying for even more federal money. Family law in Minnesota is very simply corrupt government and lawyers helping themselves to the spoils of the fractured family.
It will only stop when great parents, Dads like Joel Lombard, and countless Moms who agree to joint physical custody stand up to the politicians, lawyers and the courts
and say "STAY OUT OF MY FAMILY" and refuse to squander life savings and college funds on the broken process that is Family law.
-
Michael Fry 02/11/2009 12:22:00 AM
Thank you for publishing the article "New law could make fathers' rights come smoother" I actually know Joel Lombard because he and I attended Early Childhood Family Education classes with our children. Joel is a great dad. We were the only dads in the class and were praised by staff and moms for taking the time to be there for our kids.
Being a great Dad like Joel is strangely a detriment it seems in Washington County family court. They system is motivated to discount and discriminate against one parent so that is can maximize its child support collections, enabling the county to apply for funds through the Federal Child support enforcement act. Then double dip by putting mom and the kids on welfare and applying for even more federal money. Family law in Minnesota is very simply corrupt government and lawyers helping themselves to the spoils of the fractured family.
It will only stop when great parents, Dads like Joel Lombard, and countless Moms who agree to joint physical custody stand up to the politicians, lawyers and the courts
and say "STAY OUT OF MY FAMILY" and refuse to squander life savings and college funds on the broken process that is Family law.
-
NikkisDad 02/10/2009 6:08:00 PM
For thousands of years, nature has clearly shown us that human children do best with the love and support of TWO parents who are actively involved in their lives. Modern research has only proven what nature and common sense should have already told us by providing a whole laundry list of statistics illustrating the problems that children from single parent households face. If you truly love children, shouldn't you want what is best for THEM?
As for all of the chicken littles screaming that joint custody will cause more children to be abused, you really should get your facts straight. As others posting here have already pointed out, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' report Child Maltreatment 2004 clearly indicates that when one parent is acting without the involvement of the other parent, mothers are almost three times as likely to kill their children as fathers are, and are more than twice as likely to abuse them. The government's own research proves that the idiotic assumption that "mommy always knows best" when it comes to child care simply leads to more child abuse.
With regards to the legions of judges, lawyers, politicians, and government employees involved in the divorce industry who loudly moan about the absence of fathers on one hand while actively seeking to prevent loving fathers from having an active, meaningful role in their children's lives: shame on you! Obviously you do not value a father's involvement with his children beyond his ability to provide $$$ for their mother and you apparently care more about keeping the $$$ from fathers flowing into the pockets of the divorce industry than you do about the welfare of our children.
-
PJ Lem 02/10/2009 1:03:00 AM
The average taxpayer wonders what is happening with their tax money. All of the groups opposing shared custody in Minnesota are at the tax trough, and it is quite the feed for them, a veritable free-for-all. What is being proposed would save government a huge amount of wasted tax money - being paid to these groups to politicize the family law system, to present society with a false picture on how their social engineering is coming along ( kids are better than ever; according to their good work ) but most importantly to protect their Golden Eggs paid for by taxpayers.
-
PJ Lem 02/10/2009 12:47:00 AM
Comment by carol on Feb 5th, 2009, 12:55 pm :
Oh the times they are a changin....and I see that a woman can still excercise her choice, her reproductive choice. It won't be long till most of us choose artificial insemination as a way to offset the chances of custody going to an abusive father. Children have rights too, they are supposed to start once the fetus is viable, their first right is to safety, if that can be accomplished with both parents involvement that is great. I have not seen that in families with joint custody, it either spawns abuse or exaserbates it, at least in the couples I have known.
PJ : CAROL, CLEARLY YOU ARE OF THE OPINION THAT YOUR 'RIGHTS' AS A WOMAN TRUMP THOSE OF INNOCENT CHILDREN AND IT FOLLOWS INNOCENT FATHERS TOO.
PJ : CAROL, YOU ARE COMMENTING IN TERMS OF NARCISSISTIC ENTITLEMENT AND THEREFORE IT FOLLOWS THAT YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF CARING ABOUT WHAT IS BEST FOR CHILDREN .... According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' new report Child Maltreatment 2004, when one parent is acting without the involvement of the other parent, mothers are almost three times as likely to kill their children as fathers are, and are more than twice as likely to abuse them."
