Guns Don't Kill People Single Parent Homes Do!

Rick Santorum: Guns Don't Kill People, Single Parent Homes Do

What if you get pregnant, your partner has abandoned you, and you happen to live in Missouri where there is ONE clinic which provides abortions? What if you're also financially or geographically unable to exercise that particular option? The Republicans have made sure that you must birth that baby, welcome to single-parenthood! According to GOP Presidential 'hopeful' Rick Santorum, you will be the leading cause of gun violence. You thought things were bleak and hopeless before, now you're carrying the weight of this country's gun violence problem squarely on your expectant shoulders.

How Does the Public View Conflict in Custody Decisions?

How Does the Public View Conflict in Custody Decisions?

One of the main reasons that judges do not automatically award equal parenting in custody decisions is because of their concern about the conflict between the parents and the harm it will do to the children. In previous work, (see blog post on this work) researchers at Arizona State University found that the general public generally favors custody decisions that award both parents equal time in custody decisions, but many custody battles involve conflict between parents. When conflict persists among divorcing parents, most judges and custody evaluators have recommended against shared parenting in order to keep children out of the conflict.

In this study, Braver and his colleagues wanted to find out how the public thinks custody decisions should be handled in which there is conflict. (SeePsychology, Public Policy and Law, 2011). 
To examine these questions, the researchers developed hypothetical cases that described a low conflict scenario and two types of high conflict scenarios. In the low conflict case, the parents were described as reasonably good parents who are involved in the children's lives. There were two types of high conflict cases, one in which both parents were described as extremely angry at each other and fight in front of the children. In the second case only one parent was angry. Half the time this was presented as the father and half the time as the mother.

These cases were presented to citizens who had been summoned to serve on a jury panel in an Arizona community. About 250 people participated in this study. The participants were given the hypothetical cases, and then asked to imagine themselves as the judge deciding these cases based on the merits of the cases and what was best for the child. In each case they were asked how much time the child should spend with each parent.

In both the case of low conflict and high mutual conflict, the participants in this study favored awarding both parents equal time (about 65%). This finding indicates that almost two-thirds of the public still favors equal parenting time even in cases in which there is continued conflict. There was not complete consensus on this arrangement however. The remaining one-third of the participants were more likely to favor having the children live with the mother and reduce the amount of time that the dad got time with the children. This group of participants favored awarding more parenting time to the mother in conflicts in which both parents were described as angry and fighting.

When the cases were presented in which one parent was described as the cause of the conflict, then participants recommended that the parent causing the conflict should get less parenting time. The participants did not differ in their judgments about mothers and fathers. Regardless of whether it was the mother or the father was the source of the conflict, participants thought they should get less time with the child if they were angry, fighting and causing conflict.

These views of custody in high conflict divorces run counter to the views of most professionals. When families are embroiled in conflict during the divorce, they recommend that children be given primary custody with one parent. This is based on the evidence that conflict between parents is one of the most damaging factors in children's well-being during a family breakup. Professionals assume that the parents will not be able to resolve their conflicts resulting in the children being continually exposed to angry, bitter altercations. The findings in this study indicate that the general public does not hold this view. The researchers conclude, "Family lawmakers need to confront that equal custody enjoys genuinely great popularity among the citizenry."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-hughes/how-does-the-public-view-_b_877174.html

Lay judgments about child custody after divorce.

I have met and heard the tragic stories of many parents. PA is a function, by and large, of a custodial ex-partner, although some alienation can start while the couple is still together.

This blog is a story of experiences and observations of dysfunctional Family Law (FLAW), an arena pitting parent against parent, with children as the prize. Due to the gender bias in Family Law, that I have observed, this Blog has evolved from a focus solely on PA to one of the broader Family/Children's Rights area and the impact of Feminist mythology on Canadian Jurisprudence and the Divorce Industry.

Lay judgments about child custody after divorce.

 Braver, Sanford L.; Ellman, Ira Mark; Votruba, Ashley M.; Fabricius, William V.

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, Vol 17(2), May 2011, 212-240. doi: 10.1037/a0023194

Abstract

In a pair of studies, we examine lay people's judgments about how hypothetical cases involving child custody after divorce should be resolved.

The respondents were citizens called to jury service in Pima County, AZ. Study 1 found that both male and female respondents, if they were the judge, would most commonly award equally shared custody arrangements, as advocated by most fathers' groups. 

However, if the predivorce child care had been divided disproportionately between the parents, this preference shifted, slightly but significantly, toward giving more time 
to the parent who had provided most of that care, consistent with the Approximation Rule advocated by the American Law Institute. 

Moreover, respondents judged that the arrangements prevailing in today's court and legal environment would award equal custody considerably less often, and would thereby provide much less parenting time to fathers, than the respondents themselves would award. 

Study 2 found that respondents maintained their strong preference for equally shared custody even when there are very high levels of parental conflict for which the parents were equally to blame, but awarded substantially less time to the culpable parent when only one was the primary instigator of the parental conflict. 

