Joint custody bill not in child's interest - says NOW's NY chapter

The following was posted in the Times Union newspaper. A local NY rag. See
if you can you spot the spin...
--------------------------------------------------

http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories...StoryID=465504

Joint custody bill not in child's interest [that is, according to NOW,
anyway]

By MARCIA A. PAPPAS [president of NOW-New York State]
First published: Tuesday, March 28, 2006

The state Legislature is considering the worst joint custody bill that the
National Organization for Women -- New York State has ever seen, presuming
joint custody in all custody cases, including a deceitful attempt to
redefine visitation of non-custodial parents as shared parenting.

NOW NYS has always favored primary caregiver presumption legislation to
ensure stability and continuity of care for children. If a person is not
involved in the lives of his or her children during the marriage, why would
that involvement increase after divorce? Therefore, we oppose court-mandated
joint custody and oppose changing the terminology to shared parenting.

Primary caregiver presumption would cut down on the abusive practice by the
moneyed spouse (usually the husband) of coercing the non-moneyed spouse
(usually the wife) to make monetary concessions rather than risk a custody
battle before a biased court. This threat of a fight for custody is the fear
factor that leads mothers to make financial concessions in exchange for the
chance to give her children a stable life. One attorney has acknowledged
that he often gave that advice to male clients. When he became chief justice
of the Supreme Court of Appeals in West Virginia, he was responsible for the
passage of a primary caregiver bill.

NOW NYS would like to set the record straight. It is a lie that mothers are
awarded custody in 95 percent of divorce cases, as fathers rights advocates
would have the public believe. Only 1 percent of cases are litigated so
mothers get custody by agreement of the parties, whether or not the
agreement is coerced as we describe.

Let us learn from the experience of others. In California, a report prepared
15 years after divorce reform legislation, found that one-third of
joint-physical custody arrangements were indistinguishable in practice from
the sole-custody visitation arrangements. After seeing the harmful effects
on children by court-ordered joint custody, California ended its presumption
in favor of joint custody awards in 1989.

Joint custody establishes rights without responsibilities. There is no way
under current law to enforce visitation. There are no penalties for failure
to visit. There is nothing in this bill, or any other joint custody or
shared parenting bill, to enforce compliance with a parenting plan. The term
parenting time suggests that all non-custodial parents take an active,
positive role in their children's lives. Reality shows us that many parents
who are granted visitation choose not to be involved in their children's
lives. Change in terminology does nothing to enforce parental responsibility
or involvement. Opponents feel that the term visitation carries a negative
connotation with respect to non-custodial parents, stating that visitation
is associated with visiting relatives in prison.

This is clearly a ridiculous argument. People visit family members and other
people in many and varied relationships. If parents want to take an active
role in their child's life, why would terminology make a difference? A rose
by any other name would smell as sweet.

NOW NYS believes the actual motivation for this change in terminology is to
require the court to equate the parenting plan or schedule with actual
parenting responsibilities, financial and otherwise. Arguments have been
made by non-custodial parents that the costs of spending time with their
children should be deducted from their child support obligations, ignoring
the fact that it is the primary caregiver who is responsible for the
day-to-day expenses of the children. This newly proposed legislation lays
the dangerous groundwork for the courts to decrease child support awards
based on a change of terminology.

It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the non-custodial
parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their children.

The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is totally
financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors that a
common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see their
fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the inequities
of material advantages they often observe when their father acquires his new
family.

This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship between
children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the best
interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to advance the
welfare of the children of New York.

Marcia A. Pappas is president of NOW-New York State.

She's a **** and has no clue about what's in a child's best interest.
Spewing statistics at every idea to keep the status quo tilted is
absolutely NOT in a child's best interest

A ****... no more, no less

On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:26:07 -0500, "Dusty" wrote:



It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the non-custodial
parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their children.

This is correct. I devote about 60 hours a week in labor to the
support of my children. My daughters mother devotes about....um...0 in
financial support. As for actual "parenting time" that adds up to 2
hours in the morning and maybe 5 at night. On the weekends she gets
dumped off on her grandmother. So yes, the loads are not equal.


The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is totally
financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors that a
common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see their
fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the inequities
of material advantages they often observe when their father acquires his new
family.

The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that when my daughter
reaches a certain age, she'll realize that her mother is a leech. She
mooches off the people she knows and the state in which she lives.

