Broken Family Court System

Broken Fathers - 2015A Broken Family Court System:
‘What are You Prepared to do?’

Ignorance is bliss in some scenarios, and as a father having been involved in a contentious divorce and custody ordeal it was a luxury I found myself longing for at times. Facing a situation where one’s back is against the wall, in a court environment overtly hostile towards those who represent themselves, as a pro se litigant is a place parents should venture with extreme caution. In my situation it came to a point where in keeping up with my own case at times I began to become curious and observe what I knew to be odd behavior and activity within the court and its players.

Continue reading

Broward Sheriff’s Office Child Protective Investigations Section is in a state of crisis.

Contact Florida Governor Rick Scott - 2016Broward sheriff’s child protection unit now ‘a shamble,’ former employee says

Investigators say children’s safety at risk

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla.Broward County is No. 1 in a category nobody wants to win, topping the state in the number of reported child abuse cases. With more than 15,000 cases a year, serious allegations are being made against the agency that handles those abuse complaints — the Broward Sheriff’s Office Child Protective Investigations Section, or CPIS, which many past and present investigators said is in a state of crisis.

“Absolutely children’s safety is at risk,”

…said one veteran investigator who recently left CPIS.

Christina Bullins, an agent for the International Union of Police Associations, which represents CPIS employees, said the union has heard complaints from about 50 investigators in the unit, starting with what she said are their staggering workloads. National standards for child protection investigators call for 12 cases at a time, but BSO records supplied to the union show that many of the BSO investigators are working double and triple that number, with three investigators working more than 40 cases each.

Continue reading

Dear 2016 Presidential Candidate, What’s causing the DCF deaths and the separation of our families?

DCF – CPS CHILDREN DEATHS DEPENDENCY & florida-judges-2015FAMILY COURTS

Dear 2016 Presidential Candidate,

Please help to stop the silent Holocaust caused by DCF nationwide. See recent example: Department of Children and Families visited Auburn foster home 3 days before toddler Avalena Conway-Coxon died in foster care 

We desperately need DCF CPS Family court Reform!

From VoteFamily.US:
Almost on a weekly basis two children are killed under the supervision of the Department of Children and Families (DCF) (last count 534+ in the last six years in Florida alone as per the Miami Herald
https://wethefamilies.wordpress.com/2013/08/25/12th-circuit-court-judge-janette-dunnigan-moition-to-disqualify/

 (miamiherald.com), and many more are taken away from parents even when this is not in the best interest of the children for mainly monetary reasons, see video.

What’s causing the DCF deaths and the separation of our families? One word summarizes it: GREED. DCF prefers to place children in foster homes or give them for adoption than to give them to family members because for every dollar it spends in foster homes, it receives three dollars from the federal government, a 200% return on investment (ROI) on top of monthly payments received for each foster child, and the bonuses received per adoption, all of which amounts to a highly sophisticated form of child trafficking as reported HERE similar to the Kids for Cash case in Pennsylvania, as described by the believed to have been murdered Senator Nancy Schaefer.

Don’t believe it? See testimony from Legal Aid attorney before Florida Supreme Court committee explaining how parents victims of domestic violence may lose custody of their children when they go before a judge for a restraining order seeking protection from their attackers and end up being separated from their children because “as a matter of law” they “have failed to protect their children from witnessing domestic violence:” YouTubeYouTube.

Take a look at three of these victims testifying at these hearings.

The second woman is Yarmila Castellanos, had her 3 day-old baby removed from her arms by DCF for no other reason than reporting domestic violence while her three other children were at home:

Unfortunately, these abuses cause great detrimental effects not only to the parents, but most importantly to the innocent children: YouTube.

And, one of the main targets of these gruesome acts are the disabled as per a recent investigation by the Department of Justiceada.gov doj child welfare.

dysfunctional-family-courts-2015

Continue reading

Florida Family Law Reform 2016!

causes.com/causes/409526-children-s-rights

Parental Alienation Dynamics ·Support Judge Gorcyca - Parental Alienation is Child Abuse - 2016

Let no good deed go unpunished. With good intentions Judge Gorcyca acted in the best interest of children. Now that a judge has finally listened, we must stand and rally.

Pathogenic parenting is a child protection issue NOT a ‪#‎childcustody‬issue. When addressing ‪#‎PathogenicParenting‬, mistakes can and will be made attempting to do the right thing. Mistakes can be fixed. When it comes to a parent emotionally and psychologically abusing children through ‪#‎ParentalAlienation‬ and hostile aggressive parenting, “there is no right way to do the wrong thing.”

