Tuesday
Sunday
Enact Uniform Parenting Guidelines in Family Law
Repeal Inconsistent Rules and Presumptions - Ask the Family Court to adopt uniform rules requiring equal parenting time
OUR LEGISLATORS CAN PROTECT US FROM THE HORRORS OF FAMILY COURTS TO IMPOSE EQUALITY STANDARDS
Our Constitutional right to bear arms is front and center in state and federal legislatures. But where is the debate on protecting our basic human rights to parent our children? (also constitutionally protected by the 14th amendment) Every day in every state, mothers and fathers lose their basic human right to parent their children.
Why? Because the divorce industry wants your family’s money! Estimated at $170 Billion annually! How? We all have a family member, friend or neighbor who has been through a nasty divorce. Most of us believe children need both parents equally and that there exist a standard of 50/50 custody that the courts start from.
NOT TRUE!!!! THERE IS NO PARENTING TIME STANDARD!!! THIS LACK OF STANDARD CREATES 90% OF ALL DIVORCE CONFLICT AND DIVORCE LITIGATION!!! IT DESTROYS FAMILIES AND LIVES!!! STOP IT NOW!!!!!
In litigated divorce, there is no standard as to how children should spend their time between parents. The lack of a parenting time standard causes our children to be viewed as a prize where unethical lawyers and custody evaluators use them as pawns between parents. If there were a parenting time standard, it would resolve over half of divorce litigation taking place right now.
MAKE PRESUMPTIVE 50/50 THE REBUTTABLE STANDARD AND ELIMINATE CUSTODY EVALUATIONS
Start with the presumption that both parents are fit and entitled to an equal role in their children’s lives. This presumption is rebuttable only by findings of fact based upon a preponderance of evidence in abuse, neglect or addiction. Everything else unconstitutionally denies parents their rights to parent children.
ONLY OUR LEGISLATORS CAN PROTECT US FROM THE DESTRUCTION OF DIVORCE WITHOUT OBJECTIVE AND EQUAL STANDARDS
The divorce industry is $170B annually and motivated to oppose standards so they can create, promote and perpetuate conflict to increase billing hours exponentially. Have you ever heard “It's only the lawyers who win in divorce”?
Posted by Childrens Rights Florida on Wednesday, July 22, 2015
Listen to internet radio with SyndicatedNews on BlogTalkRadio
Family Matters with Wendy Archer
Wendy Archer, Parental Alienation Awareness and Education Advocate, has been involved in Parental Alienation Awareness and the related necessary Family Court Reform since September 2009. Wendy founded The LRC Foundation Inc, a non-profit Texas Corporation.
Family Matters visits with Dr. J. Michael Bone
Listen to internet radio with SyndicatedNews on BlogTalkRadio
Family Matters visits with Dr. J. Michael Bone
Parental Alienation and Family Court Cases involving Parental Alienation and Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) are perhaps the most vexing and difficult that exist in Family Court. These cases require careful and painstaking preparation, analysis of voluminous documentation, preparation of experts and collateral witnesses. They can be difficult to demonstrate in court and include arduous steps that exceed the normal representation of a Family Law case without parental alienation. These cases exploit and wear down the system and do so in the service of the alienation.
Men Matter with Dr. Maguire & Melody Brooke
Listen to internet radio with SyndicatedNews on BlogTalkRadio
This project will only be funded if at least $120,000 is pledged by Friday Sep 9, 10:47pm EDT. Hollywood won't make this movie or tell this story. This is not a “politically correct” film, it goes against the current media position on the role of father’s in children’s lives and is NOT something that can be funded through traditional sources. This is an important message. The film needs to reach millions worldwide. To do that we have to do a better job than you typical special interest indie film. Mass appeal demands an entertaining, funny, and well acted film with great production values.