This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship between
children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the best
interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to advance the
welfare of the children of New York.

She is correct yet again! Any time I spend with my daughter is on the
pretext of it being some sort of relationship. To her, I'm just some
guy that she gets to see every other week (or longer, depending on the
mental state of the leech). She needs a FATHER not a few sporadic
visits a year whenever her mother feels like she can get something
extra out of the old "sperm donor".

Marcia A. Pappas is president of NOW-New York State.

Joint custody establishes rights without responsibilities. There is
no way
under current law to enforce visitation.

Leave it to an organization representing a bunch deadbeat women to make
such an dishonest statement as this. Their right of course. Instead
of joint custudy, default custody should always go with the Man, who is
more often than not paying for the child. If he is paying he should
have first dibs on raising the child.

Ruben

"Pete" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:26:07 -0500, "Dusty" wrote:



It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the non-custodial
parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their children.

This is correct. I devote about 60 hours a week in labor to the
support of my children. My daughters mother devotes about....um...0 in
financial support. As for actual "parenting time" that adds up to 2
hours in the morning and maybe 5 at night. On the weekends she gets
dumped off on her grandmother. So yes, the loads are not equal.


The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is totally
financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors that a
common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see their
fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the
inequities
of material advantages they often observe when their father acquires his
new
family.

The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that when my daughter
reaches a certain age, she'll realize that her mother is a leech. She
mooches off the people she knows and the state in which she lives.

This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship between
children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the best
interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to advance the
welfare of the children of New York.

She is correct yet again! Any time I spend with my daughter is on the
pretext of it being some sort of relationship. To her, I'm just some
guy that she gets to see every other week (or longer, depending on the
mental state of the leech).

Not to mention that you are a FREE babysitter, and the mother can go out and
play during this time with the FREE money that is extorted from you.

She needs a FATHER not a few sporadic
visits a year whenever her mother feels like she can get something
extra out of the old "sperm donor".

Marcia A. Pappas is president of NOW-New York State.

"Chris" wrote in message news:sEhXf.2352$qd.358@fed1read08...

"Pete" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:26:07 -0500, "Dusty" wrote:



It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the non-custodial
parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their children.

This is correct. I devote about 60 hours a week in labor to the
support of my children. My daughters mother devotes about....um...0 in
financial support. As for actual "parenting time" that adds up to 2
hours in the morning and maybe 5 at night. On the weekends she gets
dumped off on her grandmother. So yes, the loads are not equal.


The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is totally
financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors that a
common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see their
fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the
inequities
of material advantages they often observe when their father acquires his
new
family.

The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that when my daughter
reaches a certain age, she'll realize that her mother is a leech. She
mooches off the people she knows and the state in which she lives.

This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship between
children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the best
interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to advance the
welfare of the children of New York.

She is correct yet again! Any time I spend with my daughter is on the
pretext of it being some sort of relationship. To her, I'm just some
guy that she gets to see every other week (or longer, depending on the
mental state of the leech).

Not to mention that you are a FREE babysitter, and the mother can go out and
play during this time with the FREE money that is extorted from you.

Since when did spending time with one's own children equate to being a babysitter? Is that really how you view your
time with your children?


She needs a FATHER not a few sporadic
visits a year whenever her mother feels like she can get something
extra out of the old "sperm donor".

Marcia A. Pappas is president of NOW-New York State.

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
news:sEhXf.2352$qd.358@fed1read08...

"Pete" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:26:07 -0500, "Dusty" wrote:



It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the
non-custodial
parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their children.

This is correct. I devote about 60 hours a week in labor to the
support of my children. My daughters mother devotes about....um...0 in
financial support. As for actual "parenting time" that adds up to 2
hours in the morning and maybe 5 at night. On the weekends she gets
dumped off on her grandmother. So yes, the loads are not equal.


The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is
totally
financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors
that a
common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see their
fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the
inequities
of material advantages they often observe when their father acquires
his
new
family.

The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that when my daughter
reaches a certain age, she'll realize that her mother is a leech. She
mooches off the people she knows and the state in which she lives.

This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship between
children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the best
interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to advance
the
welfare of the children of New York.

She is correct yet again! Any time I spend with my daughter is on the
pretext of it being some sort of relationship. To her, I'm just some
guy that she gets to see every other week (or longer, depending on the
mental state of the leech).

