Received this recently:

We have initiated a Women for Shared Parenting project.  A number of prominent women are forming a group to endorse a statement supporting shared parenting.  The project is in the early development stage, with statement drafting just getting underway.   The group is bi-partisan consisting of female legislators, business leaders, journalists, etc, all of whom support shared parenting.  Presently over 50  prominent women have been identified as participants and are in the process of being contacted.  

Ultimately the idea is to have the statement translate into a website where women from around the United States and Canada sign on as endorsers.  We expect the initial group may also post two minute video statements on why they are supporting shared parenting, etc.   We will also pursue Op Ed pieces in influential newspapers.  There will be very little time commitment necessary on your part.  

Following are several women who’ve already responded, requesting their inclusion in the project.  

Barbara Kay – Canadian National Post syndicated columnist  http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/01/24/post-ebook-no-5-best-of-barbara-kay-vol-i/  

Molly Olson – Minneapolis, MN. Founder – Center for Parental Responsibility (CPR)  http://www.cpr-mn.org/

Dr. Linda Nielsen – Social Scientist, Author, Adolescent and Educational Psychologist, Wake Forest Universityhttp://users.wfu.edu/nielsen/

Kris Titus - Founder, former President – Canadian Equal Parenting Council – national Canadian shared parenting umbrella organization http://canadianepc.org/

Before any statement is publicly released it will be privately circulated to all who indicated a desire to participate for their input.  We anticipate the statement may be tailored as a broad policy statement in order to attract the greatest level of support.

We would be interested in being introduced to  any Prominent Women Leaders who would appreciate hearing about this endeavor.  I can be contacted with the information below. 

Kind Regards,

Terry Brennan

tbrennan211@msn.com

Just received this notice:

My name is Khaaliq Thomas and I’m a professional photographer and custodial dad of 3 (recently divorced).
For the past year I’ve been working on a photo documentary concentrating on single / custodial fathers households.
I’m hoping to get your help in spreading the word about the project.

Purpose of The Project
The project will challenge the belief of fathers being incapable, unwilling, and or inadequate in performing responsibly,
productively and lovingly as a single / custodial parent. I currently have 3 participants and need another 3 to 4 for a
truly diverse look into these unconventional family structures. Attention will be given to the dedicated ability of these
dads and their commitment to raising productive children and supplying a stable home on their own. The finished project
will consist of a 110 page full color photo book. I’m using Kickstarter to raise the funds to search for more dads through
advertising, print and design of the book and setting up exhibitions of the final project.

How You Can Help
I need your help in spreading the word about the Kickstarter fundraiser in order to get the project to the public and
share in the experience of a single father household through this project. I’m asking for your help in support of the project
by spreading the word on your website, (or anyway you can), and allowing me to add you as a supporter on Kickstarter.
I plan on launching the Kickstarter fundraiser early March or whenever I have enough support, whichever comes first.
A link to a video introduction of the project is included.

Thx for your time -

http://vimeo.com/36229020

These types of bills have always foundered when the lawyers and special interest lawyers start weighing in.  Also, courts are loathe to give up any discretion, especially in cases of disputed custody.

 More than a quarter of our kids are being raised by just one parent. Some Heartland fathers feel like they don’t have the parenting rights they deserve. Two Nebraska state lawmakers are trying to change that.

Joe Trader thought he had all the evidence he needed in the custody hearing for his daughter Gracie; but the judge decided otherwise. “I wasn’t going to let a decision that has been given to fathers for years determine what kind of father i was going to be able to be to my child.”

Up before the unicameral this year are two bills focusing on father’s rights.

State Senator Galen Hadley’s bill wants to bring laws made years ago up to today’s times. “I think this bill is looking more at modern society and trying to come up with a parenting plan that tries to deal with the kind of conditions we find in modern divorce.”

Senator Russ Karpisek wants to go one step further; holding judges accountable for the decisions they make.

Trader says both bills show progress. “Any benefit, any increase in time or really any acknowledgment of the equal parenting an how important it is a huge stride,” he said.

Trader’s main goal is for more time with his little girl, Gracie. “Let Nebraska know we’re tired of being just child support, we want to be parents.”

