Parents Organize Fight Over Custody Laws

Parents Organize Fight Over Custody Laws

Fri Oct 8, 8:24 AM

By JOE MANDAK, Associated Press Writer

PITTSBURGH - John Cihon lost custody of 6-year-old Andrew when he and his
wife divorced. Now, father and son spend two weekends a month together and
try to talk on the phone nearly every day. Cihon, of Pittsburgh, contends
some 25 million parents in the United States - 22 million fathers and 3
million mothers - are just like him, not allowed to live with their children
because of unfair custody laws.



Last week, Cihon became part of a nationwide effort to reform those statues
when he signed on as lead plaintiff in a federal lawsuit against the state
of Pennsylvania.


Led by the Indiana Civil Rights Council, like-minded groups such as the
American Coalition for Fathers and Children plan to sue all 50 states and
U.S. territories. At least 40 suits have already been filed, according to
the council.


The lawsuits use a wide range of constitutional grounds to argue that a
child's natural parents both have an equal right to custody, but that right
for one parent is too often trumped by a swell-sounding but ill-defined
legal standard known as "the best interest of the child."


Generally, children's advocates and family lawyers say, courts find it is in
the child's best interest to give physical custody to the primary caregiver.
Living with one parent minimizes shuttling a child - especially a younger
one - between homes. The "noncustodial" parent is ordinarily the
breadwinner, still frequently the man, who spends more time away from the
child.


"As children progress (in maturity) they're better able to handle those
types of situations," said Chris Zawisza, director of the Child Advocacy
Clinic at the University of Memphis Law School.


The lawsuits seek $1 million in damages for any plaintiffs who may sign on
to each class action, meaning the potential damages run into the trillions
nationwide. But what the groups really want are changes in the laws, such as
a bill being proposed for Pennsylvania by state Rep. Thomas Stevenson.


Stevenson's bill would set a "presumptive standard" that physical custody
should be split 50-50 unless one parent can prove that there's a good reason
for a different arrangement. Legal custody, which gives both parents a say
in issues such as religion, health and education, can be shared equally even
when physical custody is not.


But many of the experts say legislating a 50-50 standard is a bad idea.


"This is one more attempt to say that every case that goes into court should
start with the assumption that it's 50-50 time - even if they haven't been
putting in 50-50 time before that," said Lynne Gold-Bikin, a family law
attorney and past chair of the American Bar Association's family law
section. "And why do they want 50-50 (custody)? Some people want it because
they know they can reduce the support they pay to their wives" as a result.


That may be, but advocates say it's discriminatory not to equally protect
both parents' full rights until and unless the facts show that one parent
has forfeited them.


And they say the deck is stacked because the time a wage-earner spends
making money to feed, clothe and shelter children isn't given equal weight
to time spent with the child, even though it's just as necessary as
nurturing.


"The many are suffering because of the reputation of a few - the deadbeat
dads and deadbeat moms," said Torm Howse, president of the Indiana Civil
Rights Council. "Each parent has certain rights and the states have been
taking away the rights of one parent."


___


On the Net:


Indiana Civil Rights Council: http://www.indianacrc.org


American Coalition for Fathers and Children: http://www.acfc.org





Memphis Child Advocacy Center: http://www.memphiscac.org


FYI - The root of this story can be found at the Indiana Civil Rights
Council's web site.

This idea has been getting more and more "air time" on the net. Though,
I've not heard of anything from the so-called "regular media". Makes you
wonder why they haven't said anything about it...

Maybe there isn't any money in it. Or maybe they think we NCPs are all
nut-cases and should be ignored, as I'm sure they do already. But that will
change, if this class-action suit moves forward.

Then there will be no choice but to take note of the plight of NCPs and it
will have to be dealt with. Perhaps GovCo will reinstate Debtor's
Prisons... or maybe there'll be another revolution.. Either way, pass the
ammunition!

------------------------------------------------------------
Eliminate the impossible and whatever remains, no matter how improbable,
must
be the truth.

---- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle ---