2. Parenting at best is a tag-team sport: Reality check - Father does not know best – and neither does Mother. But between them, employing their complimentary gifts, more often than not, they’ll get it right.
3. Mom’s missing something too: We’re not saying a woman is incomplete without a man. What we are saying is that kids miss out twice when there’s no father in the home. Kids whose mom is loved eloquently by their dad have the advantage of a mother who’s loved by a good man. Every child should live in a home like that.
4. Modeling for boys: Boys need to see what it means to live as a man. Men are different in a variety of ways. Boys who see man-stuff, in action, around the home on a day-to-day basis, are at an advantage to be better equipped.
5. Modeling for girls: Most girls are going to get married one day. If they haven’t seen a real live dad, being a good man, day-in day-out, then they have missed a great opportunity to understand what to value and what to look for.
6. The family is a model love-relationship: Love is the great force in relationships. The family is a place where the dynamics of love between a man and a woman work themselves out in the real world. Commitment, faithfulness, forgiveness, discipline, belief – all these and more play out in front of a child’s eyes. Without a dad, this very important part of the function of a family simply is not there, to instruct children. Not having a father present in the home is a huge loss in that regard.
7.The best man: Not every young man is going to ask Dad to be best man at his wedding, but – beyond the ceremonial moment – Dad should be there to fulfill the role from the day his kids start dating to the day they start a family of their own.
8.Loss of focused time: Understand this, a single-parent family is not 50% of a parenting unit. In fact, it’s no fraction of a family - because a single parent family is a bona fide family, period. But, in the metrics of time, a missing dad is irreplaceable in terms of what a dad does while the other parent is doing what they do. No matter how talented mom is, she can’t be duplicated and she is finite in time and space.
9. The cost in innocence: Try this question… When there’s no Dad around for Mom to lean on (and vice-versa), then who is left to play the other grown-up when one’s needed? Just in case you wonder, a grown-up IS often needed. It doesn’t matter how old the kids are, they’re going to step up and fill those shoes prematurely and there’s a cost to go along with that.10.The cost in security: Ideally, one job Dad does best is carrying the mantle of security for a family. It doesn’t mean he’s always strong physically, and it doesn’t mean that mom is weak. The “Dad” kind of security is a simple fact of biology. But it’s real, and every child without a father loses something intangible that takes its toll in confidence.
10 Reasons Why Kids Without Dads Are at a Big Disadvantage
Let’s start by saying this – there’s little virtue in simply being a biological father. You have to step up and parent. In other words, children who don’t have a father are only disadvantaged as compared to kids with fathers who invest themselves in the dad role with all the gifts and the resources they’ve been given.
That said, we understand that divorce and other tragedies are a reality of 21stCentury life. Some kids simply don’t have a dad. Their moms provide a wonderful home and what they achieve is nothing short of the miraculous. But they can’t make up not having a loving father around.
All Pro Dad is interested in talking about dads doing their best, about dads making the decision to take their role seriously, and about what is at risk if we walk away.
There’s only one non-negotiable expectation that should come with the dad job, and that’s “MY BEST.”
Let’s take a look at 10 reasons not to slack off:
Balance: Mothers are amazing. Fathers are amazing too. But we were created to learn and grow as balanced people. Dad is a unique piece of that puzzle.
Parenting at best is a tag-team sport: Reality check - Father does not know best – and neither does Mother. But between them, employing their complimentary gifts, more often than not, they’ll get it right.
Mom’s missing something too: We’re not saying a woman is incomplete without a man. What we are saying is that kids miss out twice when there’s no father in the home. Kids whose mom is loved eloquently by their dad have the advantage of a mother who’s loved by a good man. Every child should live in a home like that.
Modeling for boys: Boys need to see what it means to live as a man. Men are different in a variety of ways. Boys who see man-stuff, in action, around the home on a day-to-day basis, are at an advantage to be better equipped.
Modeling for girls: Most girls are going to get married one day. If they haven’t seen a real live dad, being a good man, day-in day-out, then they have missed a great opportunity to understand what to value and what to look for.
The family is a model love-relationship: Love is the great force in relationships. The family is a place where the dynamics of love between a man and a woman work themselves out in the real world. Commitment, faithfulness, forgiveness, discipline, belief – all these and more play out in front of a child’s eyes. Without a dad, this very important part of the function of a family simply is not there, to instruct children. Not having a father present in the home is a huge loss in that regard.
The best man: Not every young man is going to ask Dad to be best man at his wedding, but – beyond the ceremonial moment – Dad should be there to fulfill the role from the day his kids start dating to the day they start a family of their own.
Loss of focused time: Understand this, a single-parent family is not 50% of a parenting unit. In fact, it’s no fraction of a family - because a single parent family is a bona fide family, period. But, in the metrics of time, a missing dad is irreplaceable in terms of what a dad does while the other parent is doing what they do. No matter how talented mom is, she can’t be duplicated and she is finite in time and space.