One of the bill would also make it so each parent is entitled to at least 45% of the year spent with their child. That could be over-turned, but a judge would have to cite a reason why.

Father’s Rights Debate Taken Up By The State Legislature.

This issue always gets debated, and then just dropped.

With attention fully on the Vikings stadium issue, a bill that would change child custody proceedings for divorcing parents in Minnesota is quietly inching its way closer to the governor’s desk.

The latest version of HF322 would simply increase the presumed time each divorcing parent would get with his or her kids from 25 percent to 35 percent. (The remaining 30 percent of time would be figured out through mediation or divorce proceedings.) The Senate held a second reading of the bill Monday.

Rep. Peggy Scott, R-Andover, had initially authored the bill with more complex reforms that would affect the calculations of child support payments. She also wanted to create a presumption of true shared custody — at 45.1 percent for each parent. The bill also included a new concept for Minnesota law – virtual parenting time — and would have required courts to consider the use of wireless and video technology to help children remain connected to both of their parents. A version of her bill with these provisions passed the House last month by an 80-53 vote.

Those concepts don’t exist in the bill before the Senate. While Scott said that was somewhat disappointing, she would be happy with the passage of a bill that would take an incremental step toward shared custody. The percentages in law are just starting points for negotiations. But Scott said she felt 25 percent is too low, and encourages parents to fight too much in divorce proceedings to claim the remaining time with their children. A presumption of shared custody, she argued, would compel more constructive negotiations.

Not everyone agrees. In committee hearings, opponents argued that a presumption of shared custody is unrealistic and potentially harmful if it requires children to ping-pong back and forth between parents too much. They argued that a move toward shared custody might be easier on parents, but might not necessarily be in the best interests of their kids.

I notice that a lot of attorneys don’t see and increase.

CHICAGO, May 8, 2012 — /PRNewswire/ – This Mother’s Day, it appears that an increasing number of moms will be setting aside time to sign child support and alimony checks.   Overall, 56% of the nation’s top divorce attorneys say that they have seen an increase in the number of mothers paying child support during the past three years, while 47% also note a rise in women being responsible for alimony throughout the same time period, according to a recent survey of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (AAML).

“The court system always ends up reflecting changes in our society and this is certainly the case with issues regarding who pays child support and alimony,” said Ken Altshuler, president of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.  “As more women achieve success on their career paths, they are also finding themselves increasingly responsible for financial obligations during and after the divorce process.”

In all, 56% of AAML members cited an increase in mothers who pay child support, while 44% said no change, and there was not an observed decrease.   Additionally, 47% have noticed an increase in the number of women paying alimony, while 53% said no change.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/05/08/4474906/more-women-paying-child-support.html#storylink=cpy

Another tragedy brought to you from the divorce courts of America.  If divorce and custody issues were handled from the perspective of parental rights to children, instead of best interest, these kinds of events would be fewer, since there would be less opportunity for enmity to escalate.

(Reuters) – A man California prosecutors say shot his ex-wife and seven other people to death in a Seal Beach hair salon in revenge over a child custody dispute was charged on Friday with first degree murder in their deaths.

Scott Evans Dekraai, 42, who is accused of carrying out the largest mass murder in the history of Orange County, was also charged with a single count of attempted murder, Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas told a news conference in Santa Ana.

The lone survivor of Wednesday’s shooting rampage at Salon Meritage, 73-year-old Harriet Stretz, remains in critical condition at a hospital in nearby Long Beach.

An emotional Rackauckas announced he would seek the death penalty against Dekraai, who he said was targeting former wife Michelle Fournier, a stylist at Salon Meritage, in the shooting rampage.

“There are some crimes that are so depraved, so callous, so malignant, that there is only one punishment that will fit the crime,” Rackauckas said. “When a person in a case such as this goes on a rampage and kills innocent people in an indiscriminate bloody massacre, I will seek the death penalty.”

Dekraai made an initial court appearance on Friday afternoon, wearing a yellow Orange County Jail jumpsuit and handcuffs and shackled at the waist as he sat in a caged area.

Orange County Superior Court Judge Erick Larsh agreed to a request by Dekraai’s lawyer, Robert Curtis, to postpone the arraignment until November 28 so Curtis can assemble a defense team.

