First Lady Laura Bush visited the National Center for Fathering in Kansas City to see how they engage and equip dads to be more involved in their children's education. I hope Ken (Ken R. Canfield, Ph.D, Founder and President, dads@fathers.com) had a chance to speak to her about the shambles called the family court system.
-----
When Judy Sheindlin was on Larry King Live last week, (October 4, 2005), the issue of joint custody came up. An excerpt from the interview:
- KING: I had a judge who became a federal judge told me once that the hardest thing to decide was custody cases...
SHEINDLIN: Yes. Sometimes it's relatively easy because the choices are clear but I've always thought in this country we do a terrible disservice to fathers. You know there was a time many years ago when we had what we called the Tender Years Doctrine, which meant children of tender years, young children, always went to their mother.
And then all of the courts in this country said that's not fair. We have to be equal. So, on the books there is a law that says no one parent is favored over the other, now that's honored more in the breach than it is honored in actuality. And, I have been a proponent for many years of there being a presumption in this country for joint custody of children. That's where courts should start.
KING: That's where you begin?
SHEINDLIN: That's where you begin and if you're going to deviate from that, you have to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that there is some valid reason why you're going to deviate from that because one parent is crazy, one parent has a drug problem, an alcohol problem, something's wrong.
But that should be the standard joint custody because children are entitled to be raised by two parents even if the parents don't get along anymore. I mean I think it's horrendous when one parent picks up and moves out of the state or moves 250 miles away and some judge in the family court, the domestic relations court usually if it's the mother who has moved away says, "Well, we'll have a hearing to determine whether it was the right thing."
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - T A Dodger
Teri,
My comments are more directed at the fatehrs' rights movement in general than to your comment in particular.
First, I support 100% a presumption for joint custody, and I am always pleased to see fathers wanting to take responsability for their children.
That said, while I genrally support the things that the "Fathers' rights" movement wants, I am deeply offended by its tendancy to minimize violence against women and to blame women for the breakdown of families.
Feminists and fathers who want custody should be on the same side. We both want to break down the traditional gender role stereotype that says fathers are bread winners only and women are the naturally nurturing ones that should care for the children.
But you're not going to win over feminists by blaming women or suggesting that we're overblowing domestic violence committed against women.
I'm sorry, but men ARE more likely to abandon their children than women. Men DO abuse women more than women abuse men. In fact, if a woman is murdered, her killer is more likely to be her domestic partner than any other person. These things weren't invented by feminsits to make men feel bad, and they should be taken very seriously.
2 - Gaurav
This is an impassioned article but filled with factual inaccuracies. I would say that your purpose would be better served by remaining true to facts. Here's a sample -
"Contrary to common belief, males and females perpetrate abuse against their own children at surprisingly similar rates. "Among all abused children, those abused by their birth parents were about equally likely to have been abused by mothers as by fathers (50% and 58%, respectively), but those abused by other parents, parent-substitutes, or other, nonparental perpetrators were much more likely to be abused by males (80 to 90% by males versus 14 to 15% by females)."
http://www.therapistfinder.net/Child-Abuse/Abusers.html
contrary to your claim that "mothers commit most abuse"
Once again abuse is a very subjectively defined term though the effects of abuse are all to real. I am not nitpicking about facts on this important issue but correct information is needed for right policy initiatives to solve the problem of child abuse.
3 - Teri In Cali
Please know that I do not minimize abuse of any type, by either gender. The facts, according to reputable studies, are that mothers acting alone are, by far, more likely to absue children than fathers acting alone. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration on Children, Youth and Families, approximately two-fifths (40.8 percent) of child victims were neglected or abused by “their mothers acting alone.” Just 18.8 percent were maltreated by their fathers acting alone, (and 1 7 percent of children were abused or neglected by both their mothers and fathers). Yes, I know what you're saying about males, they are usually the men that mother brings into the household to replace the real father. Biological fathers are the LEAST likely to harm children. All I'm asking for is that the TRUTH be told, not the propaganda everyone has been fed for decades.