The cost in innocence: Try this question… When there’s no Dad around for Mom to lean on (and vice-versa), then who is left to play the other grown-up when one’s needed? Just in case you wonder, a grown-up IS often needed. It doesn’t matter how old the kids are, they’re going to step up and fill those shoes prematurely and there’s a cost to go along with that.
The cost in security: Ideally, one job Dad does best is carrying the mantle of security for a family. It doesn’t mean he’s always strong physically, and it doesn’t mean that mom is weak. The “Dad” kind of security is a simple fact of biology. But it’s real, and every child without a father loses something intangible that takes its toll in confidence.
An At-Home Parent Finds His Non-Parenting Niche
Kevin McKeever at NYC Dads Group -
HOW DID CHILDREN OF DIVORCE GET STUCK WITH THE VISITATION PLAN THAT AFFORDS THEM ACCESS TO THEIR NON-RESIDENTIAL PARENT ONLY ONE NIGHT DURING THE WEEK AND EVERY OTHER WEEK-END?
ReplyDeleteWhat is the research that supports such a schedule? Where is the data that confirms that such a plan is in the best interest of the child?
Well, reader, you can spend your time from now until eternity researching the literature and YOU WILL NOT DISCOVER ANY SUPPORTING DATA for the typical visitation arrangement with the non-residential parent! The reality is that this arrangement is based solely on custom. And just like the short story, "The Lottery," in which the prizewinner is stoned to death, the message is that deeds and judgments are frequently arrived at based on nothing more than habit, fantasy, prejudice, and yes, on "junk science."
This family therapist upholds the importance of both parents playing an active and substantial role in their children's lives----especially in situations when the parents are apart. In order to support the goal for each parent to provide a meaningfully and considerable involvement in the lives of their children, I affirm that the resolution to custody requires an arrangement for joint legal custody and physical custody that maximizes the time with the non-residential----with the optimal arrangement being 50-50, whenever practical. It is my professional opinion that the customary visitation arrangement for non-residential parents to visit every other weekend and one night during the week is not sufficient to maintain a consequential relationship with their children. Although I have heard matrimonial attorneys, children's attorneys, and judges assert that the child needs the consistency of the same residence, I deem this assumption to be nonsense. I cannot be convinced that the consistency with one's bed trumps consistency with a parent!
Should the reader question how such an arrangement can be judiciously implemented which maximizes the child's time---even in a 50-50 arrangement----with the non-residential parent, I direct the reader to the book, Mom's House, Dads House, by the Isolina Ricci, PhD.
Indeed, the research that we do have supports the serious consequences to children when the father, who is generally the non-residential parent, does not play a meaningful role in lives of his children. The book, Fatherneed, (2000) by Dr. Kyle Pruitt, summarizes the research at Yale University about the importance of fathers to their children. And another post on this page summarizes an extensive list of other research.
Children of divorce or separation of their parents previously had each parent 100% of the time and obviously cannot have the same arrangement subsequent to their parents' separation. But it makes no sense to this family therapist that the result of parental separation is that the child is accorded only 20% time with one parent and 80% with the other. What rational person could possibly justify this?
"Normal parents can put the needs of their children first. They know that demeaning and demonizing their partner harms the children, and however they may feel, they do not want to harm their children. The problem of brainwashing children arises when one or other parent or both put their needs first and use the children as weapons against each other. These are the adults who have personality disorders that go unrecognized in court. There both parents are given an equal hearing the problem occurs when one parent lies and cheats under oath, manipulates the judiciary and everyone in the case while the normal parent looks on in horror. Women will always be given the benefit of the doubt over men especially by men which is why so many men loose their children. The training of so called experts in the universities and in workshops has been in the hands of radical feminists for the last forty years as a result there is no level playing field between parents any longer. All I can say that I have seen children deprived of a loving parent reconnect after years of demonizing that parent. For other parents they have to live with the injustice for the rest of their lives their child or children are to damaged to ever know the truth." ~ Erin Pizzey
ReplyDeletePRO SE RIGHTS:
ReplyDeleteBrotherhood of Trainmen v. Virginia ex rel. Virginia State Bar, 377 U.S. 1; v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335; Argersinger v. Hamlin, Sheriff 407 U.S. 425 ~ Litigants can be assisted by unlicensed laymen during judicial proceedings.
Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957) ~ "Following the simple guide of rule 8(f) that all pleadings shall be so construed as to do substantial justice"... "The federal rules reject the approach that pleading is a game of skill in which one misstep by counsel may be decisive to the outcome and accept the principle that the purpose of pleading is to facilitate a proper decision on the merits." The court also cited Rule 8(f) FRCP, which holds that all pleadings shall be construed to do substantial justice.
Davis v. Wechler, 263 U.S. 22, 24; Stromberb v. California, 283 U.S. 359; NAACP v. Alabama, 375 U.S. 449 ~ "The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, are not to be defeated under the name of local practice."
