NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/alt/childsu/3677

Text File | 1992-11-18 | 18.2 KB | 389 lines

Newsgroups: alt.child-support
Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnewsk!noraa
From: [e-mail] (aaron.l.hoffmeyer)
Subject: Finally, action (Re: Massachusetts gets tough--and CSAM)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 06:33:07 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Lines: 378

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bob Kirkpatrick) writes:
>[e-mail] (Kevin Ruddy) writes:
>> I hereby propose myself to perform activities on behalf of the Child Support
>> Alliance of Massachusetts.  I don't have a lot of time, but I can't stand
>> by idly any longer, wishing things would change.  I've got to do something.
>> Nothing is ever going to change unless I (and any other MA [un]fortunates)
>> get out there and start writing, calling, and speaking to the people who
>> are responsible for this stuff.
>
>I'm wondering (not criticizing or flaming) if it might be a good idea for
>you folks to start a newsgroup or a maillist for the Massachusettes group.
>There's always plenty of room for discussion here in these groups, but it
>might help y'all localize and consolodate the work you're setting out to
>do.
>
>The idea seems to have struck a positive note with quite a few people, and
>even though I'm from Washington, your group plans sound really good to me.
>I think local groups --able to deal with the specifics of a state-- are a
>much better alternative to national orgs who have to deal with a much more
>generalized agenda. A good 'for instance' is FACE in Ohio. I'm always im-
>pressed with their work. As a matter of fact, you might ask Aaron Hoffmeyer
>for some tips on building your organization.
>
>Anyway, just a thought. Does anyone else think this might be a good idea?
>---
>Bob Kirkpatrick <[e-mail]>
>Dog Ear'd Systems of Spokane, WA

Yes.

A Brief History of FACE in central Ohio:

FACE was started when a man named David Larson, who had a Ph.D. in
history (see Hippy), went through a divorce in 1974.   He lost
custody,  because in Ohio at the time, fathers always lost custody
unless the mother abandoned the children.  But, the state legislature
changed the law that year and determined that the state could award
custody to either parent with no bias towards either gender, based on
whatever was in the child's best interests.  Joint custody was not an
option, though.  As it turned out, when this law was "enforced" by the
judges, it somehow always ended up that it was "in the child's best
interests" to live with Mom and make Dad pay Mom.  Good ol' boy biases
completely negated the intent of the law.

Dave took his non-custodial award because it was what he expected, but
he wanted ample visitation.  However, almost immediately, visitation
problems began.

Within a year of the final date of his divorce, his ex-wife notified
him that she was moving to Chicago and taking the kids.  She had made new
visitation arrangements.  If he flew to Chicago once a month, he could
see his children at the airport for 6 hours.  Quite a deal.

Dave filed for a change of custody, based on a statement his attorney
had fought to have included in the final divorce decree that asserted
that if either parent moved, the court had to re-decide custody.  After
a year of battling in court, Dave's ex-wife was blocked from moving to
Chicago or she would lose custody.  Both he and his ex- had remarried
in the meantime.

And then, after Dave had blocked the move, the visitation problems got
worse.  Dave's ex-wife refused all visitation.  After a few months,
Dave stopped paying his child support.  Dave filed contempt charges for
refusal of visitation.  His wife filed for non-payment of child
support.  When the judge heard the case, Dave was thrown in jail and
nothing was done to his ex-wife.

Dave got together with some of his friends and some attorneys and
started Fathers for Equal Justice, the central Ohio chapter.  They were
vocal, and logical.  They garnered a lot of media attention.  When Dave
went to jail for non-payment of child support, it was on the front page
of the Columbus paper and on all the news stations.  People were
outraged.

And then, Dave did something great.  He filed for custody and he sued
Franklin County Domestic Relations Court for sexual discrimination.
This sexual discrimination suit lasted six years and was in the press
much of the time.  In the end, the case went to the US Supreme Court,
but they kicked it back to Ohio.  Franklin County finally agreed to
settle by having two judges and a referee resign in 1980.  They were
replaced with an appointed referee endorsed by this group, and the
judges who won office during the election were both endorsed by this
group (one has retired, the other is still a judge here).  (Dave did get
custody of his son in 1976, his daughter stayed with her mother.)