One day we'll all be on the same side. I'm doing everything I can to make that happen sooner than later.
4 - Jeremy Swanson
Well Done Kudos and 'massive pats on the back' to Teri Stoddard for having the guts to tell PBS where she-and we Dads-stand on the outrageius and almost criminal PBS support of radical hate feminists in the documentary series "Breaking the Silence". She is not afraid to stand up for Dads against this virtual tyranny and even less afraid to tell the ferminist mercenaries in PBS what she thinks of them. Good for you Teri. You are indeed one of us. its always good to have a woman who stands for truth and justice first-on our side.
Teri has pointed out that PBS used to be associated with truth and honesty. But not now. I think she is quite right. I think its time the FCC pulled the PBS licence. It is no longer a service to the people it accepts resource money from. It has become a tool for the radical left and a disgrace to families everywhere. it is certainly an enemy of American and Canadian Fathers. I have to wonder what the Board of Directors is doing about it. All I can think is that they are just happy that they are still getting funding from the public and therefor say nothing. So maybe we should stop that funding. They certainly don't deserve it.
If there is even an ounce of the same kind of decency (that Teri Stoddard has in abundance)in CEO Pat Mitchells body she should resign and allow others to take PBS back to its common sense-family oriented roots.
JS
5 - tom porter
The general disregard for the necessity of children having access to both parents is a focal point for the ever increasing loss of good parenting arrangements. Good parenting environments in the form of well understood and accepted family values is required to establish the means to achieve stable children who have the temperament and capacity to respect human dignity and enjoy loving relationships.
A presumption of equal parenting between wed or unwed or separating or separated parents is necessary for children to learn to get along with others in a fair and equitable manner. Emotional and instructional stability is difficult to establish when both parents, having access to readily available adversarial social and justice systems, are unable to collaborate effectively in an atmosphere of cooperation.
Estranged parents are not the only concern .The problem extends to all those who represent a positive influence and a loving and secure environment for our children. We need to dissolve all barriers to include race, gender and religious belief This is a grave social issue whose importance cannot be emphasized enough.
What is required is a social environment where the values of both parents will be respected. Where the right to both parents to equal decision-making authority is defended. Where equal responsibility is enforced fairly and where equal time sharing with the children is facilitated and encouraged where ever possible. The ultimate goal is to create a working environment where both parents are valued and required to ensure the best possible conditions for the upbringing of every child for the benefit of the future.
There are many issues that contribute to the deterioration of equal parenting. All issues need to be addressed in various ways. To that end, everyone who supports equal parenting will be invited in an effort to both understand the complexities and extent of the problem and the issues. Together we will be able to devise effective means of improving the parenting environment for the benefit of the children, the parents and ultimately for all of society.
6 - tom porter
The focus of my belief is the need for change in the current system such as to allow those who wish to be parents to have the opportunity. I believe that parenting should be shared both economically and personally. This requires both parents to subscribe to a co-parenting plan which includes a split of time as close to 50/50 as possible. In addition those who chose to relinquish any part of that time should compensate the other parent monetarily within reason. Clearly this split of time refers to in person parenting time not the ability to find a third party to care for the child. By working from this point we eliminate any battle in court for great financial gain as this is the primary goal of the divorce industry. The parent who has the extra 1 or more percent is determined by that parent’s ability to provide a superior environment not determined by their lawyer’s ability to assassinate the other parent’s character.
Simply put the common thread I find among all true parents is their focus in life… raising future citizens who embody all the base values that we as a collective humanity cherish. Including but not limited to… Honesty, respect, compassion , caring, kindness, generosity, a capacity for love, responsibility, dedication and the ability and desire to instill these values in their offspring. To do this we must not waste their formidable years bickering in court about who the worse human being is but rather offering them the opportunity to experience the best qualities offered by each of the parents who jointly created this life. To this end we must work to create an environment that allows each parent to be those qualities and the time and resources to impart them. By weighting the court battle either way the system creates an environment of win / lose which creates financial devastation and emotional burden which ultimately takes time and financial resources away from the child. This cycle is perpetuated by the divorce industry . I believe that if an umbrella set of guidelines is set prior to divorce and it is made less lucrative to fight then we as a society would spend our time connecting with our kids instead of our lawyers .We as a collective group of humans should value humanity and it’s future (our children) not the fight for financial superiority which destroys our children.
