The following URL links from today's online edition of The Detroit News represent a special Fathers' Day greeting from:
Murray Davis
Board President
National Family Justice Association
Midwest Regional Office
26677 W. 12 Mile Rd.
Southfield, MI 48034
(248) 755-5904
(313) 937-3453 (fax)
www.NFJA.org
The following URL links from today's online edition of The Detroit News represent a special Fathers' Day greeting from:
Murray Davis
Board President
National Family Justice Association
Midwest Regional Office
26677 W. 12 Mile Rd.
Southfield, MI 48034
(248) 755-5904
(313) 937-3453 (fax)
www.NFJA.org
A House Subcommittee held a hearing Thursday June 17 on Fatherhood.
>> Chairman Jim McDermott (D-WA) of the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on
>> Income Security and Family Support explained that the $150 million a
>> year-for-five years fatherhood grants ($750 million total, most of which
>> went to marriage preparation) expire this September 30. As Congress looks
>> to re-authorization, the Committee wanted to assess the grants awarded so
>> far and to discuss the importance of fatherhood.
>>
>> It was clear during the hearing (and in lead-ups to the hearing), that
>> marriage will no longer be the focus of any new grants. The Obama
>> Administration, Rep. Lanny Davis (D-IL), sponsor of a bill on fatherhood,
>> and advocates for low-income fathers, who will receive most of any new
>> grants, want the money to be for fatherhood regardless of its form --
>> especially for never-married fathers. The testifiers could find no direct
>> correlation between the existing grants and any increase in marriage due to
>> the grants.
>>
>> The hearing emphasized jobs and the ability of fathers to pay their
>> financial child support if they have jobs, and then being better able to
>> connect them to their families.
>>
>> Committee member John Lewis (D-GA), a hero of the Civil Rights Movement,
>> asked Ralph Smith of the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the largest family
>> foundation in America, why the foundation has been funding fatherhood
>> initiatives for the past 10 years. Smith said that the importance of
>> fathers to children could not be over-estimated. Smith urged that Congress
>> "stop the clock" on child support when a father is in jail, calling the
>> argument that jail is "voluntary unemployment" an "oxymoron." Smith also
>> said that non-custodial fathers who pay child support should be eligible for
>> the Earned Income Tax Credit, currently available essentially only to
>> low-income custodial mothers.
>>
>> Ron Mincy of Columbia University, considered the academic "guru" of the
>> never-married movement, said that when he was with the Ford Foundation prior
>> to Columbia, he was able to secure funding for organizations that reached
>> out to low-income fathers. He said that about 80 percent of never-married
>> fathers are involved with the mother at the time of the child's birth, and
>> America must do more to ensure that those fathers remain involved in
>> children's lives.
>>
>> Judge Milton Lee Jr. of the District of Columbia discussed the "fathering
>> court" that graduates up to 40 fathers a year with jobs and relationship
>> training. After the 2-hour hearing, he told me that even though Washington,
>> D.C. has a presumption for joint custody (physical and legal), co-parenting
>> and shared parenting are just an afterthought because of America's legal
>> emphasis on paying child support. He said that Congress needs to change the
>> emphasis for America so that co-parenting receives more attention
>>
>> Other testifiers included David Hensel of the U.S. Department of Health
>> and Human Services (HHS),.Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute,
>> Kirk Harris of the National Fatherhood Leaders Group in Chicago, and
>> Nathaniel Rauschendorfer, Parenting Services Program Manager, Catholic
>> Charities of St. Paul and Minneapolis.
>>
>> Unless TV cameras are present, usually only one or two members of any
>> Congressional committee show up for a hearing, but at one time, there were
>> five subcommittee members present for this fatherhood hearing.
>>
>> Written statements may be submitted for the record. Go to "House Ways and
>> Means Committee," and click on "Recent Hearings -- Hearing to Review
>> Responsible Fatherhood Programs." You can listen to the hearing (probably
>> by next week) and obtain instructions on how to submit up to 10 pages of
>> testimony by July 1, 2010. The more testimony that is submitted, the
>> better. "Divorce" was mentioned only once during the hearing, by Chairman
>> McDermott, who, although he is a medical doctor, referred to the many
>> upsetting cases of divorce he is aware of. Explain in your testimony why
>> low-income divorced fathers also need a mix of services to help them be
>> better parents to their children.
