Rant--The CP is Not the Judge

Just a reminder to all NCPs--Your child's custodial mother, her parents,
sisters, etc. do not determine
family law matters. *Do not let them intimidate you.* These issues are
resolved by a court. You do not need your ex's permission to take your case
to court. You need the filing fee and the proper forms and procedures (if
you do not have an atty.) Many states now have these forms online as well as
instructions on how to file them. Granted, it is not easy to get a custody
change, but if you have a child in danger or at risk, you have a
responsibility to that child to try every possible avenue to help him or
her. I'm sure most of you have heard about the mother who threw her 1 year
old twins off a Mississippi River bridge and then jumped in herself
intending murder/suicide. The public needs to ask where the fathers were in
every one of these cases and whether the father attempted to get a custody
change prior to the violent acts. If he didn't, shame on him; if he did,
shame on the courts and states and they should be held accountable for the
injuries or deaths of these children.
====


--
There may not be much difference
between Marilyn Monroe and Lenny
Bruce. If we check their coffins.
--John Lennon

"gini52" wrote in message
...
Just a reminder to all NCPs--Your child's custodial mother, her parents,
sisters, etc. do not determine
family law matters. *Do not let them intimidate you.* These issues are
resolved by a court. You do not need your ex's permission to take your
case
to court. You need the filing fee and the proper forms and procedures (if
you do not have an atty.) Many states now have these forms online as well
as
instructions on how to file them. Granted, it is not easy to get a custody
change, but if you have a child in danger or at risk, you have a
responsibility to that child to try every possible avenue to help him or
her. I'm sure most of you have heard about the mother who threw her 1 year
old twins off a Mississippi River bridge and then jumped in herself
intending murder/suicide. The public needs to ask where the fathers were
in
every one of these cases and whether the father attempted to get a custody
change prior to the violent acts. If he didn't, shame on him; if he did,
shame on the courts and states and they should be held accountable for the
injuries or deaths of these children.
====

I think this assessment of how fathers should act is not realistic. The
problem fathers face is no-fault divorce laws do not allow any of the "dirt"
from the relationship to be heard and considered by the court. Although not
specified in the law that means the no-fault process of ending a marriage
carries over into no-fault child custody.

My personal experience is a judge will not listen to the parties when the
laws in the state mandate custody mediation. Even after the divorce is
final, any subsequent attempts to seek a change of custody are forced back
into the same state mandated custody mediation process, with the same
evaluators who made the original decision. The real problem fathers face is
getting the custody evaluators who made the original decision to admit they
made a mistake and reverse their previous decision.

The only way I know for a father to get around this Pandora's box is to be
patient, pray something bad doesn't happen, and hope the mother finally
gives up custody.

I went so far as to tell the judge I thought the county custody evaluators
were professionally incompetent and biased in favor of the mother, and I
wanted an independent evaluation done by a private evaluator. The judge
told me she would not order an outside evaluator and crossed the custody
change off my motion to modify saying she wouldn't hear the case.

"gini52" wrote in message
...

I'm sure most of you have heard about the mother who threw her 1 year
old twins off a Mississippi River bridge and then jumped in herself
intending murder/suicide. The public needs to ask where the fathers were
in
every one of these cases and whether the father attempted to get a custody
change prior to the violent acts.

Why does the whereabouts of the father have anything to do with a woman's
mental issues? Since 70% of black children are born out of wedlock, the
twins father was where other black fathers are today - excluded from their
children's lives so the mother can qualify for welfare benefits.

Would anyone consider a mother sane who names her twins Supreme Knowledge
Allah and Sincere Understanding Allah and then claims she went to the July
4th celebration looking for other black single moms and when she found none
decided to jump off the bridge because she felt alone?

Our welfare system gives these types of mothers money to raise children and
the system doesn't ever seem to take children away from dangerous situations
until after something bad has happened. And that is not the father's fault.

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
rthlink.net...