I believe that….all cultures believe that children are the greatest gift in the world and to be a parent is the one thing in life that guarantees our immortality. To be remembered generations from now for being a positive influence is in itself immortality. Every child deserves love , guidance, and positive reinforcement. Those should be given by the 2 lives that created the child and despite the differences of those parties the responsibility should be given equally. The parties desire to raise children without the stresses imposed on them by an industry which serves only itself should be the concern of all citizens of the planet. Anyone who argues that children do not need positive interaction with both parents equally has an agenda other than raising good kids.
7 - tim
T A Dodger....whether men abuse women more often should not play into how the courts address custody issues PERIOD. If we were to use any logic in regards to child abuse statistics, specifically looking at women acting alone, then men should be awarded custody much more often than women. So, don't hide behind facts, bogus or not, address the real issue. We need presumptive joint custody in every case. I mean, isn't that what your fighting for.....Equal rights?
8 - Noodle
Teri,
Thank you for posting this information and for keeping us informed. Being involved in the equalization of parental rights, it is encouraging to see a judge highlight that there is a problem in the system. In our states, there is such political pressure from the various groups and bar associations, that many judges and legislators fall into "going with the flow" instead of doing what is right by our children.
As for domestic violence, I do understand the dilemma there. My ex was abusive in subtle ways - he only hit me a few times but would do things such as break my personal things and and threaten me. I removed myself from the situation. However, it is far too easy in our current court system for one party to gain the upper hand when it comes to custody by making a false abuse charge. A good judge will explore the facts enough to figure out if there is a true risk before issuing a restraining order.
9 - Broken Soldier
Given the present situation in my own life as a result fo a choice my sister-in-law made, I can no longer say that the DV laws are wrong. I will state boldly and plainly that THEY SHOULD NOT PLAY INTO ANY CUSTODY DECISION because in most DV cases both parties are at fault. No this does not make it right, however there is in most cases an antagonist, and then there is the perp.
In my specific family situation at this point in time, the lives of my entire family have been threatened by an individual that I know well enough to know would not think twice.
The sad reality is that a PPO does nothing except further the anger that drives the issue. Ultimately I am greatful at this point to know that this person will have his personal arsenal removed from his posession.
Another part of the sad reality is that as a result of this, I may have the duty to deal with this issue from my own arsenal, becasue we all know that the legal system is only there for the after the fact scenarios.
The State Government only cares about one thing, I have said and will continue to say... QUIT PAYING THEM by way of need for special interest laws. Its terrible cause I just said I was greatful for one of them. Ultimately all this piece of legislation is going to do is Piss off the perp. Then who is it that really gets to deal with the situation?
Exactly....
STOP GIVING THEM CONTROL OVER YOUR LIFE.
FORCE THEM TO RETURN WHAT THEY HAVE STOLEN FROM YOU. DO IT VERY PUBLICLY, but that does not mean simply build a website, GET IN TOUCH WITH YOUR LEGISLATORS, and tell them either make the necessary changes or you will run yourself against them. It does have an impact, trust me.
10 - T A Dodger
Tim,
So, don't hide behind facts, bogus or not, address the real issue. We need presumptive joint custody in every case. I mean, isn't that what your fighting for.....Equal rights?
Did you not read the part of my comment where i said that i support a presumption for joint custody? My point is that minimizing violence against women as part of appeals for joint custody is counterproductive. It alienates people who would otherwise be inclined to support you.
11 - T A Dodger
Broken Soldier,
I will only say one thing. Your assertion that most women who are killed, beaten, or raped by their domestic partners were asking for it because they were being antagonistic is just incredibly disgusting. There is just nothing else to say.