Source: Child Maltreatment 2004, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. According to Figure 4-2 �Perpetrator Relationships of Fatalities, 2004 Child Maltreatment 2004� here, child fatalities perpetrated by mothers or by �mother and other [not father]� comprise 40.6% of all child fatalities. Figure 4-2 also shows that fatalities perpetrated by fathers or by �father and other [not mother]� comprise 15.6% of all child fatalities. According to Figure 3-6 �Victims by Perpetrator Relationship, 2004 Child Maltreatment 2004,� here child abuse perpetrated by mothers or by �mother and other [not father]� comprise 45.6% of all child abuse. Figure 3-6 also shows that abuse perpetrated by fathers or by �father and other [not mother]� comprise 19.5% of all child abuse.
-
PJ Lem 02/10/2009 12:46:00 AM
Comment by carol on Feb 5th, 2009, 12:55 pm :
Oh the times they are a changin....and I see that a woman can still excercise her choice, her reproductive choice. It won't be long till most of us choose artificial insemination as a way to offset the chances of custody going to an abusive father. Children have rights too, they are supposed to start once the fetus is viable, their first right is to safety, if that can be accomplished with both parents involvement that is great. I have not seen that in families with joint custody, it either spawns abuse or exaserbates it, at least in the couples I have known.
PJ : CAROL, CLEARLY YOU ARE OF THE OPINION THAT YOUR 'RIGHTS' AS A WOMAN TRUMP THOSE OF INNOCENT CHILDREN AND IT FOLLOWS INNOCENT FATHERS TOO.
PJ : CAROL, YOU ARE COMMENTING IN TERMS OF NARCISSISTIC ENTITLEMENT AND THEREFORE IT FOLLOWS THAT YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF CARING ABOUT WHAT IS BEST FOR CHILDREN .... According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' new report Child Maltreatment 2004, when one parent is acting without the involvement of the other parent, mothers are almost three times as likely to kill their children as fathers are, and are more than twice as likely to abuse them."
Source: Child Maltreatment 2004, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. According to Figure 4-2 �Perpetrator Relationships of Fatalities, 2004 Child Maltreatment 2004� here, child fatalities perpetrated by mothers or by �mother and other [not father]� comprise 40.6% of all child fatalities. Figure 4-2 also shows that fatalities perpetrated by fathers or by �father and other [not mother]� comprise 15.6% of all child fatalities. According to Figure 3-6 �Victims by Perpetrator Relationship, 2004 Child Maltreatment 2004,� here child abuse perpetrated by mothers or by �mother and other [not father]� comprise 45.6% of all child abuse. Figure 3-6 also shows that abuse perpetrated by fathers or by �father and other [not mother]� comprise 19.5% of all child abuse.
-
PJ Lem 02/10/2009 12:39:00 AM
Why does this "article" read more like a press release? Where is the research, or background information.
Although the twice-divorced legislator is correct, everyone pays; the new law won't change much because a judge still has to determine the best interests of the child after a question is raised.
Please review the number of dead kids listed by state, mostly killed by their fathers, at www.FamilyLawCourts.com/kids.html
Sadly, this "article" is missing several key elements.
Comment by Bonnie from All cities on Feb 4th, 2009, 08:06 am
HERE 'Bonnie' the lawyer:
MOST CHILD ABUSE AND PARENTAL MURDER OF CHILDREN IS COMMITTED BY MOTHERS, NOT FATHERS.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children, Youth, and Families, Child Maltreatment 1997: Reports from the States to the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (Washington DC, :GPO, 1999). See: http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cb/publications/ncands97/s7.htm. Child abuse perpetrators are 62.3% female. Child fatality perpetrators are 62.8% female. The mother/father ratio is actually greater than this, because many of the male abusers counted are not the biological fathers but instead step‑fathers, boyfriends, etc.
Source on murders of children by single parents: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, Third National Incidence Study Of Child Abuse and Neglect: Final Report Appendices (Washington D.C., U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1997, pp. A‑63‑A‑64. The estimated total is 264 parental murders of children committed by single custodial mothers and 11 by single custodial fathers. There are roughly five times as many single custodial mothers as single custodial fathers.
Source: Warren Farrell, Father and Child Reunion: How to Bring the Dads We Need to the Children We Love, Penguin Putnam Inc, 2001, pp 75-77.
ACCORDING TO THE US.S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES' NEW REPORT 'CHILD MALTREATMENT 2004, WHEN ONE PARENT IS ACTING WITHOUT THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE OTHER PARENT, MOTHERS ARE ALMOST THREE TIMES AS LIKELY TO KILL THEIR CHILDREN AS FATHERS ARE, AND ARE MORE THAN TWICE AS LIKELY TO ABUSE THEM.
