Rethinking Fathers’ Rights

I have seen child support as high as 50% even if the law states that 30% is what should be taken. I have seen women accuse their ex-husbands of all sorts of bad things and the court just accepts what the women say, no proof was needed. I have seen women with DWI's and violence against their ex-husbands still get custody of the children. As long as she gave birth to the child, she gets custody. I will take years for a man to win custody of his kids and tons of evidence. Unless there is evidence to proof either a man or a woman's statement, it should not be used in a court. I am a woman and I have more men get cleaned out by the courts both monetarily and physically. Why can't someone listen to the fathers? They are people too and love their kids just as much.

I'm not sure where she got the quote about fathers paying 33% of their income in child support. In my state, child support can only be up to 25% of the obligee's income, and is often much lower. My sister's daughter is 8, and my sister only received $235/month from the father. The father makes $45,000. Definitely nowhere near 33%!! (Although, granted, the child support system in the Ohio county where she lives is pretty terrible.)

The author says we "...pick the wrong poster boys to highlight the problems of fathers' rights." and then she does the same thing. There is a reason Alec Baldwain, Clark Rockefeller, and Darren Mack will/have end up in court over custody and it's not becasue they are such awesome fathers. Truly adult parents who actually understand how to parent do not end up in court fighting over who "gets" the children. In addition, fathers do not pay to see their kids - they provide child support to SUPPORT their CHILDREN. This is their, and their ex-wives' responsibility, it's not a punishment. Congratulations though as you manage to both insult women and men with this article.

The author begins: "Despite the fact that divorce is rarely triggered by violence or abuse" Is this statement posed by the author based upon her research, or her personal observation? From where is her vantage point? A highly paid attorney more often affordable to men than women? A second wife or girlfriend believing the first wife must have been "crazy" (She'll likely revise that opinion in a few years). I've worked in the Court system for years, and spent many years conducting child custody investigations. In the first place, the really good healthy parents, fathers and mothers, NEVER end up in court fighting over their children. They work it out between themselves. The ones who do end in Court? They exhibit a few common factors: At least, at the very least, 50 percent have domestic violence as a factor in the divorce. Not made up domestic violence. Police in the middle of the night, physical injury, children hysterical domestic violence. The others have a geography issue. Or just serious mental health of at least one, if not two members of the couple. But to imply that the violence I saw, so very well documented, most often with the mother as a victim, does not occur, is obviously not based on research, but rather some kind of personal bias or agenda. Newsweek should be above this kind of article.

Thank you for this article. It is a shame what the courts put these fathers throught. As a child of a fathered who was screwed over by the courts and my mother (thank god my father fought and fought and finally got custody). While he had everything against him, he never gave up and finally rightfully got us away from my mother.

Thank you for this article. As a child who went through this, it's a relief to hear the problem being recognized. The court and my mother tried to shut my father out of my life, but thank god he continued to fight and finally got custody of us (he should have gotten it from the beginning. It's appalling the way the courts favor mothers.

Thank you for your article. The time has come to give back Dad's their constitutional right to parent and recognize that right as equal to the Mom's. Family Courts are corrupt systems that profit immensely by creating chaos and conflict in divorce and custody proceedings. This must stop now.
Paul Greiner, Franklinville, NY www.thegeezerzone.com

Thank you, thank you, thank you for pointing out so accurately some of the horrible things going on in the family court system. I am a dad who has pain my ex and her husband over $45,000 since January of 2004. I am a 100% disabled Vietnam Vet and have to fight for every moment I get with my son. We live in the same town but I have been refused shared parenting several times. Dahlia, thanks again for speaking out because so many people are afraid to do so for fear of feminist backlash. Paul Greiner, Franklinville, NY
www.thegeezerzone.com

Katy Perry--Anti-Gay or Anti-Male? First Lesbian Marriage, Now Lesbian Child Support


Atlanta Cop: I'm tired of seeing restraining orders used as a weapon against good men
July 24th, 2008 by Glenn Sacks
"In my 14 years of policing, when proof is made to show the court that the T.P.O. is being sought for false reasons, no arrest is ever made...Judges just lecture the false accuser and sends her on her merry little way."