Teri In Cali re Comment 3,
I too hope we can all be on the same side. After all, we should all be on the side of the children :). We shouldn't undermine the contributions of mothers, fathers, or step-parents.
12 - Jim Loose
It's refreshing (though, I'm pleased to say, no longer as surprising as it used to be) to see commonsense like Ms. Stoddard writes. Clear thinking cures a multitude of ills in anyone's personal life. And the same is going to prove true in American social life regarding child custody. Most people know there's something rotten in Denmark (i.e., that lots of the propaganda making the rounds -- even when true -- is irrelevant). No one involved in our effort is interested in protecting abusive parents. We're interested in protecting citizens from overzealous (or callous, or greedy, or expedient, or insufficiently thoughtful) government officials (who aren't better parents than the rest of us) from invading the family/personal lives of innocent parents.
Question: What could possibly be objectionable about that?
Answer: Nothing.
Which is why our opponents so often change the subject. Best way to respond? Don't take the bait. If someone changes the subject, agree to talk with them about that AFTER finishing the discussion at hand.
Here's the bottom line to all our work: All parents are fit until they are proven to be otherwise. This is as true for divorced parents as it is for married parents -- and until the state proves that a parent is unfit, it has no business with its big, galumphing, eye-crossing nose inserted into our private lives. End of story. When it can do that, it should. But the burden of proof is on anyone who wants to claim that a parent is unfit.
Here's the payoff: Until we're proven unfit, no one (not your ex-spouse, and most particularly not your government) is allowed to treat you as some kind of a second class parent.
Oh, yeah, and there are a couple other payoffs too: A lot less divorce, less gender-politics, better school performance for children, less child substance abuse, less teenage pregnancy, less problems with youth incarceration and runaways, less youth suicide ... and a substantial savings on the estimated $250 billion Americans annually spend on the Divorce Industry.
All in all ... not a bad return on a sound policy decision.
Kudos, Ms. Stoddard. Keep it up!
Jim Loose
Chairman of the Board
People for Equal Parenting, Inc.
13 - Don, the 14%er
October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month. Advocates for children should keep in mind that child abuse is domestic violence at its worst. As far as child abuse is concerned, women comprise a larger percentage of perpetrators than men - 58 percent compared to 42 percent.*
Spouses of domestic violence can leave an abusive relationship. Children cannot. The law should make no distinction who is responsible for child abuse. The guilty must pay.
*US Department of Health and Human Services Child Maltreatment 2003: Summary of Key Findings - "Female perpetrators, who were mostly mothers, were typically younger than male perpetrators, who were mostly fathers. Women also comprised a larger percentage of all perpetrators than men: 58 percent compared to 42 percent." http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/factsheets/canstats.cfm
14 - Robert Gartner
Tell me and my daughter about domestic violence! Tell me and my daughter about systematized violence heaped upon me by my own government! Tell me about my daughter and I being abused by one of the largest law firms in the world, [a law firm]! Tell me and my daughter about being destroyed via one of the zealots in the form of Justice for Children (JFC), Founded by Randy Burton. Go to their web site and see for yourself how this group predicated on helping the children has a link right there on its front page, taking you to the denigration of parental alienation as a potential factual circumstance in custody issues. Hey folks wake up! ITS ALL AROUND YOU! Even the JFC, a so called help group, is soliciting, sanctioning, and indoctrinating parents into the systematic psychological abuse of the child then helping them get custody! What a way to get the business!! This film, BREAKING SILENCE: Childrens voices, PBS October 20 in Houston Texas and nationwide was probably brought to you, in part, by monies from one of these god-like law firms or misandrist help groups! Mary Kay Chairtable Foundation of Mary Kay cosmetics underfunded it too.
And to the continuing saga of the destruction of me and my daughter. I just found out that her mother was committing a major felony for which she received orders to pay back thirty thousand dollars and also got ten years probation. She was out doing all this crime while she was enjoying for free the lynching of my daughter and I by the JFC and [a law firm].