Curtis also asked the judge to order to ensure that Dekraai was given his medications, including two anti-psychotic drugs. Larsh said he could only order jail doctors to “do what is appropriate” for Dekraai’s medical conditions.

‘I HATE YOU!’

As Dekraai was being taken out of court, a woman in the audience shouted “I hate you! I hate you!” toward his back. Another man clutched a picture to his chest.

Prosecutors say Dekraai, who divorced Fournier, 48, in 2007 and was still battling her in court over custody of their young son, wanted revenge when he stormed into Salon Meritage and began shooting.

The former couple had been in court over the child custody issues on Tuesday and Rackauckas said the hearing apparently “didn’t go very well” for Dekraai. He said Dekraai and Fournier had argued over the phone on the morning of the rampage.

“We believe that the defendant committed this unimaginable act of violence because he wanted to kill his ex-wife over a custody dispute over their 8-year-old son,” Rackauckas said. “He was willing to end any life in his path, and he did.”

via Accused Seal Beach gunman sought revenge: prosecutor | Reuters.

Glad to see Dear Amy sticking up for fathers.  Unfortunately, what this father is experiencing happens everyday, in the entire western world.  The political forces that are invested in the “mothers first” movement are simply too powerful for any progress to be made.  All a father can do is to know his rights, hire a good lawyer, and spend lots of money making sure his child doesn’t grow up forgetting who he is, due to the perfidious behavior of a truly selfish, self-absorbed mommy.

By Amy Dickinson ,QMI Agency

DEAR AMY: My longtime fiancee and I split up three months ago. It was her choice to split. We have a 20-month-old baby, and we are having a major disagreement about “visitation.”

The fact that a parent has “visitation” at all should be a thing of the past.

I am a father who took parental leave for three months to help raise our baby, and I have been a very involved father since her birth.

My ex and I work shift work on opposite shifts. My ex would rather send our baby to day care than have me take care of her. The day care shift my ex wants for our daughter would be from late afternoon to 10:30 p.m.

What do you think of the prospect of a 20-month-old being in day care, versus being with a parent?

My ex thinks our baby won’t fit in at school if she doesn’t attend day care. I understand the importance of her social development but not between the hours of dinner, bath and bedtime.

I grew up in a split family where I only saw my father every other weekend, and I don’t want that for my child. I truly believe that setup is outdated and fathers should have more rights! What say you? — Frustrated Father

DEAR FATHER: I agree with you on every front.

It is in the best interest of the child to spend as much time as possible with both parents, when both parents are committed, loving and involved — as you obviously are.

Parental care is preferable to day care, especially given the scenario you present in which a toddler would be away from home during dinner, evening, bath and bedtime.

Your child’s pro-social development can be encouraged through playgroups with other parents and toddlers and, later, a nursery school.

Your ex is using this as an excuse to deny your parental rights — and it’s absurd. You need to mediate a common-sense solution — one that is firmly focused on the child’s needs.

You could achieve this working with a mediator if your ex were being reasonable, but you should see a lawyer all the same.

I agree with you that the assumption that the child belongs with the mother with paternal “visitation” is an outmoded model, and I think the courts are moving slowly to recognize this.

via Dad stands up for his parental rights | Life | Toronto Sun.

Most fathers new to the divorce scene have no clue as to just how precarious their relationship with their own children really is.  It can be stripped from them by the stroke of a judges pen, just because mommy checked some little box on a form that said there was abuse in the home.  They don’t get that the assumption is that it is the father who is guilty of abuse, when as often as not, it is in fact the mother herself who is really the abusive and manipulative one.

Advocates explain that the leverage gained by a divorcing spouse who falsely accuses her spouse of abusing children or herself leads to a denial of due legal process to the victim of those lies.

September 04, 2011 /24-7PressRelease/ — The divorce process presents tremendous challenges for spouses who face questions about parental fitness or financial improprieties. One issue frequently raised by a spouse is serious accusations of domestic violence followed by petitions for restraining orders. Even if the abuse claim is shown to have been backed by false accusations, tremendous damage to an innocent person’s reputation may have already occurred.