"gini52" wrote in message
...
Just a reminder to all NCPs--Your child's custodial mother, her parents,
sisters, etc. do not determine
family law matters. *Do not let them intimidate you.* These issues are
resolved by a court. You do not need your ex's permission to take your
case
to court. You need the filing fee and the proper forms and procedures
(if
you do not have an atty.) Many states now have these forms online as
well
as
instructions on how to file them. Granted, it is not easy to get a
custody
change, but if you have a child in danger or at risk, you have a
responsibility to that child to try every possible avenue to help him or
her. I'm sure most of you have heard about the mother who threw her 1
year
old twins off a Mississippi River bridge and then jumped in herself
intending murder/suicide. The public needs to ask where the fathers were
in
every one of these cases and whether the father attempted to get a
custody
change prior to the violent acts. If he didn't, shame on him; if he did,
shame on the courts and states and they should be held accountable for
the
injuries or deaths of these children.
====

I think this assessment of how fathers should act is not realistic. The
problem fathers face is no-fault divorce laws do not allow any of the
"dirt"
from the relationship to be heard and considered by the court. Although
not
specified in the law that means the no-fault process of ending a marriage
carries over into no-fault child custody.

My personal experience is a judge will not listen to the parties when the
laws in the state mandate custody mediation. Even after the divorce is
final, any subsequent attempts to seek a change of custody are forced back
into the same state mandated custody mediation process, with the same
evaluators who made the original decision. The real problem fathers face
is
getting the custody evaluators who made the original decision to admit
they
made a mistake and reverse their previous decision.
==
Not necessarily (in theory, anyway). Most family law modifications are based
on
"change of circumstance" which can be argued if a CP's mental condition
and/or lifestyle
has changed/worsened in a way that puts the child at risk. These changes are
rarely easy and
shouldn't be--but when well documented circumstances are in front of the
judge, he/she should be compelled
to act. I don't know whether there has been a recent
increase in violence against children by mothers, but it is happening *a
lot*--epidemic, perhaps. This needs to get the
notice of society/courts/legislatures so that mother custody is *not*
default and serious and equal consideration must be given to both parents as
well as enforcing shared physical custody so neither parent is carrying the
entire emotional/psychological load of "single parent." Otherwise, let the
accountibility fall into the laps of those who refuse to act to protect
these kids. This needs to be a forefront issue for fathers as it is one that
is critically needed and one society will sympathize with. The judge *will*
listen when society demands it. This is not an issue that can accomodate
excuses from fathers as to why they didn't try
to get custody. They must be compelled to try--and not give up on these kids
at risk. Don't forget--Drew did it and he is not alone.
==
==

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
rthlink.net...

"gini52" wrote in message
...

I'm sure most of you have heard about the mother who threw her 1 year
old twins off a Mississippi River bridge and then jumped in herself
intending murder/suicide. The public needs to ask where the fathers were
in
every one of these cases and whether the father attempted to get a
custody
change prior to the violent acts.

Why does the whereabouts of the father have anything to do with a woman's
mental issues? Since 70% of black children are born out of wedlock, the
twins father was where other black fathers are today - excluded from their
children's lives so the mother can qualify for welfare benefits.

Would anyone consider a mother sane who names her twins Supreme Knowledge
Allah and Sincere Understanding Allah and then claims she went to the July
4th celebration looking for other black single moms and when she found
none
decided to jump off the bridge because she felt alone?

Our welfare system gives these types of mothers money to raise children
and
the system doesn't ever seem to take children away from dangerous
situations
until after something bad has happened. And that is not the father's
fault.
==
It is *not* the father's fault if he doesn't succeed. It *is* the father's
fault if he doesn't try.
==
==

"gini52" wrote in message
...


==
Not necessarily (in theory, anyway). Most family law modifications are
based
on
"change of circumstance" which can be argued if a CP's mental condition
and/or lifestyle
has changed/worsened in a way that puts the child at risk. These changes
are
rarely easy and
shouldn't be--but when well documented circumstances are in front of the
judge, he/she should be compelled
to act.

So let's say a woman has multiple drug convictions, has never been married,
quit school in the 9th grade, had her first child at age 15, has had three
children with three different men, she collects welfare benefits, and has
never been able to hold down a steady job. How can a father prove "change
of circumstances" under this very common scenario unless something far worse
occurs in her life like a felony conviction?