*********************ba768-divorce18 CL: If you are a parent that has to deal with lies that have been untested, interference by the custodial parent and a full campaign of hatred from your kids and the ex, you need to speak up on behalf of this judge.

We don’t just encourage you to read these posts, we encourage action. It is only by protecting the vulnerable judges who on occasion get it right and that do punish alienation can we send a message to the entire judicial bench that we are sick of it.

Please write on behalf of this judge showing she used her judicial independence to heal this family because of the toxic brainwashing of the mother. Her conduct might not sit well with the board but her decisions were in the best interests of the children to end the parental alienation and dispense of testimony that did not make sense from the brainwashed children.

Let the Michigan Supreme Court and Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission know that you ‪#‎supportGorcyca‬.

MSC, CHIEF OF STAFF
Larry S. Royster
(517) 373-0120

MSC, PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE
John Nevin, Communications Director
(517) 373-0129

MJTC
Phone: (313) 875-5110
Fax: (313) 875-5154
E-mail: judicialtenure@courts.mi.gov
Parent League

Family Law Reform - 2016

Continue reading

I Just Want To Be A Good Dad

shared parenting· Supporters of South Dakota Shared Parenting  link ·

A group of fathers in New Jersey have banded together to bring a class action lawsuit against five family court judges. They allege their constitutional rights…
LAWDIVA.WORDPRESS.COM
Siding with Democratic legislators, Florida Governor Rick Scott (R) vetoed alimony reform legislation that Florida’s GOP-controlled legislature had passed by a
EXAMINER.COM
Please meet… Chris Colbert Regional Director (Southeast) Chris is the proud father of a son and a daughter. Chris worked hard to achieve 50-50 legal and physical custody of his children. He is a fifth grade teacher in the State of Florida and in his spare time he enjoys golfing, grilling, and outdoor activities. Chris graduated from Union College with a BA in History. He continued his education at the National University of Ireland, Galway and has an MA in Irish Studies. He became actively involved with The Fathers’ Rights Movement while battling for his children in 2014-2015. In June 2015, Chris became an editor for the Florida Chapter’s Facebook page. A few months later, he was promoted to Central page and then was asked to be a member of the Board of Directors. He now uses his energies to help other parents have an equal say in raising their children. Chris is currently the Regional Director for the Southeast. He wants every father out there to know that, “You are not alone.”

My daughter is now 9 and despite a long court case, nothing much has changed.

My ex has hurt me for years on end and she seems relentless in erasing me from our daughter’s life. I am reduced to nothing more than a brokenhearted dad that battles on for justice in the courts.

Will someone make or encourage my ex to let me see our daughter, to see me as an equal parent, and let me be a part of our daughter’s life? I have a lot to give and a lot to teach her, but the only people she gets to see is her mothers’ friends and family. Not a true representation of her whole family!

SUPPORT OUR CAUSE ~ Children’s RightsThe Harm Caused By Family Court System - 2016

Not all dads are good fathers. What about the deadbeats?

What about them? You want an acknowledgement that they in fact exist?

Of course they do. So do bad mothers. Abusive ones. Neglectful ones. Their existence however doesn’t disadvantage mothers as a whole walking into a courtroom.

Do you think that as The Fathers’ Rights Movement–a movement for fathers fighting for their children–we should jump on the “screw dads” bandwagon like all of the politicians, media, and the countless mom groups out there talking about how bad dad is, how inferior the paternal instinct allegedly is to the maternal instinct?

”Bad dads” are thrown in our face everywhere else on the internet and in society. We tell the other side of that story–the one that virtually never gets heard. Why do people get all up in arms because we focus on dads who are fighting for their children?

Can we not have one place where we don’t have the fact that bad dads exist thrown in our face?

We get it.

It’s not like we’re not aware that some dads are deadbeats.

We do however know these to be the minority compared to fathers who are good fathers and want to be fathers. We do question, in most of the instances where a father is being accused of being a deadbeat, whether or not he actually is or was never allowed the chance. Fathers not being treated equally is a much more serious and prevalent problem than fathers who willingly walk away when they were given a fair chance.

A true deadbeat would not likely even bother to join a movement such as this. He’s not fighting to see his kids. He has nothing to offer this movement, and we have nothing to offer him.

TFRM is for fathers fighting for equal consideration in their children’s best interest, and all fathers deserve to at least be considered an equal unless they prove or reveal themselves to be otherwise.

That is the purpose of this movement.

–Derek

This man is spot on. Parental Alienation is a mental health problem caused by the alienating parent that goes back to THEIR childhood. I always thought this was the case. Not helped of cause by Cafcass not even recognizing that it exists. Dr Childress has studied this for seven years. The courts can sort it once the mental health systems recognize it and not the other way around. A great eye opener.