Source: Child Maltreatment 2004, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. According to Figure 4-2 �Perpetrator Relationships of Fatalities, 2004 Child Maltreatment 2004� here, child fatalities perpetrated by mothers or by �mother and other [not father]� comprise 40.6% of all child fatalities. Figure 4-2 also shows that fatalities perpetrated by fathers or by �father and other [not mother]� comprise 15.6% of all child fatalities. According to Figure 3-6 �Victims by Perpetrator Relationship, 2004 Child Maltreatment 2004,� here child abuse perpetrated by mothers or by �mother and other [not father]� comprise 45.6% of all child abuse. Figure 3-6 also shows that abuse perpetrated by fathers or by �father and other [not mother]� comprise 19.5% of all child abuse.
IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER 'QUESTIONS' THAT REQUIRE A RESPONSE PLEASE POST.
-
John 02/10/2009 12:38:00 AM
"It won't be long till most of us choose artificial insemination as a way to offset the chances of custody going to an abusive father." "Children have rights too, they are supposed to start once the fetus is viable, their first right is to safety", if that can be accomplished with both parents involvement that is great. I have not seen that in families with joint custody, "it either spawns abuse or exaserbates it",
That sounds like a good idea Carol. Those who don't want to do whats best for the children in divorces don't have to worry about men.
Divorce spawns abuse, Joint custody would be no more a catalyst then that. Where abuse is proven it's not going to happen anyway. 1 major issue i see with this is that there are already an insane amount of people crying wolf when it comes to abuse anyway. Look no further then that nutter Holly Collins. Isn't most abuse against children by mothers, especially single mothers in exactly these cases? I know my mother was and she did what I see allot of mothers doing. Turned me against my father while abusing the crap out of me.
-
John 02/10/2009 12:37:00 AM
"It won't be long till most of us choose artificial insemination as a way to offset the chances of custody going to an abusive father." "Children have rights too, they are supposed to start once the fetus is viable, their first right is to safety", if that can be accomplished with both parents involvement that is great. I have not seen that in families with joint custody, "it either spawns abuse or exaserbates it",
That sounds like a good idea Carol. Those who don't want to do whats best for the children in divorces don't have to worry about men.
Divorce spawns abuse, Joint custody would be no more a catalyst then that. Where abuse is proven it's not going to happen anyway. 1 major issue i see with this is that there are already an insane amount of people crying wolf when it comes to abuse anyway. Look no further then that nutter Holly Collins. Isn't most abuse against children by mothers, especially single mothers in exactly these cases? I know my mother was and she did what I see allot of mothers doing. Turned me against my father while abusing the crap out of me.
-
Dan 02/08/2009 11:43:00 PM
I want to thank City Pages for covering an issue of such great importance that presents unending obstacles, and affects tons of fathers and thier childrens relationships and lives. The majority of people do not have the time or really care about the issue until they are put in the situation and see how unfair the family court system really is towards fathers. With Minnesota's no fault divorce process the finger cannot be pointed at the mother or the father. Joint custody is the only option unless there is some substantiated cause proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law which would protect the children from either the convicted mother or convicted father.
I think about the how African Americans were totally discriminated against such as not being allowed to vote, drink out of the same water fountain or ride in the same area of the bus as white people. Females were also extensively discriminated against and treated similar fashion including not being allowed to vote. These were clear and common sense violations of their constitutional rights. I, and the majority of society, wonder what the heck people were thinking back then. When the members of this panel come up with a front/stalling tactics saying more studies, data, and proof that joint physical custody is appropriate they are 100% wrong. Did we need studies, data, or proof that black people should be able to drink out of the same water fountain as whites, or women could vote. Absolutely not--because it was just common sense and a total violation of their constitutional rights.
In my case my ex-wife deprives me of my parenting time, leaves profanity filled scream fests on my voicemail, and blatently admits she is violating our divorce decree. If I did any one of these things the police would be knocking on my door, she would be granted an OFP, and the judge would fine and possibly jail me. As a father you are expected to blow these types of violations off and toughen up. There is most often no recourse for her and no free legal help for a father with limited parenting time and no money.