YEAH, tell the FCC and PBS that a film about the voice of a child has no place for american ears unless and until the full story is told. Shout it from the highest hill! Its a crime that PBS dare present such crap, asking a child, who- did-what, when its the child that gets it, if they somehow refuse to be indoctrinated to hate one of the parents. Parental Alienation is not, and has not been, for a very long time, a gender issue, or one scoffed as "junk science" as the film perpetrates. Parental Alienation is a parenting issue and a grievous, insidious, bonafide issue of the action of systematic CHILD ABUSE.
I'm sure this american government with its legions of addicted, addicted and dying to a deeply diseased symptomology one ingredient of which is DENIAL, will keep throwing out bones of the formerly alive to preserve itself. We ate the American Indians after we ate the native peoples of the carribean and south america and still cram COLUMBUS, as hero, into the heads of elementary when he was the first white slave trader! We have raped the planet of its creation of plants and animals. We have raped the planet of its mineral resources. Now American Government with its agents is coming for live human beings starting with poor and nonstatused fathers!! THink I am kidding? Then read When Society Becomes An Addict, by Anne Wilson Schaef, Harper and Row, 1986.
YES folks tune in for this film because you will receive instructions on who to have for dinner and how to cook them!
15 - Tom Gallen
Teri:
People throw statistics around but I wonder if we will ever know the truth about which gender is more destructive. In the 16+ years that I lived with a violent female abuser, I NEVER hit back. What is I had hit back? I'd have been arrested and then I would have become a statistic in the Abusive Male column and she, the abuser would have been placed in the poor, poor ABUSED FEMALE column. When I called the abuse helplines, they basically laughed my report off as if I were the only man who had ever reported and an abusive female. When I went to court for a Protection From Abuse order, the judge REFUSED to even look at my case and the 12 police reports and ER records which I had brought as evidence of the abuse. I wonder how many other men have been not believed by crisis lines and by prejudiced judges and how many abused males never get on recognised as being abused. There are, no doubt abusive men but thinking logically, what does a good man and father get out of being abusive, to a woman? He gets to lose his kids, much of his income, half of his retirement, his house, his life as he knows it, etc., etc., etc. What does an abusive women gain by being abusive and getting away with it and then dumping a good father? She gets his kids, much of his income, half of his retirement, his house, his life as he knows it, etc., etc., etc. Good fathers are getting screwed because there are a few bad fathers. Is that fair?
16 - Marc Snider
Sheindlin knows the truth, and everyone in this country has got to come to recognize it as well.
The children of America are being done a terrible disservice by the injustices being administered in the states' family courts. And it is time for the institutionalized removal of parents (overwhelmingly fathers) from their children's lives at the time of divorce and child custody proceedings to stop.
Clear and convincing evidence must be the standard for why a parent is denied equal access to their children. What other possible reason makes sense? And who has a right to order that these children of broken families be raised meaningfully by only one parent?
Except in cases where a parent is less than fit, the answer is no one... That's who.
If parents, regardless of their gender, are not both legally and practically entitled to a rebuttable presumption of equal parenting rights and responsibilities when they are forced from their marriages, then it is surely time for the would-be future parents (and primarily fathers) of the country to closely examine whether there is too much risk involved in starting a family.
The cultural adaptation has already begun and is progressing. Evaluation of recent statistical information bears this out. The next generation of would-be fathers is becoming more and more cognizant of the dangers that they and their as yet unborn progeny are likely to face after starting a family.
This misguided, unwise, and destructive social policy whereby children of divorce are so often prescribed parentectomy (overwhelmingly a fatherectomy) by family courts across the country is directly influencing and modifying the nature of relationships between men and women.
The results can already be discerned by those who pay attention. Soon the disastrous fallout will be discernable by all...
17 - Mona Lena USA
First Lady Laura Bush visited the National Center for Fathering in Kansas City ( Ken R. Canfield, Ph.D, Founder and President, <<
In the United States of America all Parents are to be Equal, they need to be given joint parenting rights joint custody as it has already been mandated in Germany ( 1998 ).
By not allowing fathers and mothers to see their children, by not investigating thoroughly accusations of abuse and neglect, these parents will in most cases kidnap their children or leave the painful past behind.