Children's and Fathers Rights - Battling Parental Alienation in the UK & Beyond

My daughter is now 9 and despite a long court case, nothing much has changed. For 12 days every fortnight I am a hard-working, broken-hearted person and I cannot find anything in the UK to make me happy.

For the two days every fortnight that I get to spend with my daughter, I am a happy, proud and confident person, a total contrast to my days without her.

Yesterday I gazed out the window watching fireworks and was really missing my angel but I cannot call her, she doesn’t call me and knowing she is only a mile away hurts like hell.

My ex has hurt me for years on end and she seems relentless in erasing me from our daughter’s life and I am reduced to nothing more than a broken-hearted dad that battles on for justice in the courts, so that someone will make my ex encourage our…

View original post 124 more words

Equally Shared Parenting

Shared parenting refers to a collaborative arrangement in child custody or divorce determinations in which both parents have the right and responsibility of being actively involved in the raising of the child(ren).

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

The term is often used as a synonym for joint physical custody, but the exact definitions vary, with different jurisdictions defining it in different ways, and different sources using the term in different ways.[1] A regime of shared parenting is based on the idea that parental responsibilities should be shared by both the parents.[2]

It is typically a legal mechanism applied in cases of divorce, separation or when parents do not live together; in contrast, a Shared Earning/Shared Parenting Marriage is a marriage where the partners choose at the outset of the marriage (and prior to conceiving children) to share the work of childraising, earning money, house chores and recreation time in nearly equal fashion across all four domains.

Stand Up For Zoraya

Shared Parenting.

Parents are presumed equal during the marriage. What changed in the equality equation once the marriage ends? Children need and want both parents in their lives, not as visitors, but as active and equal participants. That’s why shared parenting is best for children.

Read more HERE

Even when blood relationships are strained, parents retain vital interest in preventing irretrievable destruction of their family life; if anything, persons faced with forced dissolution of their parental rights have more critical need for procedural protections than do those resisting state intervention into ongoing family affairs. Santosky v. Kramer, 102 S Ct 1388; 455 US 745, (1982).
Parents have a fundamental constitutionally protected interest in continuity of legal bond with their children. Matter of Delaney, 617 P 2d 886, Oklahoma (1980). .
The liberty interest of the family encompasses an interest in retaining custody of one’s children and, thus, a state…

View original post 579 more words

Is The Fox Ruling The Henhouse?

 

Family Law Reform - 2016I then followed up with a post to that thread describing my disgust with National Organization for Women (NOW) and other anti-equal parenting lobbying groups; because it’s become apparent that this is one of the universal talking points that’s being injected into the public commentary – I’m simply seeing it all over.  Basically, here’s  what they’re saying:

**The only reason fathers want equal parenting is to avoid paying child support.**

Yet interestingly enough, when we recently ran a poll of our followers, we asked the following question:

“If you were given a magic wand and told you could change just ONE thing about Family Law, right now; what would that ONE thing be?

  1. A presumption of 50/50 custody.
  2. An elimination of shared income redistributions within the child support calculation
  3. Government enforcement of visitation orders
  4. Punishments/Remedies for fraudulent false allegations of abuse.

Enforce Visitation NOT Child Support - 2016

So according to the propaganda, it would be logical to expect that answer “B” would have dominated the responses, or at the very least, presented a significant presence.

Well, as it happens, option “B” did not receive a single vote – NOT ONE person who responded to our poll identified child support as the most important Family Law reform they wanted addressed.Parental Alienation AKA Child Abuse is a CRIME - 2016

None.

Nada.

Zip-o-la.

In fact here are the results:

Option “A” – the presumption of 50/50 custody received 35.20% of the votes.

Option “B” – the elimination of income sharing within the child support calculation, of course, received 0% of the votes.

Option “C” – Government enforcement of visitation orders received 5.88% of the votes.

Option “D” – Punishments/Remedies for fraudulent false allegations of abuse received the remaining, and largest percentage of votes at 58.82%.