The striking degree to which the public favors equal custody combined with their view that the current court system under-awards parenting time to fathers could account for past findings that the system is seriously slanted toward mothers, and suggests that family law may have a public relations problem. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved) 

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/law/17/2/212/

From the Huffington Post 

ROBERT HUGHES, JR.

University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, Professor of Human Development

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-hughes/how-does-the-public-view-_b_877174.html

American Fathers Liberation Army shared Mike Whitney's 

Mike Whitney

November 25 at 7:27pm · 

On this thanksgiving or any other day... No matter what is going on in your life and no matter how bad it is or how sad it makes you feel, No matter what you'refaith or beliefs are, No matter if you're all alone or if you're surrounded by a bunch of assholes, No matter how hard it may seem to you..
Please take the time to really think about some of the things you actually do have to be thankful for. No matter how insignificant you may think those things may be they're probably something that somebody somewhere dreams about having.

You may even realize that there's actually many things you have to be thankful for, so really think about it. Even if it means you only find one thing and you feel like you just don't care, as if all you have in life is barely even a small spark of hope. Well at at least you have that so don't take it for granted and minimize it. Instead you should try hard to focus and build on it.

Even if it means you feel you can't or won't help yourself it's still possible for you to help others in some way. You could give somebody or something else a bit of hope if only just for a moment. By doing this it means you do matter and in a round about way you will be actually helping yourself as well.

That's how this shit works. You're alive! so just try hard to think about what you do have to be thankful for no matter how insignificant you think it is. Some of us may think differently about it being insignificant and may be quite thankful for you being there making an effort.. I know I would be.
I tip my hat to those who find light in the darkest places and are willing to share it. Much Love & respect to all those who are willing to help themselves and help others.

"Happy" may be a word that seems very far off to many people and animals who are in a bad way, but remember that no matter what you've been through or what you think you know... the truth is that it's always very possible for you to still make a difference in some way. Help yourself by helping others in any way at all. Even if it goes unnoticed it still means something if you try and never give up.

The word "Happy" can actually sting to those who are truly hurting. So instead I'll wish a "Hopeful" Thanksgiving to all.. with no exceptions.

So for your sake and everyone else.. hang tough & start paying it forward.

Post by Miami-Dade Commission on Ethics & Public Trust.

Related articles

• Equal Parental Rights for Fathers and Equity in Child Custody Cases for BOTH Parents.
• "Winner Take All" System Fails America!
• Judicial Accountability for Court Ordered Parental Alienation
• Hold Family Courts Accountable
• Family Court Stress Disorder (PTSD)...
• Would you support social security title IV D and family law reform? Asks ChangePolitics
• New Studies Confirm Benefits of Joint Custody
• Presumptive joint custody
• The myth of the primary parent
• Children Need Both Parents

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”?

Add to lawyers: custody evaluators (duplicate roles in some states), criminal lawyers, courts, psychologists, therapists, investigators, GALs, an entire cottage industry of brokers! With overdue and demanded, simple and just changes to state statues, families and children can be forever protected from the ravages of the divorce industry by a simple and equal standard. The lack of a presumptive 50/50 rebuttable standard destroys lives and families, often forever.  Children as pawns can be scared for life, arbitrarily lose a parent, or two, for life and are in much greater peril in life.  Mothers and fathers lose their children and react badly.  Suicide and homicide is not uncommon.  Mothers and fathers can be jailed for protecting their children or going bankrupt.

Post by Childrens Rights Florida.

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.

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.

Listen to internet radio with SyndicatedNews on BlogTalkRadio

Men Matter with Dr. Maguire & Melody Brooke

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.

"The Family" and Family Courts

Dr. Stephen Baskerville in Amsterdam at the 5th World Congress of Families

Dr. Baskerville presents a compelling argument for a paradigm shift globally to recognize the role of both fit parents in children's lives and a departure from the current trajectory toward the growing welfare state in western civilization.

 By now the Committee on the Rights of the Child (“Committee”), which is charged with overseeing the implementation of the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), has made so many exaggerated claims of authority that they can’t even shock us anymore. Well, until they do.

Last month the Committee issued its review of CRC implementation by the Holy See, the political entity of the Vatican and the Roman Catholic Church. While the extreme leftist agend of the Committee has never been much of a secret, it is on display at its most egregious in this “Concluding Observations” report.

The key issues of “concern” for the Committee were as one might expect: abortion, teen sexuality, homosexuality (and homosexual marriage), corporal punishment (spanking), and parental rights. According to Catholic Church doctrine, abortion is the murder of an unborn child; sex is intended only within the confines of marriage; homosexual activity or lifestyle is a sin; a moderate spanking is – or can be - a part of godly discipline; and parents have the ultimate God-given responsibility for their children.

But the Committee disagrees on all points. What’s more, they communicated the expectation that the Catholic Church must change its stance on all of these topics to comply with the Convention. In so doing, the Committee placed its own opinion above the Scriptures, traditions, and religious convictions of the Catholic Church.