USA is to guard the child’s parent as well the child itself.
USA needs to discover a balance to maintain its humane welfare system without prosecuting the father/non custodial parent whose ex wife refuses to go to work and support the child as well, that I quote due to feminists who continue to ask for more but yet find no excuse to sit at home not contributing financial support of their children while again blaring for Equal Rights. All the while they are not aware by doing so that they are contributing to feminism beyond means.
No other country incarcerates a child for life under the age of 15 for committing murder but the United States of America! United States of America has become a country without feelings and emotions!
This is the country which is based on family values! These values can not end due to injustice within family courts it is unheard of in most country’s around the globe and hopefully none will follow the example which is in the present world simply embarrassing. How can such grate country dishonor its males by ignoring their out cry for help?
Mona Lena
18 - Tom Gallen
I noticed one comment that said basically, "I sympathise with men's plight BUT, remember that men ARE more abusive". I don't believe that, for a minute and that backhand slap did not go unnoticed. If you add in the abuse NOT reported by males who are too ashamed of being beaten by a woman, by those who are abused by helplines and never call again, Those abused by judges and the court system and are afraid to make waves lest the come back and take away whatever is left. When you add in all of the men who live in houses where "SHE wears the pants in that house" and where the man afraid to get home from work one minute late because of the feared consequences. And how about men who live in houses where the man is forbidden to associate with friends and family, lest it take away from her control of his life. When you add in the men who live in terror 24 hours a day and are never actually beaten but are beaten down THEN the percentage of abusers would probably be quite different. Think about it!
19 - Barbara C. Johnson
When first hearing about PBS's BREAKING THE SILENCE and seeing a promo, I wrote a letter to PBS. (See very bottom of this blog.) PBS responded today.
Note that they called my letter "Positive." When you read their letter, you will also note `~``~`. Those characters represent where PBS redacted the letter.
They are truly deluding themselves, and will likely attempt to delude the public by pubicizing that the response to their broadcast was primarily positive.
Well, here is my reply to their response. I shall await learning whether they considered this letter, too, a "positive" response. Nothing like tilting statistics!
Here is my latest:
Dear PBS Org:
That Dominique Lasseur and Catherine Tatge spent "countless hours" doing "extensive research and interviews" is only Pablum. The problem, I suspect, is that they used a limited database suggested by those on the women's side of the Gender War, which is polarizing our society.
.
I would like Lasseur and Tatge to reveal diverse details regarding that research. Without a control mechanism, their study is invalid.
Having worked for many years in the "divorce industry," my extensive research and interviews show the opposite to be true, to wit, that women regularly alienate their children from their fathers. Money and control are the motivators. Pro-women organizations use false statistics to promote their interests and get annual bonuses and grants from the federal government. As a result, children are parentectomized -- the parent being cut out is the father. By so doing, the children lose their self-confidence and identity, particularly if they have been led to believe they "are like their father." In the extreme, we see self-mutiliation, drugs, criminality, runaways, teenage pregnancy.
Cited below are current statistics from the Departments of Justice, Health and Human Services, the Centers for Disease Control, the National Institutes of Health, the Census Bureau and private studies, which clearly reflect the level of damage that is occurring as a result of Anti-Family Law in America:
Children that grow-up without a father's influence:
* <>are 33 times more likely to be seriously abused (so that they will require medical attention) <>
* <>account for 71% of teenage pregnancies (Costing the US Taxpayers $40B per year)
* are 73 times more likely to be killed as a result of abuse
* daughters are 2.1 times more likely to have children during there teenage years than are children from intact families
* <>are 4.6 times more likely to commit suicide
* are 6.6 times to become teenaged mothers
* are 24.3 times more likely to run away
* are 15.3 times more likely to have behavioral disorders
* are 6.3 times more likely to be in a state-operated institution
* are 10.8 times more likely to commit rape
* are 6.6 times more likely to drop out of school
* are 15.3 times more likely to end up in prison while a teenager
* account for 90% of all homeless and runaway children
* account for 70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions
* account for 75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers
* account for 85% of prison youths
* account for 63% of youth suicides
* account for 85% of all children the exhibit behavioral disorders
* account for 80% of rapists motivated by displaced anger disorder
* 70% of confirmed cases of child abuse are committed by mothers <><>
* <><>65% of parental murders of children are committed by mothers. Police investigators and academics believe that 15% of the roughly 7,000 Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) cases reported each year in the United States are really cases of suffocation, primarily committed by the mother. This alone accounts for at least 1,000 homicides a year.