Children in joint custody arrangements had less behavior and emotional problems, had higher self-esteem, better family relations and school performance than children in sole custody arrangements. And these children were as well-adjusted as intact family children on the same measures, said Bauserman, "probably because joint custody provides the child with an opportunity to have ongoing contact with both parents."  These findings indicate that children do not actually need to be in a joint physical custody to show better adjustment but just need to spend substantial time with both parents, especially with their fathers, said Bauserman. Also, joint custody couples reported less conflict, possibly because both parents could participate in their children's lives equally and not spend the time arguing over childcare decisions. Unfortunately a perception exists that joint custody is more harmful because it exposes children to ongoing parental conflict. In fact, the studies in this review found that sole-custody parents reported higher levels of conflict.  It is important to recognize that the results do not support joint custody in all situations. When one parent is abusive or neglectful or has a serious mental or physical health problem, sole-custody with the other parent would clearly be preferable,

Children in joint custody arrangements had less behavior and emotional problems, had higher self-esteem, better family relations and school performance than children in sole custody arrangements. And these children were as well-adjusted as intact family children on the same measures, said Bauserman, “probably because joint custody provides the child with an opportunity to have ongoing contact with both parents.”
These findings indicate that children do not actually need to be in a joint physical custody to show better adjustment but just need to spend substantial time with both parents, especially with their fathers, said Bauserman. Also, joint custody couples reported less conflict, possibly because both parents could participate in their children’s lives equally and not spend the time arguing over childcare decisions. Unfortunately a perception exists that joint custody is more harmful because it exposes children to ongoing parental conflict. In fact, the studies in this review found that sole-custody parents reported higher levels of conflict.
It is important to recognize that the results do not support joint custody in all situations. When one parent is abusive or neglectful or has a serious mental or physical health problem, sole-custody with the other parent would clearly be preferable,

Actually,  I don’t think it’s a stretch to assume we’re not the first organization to come up with these sorts of findings, and it would be hard for me to believe that those putting out the misinformation are ignorant of the facts.

Could it be that they’re simply lying to the Public in order to promote a political agenda?

NC Fathers then followed up my post with a response:

“We don’t worry so much about NOW anymore.

I see diehard members of that organization starting to speak out about how this system throws step-mothers, grandmothers, aunts, and other females under the bus.

It used to be framed as a male vs. female issue, but clearly women in paternal families are on their knees as much as fathers are.

The REAL opponent is one of the largest, single most powerful lobby organizations in the USA. That is the American Bar Association which pumps tremendous amounts of influence and money into stopping equally shared parenting.

It disturbs us to know that the lawyers we are spending $15,000 on per custody matter believe that we either win, or be marginalized.”

Ah, so we get to the heart of it.

True enough, it’s about money all right, but who is REALLY the party guilty of greed?

Well, that question is answered very well described by another follower posting on the conversation thread referenced here:

“This is sad but true.9b9ba-justice2bmoving2bpic

When my husband and I decided to divorce, we sat down and agreed to split everything 50/50 and to make an appointment with our marriage counselor to learn how to tell the kids, and to discuss how to share them. Because we were both in agreement, we decided to share a lawyer. Because he worked out of town, I agreed to find a lawyer to help us draw up paperwork.

At my initial meeting the attorney informed me she cannot represent both of us and my husband would have to get his own attorney.

She started asking questions about our jobs and lives and then let me know that because he made more money, I am due alimony to bring me up to his level of income. She also advised I fight for sole custody of the kids, or at the very least reduce his visitation down to no more than something like 60 nights per year, as that would give me the maximum child support.

I’m embarrassed to say, I had never even heard of child support before!

We were still living together at this point, so she advised I start a fight that would encourage HIM to be the one to move out so it would look like he abandoned us, as this would give me my best chance at my custody and child support wishes. She spent an hour telling me what a looser he was (she’d never met him!) and how much of his money I deserved.

When I told her that I couldn’t live with myself taking so much from him and taking the kids away from their dad, she started telling me that my kids deserve to live in one home with their mother, how studies proved that mothers are better care takers, and that his new role should be to provide financial support, if he really loved his children.

She even said, “Wouldn’t it be nice to only work part time or quit working, your kids need you more than you need your job!” I did not hire her, and we figured out how to file our paperwork without crooked attorneys, got co-parenting advise from a counselor, and today our kids enjoy a healthy relationship with both parents, and we share equally in all expenses (actually, he probably does pay a little more than half their expenses, but it is his choice to do so, he has more expensive tastes in stuff than I do).

I believe many attorneys are the root cause of their family court battles, and likely the reason family court moves so extremely slow!”

As of the latest published data by the US Census Bureau (2007), there were 175,825 Law firms generating just under $228 billion dollars in gross annual revenues operating within the United States.

88% of these entities were operating with 10 or fewer employees with an average of 6.3 employees per firm, which equates to approximately $205,627 per employee.

Furthermore, in the United States, politicians who described their profession as “lawyer” make up the single most influential voting block within Congress  (37.2% total; with 60% of the US Senate being lawyers).

Ah okay….