Certain Truths Are Self-Evident

Ten things you need to know about the structure of the CRC:

• It is a treaty which creates binding rules of law.  It is no mere statement of altruism.^1.
• Its effect would be binding on American families, courts, and policy-makers.^2.
• Children of other nations would not be impacted or helped in any direct way by our ratification.^3.
• The CRC would automatically override almost all American laws on children and families because of the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause in Article VI.^4.
• The CRC has some elements that are self-executing, while others would require implementing legislation.  Federal courts would have the power to determine which provisions were self-executing.^5.
• The courts would have the power to directly enforce the provisions that are self-executing.^6.
• Congress would have the power to directly legislate on all subjects necessary to comply with the treaty.  This would constitute the most massive shift of power from the states to the federal government in American history.^7.
• A committee of 18 experts from other nations, sitting in Geneva, has the authority to issue official interpretations of the treaty which are entitled to binding weight in American courts and legislatures.  This effectively transfers ultimate authority for all policies in this area to this foreign committee.^8.
• Under international law, the treaty overrides even our Constitution.^9.
• Reservations, declarations, or understandings intended to modify our duty to comply with this treaty will be void if they are determined to be inconsistent with the object and purpose of the treaty.^10.

Ten things you need to know about the substance of the CRC:

Displeasing the Alienating Parent

Fear Reaction to Displeasing the Alienating Parent
The Fourth Ingredient of Parental Alienation

This is the fourth in a series of posts devoted to discussion of the four criteria found in cases where parental alienation is present.

Deterioration in the Parent Child Relationship
The Third Ingredient of Parental Alienation

This is the third in a series of four posts devoted to the four behavioral criteria that are all present in cases of parental alienation. These criteria were first described in an article authored by myself and family attorney, Michael Walsh. The article was first published in the Florida Bar Journal and then was republished as the lead article in the Minnesota Bar Journal.

Access and Visitation Blocking
The Second Ingredient of Parental Alienation

This is the second in a series of four posts devoted to the four criteria that are found in parental alienation cases. As a reference point to this, I would remind the reader that this series of posts is related to an article authored by myself and a Florida Attorney, Michael Walsh. The original purpose of the article was to provide Family Law attorneys with a kind of template as to what to look for in these cases. It was written in such a way that one could potentially review the file and make a fairly good speculative guess as to the presence or absence of parental alienation.

Access and Visitation Blocking
The First Ingredient of Parental Alienation

This is the first of four weekly posts regarding the four criteria which are present in cases were Parental Alienation is present. These posts are derived from an article that was published in the Florida Bar Journal in 1999.

"Systemic Induced Trauma." Will you be able to settle or will you end up in family court?

Will you be able to settle or will you end up in divorce court? The only reason divorcing couples end up in divorce court is because one or the other refuses to negotiate, mediate or be flexible and come to an agreement with the other.

Ninety-five percent of all divorces are settled outside court. That is an encouraging statistic, but it needs to be known that the other 5% are the ones that keep the Family Court System working over time.

It is that 5% that tend to go back to court repeatedly. At times over frivolous issues that could be solved if one of the parties would make the choice to respond to the situation in a rational manner. It has been my experience when working with clients that the underlying issue with people who are continually going back to court is the need to get even with an ex-spouse.

There is either the spouse who refuses to follow through on an agreement in an attempt to get back at their ex-spouse or the spouse who withholds child visitation or child support in an attempt to get back at an ex-spouse. They use the Family Court System to keep from having to deal with each other and to keep from having to accept responsibility for the role they play in the ongoing conflict with their ex-spouse. It is toxic behavior that damages all involved including the one engaging in the behavior.

In other words, they keep a legal system backlogged because they have emotional issues that need to be dealt with. So, here is some advice from me, if your ex pushes your buttons emotionally and you want to get back at her/him by going to court, get thee to a therapist’s office, not an attorney’s office.

Karin Huffer, a marriage and family counselor in Las Vegas has identified a new disorder for a nation already reeling from chronic fatigue syndrome, Internet addiction disorder and other new-age afflictions.

It's called “legal abuse syndrome”, and it can strike crime victims, litigants, attorneys, and anyone who has dealt with the Family Court System. According to Dr. Huffer, “legal abuse syndrome (LAS) is a form of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). It is a psychic injury, not a mental illness. It is a personal injury that develops in individuals assaulted by ethical violations, legal abuses, betrayals, and fraud. Abuse of power and authority and a profound lack of accountability in our courts have become rampant.”

Using the Family Court System to abuse an ex only promotes more conflict. If you are of the belief that going back to court or engaging in behavior that defies a divorce court order you are engaging in legal abuse. A therapist can teach you skills needed to resolve conflict in a healthier manner, skills that will save you not only emotional stress but all the money you give a divorce attorney every time you are angry with your ex.

Non Custodial Parents Rights - A Civil Rights Issue

Fighting For Parents' Rights

Help the Fight - America we need to stop the One-Parent Fight arising in this Country.

Our Children are being destroyed because of Parents Rights being Neglected and Parent Alienation.

Do your Part Unite and Write!!!!