Darrick Scott-Farnsworth
Executive Director www.AChildsRight.net www.daddyblogger.com
Cell 269 209-7144 or Nextel DC ID 130*112*19287
True Conservative: Pro-Life, Liberty and Property
>>> Up to $50 million in Federal funds per year is now available in
>>> competitive grants to States, territories, Indian tribes, and public and
>>> non-profit community organizations to operate Responsible Fatherhood
>>> Initiatives. The program is designed to promote responsible fatherhood
>>> through: parenting activities, fostering the economic stability of fathers,
>>> marriage promotion, and collaborating with non-profit fatherhood promotion
>>> organizations to develop and advance media campaigns to encourage parental
>>> involvement. Funding for the program expires on September 30, 2010.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> President Obama included a proposal in his FY2011 budget to redirect
>>> funds from the current Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood Programs
>>> into a new Fatherhood, Marriage, and Families Innovation Fund. The new
>>> program would provide competitive grants to States to develop, implement,
>>> and evaluate comprehensive responsible fatherhood programs and comprehensive
>>> family demonstrations that improve child well-being by improving the
>>> outcomes for families experiencing severe barriers to self-sufficiency. The
>>> proposal would provide $500 million in FY2011 and $150 million per year for
>>> FY2012 through FY2015.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In announcing the hearing, Chairman McDermott stated, *“I look forward
>>> to hearing how Responsible Fatherhood Initiatives have helped men play a
>>> bigger role in the lives of their children, and how the program might be
>>> built upon to improve the overall well-being of vulnerable children and
>>> their families.”*
>>>
>>> * *
>>>
>>> *FOCUS OF THE HEARING**: *
>>>
>>> The hearing will focus on the effectiveness of Responsible Fatherhood
>>> Programs in improving the relationship between non-custodial parents and
>>> their children, as well as their ability to provide financial support.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *DETAILS FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS**:*
>>>
>>> *Please Note: * Any person(s) and/or organization(s) wishing to submit
>>> for the hearing record must follow the appropriate link on the hearing page
>>> of the Committee website and complete the informational forms. From the
>>> Committee homepage, http://waysandmeans.house.gov, select “*Hearings*.”
>>> Select the hearing for which you would like to submit, and click on the link
>>> entitled, “*Click here to provide a submission for the record*.” Once
>>> you have followed the online instructions, complete all informational forms
>>> and click “submit” on the final page. *ATTACH* your submission in
>>> compliance with the formatting requirements listed below, by close of
>>> business *Thursday, July 1, 2010. * Finally, please note that* *due to
>>> the change in House mail policy, the U.S. Capitol Police will refuse
>>> sealed-package deliveries to all House Office Buildings. For questions, or
>>> if you encounter technical problems, please call (202) 225-1721 or (202)
>>> 225-3625.
>>>
>>> * *
>>>
>>> * *
>>>
>>> *FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS**:*
>>>
>>> The Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the official
>>> hearing record. As always, submissions will be included in the record
>>> according to the discretion of the Committee. The Committee will not alter
>>> the content of your submission, but we reserve the right to format it
>>> according to our guidelines. Any submission provided to the Committee by a
>>> witness, any supplementary materials submitted for the printed record, and
>>> any written comments in response to a request for written comments must
>>> conform to the guidelines listed below. Any submission or supplementary item
>>> not in compliance with these guidelines will not be printed, but will be
>>> maintained in the Committee files for review and use by the Committee.
>>>
>>> 1. All submissions and supplementary materials must be
>>> provided in Word or WordPerfect format and MUST NOT exceed a total of 10
>>> pages, including attachments. Witnesses and submitters are advised that the
>>> Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the official hearing
>>> record.