People and mothers who don't support joint physical custody in the majority of family break-ups are promoting violating the children's and father's constitutional rights to be together on an equal basis as the mothers. The current system is based on greed for time, showing power and control to not let the other parent have time, and a sytem that is nothing but a great money machine for the state. With perseverance by people who care, Joint Physical Custody will soon be established. Then when the children of future generations look back on the treatment of African Americans, women, and fathers---they will ask "What the heck were they thinking?"
-
Dan 02/08/2009 11:39:00 PM
I want to thank City Pages for covering an issue of such great importance that presents unending obstacles, and affects tons of fathers and thier childrens relationships and lives. The majority of people do not have the time or really care about the issue until they are put in the situation and see how unfair the family court system really is towards fathers. With Minnesota's no fault divorce process the finger cannot be pointed at the mother or the father. Joint custody is the only option unless there is some substantiated cause proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law which would protect the children from either the convicted mother or convicted father.
I think about the how African Americans were totally discriminated against such as not being allowed to vote, drink out of the same water fountain or ride in the same area of the bus as white people. Females were also extensively discriminated against and treated similar fashion including not being allowed to vote. These were clear and common sense violations of their constitutional rights. I, and the majority of society, wonder what the heck people were thinking back then. When the members of this panel come up with a front/stalling tactics saying more studies, data, and proof that joint physical custody is appropriate they are 100% wrong. Did we need studies, data, or proof that black people should be able to drink out of the same water fountain as whites, or women could vote. Absolutely not--because it was just common sense and a total violation of their constitutional rights.
In my case my ex-wife deprives me of my parenting time, leaves profanity filled scream fests on my voicemail, and blatently admits she is violating our divorce decree. If I did any one of these things the police would be knocking on my door, she would be granted an OFP, and the judge would fine and possibly jail me. As a father you are expected to blow these types of violations off and toughen up. There is most often no recourse for her and no free legal help for a father with limited parenting time and no money.
People and mothers who don't support joint physical custody in the majority of family break-ups are promoting violating the children's and father's constitutional rights to be together on an equal basis as the mothers. The current system is based on greed for time, showing power and control to not let the other parent have time, and a sytem that is nothing but a great money machine for the state. With perseverance by people who care, Joint Physical Custody will soon be established. Then when the children of future generations look back on the treatment of African Americans, women, and fathers---they will ask "What the heck were they thinking?"
-
Andrew 02/08/2009 2:14:00 AM
I see that Fox9 has changed their site that contained my blog that speaks of the nature for which this article was published. Funny how that happend just days after I built the blog. Well here is what I wanted to put on it!
This is are outrageous examples for those men bashing feminists that assume Father is always the raging murdrer!
NY mom who drowned kids apparently reaches insanity plea; Father of 2 victims `shocked' http://www.startribune.com/nation/39239437.html?elr=KArks:DCiUMEaPc:UiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU
Upstate NY woman found guilty of poisoning husband with antifreeze, trying to kill daughter http://www.startribune.com/nation/39148312.html?elr=KArks:DCiUMEaPc:UiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU
Fla. woman accused of abusing adopted children, taking $1M in subsidies, sentenced to 20 years http://www.startribune.com/nation/39142957.html?elr=KArks:DCiUMEaPc:UiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU
Hamtramck woman calls police herself, is charged with torturing kids, 4 and 5 years old.
Police said Valentino's husband, Randy, wasn't home and there's no evidence that he abused their children. The license plate in the window of the family Cadillac reads "Best Dad." But a 4-year-old girl told police Mom wasn't nearly so kind.
The couple has three other children, two boys believed to be 7 and 8 years old and an infant who is about 8 months, Bielecki said.
All five children are in foster care and doing well, he said. Martin said police removed them from the house about a week ago.
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090206/METRO/902060381/&imw=Y
What I entirely don't understand is why aren't the kids with DAD instead of fostercare? If anybody remembers the lady this past summer who negglected her children and in turn resulted in her infant child drowning in the tub. The Judge actually susspended her prison time so she could go back home to be with her remaining child for the rest of the summer.
-
Brenda Pence 02/07/2009 10:16:00 PM
Thank you so much for writing this article. More and More people need to read and hear what is happening in Mn Family Courts. People automatically assume that "Family Court" means that the Judges and Lawyers are looking out for the best interest of our children, but I tell you from having sat in these court rooms that this is not true. They are only interested in the money. As a grandmother denied access to my grandchild I tell you that our laws need to be changed. The courts should not be deciding to place children in sole custody of one parent when neither has been proven unfit. Children need both of their natural parents, especially if both want to be involved in their lives. This extortion of money for Fathers to see and spend time with their children is just that "Extortion".