Wednesday
Presumption of equal time-sharing by both parents
General Bill by Lee ~ | ||
| ||
Effective Date: Except as otherwise expressly provided in this act, this act shall take effect July 1, 2016 | ||
Last Event: 09/17/15 S Referred to Judiciary; Appropriations Subcommittee on Criminal and Civil Justice; Appropriations on Thursday, September 17, 2015 1:54 PM
|
Monday
Shared Parenting Supporters Say "Changes Are Long Overdue".
The State House hearing room seemed an unlikely place for grown men to bare their souls.
 |
| Ned Holstein of the National Parents Organization testified for change. |
But as father after father took a seat in a committee room, urging lawmakers to support proposed legislation to revamp Massachusetts’ child-custody statute, they laid out the particulars of their divorces and personal lives in blunt detail.
Creemos que debemos unirnos para defender a nuestras familias.
 |
Somos una coalición de ciudadanos de todos los ámbitos de la vida muy preocupados por la seguridad y el bienestar de nuestros niños y familias. Creemos que debemos unirnos para defender a nuestras familias ya que hay gran poder en la unidad: “Uno solo puede ser vencido, pero dos podrán resistir. Y además, la cuerda de tres hilos no se rompe fácilmente” (Eclesiastés 4:12).Somos un ejército de padres defendiendo a nuestros hijos.
|
Derechos de los Hombres
Feminismo y el Hombre Desechable
Saturday
No definition of transformative use is set out in the Copyright Act
Which of the following statements is/are true?
(a) Copying up to 25 words is fair use.
(b) Copying less than 10 percent is fair use.
(c) Copying 25 words or 10% is fair use.
(d) Copying only a small amount is fair use.
(e) If you don’t make money on it, it’s fair use.
(f) It’s fair use if it’s for an educational purpose.
(g) Non-profit organizations can’t be sued for copyright infringement.
(h) It’s fair use if there’s no copyright notice on it.
(i) If the author is dead, you can copy anything he wrote.
(j) As long as you give credit to the author, it’s fair use.
(k) “Fair use” is a myth. There is no such thing.
If you answered (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i), (j), or (k), then you failed the test. You’re in good company, though; nearly everybody believes at least one of these things is true.
Monday
Family Court is a deadly business
Originally appeared at CatholicCourier.Com (Regional paper for Catholic Diocese of Roches
Lyons man stands up for beliefs
(Publication Date: 09-03-2008)
By Jennifer Burke/Catholic Courier Lyons resident John Murtari has been standing up for what he believes in for years, but those actions recently made him a minor celebrity in his hometown. Murtari is featured in "Support? System Down," a documentary recently produced and directed by actor Angelo Lobo. The film explores what Lobo sees as the flaws in America's child-support system. "Support" premiered in California this past spring, and the recently restored Ohmann Theater in Lyons hosted a special screening of the film Aug. 13. In November 2006 Lobo visited Murtari in prison, where Murtari was serving a six-month sentence for failure to pay child support. Murtari claims he fell behind in his child-support payments because the payment amounts were calculated based on an income level he no longer had. What little extra money Murtari did have was usually spent traveling across the country to visit his son Domenic, he said. "What am I supposed to do? I want to see my son," Murtari, who belongs to St. Michael Parish in Lyons, told the Catholic Courier. "He wasn't (physically or financially) hurting for anything, but he wanted Daddy." Murtari refused food or water while imprisoned and instead received his nourishment through a feeding tube inserted through his nose. He did so not to harm himself, but to protest what he called an unjust family-court system that he felt had wrongly taken away his son and sent him to prison, all without a jury trial. Murtari also has been arrested several times for writing on the ground in chalk "I love you, Dom" and "Senator Clinton, help us" outside the Federal Building in Syracuse in an attempt to draw Sen. Hillary Clinton's attention to his proposed Family Rights Act. "The idea is to get Congress to pass a Family Rights Act. Each state has different family law, and it's almost amazing to think that your relationship with your children could be governed differently in Alabama than here in New York," Murtari said. Murtari, founder of the nonprofit organization A Kids Right, has a draft of the proposed act on the organization's Web site, www.AKidsRight.org. The organization's members believe all parents should be presumed fit and equal parents unless the government can prove through a jury trial that they are a demonstrated threat to their children, and have demonstrated that with harmful intent. Only then should the government interfere with a parent's right to raise his or her child, according to the organization and the proposed legislation. "John Murtari is a voice for the many non-custodial parents