So now we see the game that’s being played here:

(1)    Lawyers make money from conflicts centering around significant threats to life, liberty, and money.  It doesn’t matter if they win or lose, as long as they stakes are high and important, and the legal process sufficiently confusing or unknown; they get paid.  Therefore, it’s in the best interests of the American Bar Association to create and/or preserve the conditions that enable conflict around children. Conflict around one’s children equals BIG money for lawyers.

(2)    The way to preserve or enhance these conditions is to use legal language that is nebulous and presumptive.  Nebulous means vague and open to interpretation, and within Law, presumption defines where the burden of proof resides.  And two of the most hotly contested laws affecting non-custodial parents (The Best Interests of the Children Rule, and The Violence Against Women Act) satisfy all these conditions: (1) Nebulous and open to interpretation by the Court, (2) Presumptive: the burden of proof is on the father to reach a high standard to show why he should have equal parenting rights, and in the Case of allegations of abuse; the accused party, which is the father 98% of the time, is presumed guilty and the burden of proof is on that person to show the allegations are unfounded, (3) High stakes (life, children, liberty, money),  and (4) public confusion and ignorance regarding the form, structure, and process of Family Law.  And it’s under these conditions that lawyers and friends of the Court parenting plan evaluators, supervisors, investigators, and social workers are making a pile of money.

(3)     As it sits currently, custodial parents, States, and many Courts enjoy lucrative financial incentives to maximize child support payments, which is likely to include minimizing or eliminating a non-custodial parents time with their children.  Why? Because the Federal Government has set it up this way by rationing Federal subsidies to States through child support enforcement vis-à-vis Title IVD Child Support Enforcement bonuses (Click here to learn more about Federal Money to States for child support enforcement). So, what we’ve got here is an environment where custodial parents, which are statistically mothers (84% of the time; the resulting 14% being mostly joint custody cases, and a very small percent having fathers as the primary custodian), lawyers, Court-appointed investigators, and Courts are colluding with each other to protect and enhance their financial interests.

But the big question remains, why are our elected officials within Federal Government not only enabling this behavior, not only empowering it, but deliberately misrepresenting the facts?

Well, Family Law reform is about money all right.

But when you’re doing something disgusting, it helps to create a noble excuse for it and manipulate public opinion about where the blame lies.family court insanity - 2016

Child support reform is NOT the primary concern of our followers  – it’s the primary concern of everyone who is making money by preserving the conditions of high-stakes conflict; those who are profiting from the abuse and exploitation of parents and children.

 

The Family Court Industry is not hiding the fact that ultimately, the argument is about money. They’re simply misrepresenting the facts so that it appears NCP’s, who are mostly fathers, are to blame.

 

So, why are our politicians supporting and spinning this for the Family Court industry?

Because the Family Court Industry is making out like bandits, and this means money for politicians, which of course means winning elections and power.

When you have power to over laws, you have power to attract political donations. And when you have power to give money to politicians, you have the power to affect the laws.

It’s a nice little cozy relationship, don’t ya think?

And this is why, the position of The Love And Iron Project is that the answer to our problems; the solution to the end of the exploitation and abuse of parents and children for money rests in our ability to come together in sufficient numbers to coerce change at the political level.

There is simply too much money being made by everyone involved. If we want change, we’re going to have to force it, because believe me, neither the Family Court Industry nor the Political Establishment is going to give up all this cash for moral reasons.

They don’t care about that. They don’t really care about your children. And they certainly don’t care about you – They are manufacturing suffering for you and your children so they can profit fromit. They are using you.

If we want change, we’re going to have to take it upon ourselves to make it happen.

We’re going to have to show these politicians that it’s in their best interests to change the laws or they’re going to lose their jobs – period.

ChangePolitics2 - - 2016Change the politicians, change the laws. Change the laws, change Court behavior. Change Court behavior, change the result.

Do this, and all the profiteers are stripped of their power and removed from the equation.

~ Michael

The Love and Iron Project

You might have noticed that the common theme of our most recent publicity messages center around “sharing the truth”.

And there’s a reason for this:  we’ve been seeing a rather active effort on the part of our opposition to blatantly lie to the Public in an attempt to thwart Family Law reform.

In reality, this is not new.  Because they’ve been doing this for the last forty years or so.

Never the less, you’re probably seeing a ridiculous talking point come up a lot lately.  I’ve seen it all over, and it’s probably best described by a Facebook post is saw in the Love and Iron newsfeed from NC Fathers.  Here is the opening post:

“In speaking w/ a NC Legislator yesterday, she exclaimed that in many cases the only reason a non-custodial parent would want shared parenting or joint custody is so that they could lower child support payments.”

View original post 1,870 more words