If a father has been taking care of his family until the divorce why would he not continue without a court order if he is still a parent and taking care of his children. Both parents need to assume responsibility and share their children just as they did before they violated their contract with each other.
As an adult of divorce and parental fighting, I tell you that I loved both my parents and wanted them both in my life. I did not care that they hated each other and did not want to hear about that, but I wanted to spend time with them when I needed or wanted them to be with me.
Please continue letting people know what is happening in this venue and thank you again for this report.
I am in favor of Joint Physical Custody!!!!
-
troy 02/07/2009 6:19:00 AM
I dont think custody battles should be handled in court, and I dont think a judge has Jurisdiction, if so does that mean all children are a ward of the state and the state has a senion interest in everyone's family.
Divorces should be resolved in mediation. The courts favor many women, however Ive seen some women get hammered too. I think both parents and the children have a right from a creator, unaleinable, to be involved in our childrens lives and government should not interfere with that right.
Now that so many people have been divorced and been through the courts, its taking a huge affect on our society, people dont want to commit, dont want to get married, dont want kids...why?? Because of all the horror stories. Marriage is a contract and should be upheld as such.
-
Jeff Tucker 02/06/2009 11:39:00 PM
My ex-wife and I divorced in 1998, though the process began in 1996. When we were going through the process, I had the hopes that I would be able to continue seeing my kids at the level I was used to. I spent my nights, weekends - I even re-negotiated my employment contract to allow for Fridays with them. I was in for a huge, nightmarish awakening. I ended up being served with an order for protection. Never in a million years could I have imagined that occurring. While it was dropped before the hearing, I asked my ex- why she would do that. She responded that Carlton County officials told her that if she filed that order, she would be bumped to the top of the list for free or low income housing, be given full medical benefits and assistance with schooling if she wanted to go back to school. While she dropped it right away after I asked her if she knew that was the kind of thing that destroyed reputations and would make it impossible for me to ever adopt a child, or potentially even work with children - she said her Legal Aide attorney had told her none of that but later confirmed it when she confronted her.
I went to three separate law firms in the Duluth area asking about joint custody. Each literally laughed. Two were honest enough and up front and told me I was welcome to spend the minimum of $5000 to $6000 for the retainer - and that the process would cost much more - and that I was virtually guaranteed to lose. One told me candidly - "You're a white male, you have a job, and you love your children - you're screwed."
My children are in their teens now. Access to them has been spotty at best, even when my youngest begged to come live with me. I've watched them grow up as a series of snapshots, not the running movie that my ex- and her family have had the blessing of seeing. When they were younger my visits were when it was convenient to my ex-, as they got older she would tell me to work through them, she's not getting involved. Thus when they choose not to return my cell texts, emails or calls - the only recourse is to attempt to go back and get the court's to enforce something that isn't worth the paper it was written on. The custodial parents has complete and total power - power over visitation, power over child support in a system that gives the non-custodial parent not only less rights, in many ways it strips our constitutional rights out from under us.
The biases and incorrect beliefs in the State of Minnesota - and this country - need to stop. Leave it to the parents to devise a schedule that's not disruptive to the child's life yet gives both time with the child and do that by not immediately removing one person's 'power' by giving the other complete custody.
As a side note - I'll bet if those that want to study this to death created a test group - and tied cooperation and visitation time to child support payments using an intermediary to ensure fairness -- I guarantee there would be a quick change of attitude among the custodial control group in their willingness to allow us access to our children.
-
Les 02/06/2009 8:49:00 AM
At a very young age I was taught a lesson by my Dad (a man who by the way was not my father) - �He always said that when you are pointing a finger at someone and telling a lie, remember you have three fingers pointing back at you� - meaning the lie you are stating is actually the truth about yourself! This is a lesson that rings so true when we are dealing with the people who defend the �Family Law / the Divorce Industry*� system as they voice talking point that bring �Personal Power & Profit� for themselves!