>>>
>>> 2. Copies of whole documents submitted as exhibit material
>>> will not be accepted for printing. Instead, exhibit material should be
>>> referenced and quoted or paraphrased. All exhibit material not meeting these
>>> specifications will be maintained in the Committee files for review and use
>>> by the Committee.
>>>
>>> 3. All submissions must include a list of all clients,
>>> persons, and/or organizations on whose behalf the witness appears. A
>>> supplemental sheet must accompany each submission listing the name, company,
>>> address, telephone, and fax numbers of each witness.
>>>
>>> The Committee seeks to make its facilities accessible to persons with
>>> disabilities. If you are in need of special accommodations, please call
>>> 202-225-1721 or 202-226-3411 TTD/TTY in advance of the event (four business
>>> days notice is requested). Questions with regard to special accommodation
>>> needs in general (including availability of Committee materials in
>>> alternative formats) may be directed to the Committee as noted above.
>>>
>>> Note: All Committee advisories and news releases are available on the
>>> World Wide Web at http://waysandmeans.house.gov.
Darrick Scott-Farnsworth
Executive Director www.AChildsRight.net www.daddyblogger.com
Cell 269 209-7144 or Nextel DC ID 130*112*19287
True Conservative: Pro-Life, Liberty and Property
Townhall.com Columnist
Saturday, June 19, 2010
http://townhall.com/columnists/PhyllisSchlafly/2010/06/19/a_good_fathers_day_gift?page=full&comments=true
A Good Father's Day Gift
by Phyllis Schlafly
excerpts:
[[VAWA has been known from the get-go as "feminist pork" because it puts nearly $1 billion a year of U.S. taxpayers' money into the hands of the radical feminists without any accountability for how the money is spent.]]
[[Charging domestic violence practically guarantees that a woman will get custody of the children and sever forever the father's relationship with his children even though the alleged violence had nothing whatever to do with any abuse of the children. Judges are required to consider allegations of domestic violence in awarding child custody, even though no evidence of abuse was ever presented or proven.]]
[[Domestic violence should be redefined to mean violence. We must eliminate the incentive for false accusations, which includes getting a restraining order as the "gamesmanship" for divorce, child custody, money, and ownership of and access to the family home.]]
Article:
A good Father's Day gift would be to reform the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), make it gender-neutral, and assure men that family courts will accord them constitutional rights equivalent to those enjoyed by murderers and robbers. VAWA will be coming up for its five-year reauthorization later this year, and that will be the time to hold balanced hearings and eliminate VAWA's discrimination against men.
VAWA illustrates the hypocrisy of noisy feminist demands that we kowtow to their ideology of gender neutrality, to their claim that there is no difference between male and female, and to their opposition to stereotyping and gender profiling. VAWA is based on the proposition that there are, indeed, innate gender differences: Men are naturally batterers, and women are naturally victims.
Rush Limbaugh
Feminist supporters of VAWA obviously share Jessica Valenti's recent assertion in The Washington Post that American women are oppressed by the "patriarchy" and that "it needs to end." One way they hope to end it is by using the extravagantly expensive and discriminatory VAWA, which was passed in 1994 as a payoff to the feminists for helping to elect Bill Clinton president in 1992.
VAWA is not designed to eliminate or punish violence, but to punish only alleged violence against women. Most of the shelters financed by VAWA do not accept men as victims.
VAWA has been known from the get-go as "feminist pork" because it puts nearly $1 billion a year of U.S. taxpayers' money into the hands of the radical feminists without any accountability for how the money is spent.
Feminists have set up shop in shelters where they promote divorce, marriage breakup, hatred of men and false accusations, while rejecting marriage counseling, reconciliation, drug-abuse treatment and evidence of mutual-partner abuse.
Feminists have changed state laws to include a loosey-goosey definition of family violence. It doesn't have to be violent -- it can simply be what a man says or how he looks at a woman.
Domestic violence can even be what a woman thinks a man might do or say. Definitions of violence include calling your partner a naughty word, raising your voice, causing "annoyance" or "emotional distress," or just not doing what your partner wants.