Not to mention that you are a FREE babysitter, and the mother can go out
and
play during this time with the FREE money that is extorted from you.

Since when did spending time with one's own children equate to being a
babysitter? Is that really how you view your
time with your children?

Your point is valid, but some of this debate has to do with perceptions by
fathers. For instance, regularly scheduled visitation time is the father's
time. Extra visitation time, or changes to visitation schedules initiated
by the mothers, can be viewed by fathers as extra time with the children or
free babysitting time.

In my experience taking the extra time was a positive thing, and once in a
while I needed to alter the "normal" visitation time too, so we worked it
out.

I think the frequency of the changes, and the reasons given for the changes,
have a direct impact on how the changes are perceived. And the children
understand when their mom has told their dad a reason for the visitation
change, and they know the mom lied to their dad about the reason, their mom
is dumping them on dad as a babysitter. My children corrected me several
times about what their mom was really doing on those weekends.

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message news

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
news:sEhXf.2352$qd.358@fed1read08...

"Pete" wrote in message
news On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:26:07 -0500, "Dusty" wrote:



It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the
non-custodial
parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their children.

This is correct. I devote about 60 hours a week in labor to the
support of my children. My daughters mother devotes about....um...0 in
financial support. As for actual "parenting time" that adds up to 2
hours in the morning and maybe 5 at night. On the weekends she gets
dumped off on her grandmother. So yes, the loads are not equal.


The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is
totally
financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors
that a
common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see their
fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the
inequities
of material advantages they often observe when their father acquires
his
new
family.

The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that when my daughter
reaches a certain age, she'll realize that her mother is a leech. She
mooches off the people she knows and the state in which she lives.

This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship between
children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the best
interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to advance
the
welfare of the children of New York.

She is correct yet again! Any time I spend with my daughter is on the
pretext of it being some sort of relationship. To her, I'm just some
guy that she gets to see every other week (or longer, depending on the
mental state of the leech).

Not to mention that you are a FREE babysitter, and the mother can go out
and
play during this time with the FREE money that is extorted from you.

Since when did spending time with one's own children equate to being a
babysitter? Is that really how you view your
time with your children?

Your point is valid, but some of this debate has to do with perceptions by
fathers. For instance, regularly scheduled visitation time is the father's
time. Extra visitation time, or changes to visitation schedules initiated
by the mothers, can be viewed by fathers as extra time with the children or
free babysitting time.

If some fathers are viewing additional time with their children as 'free babysitting time", I'd certainly question their
perception. Last time I checked, it was parenting one's children - babysitting is what you do for other people's
children.


In my experience taking the extra time was a positive thing, and once in a
while I needed to alter the "normal" visitation time too, so we worked it
out.

I think the frequency of the changes, and the reasons given for the changes,
have a direct impact on how the changes are perceived. And the children
understand when their mom has told their dad a reason for the visitation
change, and they know the mom lied to their dad about the reason, their mom
is dumping them on dad as a babysitter.

And dad's never lie about being unavailable for a time they are supposed to have the kids? Uh huh.

My children corrected me several
times about what their mom was really doing on those weekends.

Before or after you questioned them?

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
news

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
news

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
news:sEhXf.2352$qd.358@fed1read08...

"Pete" wrote in message
news On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:26:07 -0500, "Dusty" wrote:



It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the
non-custodial
parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their
children.

This is correct. I devote about 60 hours a week in labor to the
support of my children. My daughters mother devotes about....um...0
in
financial support. As for actual "parenting time" that adds up to 2
hours in the morning and maybe 5 at night. On the weekends she gets
dumped off on her grandmother. So yes, the loads are not equal.


The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is
totally
financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors
that a
common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see
their
fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the
inequities
of material advantages they often observe when their father
acquires
his
new
family.

The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that when my
daughter
reaches a certain age, she'll realize that her mother is a leech.
She
mooches off the people she knows and the state in which she lives.

This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship
between
children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the
best
interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to
advance
the
welfare of the children of New York.

She is correct yet again! Any time I spend with my daughter is on
the
pretext of it being some sort of relationship. To her, I'm just some
guy that she gets to see every other week (or longer, depending on
the
mental state of the leech).

Not to mention that you are a FREE babysitter, and the mother can go
out
and
play during this time with the FREE money that is extorted from you.

Since when did spending time with one's own children equate to being a
babysitter? Is that really how you view your
time with your children?