Facts they don�t bring up:
DHHS Report 03' Child Maltreatment
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm03/index.htm
Fatalities by Perpetrator Relationship: �Almost one-third (30.5%) of fatalities were perpetrated by the mother acting alone.� Additionally note that the total for a mother and other (meaning someone she has introduced the child to) equals 38.7% vs. 19.1% of child fatalities were by their fathers acting alone or with others( (Page 78)
Perpetrators of Maltreatment: �Approximately two fifths(40.8%) of child victims were maltreated by their mothers acting alone;� (Additionally note that the total for a mother and other (meaning someone she has introduced the child to) equals 47.1% vs. 19.9% of child victims were maltreated by their fathers acting alone or with others) (Page 46)
Perpetrators by Relationship to Victims: �Female perpetrators, mostly mothers, were typically younger than male perpetrators, mostly fathers. Women also comprised a larger percentage of all perpetrators than men, 58 percent compared to 42 percent (figure S�7). Nearly 76 percent of all perpetrators of sexual abuse were friends or neighbors and 30 percent were other relatives. In addition, less than 3 percent of all parental perpetrators were associated with sexual abuse.� (Page 20)
04' AZ State University Study
http://www.public.asu.edu/~devra1/matt&jenessa.pdf
�The most explored and obvious factors by which consequences differ are: (1) the parent with custody vs. the one without custody of the child(ren); (2) the gender of the parent; i.e., the mother vs. the father; or (3) the person who initiated the divorce vs. the one who didn�t (and often didn�t want it); i.e., the �dumper� vs. the �dumpee�.
It turns out that there is a great deal of overlap between these three dimensions: mothers generally are the parents that get custody; and mothers generally are the dumper.� (page 2, paragraph 1 & 2)
�Legal Consequences of Divorce: Gender Differences As a result of the processes leading them to resolution of the issues they must finalize, mothers and fathers typically experience far different legal consequences of divorce. According to a recent national study (Nord & Zill, 1996), in 75% of divorce cases, mothers become the sole custody parent, and fathers the nonresidential parent; in about 4% of cases it is reversed� (page 5 paragraph 4 and Page 6 paragraph 1).
03' U of M Study for DHS
http://www.f4j.us/fileadmin/user_upload/News_Articles/UofM_DHS_CSstudy_1_.pdf
According to a report prepared for the Department of Human Services by the University of Minnesota in 2003, sample data showed that mothers were awarded sole physical custody 94% of the time, with fathers receiving sole physical custody 6% of the time. (Page 12, Table 2) (Affirmed again in 07� by the Child & Families Studies Dept., St. Cloud State University http://www.mnfathers.org/DoWeCountFathers.pdf)
01-06 Newsweek Cover Story
�One of the most reliable predictors of whether a boy will succeed or fail in high school rests on a single question: does he have a man in his life to look up to? Too often, the answer is no. High rates of divorce and single motherhood have created a generation of fatherless boys. In every kind of neighborhood, rich or poor, an increasing number of boys - now a startling 40 percent - are being raised without their biological dads.� (Paragraph 20)
Jeff Edleson and all the other biased people in this story on the so called study group are looking for data in all the wrong places!!!!
�The Removal of a Fit Loving Parent From a Child IS Child Abuse!�
Les Jobst
Fathers-4-Justice MN Coordinator
763.300.9766
"Anyone who sees a father's positive role in a child's life as a threat, certainly has a agenda and children are not on it! Children deserve having equal access to both parents!"
FIGHTING FOR TRUTH, JUSTICE & EQUALITY IN FAMILY LAW
-
Les 02/06/2009 8:48:00 AM
At a very young age I was taught a lesson by my Dad (a man who by the way was not my father) - �He always said that when you are pointing a finger at someone and telling a lie, remember you have three fingers pointing back at you� - meaning the lie you are stating is actually the truth about yourself! This is a lesson that rings so true when we are dealing with the people who defend the �Family Law / the Divorce Industry*� system as they voice talking point that bring �Personal Power & Profit� for themselves!
Facts they don�t bring up:
DHHS Report 03' Child Maltreatment
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm03/index.htm
Fatalities by Perpetrator Relationship: �Almost one-third (30.5%) of fatalities were perpetrated by the mother acting alone.� Additionally note that the total for a mother and other (meaning someone she has introduced the child to) equals 38.7% vs. 19.1% of child fatalities were by their fathers acting alone or with others( (Page 78)
Perpetrators of Maltreatment: �Approximately two fifths(40.8%) of child victims were maltreated by their mothers acting alone;� (Additionally note that the total for a mother and other (meaning someone she has introduced the child to) equals 47.1% vs. 19.9% of child victims were maltreated by their fathers acting alone or with others) (Page 46)
Perpetrators by Relationship to Victims: �Female perpetrators, mostly mothers, were typically younger than male perpetrators, mostly fathers. Women also comprised a larger percentage of all perpetrators than men, 58 percent compared to 42 percent (figure S�7). Nearly 76 percent of all perpetrators of sexual abuse were friends or neighbors and 30 percent were other relatives. In addition, less than 3 percent of all parental perpetrators were associated with sexual abuse.� (Page 20)
04' AZ State University Study
http://www.public.asu.edu/~devra1/matt&jenessa.pdf
�The most explored and obvious factors by which consequences differ are: (1) the parent with custody vs. the one without custody of the child(ren); (2) the gender of the parent; i.e., the mother vs. the father; or (3) the person who initiated the divorce vs. the one who didn�t (and often didn�t want it); i.e., the �dumper� vs. the �dumpee�.