VAWA makes taxpayers' money available to the feminists to lobby state legislators to pass feminist laws, to train law enforcement personnel and judges in using those laws, and to fund their enforcement. VAWA provides women with free legal counsel to pursue their allegations while men are left on their own to find and pay a lawyer, or struggle without one.
Feminists have lobbied most states to adopt mandatory-arrest laws, which means that when the police arrive at a disturbance and lack good information on who is to blame, they are nevertheless legally bound to arrest somebody. Three guesses who is usually arrested.
Feminists have lobbied most states to pass no-drop prosecution laws, which require proceeding with prosecution even if the woman recants her charges or wants to drop them. Studies show that women do recant or ask to drop the charges in 60 percent of criminal allegations, but the law requires the man to be prosecuted anyway, which means he loses his constitutional right to confront his accuser.
Charging domestic violence practically guarantees that a woman will get custody of the children and sever forever the father's relationship with his children even though the alleged violence had nothing whatever to do with any abuse of the children. Judges are required to consider allegations of domestic violence in awarding child custody, even though no evidence of abuse was ever presented or proven.
It seems elementary that husbands and fathers who are accused by their wives or girlfriends should have the constitutional rights accorded to any criminal, but they are routinely denied equal treatment under law, the right to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence until proven guilty and the right to own a gun. The accusation also destroys his employability, which diminishes her income as well as his.
Based on a woman's unsubstantiated allegations of trivial offenses, family courts deprive thousands of men of their fundamental right to parent their own children. VAWA has a built-in incentive for the woman to make false charges of domestic violence because she knows she will never be prosecuted for perjury.
Domestic violence should be redefined to mean violence. We must eliminate the incentive for false accusations, which includes getting a restraining order as the "gamesmanship" for divorce, child custody, money, and ownership of and access to the family home.
Reforming VAWA is today's basic civil rights issue. All persons accused of domestic violence, men and women, are entitled to have fundamental constitutional rights in court, including due process and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty by clear and convincing evidence.
Darrick Scott-Farnsworth
Executive Director www.AChildsRight.net www.daddyblogger.com
Cell 269 209-7144 or Nextel DC ID 130*112*19287
True Conservative: Pro-Life, Liberty and Property
Social Issues vs. Fiscal Issues
June 18, 2010
by Phyllis Schlafly
The media are forever trying to create a division in the Republican Party between those who care most about so-called social issues and those who want priority for fiscal issues. Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels is the most recent politician to fall into this trap by asserting that the next president "would have to call a truce on the so-called social issues."
The truth is that social and fiscal issues are locked in a political and financial embrace that cannot be pried apart. Those who emphasize runaway government spending and out-of-control debt and deficits must face the fact that those trillions of dollars are being spent by government on social problems.
Those who care about Big Brother's dictatorial intrusions into our daily lives and privacy must come to grips with how and why Big Brother has vastly increased his regulatory power. Government powers, as well as the money in government's hands, have expanded to deal with social problems.
In order to reduce government's size and power, and restore the limited government sought by fiscal conservatives, they simply must address the social issues. It's the breakdown in our culture that has caused millions of Americans to depend on government for their living expenses and for solutions to their personal problems.
In the not-too-distant past, we had a society where husbands and fathers were the providers for their families. The 1.7 million out-of-wedlock babies born last year (41 percent of all births) and their unmarried moms now look to Big Brother as their financial provider.
The decline of marriage is not only the biggest social problem America faces today, but it's also government's biggest financial problem.
It is encouraging that some grassroots groups are now searching for remedies to the marriage problem. A ten-point agenda for rebuilding our society based on traditional marriage has just been articulated by two author-activists, David R. Usher of the Center for Marriage Policy and Mike McManus of Marriage Savers.
Their agenda recommends waiting periods both for marriage and for divorce. The agenda includes replacing our current system of unilateral divorce with permitting divorce based on two methods: Mutual Consent or Necessary Dissolution for defined and proven reasons.
Their agenda calls on churches to take the lead in fostering policies that promote and save marriage. This would include encouraging four to six months of marriage preparation so couples will know what they are getting into before they marry, and mentoring couples in troubled marriages.