Criminologists point out that many, if not most, cases of SIDS are not reported. (Autopsies are rarely able to distinguish between suffocation and SIDS). Therefore, the actual number of murdered infants is probably much higher.
* 37.9% of fathers have no access/visitation rights
* 40% of mothers reported that they had interfered with the non-custodial father's visitation on at least one occasion, to punish the ex-spouse
* <>50% of mothers see no value in the father`s continued contact with his children
* <>11% of mothers value their husband's input when it comes to handling problems with their kids. Teachers & doctors rated 45%, and close friends & relatives rated 16%
* <> The former spouse (mother) was the greatest obstacle to having more frequent contact with the children
* 70% of fathers felt that they had too little time with their children
* Very few children are satisfied with the amount of contact with their fathers after divorce
Mothers prevent visits to retaliate against fathers for problems in their marital or post-marital relationship:
* 77% of non-custodial fathers are NOT able to "visit" their children, as ordered by the court, as a result of "visitation interference" perpetuated by the custodial parent
Non-compliance with court-ordered visitation is three times the problem of non-compliance with court-ordered child support and impacts the children of divorce even more:
* only 10% of all noncustodial fathers fit the "deadbeat dad" category and 99% of those are "dead broke"
* 90% of the fathers with joint custody paid the support due
* Fathers with visitation rights pay 79.1%
* 44.5% of those with NO visitation rights still financially support their children
* 79.6% of custodial mothers receive child-support award
* 29.9% of custodial fathers receive a support award
* 46.9% of Non-custodial mothers totally default on child support
* 26.9% of Non-custodial fathers totally default on child support
The ONLY viable solution to this societal crisis is an immediate end to the "Failed Social Experiment" and the enforcement of
the fundamental liberty right to parent one's children absolutely free from unnecessary governmental interference -- unless/until it is
clearly established that a parent is unfit to parent. Divorce does not make a parent a bad parent, and this must not be allowed to
continue to be the sole-basis upon which governmental entities forcibly remove Fathers from the lives of their children.
Barbara C. Johnson
Catalog Name : Barbara C. Johnson, Attorney at Law
Catalog Street Address : 6 Appletree Lane
Catalog City : Andover,
Catalog State : MA
Catalog Zip Code : 01810-4102
viewer--pbs.org wrote:
> Dear Ms. Johnson:
>
> Thank you for taking the time to write to PBS about your concerns regarding BREAKING THE SILENCE: CHILDREN’S STORIES. Comments from our viewers - both positive and negative " are the best guides we have to make future programming decisions.
>
> We have forwarded your observations to the filmmakers - producer Dominique Lasseur and director Catherine Tatge - who have asked us to share their thoughts about the documentary with you.
>
> “When we began this project over a year ago, our goal was to produce a documentary about domestic violence and children. We had no preconceived notions about the issue … no specific agenda to prove or disprove. The finished documentary is simply a result of where countless hours of extensive research and interviews took us. These are the real stories of real women who lost custody of their children when Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) was used as scientific proof in their family court cases. These were the stories we found over and over again.
>
> These are difficult and controversial issues that stir human emotions. Nothing can galvanize one’s passion like the welfare of a child. We understand certain individuals will never be completely satisfied with the information presented in the documentary. All we can do is offer, in the most open and transparent manner, the reasoning and research that went into this program.”