It turns out that there is a great deal of overlap between these three dimensions: mothers generally are the parents that get custody; and mothers generally are the dumper.� (page 2, paragraph 1 & 2)
�Legal Consequences of Divorce: Gender Differences As a result of the processes leading them to resolution of the issues they must finalize, mothers and fathers typically experience far different legal consequences of divorce. According to a recent national study (Nord & Zill, 1996), in 75% of divorce cases, mothers become the sole custody parent, and fathers the nonresidential parent; in about 4% of cases it is reversed� (page 5 paragraph 4 and Page 6 paragraph 1).
03' U of M Study for DHS
http://www.f4j.us/fileadmin/user_upload/News_Articles/UofM_DHS_CSstudy_1_.pdf
According to a report prepared for the Department of Human Services by the University of Minnesota in 2003, sample data showed that mothers were awarded sole physical custody 94% of the time, with fathers receiving sole physical custody 6% of the time. (Page 12, Table 2) (Affirmed again in 07� by the Child & Families Studies Dept., St. Cloud State University http://www.mnfathers.org/DoWeCountFathers.pdf)
01-06 Newsweek Cover Story
�One of the most reliable predictors of whether a boy will succeed or fail in high school rests on a single question: does he have a man in his life to look up to? Too often, the answer is no. High rates of divorce and single motherhood have created a generation of fatherless boys. In every kind of neighborhood, rich or poor, an increasing number of boys - now a startling 40 percent - are being raised without their biological dads.� (Paragraph 20)
Jeff Edleson and all the other biased people in this story on the so called study group are looking for data in all the wrong places!!!!
�The Removal of a Fit Loving Parent From a Child IS Child Abuse!�
Les Jobst
Fathers-4-Justice MN Coordinator
763.300.9766
"Anyone who sees a father's positive role in a child's life as a threat, certainly has a agenda and children are not on it! Children deserve having equal access to both parents!"
FIGHTING FOR TRUTH, JUSTICE & EQUALITY IN FAMILY LAW
-
Andrew Dupay 02/06/2009 1:16:00 AM
I'm rather disgusted with the DISCRIMINATION set forth by beliefs and comments made by "some" women. So generally stated, suggesting that any father who gets joint custody will become a raging murderer. So as to say absurdly that I would become a raging murderer if I get JPC! What a disgrace to liberation groups to have come this far only to abuse their influence by taking a worthy cause (womans rights) and using it to attack fathers. The presumption of joint custody would be for the "normal" divorcing parents that are thrust into battle because of the cohesion of payouts and likely just the fear stricken in them when sitting in front of that lawyer telling them all the whose. Just like the "regular" mom doesn't like to hear of that MOM driving her car in to the pond intentionally drowning her 4 children. Or even the mom leaving her toddler in the tub to drown while she surfs the Internet...fathers don't excuse this conduct. There are so many of these cases that are "extreme", should they really be the backbone for normal citizens to be guided by? No, these unforgivable crazies that kill their children should not be the rule that guide the system for the rest of us.
-
carol 02/05/2009 10:55:00 PM
Oh the times they are a changin....and I see that a woman can still excercise her choice, her reproductive choice. It won't be long till most of us choose artificial insemination as a way to offset the chances of custody going to an abusive father. Children have rights too, they are supposed to start once the fetus is viable, their first right is to safety, if that can be accomplished with both parents involvement that is great. I have not seen that in families with joint custody, it either spawns abuse or exaserbates it, at least in the couples I have known.