Or let's say a married woman divorces. She shacks up with a drug pusher who
is an ex-con, starts doing lots of coke, drives while intoxicated, gets
tattoed and pierced, and generally goes through a second childhood. How can
a father prove "change of circumstances" when it comes down to his word
against hers? Aren't these lifestyle changes freely made and not an issue
unless she gets arrested, prosecuted, and convicted of a crime? What if the
first offense only results in a suspended sentence with probation and a
lecture to clean up her act? How many offenses does it take to prove a
"changes of circumstances"?

I don't know whether there has been a recent
increase in violence against children by mothers, but it is happening *a
lot*--epidemic, perhaps. This needs to get the
notice of society/courts/legislatures so that mother custody is *not*
default and serious and equal consideration must be given to both parents
as
well as enforcing shared physical custody so neither parent is carrying
the
entire emotional/psychological load of "single parent."

Mothers have always been more violent against their children than fathers.
But it's not just the violence. Children from mother headed households are
far more apt to be in prison, have drug problems, drop out of school, create
teenage pregnancies, commit suicide, etc. and the courts still don't act on
these statistics. These very real statistics get ignored because they don't
fit the decision-making template that mothers make better, nurturing
parents.

Otherwise, let the
accountibility fall into the laps of those who refuse to act to protect
these kids. This needs to be a forefront issue for fathers as it is one
that
is critically needed and one society will sympathize with. The judge
*will*
listen when society demands it. This is not an issue that can accomodate
excuses from fathers as to why they didn't try
to get custody. They must be compelled to try--and not give up on these
kids
at risk. Don't forget--Drew did it and he is not alone.
==
==

Judges and state workers are protected from accountability for their
misdeeds through sovereign immunity granted to public officials. As long
as they can claim immunity they will never be accountable for their
mistakes.

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
rthlink.net...

"gini52" wrote in message
...
Just a reminder to all NCPs--Your child's custodial mother, her parents,
sisters, etc. do not determine
family law matters. *Do not let them intimidate you.* These issues are
resolved by a court. You do not need your ex's permission to take your
case
to court. You need the filing fee and the proper forms and procedures
(if
you do not have an atty.) Many states now have these forms online as
well
as
instructions on how to file them. Granted, it is not easy to get a
custody
change, but if you have a child in danger or at risk, you have a
responsibility to that child to try every possible avenue to help him or
her. I'm sure most of you have heard about the mother who threw her 1
year
old twins off a Mississippi River bridge and then jumped in herself
intending murder/suicide. The public needs to ask where the fathers were
in
every one of these cases and whether the father attempted to get a
custody
change prior to the violent acts. If he didn't, shame on him; if he did,
shame on the courts and states and they should be held accountable for
the
injuries or deaths of these children.
====

I think this assessment of how fathers should act is not realistic. The
problem fathers face is no-fault divorce laws do not allow any of the
"dirt"
from the relationship to be heard and considered by the court. Although
not
specified in the law that means the no-fault process of ending a marriage
carries over into no-fault child custody.

My personal experience is a judge will not listen to the parties when the
laws in the state mandate custody mediation. Even after the divorce is
final, any subsequent attempts to seek a change of custody are forced back
into the same state mandated custody mediation process, with the same
evaluators who made the original decision. The real problem fathers face
is
getting the custody evaluators who made the original decision to admit
they
made a mistake and reverse their previous decision.

The only way I know for a father to get around this Pandora's box is to be
patient, pray something bad doesn't happen, and hope the mother finally
gives up custody.

I went so far as to tell the judge I thought the county custody evaluators
were professionally incompetent and biased in favor of the mother, and I
wanted an independent evaluation done by a private evaluator. The judge
told me she would not order an outside evaluator and crossed the custody
change off my motion to modify saying she wouldn't hear the case.

I'm SHOCKED!