who wanted to share their children equally. People will see why he not only went on a hunger strike for change, but also continues to peacefully protest for the rights of children to have both parents," Lobo said in a statement. Murtari, who hadn't seen the movie before the Aug. 13 screening, said he was pleased with the way Lobo told his story and the way the film educated people unfamiliar with the child-support and family-court systems. "It's always weird seeing yourself (on film)," Murtari said. "What really got me was the people from town who were there and said, 'Wow, I never knew (about the system)." Murtari said he himself had never known much about the child-support and family-court systems before his divorce, even though he'd always considered himself a politically aware man. When his ex-wife decided to move across the country with their 5-year-old son, however, he said the "gut-wrenching" experience inspired him to learn more about the system and how he might change it. He drew inspiration from the Gospels and from reading about the lives of St. Francis of Assisi, Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi. Inspired by what these men were able to do through simple faith and nonviolent action, Murtari decided to follow their examples. "Nonviolent action doesn't mean writing letters. It's voluntary, loving self-sacrifice to show how deeply you believe in your cause," Murtari said. His nonviolent actions have landed him in jail more than once, but Murtari said he's seen some fruits from his labor. Once-hostile law-enforcement officers and court officials have begun treating him with respect, and he's full of hope that his actions can make a difference for families throughout the nation. "I could have easily descended into that bitterness and helplessness. Once I started taking these actions I felt better," Murtari said. "With faith you can lose that bitterness. When you're using that faith and sacrificing to make things better for others, you're going to feel better." EDITOR'S NOTE: To learn more about "Support? System Down," visit the film's Web site at www.SupportTheMovie.com. |
The 'Family Court in Focus' event is tomorrow night! - Note: You don't need to bring your tickets, just yourselves and support to bring these issues back on the public and political agenda. We look forward to seeing you there.
Children Lost in Divorce
The gift of parenting children is the single greatest blessing and experience an individual can enjoy in life. Therefore to me, parenting rights are not a “special rights” concern; they are a “human rights” concern.
So, I want to ask where you stand on an important political issue: Family Law Reform.As you may or may not be aware, our current system of Family Law has devolved into one in which a whole host of Family Court Industry players are profiteering from the minimization or elimination of parenting time and rights for non-custodial parents.
Many custodial parents, lawyers, parenting plan evaluators, supervised parenting services, States, friends of the Court social workers, many Courts, and others; are making money by using children as an excuse to exploit non-custodial parents, causing irreparable harm to both children and their parents in the process.
I, and a rapidly growing base of many others, would like this to stop. More specifically, we are asking for five primary reforms to Family Law:
The presumption of 50/50 custody and parenting rights during and after divorce. We are NOT asking for a REQUIREMENT of 50/50, because we still want parents to be able to decide for themselves what works best for them. However, in the event that case goes to trial, instead of having the NCP being forced to rise to a high standard to show why they should have time with their children, I believe it’s far healthier (for both parents and children) for the parent contesting this time to be required to rise to a high standard to show why the NCP should NOT have equal time with their children. And while this may dramatically hit the financial accounts of those who are using children for profit by creating or aggravating conditions of conflict, this reform will affect far healthier outcomes for families.
I would like reforms to child support calculations. More specifically, an elimination of financial incentives for minimizing or eliminating a non-custodial parent’s time with their little ones. As it sits now, there are basically two pieces to the child support calculation: (1) An actual physical needs worksheet, and (2) A tax-free income redistribution; with the Court establishing the higher of the two as the child support order. I recognize that custodial parents may need some time to adjust after divorce, and I have no problems with alimony/maintenance. However, I would like the alimony portion of child support to be eliminated. If a CP wants to better their lifestyle, they can put the work into bettering themselves just like NCP’S are often admonished to do. Children are NOT tax-free income producing assets, and NCP’s are NOT indentured servants.