Because spousal or child abuse claims are most frequently leveled against husbands by wives, fathers’ rights groups have sought help from Florida legislators to create legal consequences for those make false accusations in divorce cases. Advocates explain that the leverage gained by a spouse who falsely accuses her spouse of abusing children or herself leads to a denial of due legal process to the victim of those lies.

One national model for reform is the Partner Violence Reduction Act, which seeks to better distinguish the consequences of an allegation from a judicial finding, while making existing domestic violence laws more gender-inclusive. The most important goal seen by many is reducing the incentive for abuse of the legal process, because too many participants in family law disputes recognize that such allegations can be particularly powerful in the divorce context.

via Florida Fathers’ Rights Update: Legal Reforms for False Abuse Claims? – U.S. Politics Today – News Media Monitoring.

Recently in the online magazine, Slate, appeared an article about Paternal Alienation Syndrome (PAS).  Many, many fathers can testify that this type of thing is common practice.  I’m usually not very sympathetic to any of these syndrome labels, since the labels themselves lead to so much abuse and insanity in the psychiatric field.  But what the writer of this article seems to miss is that when one parent consciously works to alienate a child from the father, she is committing a serious crime against the happiness and over all health of the child.   I believe it should be treated as a serious crime by the courts, not just something that divorcing parents do.  Most of the time, the father bends over backward to not say derogatory things, either to the child, or even to the judge in court, about the mother.  However, the same can not be said of mothers, as anyone who has spent any time in court knows.

The most worrisome aspect of the legal fight over parental alienation syndrome may be that it divides supporters and opponents along strict gender lines: As a rule, this is classed as a women’s sickness alleged by men. Fathers’ rights groups are not solely to blame for the fact that an entire “disease” is predicated on the notion that women are lying liars; the inventor of the syndrome can take responsibility for that. But no hypothesis so rooted in gender bias should be credited by medical science. And because evidence of PAS is so frequently offered to counter maternal allegations of abuse, the experts testifying about PAS can be aiding and abetting a system that takes children from abused mothers and hands them right back to abusive fathers. Once again, this doesn’t mean that some parents don’t alienate their children in a divorce. It means that PAS is now used to discredit women whenever they claim abuse.

Much of the blame for the biased history of PAS can be laid at the feet of its originator, Dr. Richard Gardner, who developed the theory—from his own practice and without clinical studies—of mothers who foster hatred for their children’s father as a ”powerful weapon” to grab custody for themselves. This wasn’t a theory born of objective empirical observation. It was a campaign against mothers rooted in the idea that they regularly lie and then “brainwash” their children into lying about paternal abuse. Because of Gardner’s gender-freighted conclusions, it was probably inevitable that men, in the form of fathers’ rights groups, would seize upon the battle to legitimize PAS. One of its most famous spokesmen became Alec Baldwin, who wrote practically a whole book on the subject in 2008, arguing paradoxically that corrupt judges and the courts have too much power over custody disputes and that by recognizing PAS, the courts could make the whole child-custody process more fair. (Here is Baldwin describing PAS as something women mainly do to men.)

Supporters of PAS argue largely from personal experience, and their stories are often compelling. But the theory of PAS is not recognized as valid by the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, or the American Medical Association. And the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges has published guidelines for custody courts clarifying that “the theory positing the existence of ‘PAS’ has been discredited by the scientific community. Any testimony that a party to a custody case suffers from the syndrome or ‘parental alienation’ should therefore be ruled inadmissible and/or stricken from the evaluation report.”

via “Parental alienation syndrome”: It’s not a real disease, but some people want it to be. – By Dahlia Lithwick – Slate Magazine.

The problem with this article, and with all these so called joint custody bills is this provision for exceptions in the case of domestic violence.  This would be fine if it weren’t so easy to lie and create a domestic violence allegation that is treated as if it were true.  It is a weapon that is commonly used in many divorces in order to obviate any chance at joint custody.

“We want to make sure we understand all the nuance, so that in the bill we clarify as many of those things as possible to avoid additional conflict for divorcing couples.”

One key concern is domestic violence, which the bill addresses head-on. “Every bill we’ve introduced makes domestic abuse an exception,” Olson has said numerous times. “No, you don’t qualify for shared parenting in that case.”

via Backer sees hope at last for joint-custody legislation | StarTribune.com.