"Father Drew" wrote in message
news:0kmOa.2396$7e.1696@fed1read07...
Never give up, never say die. It's a hard road, but this is for your
kids.
Any parent that is willing to give up on their kids probably wouldn't be
much of a parent anyway in my book. If a father loses after exhausting
every avenue, he can live his life knowing he did his best, but I'm
willing
to bet many give up before using all their options. One word, "APPEAL".

Appeal to WHO, the other enemy?
I do commend you though for your persistency.


-Drew


"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
rthlink.net...

"gini52" wrote in message
...
Just a reminder to all NCPs--Your child's custodial mother, her
parents,
sisters, etc. do not determine
family law matters. *Do not let them intimidate you.* These issues are
resolved by a court. You do not need your ex's permission to take your
case
to court. You need the filing fee and the proper forms and procedures
(if
you do not have an atty.) Many states now have these forms online as
well
as
instructions on how to file them. Granted, it is not easy to get a
custody
change, but if you have a child in danger or at risk, you have a
responsibility to that child to try every possible avenue to help him
or
her. I'm sure most of you have heard about the mother who threw her 1
year
old twins off a Mississippi River bridge and then jumped in herself
intending murder/suicide. The public needs to ask where the fathers
were
in
every one of these cases and whether the father attempted to get a
custody
change prior to the violent acts. If he didn't, shame on him; if he
did,
shame on the courts and states and they should be held accountable for
the
injuries or deaths of these children.
====

I think this assessment of how fathers should act is not realistic. The
problem fathers face is no-fault divorce laws do not allow any of the
"dirt"
from the relationship to be heard and considered by the court. Although
not
specified in the law that means the no-fault process of ending a
marriage
carries over into no-fault child custody.

My personal experience is a judge will not listen to the parties when
the
laws in the state mandate custody mediation. Even after the divorce is
final, any subsequent attempts to seek a change of custody are forced
back
into the same state mandated custody mediation process, with the same
evaluators who made the original decision. The real problem fathers
face
is
getting the custody evaluators who made the original decision to admit
they
made a mistake and reverse their previous decision.

The only way I know for a father to get around this Pandora's box is to
be
patient, pray something bad doesn't happen, and hope the mother finally
gives up custody.

I went so far as to tell the judge I thought the county custody
evaluators
were professionally incompetent and biased in favor of the mother, and I
wanted an independent evaluation done by a private evaluator. The judge
told me she would not order an outside evaluator and crossed the custody
change off my motion to modify saying she wouldn't hear the case.

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
thlink.net...

"gini52" wrote in message
...


==
Not necessarily (in theory, anyway). Most family law modifications are
based
on
"change of circumstance" which can be argued if a CP's mental condition
and/or lifestyle
has changed/worsened in a way that puts the child at risk. These changes
are
rarely easy and
shouldn't be--but when well documented circumstances are in front of the
judge, he/she should be compelled
to act.

So let's say a woman has multiple drug convictions, has never been
married,
quit school in the 9th grade, had her first child at age 15, has had three
children with three different men, she collects welfare benefits, and has
never been able to hold down a steady job. How can a father prove "change
of circumstances" under this very common scenario unless something far
worse
occurs in her life like a felony conviction?
===
You are missing the point, Bob. I'm not going to attempt to rationalize
every detail of every
case, real or hypothetical. My point is that fathers *must* do everything
they can to get their children out
of an abusive or neglectful environment. What is your suggestion--that we
let the state "rescue" these
children at risk? Parents should be the first responders to their childrens'
needs. I don't care what odds he faces--A father has a duty to act quickly
and aggressively to retrieve his children from a dangerous living
environment. If you feel otherwise or wish to make excuses for his inaction,
fine. I just hope that fathers reading this thread who have children in
dangerous households do not use your comments as an excuse to not try to get
their children to safety.
(More)
===
......................

I don't know whether there has been a recent
increase in violence against children by mothers, but it is happening *a
lot*--epidemic, perhaps. This needs to get the
notice of society/courts/legislatures so that mother custody is *not*
default and serious and equal consideration must be given to both
parents
as
well as enforcing shared physical custody so neither parent is carrying
the
entire emotional/psychological load of "single parent."