Usher and McManus recommend effective shared parenting laws after divorce because all social studies show that children need parenting by both mother and father, unless a parent is found unfit.
Usher and McManus urge reforming welfare and child-support policies to remove financial incentives for non-marriage. Present policies of welfare-to-perpetual dependency should be replaced with policies that promote welfare-to-marriage because marriage is one of the best routes out of poverty.
The famous 1965 Moynihan Report on how welfare handouts destroy families by giving financial handouts only to women, thereby making husbands and fathers irrelevant, is now recognized as one of the most prophetic government reports ever written. The many financial incentives written into federal appropriations laws which promote cohabitation rather than marriage, must be eliminated.
Even Obamacare contains a marriage penalty by reducing the insurance subsidy when cohabiting couples marry. Financial incentives that penalize marriage are a reason why unmarried cohabiting couples soared from 430,000 in 1960 to 6.8 million in 2008.
The ten Usher-McManus recommendations include the economic factor by urging us to bring back sustainable manufacturing jobs for working-class Americans. Jobs used to be available to the average middle-class guy which enabled him to support his wife and children in their own home, but millions of those jobs have now gone overseas.
The decline of marriage is the major cause of the growth of the welfare state. This year we the taxpayers are spending $350 billion to support single moms, and this amount increases every year.
That's only the start of the costs because social problems come out of female-headed households: crime, drugs, sex, teen pregnancies, suicides, runaways, and school dropouts.
The left is content to let this problem persist because 70 percent of unmarried women voted for Barack Obama for president. They vote for the party that offers the richer handouts.
Abortion is another major factor in the social-fiscal controversy. The feminists who demand the right to abortion also demand that the taxpayers pay the costs, and the people who opposed Obamacare discovered that the abortion-funding issue almost enabled defeat of Obama's Health Control Law.
Fiscal and social conservatives need each other. Remedying the culture and restoring a marriage society is the only way to reduce the size and costs of the welfare state.
Further reading:
Married Fathers: America's Greatest Weapon Against Child Poverty
Follow Eagle Forum on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/EagleForumInfo
Read this column online. If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from us, please click here.
Darrick Scott-Farnsworth
Executive Director www.AChildsRight.net www.daddyblogger.com
Cell 269 209-7144 or Nextel DC ID 130*112*19287
True Conservative: Pro-Life, Liberty and Property
| If you can't see the images in this email, click here. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2010. Fathers and Families. All Rights Reserved.
|
Roasalynn Bliss-City Commissioner 2nd ward who heads up the Kent County DVCCRT - Web site for Domestic Violence. http://www.kentcountydvccrt.net/
Will be at these locations for you to come and talk with her. She knows all about Judge Gardner and is another politician that looks the other way.
COFFEE WITH BLISS
Here is the 2010 schedule for my Coffee with Bliss get togethers:
Wednesday, June 23rd at 7:30am at Wealthy Street Bakery- David LaGrand's Bakery (Was city commissioner and resigned to run for Senator again.)
Monday, July 19th at Noon at Global Infusion on Diamond
Tuesday, August 24th at 5pm at Bagel Beanery on Michigan Street
Wednesday, September 22nd at 7:30am at Common Ground
Thursday, October 21st at 4:30pm at Vitale's Sports Bar on Leonard St.
Tuesday, December 7th at 5pm at Sazerac Lounge on Plainfield Ave.
--
Dennis Lawrence
Child and Family Rights Advocate
www.miparentalrights.ning.com
616-848-0664
Family Court Reform MEDIA ACTION ALERT
Be an Advocate - Please Write the Paper TODAY
Article in Mpls Star Tribune Requires Your Follow-up
Article Supportive of Fathers - Pass it on!
"Shared Parenting is one gift that's long overdue."
June 21, 2010
The Minneapolis Star Tribune newspaper published an article supportive of fathers this past Sunday (Fathers Day) called “Shared parenting is one gift that’s long overdue.” Full article below.