On the subject of women employing fraudulently obtained domestic violence restraining orders as a strategic tool, I recently received this letter from Mark, an Atlanta police officer. Mark writes:

I have seen first hand the horrendous treatment that fathers get in Family Court. Just last week I had the privilege to prevent a woman from getting a Temporary Protective Order against her ex-boyfriend.

Her intent was to remove him from his house so she could move in and gain residency because she lost her home and had no other place to go. I felt an arrest was in order for false statements to the court in her application. She cited that he was abusive and she was scared of him. Failing to inform the court that she did not even live with him!

Fortunately for him, I, a police officer, was there to stand up on his behalf. Sadly, most men do not have an officer to prevent the issuance of T.P.O.s. Most counties do not even require a police investigation. The allegation is sufficient enough to warrant the T.P.O.

I believe we should all remember that a T.P.O. is a mere civil action until it is violated, which means there is no crime. The false statements and swearing, that is required, to obtain a T.P.O. is a felony right from the start.

In my 14 years of policing, when proof is made to show the court that the T.P.O. is being sought for false reasons, no arrest is ever made. Furthermore, this is done at a hearing in front of the judge. Judges just lecture the false accuser and sends her on her merry little way. I have witnessed many injustices against fathers.

I do feel that Protective Orders can be a good tool. I'm just tired of them being used as a weapon against good men.

A friend of mine, also an officer, sent me your site in an e-mail, and many officers share your views. We see it firsthand and many of us strive to make sure the right thing is done.

This entry was posted on Thursday, July 24th, 2008 at 10:30 am and is filed under Domestic Violence/DV System, Restraining Orders/Protection Orders. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently

The courts preach "in the best interests of the children", but they practice "in the best interests of the custodial parent". This is almost always the mother. Her best interests are almost always what she says they are. Hence if the wrong parent is given custody, they are also handed a very powerful weapon with which to damage the other. As long as they don't produce actual physical wounds, they can pretty much use and abuse their children however they wish. They are the legally recognized and supported gatekeeper on any relationship the rejected parent may want to have with his children. Because of this, any conflict they wish to cause is ignored or blamed on the other parent. Everything depends on the custodial parent's willingness to cooperate. If the custodial parent does not want to cooperate, their is nothing the noncustodial parent can do to defend himself. Hence the sole custody model is at the root of the problem and has caused immeasurable grief.

The courts preach "in the best interests of the children", but they practice "in the best interests of the custodial parent". This is almost always the mother. Her best interests are almost always what she says they are. Hence if the wrong parent is given custody, they are also handed a very powerful weapon with which to damage the other. As long as they don't produce actual physical wounds, they can pretty much use and abuse their children however they wish. They are the legally recognized and supported gatekeeper on any relationship the rejected parent may want to have with his children. Because of this, any conflict they wish to cause is ignored or blamed on the other parent. Everything depends on the custodial parent's willingness to cooperate. If the custodial parent does not want to cooperate, their is nothing the noncustodial parent can do to defend himself. Hence the sole custody model is at the root of the problem and has caused immeasurable grief.

The courts preach "in the best interests of the children", but they practice "in the best interests of the custodial parent". This is almost always the mother. Her best interests are almost always what she says they are. Hence if the wrong parent is given custody, they are also handed a very powerful weapon with which to damage the other. As long as they don't produce actual physical wounds, they can pretty much use and abuse their children however they wish. They are the legally recognized and supported gatekeeper on any relationship the rejected parent may want to have with his children. Because of this, any conflict they wish to cause is ignored or blamed on the other parent. Everything depends on the custodial parent's willingness to cooperate. If the custodial parent does not want to cooperate, their is nothing the noncustodial parent can do to defend himself. Hence the sole custody model is at the root of the problem and has caused immeasurable grief.