Social Security Act, Title IV, Part D, Section 458 "Incentive Payments To States": I have no problem, in theory, with states being rewarded for child support enforcement. However, I have a big problem with States profiting from it, and a REALLY big problem with the lack of resources available to NCP’s for visitation enforcement. For little or no cost, a CP can have the state pursue civil or criminal remedies for delinquent child support. However, an NCP in reality, must hire an attorney if his or her visitation orders are being ignored, and often, these orders are not enforced with anywhere near the same severity by the Court as they are with child support orders. And I’m confident this is happening in large part, due to the financial interests of those parties noted in paragraph four. Therefore, if there is going to be Federal incentives for the enforcement of Family Court orders, I want equal weighting and importance put the enforcement of visitation orders. Honestly, the message that money is more important than a parent’s relationship and the emotional well-being of children is remarkably disgusting. I simply can’t tolerate that kind of worldview.
VAWA reform. I agree that victims of abuse and violence need the ability to feel safe in swiftly seeking the protection of the Justice system. However, fraudulent allegations of abuse made during Family Court are getting out of control. This is a gender-neutral problem, and it seems it now boils down to which party can launch this nuclear attack first. There are no remedies available to the victims of fraudulent allegations – none, and the damage these allegations cause to both children and parents is catastrophic.
The American Bar Association loves to fall back on VAWA as its reasoning for opposing any kind of Family Law reform. However, I can’t help but wonder how much money attorneys and investigators are making from a law that allows someone to be accused of such a serious crime and presumed guilty of it with no credible evidence what-so-ever. Something needs to be done about this, right now.
In short, much of the current political and judicial rationalizing for the current structure of Family Law centers on the concept of what’s “in the best interests of the children”. However, what is becoming increasingly clear is that children are simply being used as a seemingly noble excuse to mask a greedier underlying motive that is causing significant and irreparable harm to parents and children alike.
I understand you can expect to receive significant resistance to my ideas for reform because those parties noted earlier have a great deal to lose when they take place.
However, I’m not concerned about them. I’m concerned about the health and well-being children and parents, and your position on this matter will affect my voting behavior going forward.
Therefore, I will be grateful if you will tell me, in plain and simple words, where you stand on Family Law Reform.
Thank you so much for your time.
Sincerely,
Let's Join The Purple Keyboard Campaign((Activate :2015))4 Family Justice Reform!
— at Let us be excellent to each other in 2015.So, I want to ask where you stand on an important political issue: Family Law Reform.As you may or may not be aware, our current system of Family Law has devolved into one in which a whole host of Family Court Industry players are profiteering from the minimization or elimination of parenting time and rights for non-custodial parents.
Many custodial parents, lawyers, parenting plan evaluators, supervised parenting services, States, friends of the Court social workers, many Courts, and others; are making money by using children as an excuse to exploit non-custodial parents, causing irreparable harm to both children and their parents in the process.
I, and a rapidly growing base of many others, would like this to stop. More specifically, we are asking for five primary reforms to Family Law:
The presumption of 50/50 custody and parenting rights during and after divorce. We are NOT asking for a REQUIREMENT of 50/50, because we still want parents to be able to decide for themselves what works best for them. However, in the event that case goes to trial, instead of having the NCP being forced to rise to a high standard to show why they should have time with their children, I believe it’s far healthier (for both parents and children) for the parent contesting this time to be required to rise to a high standard to show why the NCP should NOT have equal time with their children. And while this may dramatically hit the financial accounts of those who are using children for profit by creating or aggravating conditions of conflict, this reform will affect far healthier outcomes for families.