Keep the conversation going and the coverage continued – make sure the paper, the reporter, the editor, your legislators, (and anyone else you can think of), know there are lots of dads out there (and grandparents and second spouses) who appreciate the article. Use this as an opportunity to leverage the media and continue the conversation in print and online – take just a few moments and SPEAK UP NOW!
WHO: YOU Can Make A Difference – with very little effort!
WHAT: Please write a BRIEF letter-to-the-editor at the Mpls Star Tribune (250 words or less)
OR, comment online after the article or call the reporter. Advocate for Family Law Reform!
WHY: In response to article “Shared parenting is one gift that’s long overdue”
Article written by Gail Rosenblum - 612-673-7350 – gail.rosenblum@startribune.com
Article dated Sunday June 20, 2010 (full text below)
WHEN: Email your letter-to-the editor no later than Friday June 25, 2010
Email: opinion@startribune.com
Letters submitted within 24-48 hours of article are more likely to get printed
Feel free to write the paper after that, just to keep dialogue with the reporter
HOW: Specific advocacy efforts and directions suggested (see instructions below)
_________________________________________________________________________________
YOUR ACTION ITEMS:
1) Read the article – see text below, or link to: http://www.startribune.com/local/96728909.html?elr=KArks:DCiU1PciUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU
(or google: star tribune + gail rosenblum)
2) Email a written letter-to-the-editor, and copy the reporter, and CPR (or just call the reporter if you can't write something)
3) Send your legislators a copy of the article! Ask them for their support for a presumption of joint physical custody.
4) THANK the legislators mentioned in article: Rep Tim Mahoney, Rep Kim Norton, and Sen Kathy Saltzman
4) FORWARD this article to anyone and everyone you think needs to know about this very important issue.
Other Tips
· Start out your letter-to-the-editor or your phone call to the reporter, with positive appreciation for covering the issue. Find something you appreciate. Otherwise we will sound like one-sided “angry white males.” This reporter is supportive, so show your appreciation.
· Respond to and refer to what has been said in the article, and draw from your truths to respectfully agree or disagree.
· Offer solutions, not just complaints. Don’t blast anyone personally – or it will come across as just a “mean” personal attack – that gets us no where and hurts the movement more than it helps.
· If you just can’t reduce your comments to the maximum length allowed by the paper – write and send it anyway. It won’t get published, but it will at least alert the paper that many people have strong feelings on the subject and that the issue is important to readers.
· Don’t get discouraged if your letter doesn’t get printed ... we know that it is likely that for every 1 letter that gets printed, the paper probably receives 20 letters that don’t get printed ... it’s the volume of letters that ensures the issue gets press – the newspaper needs to know this issue is important to its readers so that the public debate will continue in the paper – it’s a great tool.
Minneapolis Star Tribune Article in Full text:
Shared parenting is one gift that's long overdue
By GAIL ROSENBLUM, Star Tribune Last update: June 19, 2010 - 9:48 PM
Molly Olson has pushed the same gift for dads for 10 years, so it's no wonder she's miffed that she can't get the right buyers. Buyers such as judges, legislators and divorce lawyers.
A decade ago, Olson founded a nonprofit organization to accomplish a no-brainer: Get family-friendly Minnesota to pass a bill that presumes that after a marriage breaks up, mothers and fathers will continue to share equally in parenting.
The bill nodded to the essential role played by dads, too often marginalized in custody disputes.
She's still banging her head. "I can't imagine giving up," said Olson, founder of the Center for Parental Responsibility (www.cpr-mn.org ). "But there are moments when I say, 'This is so hard.'"
Maybe not for long. Rob Hahn, a gubernatorial Independence Party candidate, has family-law reform in his platform. New, soon-to-be-published data give legislators proof of serious discrepancies in child-custody awards across Minnesota. Most intriguing is support for shared parenting by women like Olson, who have no dog in this fight other than a sincere desire to strengthen families.
In the 2010 legislative session, Rep. Kim Norton, DFL-Rochester, took over as chief author of an unsuccessful House bill from Rep. Tim Mahoney, DFL-St. Paul, after "a group of angry dads" spoke to her at the State Fair. "I didn't appreciate their approach, but their feelings were sincere and need to be addressed," Norton said.