At the same time (during the late 70s), this group and several other
father's right groups around the state actively sought to have a joint
custody law adopted by Ohio, in the same manner as the joint custody
law that was adopted in California in 1976 or '77.  However, at the
last minute, the law was watered down a great deal.  It included the
clause that stated something like, "if either parent does not want
joint custody, the judge shall not award joint custody."  In effect,
joint custody did not become reality.  It was a whitewash.  It was
rarely, hardly ever, awarded to anyone.

If the law that passed in 1980 had been just, many fathers' rights
groups might have faded away.  But it was not.  It was terrible.  In
fact, Ohio was still one of the worst states in the US in which to get
a divorce if you were a man.

For another 10 years, these groups lobbied the legislature and
testified at hearings, trying to get this law fixed.  The local group
was very influential--primarily because the legislature is in this
city, the state capitol.  Many men came and went during the 80s, but
membership in the group here in Columbus never dropped below 30 active
people.  Different personalities with different agendas participated.
For several years, a millionaire was a member and he contributed
something very important--cash.  Some of the more calm, casual, and
learned men met with legislators in their offices, attended closed
meetings, got appointed to committees reviewing laws.  There were
always a few attorneys that were members--one, who divorced twice
during the 17-year history of this group, has stayed involved the whole
time.

Because of the efforts of these men (and even some women--mostly second
wives), a new law passed in 1990 and went into effect in 1991.  This
new law created shared parenting as the default award if either parent
requests it.  The law states that judges must be gender-neutral.
However, women are still awarded "residential" parent status in the
vast majority of cases and men are made "obligors."  As non-residential
parents, men are typically given visitation one night a week and every
other weekend.  Some men get their children for half the summer.
Smells like the same-old, same-old?  Well, it is better than what it
was before, and it is better than the judges have been/are
interpretting it.

The progress is slow, the battles trying.  But things do get changed.

Right now we have a bill pending that will, if passed, define the
minimum standard for "reasonable" visitation at about 35% of the year,
basically the visitation standard of the county most empathetic of
fathers in Ohio--Mahoning.  We don't know if it will pass, but it has
ample support.  Many of the men in the legislature have been divorced.

Ohio's child support guidelines are also being reviewed.  The language
of the current law states that "time" with the children should be
considered in setting the child support amounts.  However, most judges
are ignoring that part of the law and won't deviate from the guidelines
unless a father has his children 35-50% of the year.  Since they like
to award standard visitation at around 25-28% of the year, it is rare
that any father has his expenses (incurred for providing for his
children while they are with him) taken into account.  Mathematical
logic is something most judges and attorneys just don't understand.
Most of them are rhetoricians.  Still, the committee reviewing the
guidelines has three men representing fathers' groups as voting
members.  Several of the judges and attorneys on this committee are
also sympathetic--they are divorced men.  The prognosis for this
committee's findings are good.  We expect them to lower the child
support amounts by as much as 10% in some pay categories--much like
Indiana.  In fact, Dr. David Garrod of Indiana is providing information
directly to one of the committee members, and via FREE, to me, and I
also make sure this committee receives this information.  We hope to
use his information to be as convincing as he was in Indiana in getting
the child support guidelines changed to reflect a little reality.

And, the fathers' rights groups, thanks to the computing age, are now
cooperating and working together to be heard en masse.  We trade
floppies and even make long-distance phone calls to stay in touch.

There are hundreds of groups, with similar histories, throughout the
US, and around the world.  And every one was started by a few guys who
decided to get together and talk about the problem, voice concerns,
share ideas and start to plan an attack.  They probably met in
someone's house, or a church basement.  Maybe they even met in one of
them fancy meetin' rooms in a swank hotel (rent is purty cheap for a
couple of 'ours--and guest speakers just love it when they get a podium
and a microphone).

Do any of us have a great deal of time to do this?  No, not really.  Do
we do it anyway?  Yes, there are many of us who put in as much as 20 to
30 hours a month towards this cause.  But every little bit helps.  Are
we some "powerful" group that gets its way on everything?  Hardly.
Most men have few resources, financial or otherwise, to engage in this
battle that needs to be fought on many fronts.  What do we have going
for us then?  Love for our children, the moral high-ground, anger,
frustration.  We do this because if we don't, we will continue to
suffer, our children will continue to suffer, and someday our sons and
daughters may have to face this same unbalanced system if we can't get
it fixed.  We do it because our society is suffering.  Fathers have
been so devalued as parents that our children are "lost sailors,"
condemned to a life without their fathers.