>
> We appreciate your interest in PBS programming and hope that you will continue to enjoy and support your local PBS member station.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> PBS Viewer Services
>
>
> At 08:26 PM 10/5/2005, you wrote:
>
>> User Information -
>>
>> Name : Barbara C, Johnson
>> Zip Code : 01810
>> Email :
>> Program Name : Breaking The Silence:Children's S
>> Nature of Comments : positive
>> Mailing List Opt-in :
>> Wants catalog :
>>
>> Comments : American society is being destroyed by programs such as that which you intend to air this month.`~``~`As a result of well-meaning laws that have gone awry since their passge, inaccurate statistics, the radical feminist movement, FATHERHOOD IS DYING and FAMILIES ARE SUFFERING.`~``~`This destabiliization of the family is destructive of our society as a whole! Every time I think I'll be donating because I've enjoyed NOVA or an historical documentary, PBS entertains producing such garbage as Breaking the Silence.`~`
>>
>>
>
>
20 - Marc Snider
I will never again support PBS and would urge every parent who has ever suffered from the effect of being alienated from their child by the child's other parent to never support PBS again either.
A one-sided piece of propaganda like this has no business being partially funded with public funds (as it is by being aired on PBS).
PBS is certainly a fine representation of how far this society has fallen. Get prepared for the further sinking of the American social foundation...
Men who start families are all but fools...
Marc
21 - Andrew Ryan
Teri,
As you know I am grateful for opening these things up for debate and opening eyes of the ignorant and showing what the current system does to children, familys and society as a whole.
People - you need to write, phone and fax each and every representative at every level of government and express your outrage at the systematic destruction of the family. The court system and the FemiNAZIS who enact VAWA as the "weapon of MASS DESTRUCTION" need to be put in their place.
Violence is already a crime - doesn't matter the gender - all violent acts should be prosecuted. False allegations from ex spouses to gain upper hand in custody disputes should be prosecuted for perjury - end of story!
Presumption of equal shared parenting (equality!!!!!) should be practiced with each parent submitting a parental plan and negotiating/mediating the best plan for the CHILDEN (remember them?).
Those who do not stand up now should find it hard to look at their children and grandchildren in the face without feeling shame, for this is a battle they may have to face if we don't fix it now - NOW!
22 - Kat Clayton
I think all fathers rights should be over hauled. There are some great dads out there that work their butts off to take care of their children. These men should have a court system that supports their love and devotion. My ex husband has custody of the two children we made together and he is a great father.
23 - Dave Nalle
It's strangely appropriate that all comments on this thread are stuck in bold, but I suppose I'll have to fix it.
Dave
24 - Darrick
These discussions are great. The VAWA issues tie in with equal physical child custody when, a large number of mothers use it to gain an upperhand in custody cases. Otherwise the most important thing to remember is that everyone needs to find out who their state and federal legislators are and lobby them to mandate a presumption of joint physical custody. Also, please join a state or national father's rights orginization and get involved.
25 - A UK Dad
I do wish that dads campaigning for fairer and equal rights to be parents, would cease all efforts to make this a gender war. It is so true that in the domain of parenting, mothers do rule the roost. Dads who have been or are capable of being equal parents after separation or divorce DO need a system that actively promotes their roles, responsibilities, duties and of course their rights.
The whole DV debate about who suffers more and who attacks more is not relavent to this subject. DV is a horrid problem that needs sorting by that is a different issue. Men and women should look at DV as a problem related to humans and personalities. Every case will always be determined on its own circumstances. Courts have inherant juristiction to overule any parents rights as they are not absolute. The paramount interest of the child / welfare is the trump card that wins all arguments.
My problem is that the welfare and what is best is not clearly defined. If we define that a child should have limited contact to a DV perp' then we need to be sure that we identify these correctly and categorise DV in ALL circumstances. If a man leaves a violent relationship where he was continually emotionally abused and belittled by his wife, and put up with it for the sake of his kids. If he leaves and she threatens that he'll never see his kids again then she uses the system against him, she needs to be seen as a DV perp' just as much as the man who hits his wife.
Rather than try to compare facts and stats. the focus should be on the failings of the existing system and remedies.