Mothers have always been more violent against their children than fathers.
But it's not just the violence. Children from mother headed households
are
far more apt to be in prison, have drug problems, drop out of school,
create
teenage pregnancies, commit suicide, etc. and the courts still don't act
on
these statistics. These very real statistics get ignored because they
don't
fit the decision-making template that mothers make better, nurturing
parents.
===
I know kids are more at risk without an involved father but I would like to
see recent data on mothers'
violence toward their children. I will search for it.
(More)
===

Otherwise, let the
accountibility fall into the laps of those who refuse to act to protect
these kids. This needs to be a forefront issue for fathers as it is one
that
is critically needed and one society will sympathize with. The judge
*will*
listen when society demands it. This is not an issue that can accomodate
excuses from fathers as to why they didn't try
to get custody. They must be compelled to try--and not give up on these
kids
at risk. Don't forget--Drew did it and he is not alone.
==
==

Judges and state workers are protected from accountability for their
misdeeds through sovereign immunity granted to public officials. As long
as they can claim immunity they will never be accountable for their
mistakes.
==
Not true in Florida. Several case workers have faced criminal prosecution
for neglect of their
duties that resulted in harm to children.
===
===

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
rthlink.net...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...


Could be the reason it is that way (the abuse) is because more women
have
the kids, not the fathers. So of course there will be more abuse by
single
mothers. Duh.

Exactly. Mothers are around the children more so they get more
opportunities to beat up the kids. Therefore, mothers should be around
their children less and the amount of abuse will go down. What better
reason to reduce the 85% mother primary custody rate to protect the
children
from mother abuse?

You miss my point. You NCP's rant about the large percentage of CP's are
women. So oviously the stats for abuse will be higher for the women. Are
you
saying men don't abuse kids.... because I know alot of adults who will
tell
you otherwise.

Men abuse kids. The men who abuse kids are most frequently the men women
invite into their children's lives. The bad choices women make in men are
highly repsonsible for male child abuser statistics. It is rarely the
bio-father who abuses his own children. The mother's boyfriend is the most
likely male abuser followed by a step-father. Bio-fathers are way down the
list of child abusers.


Could be part of the reason that so many kids from single
mother households are that way because the father up and left......
can
you
imagine what it does to a child when one parent isn't interested in
them?

The statistics show women initiate the breakup of the relationship 70%
of
the time by deciding they want to leave.

Regardless who initiates..... I initiated a breakup with a boyfriend....
he
was abusive.

Was that abuse child abuse or spousal abuse? I thought this thread was
about child abuse.


Sadly, women also believe they can
raise their children as effectively as a single parent as a two parent
family can raise them. and this latter statistic tracts by race very
close
to the single parent households. As examples 38% of white women, 64% of
black women, 61% of hispanic women, and 58% of indian/Alaskan women they
can
raise children as effectively as single parents.

Well, I agree that is wrong. It takes 2 parents. Not one... wether it be
father or mother.

Fathers actually recognize the value of two parent households more than
mothers. 26% of men think they can raise a child without a woman's help
versus 42% of women.


But you know, I have been meeting more and more single fathers who are
raising the kids, sometimes totally on their own. So we will see, as
more
fathers become the CP, how the stats might change.

Mothers currently commit 55% of child murders.

Because more mothers have their kids. Its hard for bio-fathers to commit
crimes to the kids when they are not around. Now don't twist this.... I am
going on the stats that are ALWAYS being posted here that mothers always
get
the kids. I am NOT saying that is right. I beleive in equal custody. I
don't
believe in posting stats that are misleading.

Okay, let's forget the stats. Fathers have psychological advantages they
bring to parenting. Fathers teach children how to keep their emotions under
control in crisis situations. Fathers teach ego strength to conduct
self-evaluation. Fathers show children alternative ways to express anger
without grudges. Fathers teach responsibilty. Fathers show how they can be
flexible to changes and shifting priorities. Fathers are more stable
emotionally because testosterone has been proven to be the calming hormone
rather than a cause of aggression.