Elmore v. McCammon (1986) 640 F. Supp. 905 ~ "... the right to file a lawsuit pro se is one of the most important rights under the constitution and laws."
Federal Rules of Civil Procedures, Rule 17, 28 USCA "Next Friend" ~ A next friend is a person who represents someone who is unable to tend to his or her own interest.
Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972) ~ "Allegations such as those asserted by petitioner, however inartfully pleaded, are sufficient"... "which we hold to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers."
Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1959); Picking v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 151 Fed 2nd 240; Pucket v. Cox, 456 2nd 233 ~ Pro se pleadings are to be considered without regard to technicality; pro se litigants' pleadings are not to be held to the same high standards of perfection as lawyers.
Maty v. Grasselli Chemical Co., 303 U.S. 197 (1938) ~ "Pleadings are intended to serve as a means of arriving at fair and just settlements of controversies between litigants. They should not raise barriers which prevent the achievement of that end. Proper pleading is important, but its importance consists in its effectiveness as a means to accomplish the end of a just judgment."
NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415); United Mineworkers of America v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715; and Johnson v. Avery, 89 S. Ct. 747 (1969) ~ Members of groups who are competent nonlawyers can assist other members of the group achieve the goals of the group in court without being charged with "unauthorized practice of law."
Picking v. Pennsylvania Railway, 151 F.2d. 240, Third Circuit Court of Appeals ~ The plaintiff's civil rights pleading was 150 pages and described by a federal judge as "inept". Nevertheless, it was held "Where a plaintiff pleads pro se in a suit for protection of civil rights, the Court should endeavor to construe Plaintiff's Pleadings without regard to technicalities."
Puckett v. Cox, 456 F. 2d 233 (1972) (6th Cir. USCA) ~ It was held that a pro se complaint requires a less stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer per Justice Black in Conley v. Gibson (see case listed above, Pro Se Rights Section).
Roadway Express v. Pipe, 447 U.S. 752 at 757 (1982) ~ "Due to sloth, inattention or desire to seize tactical advantage, lawyers have long engaged in dilatory practices... the glacial pace of much litigation breeds frustration with the Federal Courts and ultimately, disrespect for the law."
Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 2d 946 (1973) ~ "There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of Constitutional Rights."
Schware v. Board of Examiners, United State Reports 353 U.S. pages 238, 239. ~ "The practice of law cannot be licensed by any state/State."
Sims v. Aherns, 271 SW 720 (1925) ~ "The practice of law is an occupation of common right."
“Justice is a part of the human makeup. And if you deprive a person of Justice on a continuous basis, it’s really an attack (and not to get religious or anything) but it’s an attack on the human soul. We have, as societies, evolved ideas of Justice and we have done that because human nature needs Justice and it needs resolution. And if you deprive somebody of that long enough they’re going to have reactions…” ~ Juli T. Star-Alexander – Executive Director, Redress, Inc.
ReplyDeleteRedress, Inc. 501c3 nonprofit corporation, created to combat corruption. Our purpose is to provide real assistance and solutions for citizens suffering from injustices. We operate as a formal business, with a Board of Directors guiding us. We take the following actions to seek redress: Competently organize as citizens working for the enforcement of our legal rights. Form a coalition so large and so effective that the authorities can no longer ignore us. We support and align with other civil rights groups and get our collective voices heard. Work to pass laws that benefit us and give us the means to fight against corruption, as is our legal right, and we work to repeal laws that are in violation of our legal rights. Become proactive in the election process, by screening of political candidates. As individuals, we support those who are striving to achieve excellence, and show how to remove from office those who have failed to get the job done. Make our presence known through every legal means. We monitor our courts and judges. We petition our government representatives for the assistance they are bound to provide us. We publicize our cases and demand redress. Create a flow of income that enables us to fight back in court, and to assist our members impoverished by the abuses inflicted on us. Create the means to relieve the stresses on us, as we share information and support each other. We become legal advocates for each other; we become an emotional support network for each other; we problem solve for individuals on a group basis! Educate our judges, lawyers, court personnel, law enforcement personnel and elected leaders about our rights as citizens! Actively work to eliminate incompetence, bias/prejudice, special relationships and corruption at all levels of government! Work actively with all media sources, to shed light on our efforts. It is reasonable to expect that if the authorities know we are watching and documenting, that their behaviors will improve. IT'S A HUGE TASK! Accountability will not happen overnight. But we believe that through supporting each other, we support ourselves. This results in a voice for justice and redress that cannot be ignored. Please become familiar with our web site, and feel free to call. We need each other - help us to help you! Although we are beginning operations in Nevada, we intend to extend into each state in a competent fashion. We are NOT attorneys, unless individual attorneys join us as members. We are simply people helping people. For those interested, we do not engage in the practice of law. You might be interested in this article Unauthorized Practice of Law on the Net. Call Redress, Inc. at 702.597.2982 or e-mail us at Redress@redressinc.com. WORKING TOGETHER TO ATTAIN FAIRNESS