According to the Minnesota Department of Human Services, there are about 240,000 dads in Minnesota with child-custody arrangements.
Norton plans to introduce a bill in 2011 proposing a 50-50 parenting split. "I think it's ridiculous in this era not to," she said.
Kathy Saltzman, DFL-Woodbury, authored the bill in the Senate. "The time has come to find a way to reflect today's society," she said. "How can we make this a win-win?"
First, we need to tackle two huge elephants. One is domestic violence, which the bills address head-on. "Every bill makes domestic abuse an exception," Olson said. "No, you don't qualify in that case."
Then there's money. Physical custody is intricately tied to financial support in a perplexing three-part formula: 0 percent to 9.9 percent; 10 percent to 45 percent; 45.1 percent to 55 percent. The more time (mostly) dads have with their kids, the less they pay to (mostly) moms in child support, a formula that only salts open wounds.
You just want more time with the kids so you can pay me less! You are only keeping me from the kids so I have to pay you more! Our smart lawmakers can't do better than this?
It would be immoral to allow a child or mother to fall through the financial cracks after divorce. But it is insulting to assume the worst of fathers, charging that their motivation for more kid-time is monetary. Many fathers tell me they'd waive the increase in a nanosecond, or use it to set up a college fund. Even in the darkest days of my own split, I never considered anything but a 50-50 plan. It was good for our kids, but it was good for me, too, as I rebuilt my financially leaner life.
Olson is not a parent. But she adored her grandfather and both parents, and she wants everybody else's children to have equal access. For a decade, she has carted around a suitcase filled with policy papers and research on the importance of both parents. She's talked to politicians, started a cable TV show and participated in a legislative study group. After the group told her to come back with more info, she did.
In 2009, a handful of CPR volunteers culled through divorce files over an 18-month period in seven counties, including Ramsey, Olmsted and St. Louis. Accounting firm Larson Allen then pulled a sample. Initial results? Children in these situations on average get "pretty much 25 percent time with dads across the board," Olson said. "It's looking pretty pathetic." In Ramsey County, mothers get sole physical custody 70 percent of the time, she said.
Not all men support the presumption. Paul Masiarchin, director of the respected Minnesota Fathers and Families Network, struggled for a year before taking a stance against it. He points to Australia, whose family courts shifted to the 50-50 split a year ago, leading to "high conflict" among exes. But keep in mind that the first year after such a seismic shift is an emotionally taxing time for parents. It's probably not the best time to assess anything but how to get both parties to breathe.
We need to somehow de-link kid-time and money while still protecting children. We need to build on Minnesota's national reputation in collaborative law and eschew attorneys entrenched in the cynical fight-to-the-finish model. We need a family court system that expects the best in families moving forward and blankets them in services to help them get there.
Mostly, we need to give dads a chance to step up, even if they never have, because life post-divorce is a new playing field for everyone.
"It's no longer you, me and the kids, but me, myself, I and the kids," said Karen Stewart, a Canadian divorce expert tracking "hugely inconsistent" U.S. custody laws. "Dad deserves the right to give it a shot."
Olson agrees wholeheartedly. "This is a mission and a passion," she said. "The question is, 'How courageous are those legislators going to be?'"
Gail Rosenblum • 612-673-7350 • gail.rosenblum@startribune.com
| ||||||||
| This mailing system may only be used for sending permission based email. | ||||||||
| Center for Parental Responsibility - P.O. Box 130776, 2868 Middle St, Little Canada, MN, 55117, 55113, United States |
Fathers and Families' Ned Holstein, MD appeared on 
Holstein said that Fathers and Families believes that children need to be financially supported but that current court-ordered child support is often excessive. It can also provide an incentive for a parent to abandon the marriage and demand sole custody. 
Fathers and Families Executive Director Glenn Sacks was interviewed by NBC Louisiana affiliate KPLC on the subject of male victims of domestic violence on June 8. To watch the report, click 