I would like reforms to child support calculations. More specifically, an elimination of financial incentives for minimizing or eliminating a non-custodial parent’s time with their little ones. As it sits now, there are basically two pieces to the child support calculation: (1) An actual physical needs worksheet, and (2) A tax-free income redistribution; with the Court establishing the higher of the two as the child support order. I recognize that custodial parents may need some time to adjust after divorce, and I have no problems with alimony/maintenance. However, I would like the alimony portion of child support to be eliminated. If a CP wants to better their lifestyle, they can put the work into bettering themselves just like NCP’S are often admonished to do. Children are NOT tax-free income producing assets, and NCP’s are NOT indentured servants.
Reforms to child support enforcement: If one wants to accomplish a goal, it helps establish good or helpful conditions to achieve that goal. Unfortunately, the Family Court has become accustomed to pathological and often draconian measures for enforcement in which the civil rights of NCP’s are systematically ignored or eliminated through administrative court procedures. If a person loses their job, or becomes ill or disabled, it makes no sense what so ever, to take away their driver’s license, vocational license, destroy their credit, throw them in jail, or force them into homelessness. How does this help to ensure the support gets caught-up? It doesn’t. It simply makes the problem worse and sets the non-custodial parent up for future, life-destroying failures. Truthfully, current regimes for enforcement that treat "deadbroke" parents as common criminals are completely inappropriate.
Social Security Act, Title IV, Part D, Section 458 "Incentive Payments To States": I have no problem, in theory, with states being rewarded for child support enforcement. However, I have a big problem with States profiting from it, and a REALLY big problem with the lack of resources available to NCP’s for visitation enforcement. For little or no cost, a CP can have the state pursue civil or criminal remedies for delinquent child support. However, an NCP in reality, must hire an attorney if his or her visitation orders are being ignored, and often, these orders are not enforced with anywhere near the same severity by the Court as they are with child support orders. And I’m confident this is happening in large part, due to the financial interests of those parties noted in paragraph four. Therefore, if there is going to be Federal incentives for the enforcement of Family Court orders, I want equal weighting and importance put the enforcement of visitation orders. Honestly, the message that money is more important than a parent’s relationship and the emotional well-being of children is remarkably disgusting. I simply can’t tolerate that kind of worldview.
VAWA reform. I agree that victims of abuse and violence need the ability to feel safe in swiftly seeking the protection of the Justice system. However, fraudulent allegations of abuse made during Family Court are getting out of control. This is a gender-neutral problem, and it seems it now boils down to which party can launch this nuclear attack first. There are no remedies available to the victims of fraudulent allegations – none, and the damage these allegations cause to both children and parents is catastrophic.
The American Bar Association loves to fall back on VAWA as its reasoning for opposing any kind of Family Law reform. However, I can’t help but wonder how much money attorneys and investigators are making from a law that allows someone to be accused of such a serious crime and presumed guilty of it with no credible evidence what-so-ever. Something needs to be done about this, right now.
In short, much of the current political and judicial rationalizing for the current structure of Family Law centers on the concept of what’s “in the best interests of the children”. However, what is becoming increasingly clear is that children are simply being used as a seemingly noble excuse to mask a greedier underlying motive that is causing significant and irreparable harm to parents and children alike.
I understand you can expect to receive significant resistance to my ideas for reform because those parties noted earlier have a great deal to lose when they take place.
However, I’m not concerned about them. I’m concerned about the health and well-being children and parents, and your position on this matter will affect my voting behavior going forward.
Therefore, I will be grateful if you will tell me, in plain and simple words, where you stand on Family Law Reform.
Thank you so much for your time.
Sincerely,
Saturday
Dad is expected to be more involved.
NCFM Advisor Gordon Finley, Ph.D. blasts VAWA for causing the deaths of men | National Coalition For Men (NCFM)
Family roles have changed substantially since the 1950s. Mom now works outside the home. And dad is expected to be more involved in raising the kids. By Sissi Aguila.
Family roles have changed substantially since the 1950s. Mom now works outside the home. And dad is expected to be more involved in raising the kids. By Sissi Aguila.
We only support organizations who show an understanding that children need both parents, and that either parent is equally capable of the choice to perpetrate hate or declare peace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