Your point is valid, but some of this debate has to do with perceptions
by
fathers. For instance, regularly scheduled visitation time is the
father's
time. Extra visitation time, or changes to visitation schedules
initiated
by the mothers, can be viewed by fathers as extra time with the children
or
free babysitting time.

If some fathers are viewing additional time with their children as 'free
babysitting time", I'd certainly question their
perception. Last time I checked, it was parenting one's children -
babysitting is what you do for other people's
children.

You are right. Babysitters get paid for performing the service. Fathers
pay to perform it.



In my experience taking the extra time was a positive thing, and once in
a
while I needed to alter the "normal" visitation time too, so we worked
it
out.

I think the frequency of the changes, and the reasons given for the
changes,
have a direct impact on how the changes are perceived. And the children
understand when their mom has told their dad a reason for the visitation
change, and they know the mom lied to their dad about the reason, their
mom
is dumping them on dad as a babysitter.

And dad's never lie about being unavailable for a time they are supposed
to have the kids? Uh huh.

I wouldn't know.


My children corrected me several
times about what their mom was really doing on those weekends.

Before or after you questioned them?

Usually it came out when I made some comment about why the change occurred
to accommodate their mother and my children told me there was more going on
than I realized. Like I said - I always took these extra opportunities to
be with my children. And, frankly, the reasons for the changes didn't faze
me. It was the children who monitored how their parents were acting.

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

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
news

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
news

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
news:sEhXf.2352$qd.358@fed1read08...

"Pete" wrote in message
news On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:26:07 -0500, "Dusty" wrote:



It is an erroneous implication that the caregiver and the
non-custodial
parent carry the same load and devote the same time to their
children.

This is correct. I devote about 60 hours a week in labor to the
support of my children. My daughters mother devotes about....um...0
in
financial support. As for actual "parenting time" that adds up to 2
hours in the morning and maybe 5 at night. On the weekends she gets
dumped off on her grandmother. So yes, the loads are not equal.


The basis for this strong battle of the fathers' rights groups is
totally
financial. It is frequently reported by school guidance counselors
that a
common complaint of children of divorce is that they don't see
their
fathers, and it is not unusual for children to complain about the
inequities
of material advantages they often observe when their father
acquires
his
new
family.

The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that when my
daughter
reaches a certain age, she'll realize that her mother is a leech.
She
mooches off the people she knows and the state in which she lives.

This bill establishes the pretext of a continuing relationship
between
children and non-custodial parents, and falsely legislates in the
best
interest of the child. The reality is that it does nothing to
advance
the
welfare of the children of New York.

She is correct yet again! Any time I spend with my daughter is on
the
pretext of it being some sort of relationship. To her, I'm just some
guy that she gets to see every other week (or longer, depending on
the
mental state of the leech).

Not to mention that you are a FREE babysitter, and the mother can go
out
and
play during this time with the FREE money that is extorted from you.

Since when did spending time with one's own children equate to being a
babysitter? Is that really how you view your
time with your children?

Your point is valid, but some of this debate has to do with perceptions
by
fathers. For instance, regularly scheduled visitation time is the
father's
time. Extra visitation time, or changes to visitation schedules
initiated
by the mothers, can be viewed by fathers as extra time with the children
or
free babysitting time.

If some fathers are viewing additional time with their children as 'free
babysitting time", I'd certainly question their
perception. Last time I checked, it was parenting one's children -
babysitting is what you do for other people's
children.

You are right. Babysitters get paid for performing the service. Fathers
pay to perform it.

Fathers aren't babysitting their own children. They're parenting.




In my experience taking the extra time was a positive thing, and once in
a
while I needed to alter the "normal" visitation time too, so we worked
it
out.

I think the frequency of the changes, and the reasons given for the
changes,
have a direct impact on how the changes are perceived. And the children
understand when their mom has told their dad a reason for the visitation
change, and they know the mom lied to their dad about the reason, their
mom
is dumping them on dad as a babysitter.

And dad's never lie about being unavailable for a time they are supposed
to have the kids? Uh huh.

I wouldn't know.


My children corrected me several
times about what their mom was really doing on those weekends.

Before or after you questioned them?

Usually it came out when I made some comment about why the change occurred
to accommodate their mother and my children told me there was more going on
than I realized. Like I said - I always took these extra opportunities to
be with my children. And, frankly, the reasons for the changes didn't faze
me. It was the children who monitored how their parents were acting.