-
Father For Justice 02/05/2009 9:13:00 PM
Like Joel, I recognized the financial strain as robbing my daughter's scholastic future. My dissolution is approaching 3yrs. in May, and there is still no Decree. This process has got to change and soon. The delays in legislation will introduce hundreds more parents into the already recognized flawed system. This legislation has been delayed for over 5yrs., while the argument continues to grow and that it's passing is long over due. The effect of this legislation is not just on the Judges that have the ability to decide on the functions of divorced parent's and their children. Evaluators play an intricate role in the current process. They may influence the courts with their reports that are often slighted, in such districts as Anoka Co.. Without going into great details of my encounter, I must note the bias. The Evaluator had suggested that I didn't follow the rules during the home visit. Being, that she showed up 15mn early when she knew I had an extreme time crunch to accommodate the visit(due to my ex suddenly making me drive 1hr 45mn one way to get my daughter from her grandparents) and I only get 3hrs time with my daughter as it is. So when there was a mere 5 mn left of the home visit and we took our usual after dinner walk, it was noted as uncooperative. Yet in the rules of the home visit "no one not living in the home shall be present for the home visit". My ex however decided she would have her son(whom never lived with us in his 17yrs, not even part time) babysit that day and train my daughter on card games an remain there for activities with the evaluator. I had on several occasions expressed my "concerns with my ex's son never living with her "ever"", so the evaluator had ample knowledge that ex's son should not have been there for the visit! But her report never suggested that mom didn't follow the rules of the home visit.
-
joyce 02/05/2009 8:11:00 PM
We certainly need something done!! According to records my son's attorney has found, the judge in my son's case has never giving custody to a father and does not believe in joint custody..What is he thinking???
-
joyce 02/05/2009 8:10:00 PM
We certainly need something done!! According to records my son's attorney has found, the judge in my son's case has never giving custody to a father and does not believe in joint custody..What is he thinking???
-
Darin 02/05/2009 11:10:00 AM
As a father who has Joint Physical Custody I can tell you that not only does it work, but it is much better for the children. Also, there is less fighting between the parents, because no one parent has more control than the other. It is kind of like a stale mate or checks and balance. I would highly recommend though that the children switch homes every month rather than every week. We tried every week at first and it did not work that well. Once we switched to monthly exchanges it worked perfectly! I am happy, my ex is happy and the kids are happy they can spend quality time with both of us!!
-
charlie 02/05/2009 7:25:00 AM
Looks like the opponents of the presumption of joint physical custody want to study this issue to death some more. There is plenty of evidence of the value of having both parents continue in the lives of children after divorce or separation. Unfortunately, lawyers, judges, psychologists, guardian ad litems, child support collectors, and the state Department of Human Services all live off of the current adversarial, winner-takes-all system. Thank you to a few courageous legislators for trying to end this system.
-
Ronj Belec 02/05/2009 7:11:00 AM
This is a HUGE victory for all males
And
This is a wake up call to all males
Join us
The National Coalition for Men (NCFM) is committed to the eradication of harmful sex-based stereotypes.
http://www.ncfm.org/
Ron Belec
Seattle
-
charlie 02/05/2009 6:53:00 AM
There is a website that gives much more information about this biased study group.
http://jpc-now.wikispaces.com/NCFM+Says+Study+Group+Biased
-
Doctor Gonzo 02/05/2009 12:37:00 AM
Ummm, that's not a picture of Minnesota State Rep. Tim Mahoney. Looks like you are confusing him with the Florida Congressman.
-
Tiffini Marie Flynn Forslund 02/04/2009 10:02:00 PM
I feel for Mr. Lombard because I am a mom in the same situation. Unfortunately, I do not have $30,000.00 so I can't afford the luxury of an attorney to keep my rights with the children in tact. I tried to represent myself to obtain joint custody and I lost time. I feel that there should be a better way for the children and parents involved to resolve these issues. I do not think that it is a gender issue as much as a financial whirlwind through the court system. One party could keep you in court until the children are each 18 years of age. I agree with Mr. Lombard again that those funds take away from educational opportunities for the child and the family. It is an unneeded stressor to enter the family structure.
I applaud the parents that can make it work for the children's sake.
-
Bonnie 02/04/2009 6:06:00 PM
Why does this "article" read more like a press release? Where is the research, or background information.
Although the twice-divorced legislator is correct, everyone pays; the new law won't change much because a judge still has to determine the best interests of the child after a question is raised.
Please review the number of dead kids listed by state, mostly killed by their fathers, at www.FamilyLawCourts.com/kids.html
Sadly, this "article" is missing several key elements.