Many men are with us in spirit, they ask us to keep working, they thank
us for our efforts.  But many men are not up to staying in this fight.
It is frustrating.  It continually opens wounds that are deep, painful.

So many men feel so powerless to do anything--they don't know what to
do--and so, they just turn away from the system that robbed them of
their self-esteem, pride, 30% of their take-home pay and their
children--just because they were men.  They just try to get on with
their lives.  They don't want to go back into the arena where they
experienced the worst days of their lives--and while there, try to
sound informed, compassionate, caring, deserving of rights, and,
hardest of all, civil.   We've asked several men recently to kind of
lay-low, we know they are with us in their hearts, but they were
hurting us, not helping us.  Unfortunately, when a member of the
legislature comes to one of our meetings and is presented with 100
well-meaning, caring and truly empassioned sentiments, but one tirade
from a person who loses their cool, they go away remembering the
tirade.

But should we feel justified in exploding in a tirade?  Damn right.
We're getting laid-away, stripped of our rights, stripped of our
dignity, stripped of our livelihoods.  But, we must try to avoid such
outbursts.  Within this system, it just doesn't work.

Because the laws are fairly gender-blind in most states in theory, we
are now seeing women who are in the same boat--non-custodial parents
who are treated like pond-scum.  Many groups have changed their names
to adopt this same gender neutrality.  We are really advocating for the
rights of non-custodial/non-residential parents, regardless of gender.

So, look at the list of Children's Rights Council groups around the
country, contact the one near you, find out how you can help, find out
if there is an affiliate or subsidiary group near you.  Start your own
group if there isn't one near you.  Be conscientious, be aware.  Inform
others.  Do it, not out of a feeling of vengence or hatred, but do it
for yourself, do it for your children.  Someday, they may have to face
exactly what you have faced, if no one does anything to change this
mess.

20 years ago, no one had ever heard of shared parenting.  Custodial
fathers were rare.  Our wives and our lawyers and judges grew up in
times when no one even considered that children have rights to have
significant relationships with both of their parents after divorce.  It
is so ingrained in them that post-divorce fathers are second-class
citizens, they just can't be objective about fathers' rights and
children's rights.  Ah, but our children are growing up in an era where
"shared parenting" is the default custody award in many states.  They
won't be so prejudiced against fathers.  I have a feeling that by the
time my sons are old enough to marry, the playing field may be nearly
level.

Just remember, change will come--we are right.  But be patient.  It will
take time.  Maybe an entire generation.

    "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful,
     committed citizens can change the world.  Indeed it is the
     only thing that ever has."
        - Margaret Mead

Remember the Boston Tea Party?  That was not a nation of people in
rebellion.  It was a small group of people who met at someone's house
and said to one another, "Let's do this."

These newsgroups, the FREE servers and the mailing lists are
excellent resources for information.  Use them wisely.

CHILDREN`S RIGHTS COUNCIL AFFILIATES

Children`s Rights Council
220 I Street NE, Suite 203, Washington, DC 20002-4362
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]CRC

The following is an up-to-date list of active groups working in
the area of family rights, children`s rights.

ALABAMA        Children`s Rights Council of Alabama
               501 Crosscreek Trail, Pelham, AL 35124
               [phone]  Charles Crawford, Chairman

ALASKA         Alaska Dads and Moms
               2225 Arctic Boulevard, Ste 203, Anchorage, AK 99503
               [phone] Gary Maxwell, State coordinator

               Alaska Family Support Group
               P.O. Box 52115, Big Lake, AK 996652-1151
               [phone], Steve Strube, president

               Second Wives and Children,
               P.O. Box 875731, Wasilla, AK 99687-5731
               [phone]  Tracy Driskill, president

DELAWARE       Children`s Right Council of Delaware
               P.O. Box 182, Bethel, DE 19931
               [phone], James Morning

CALIFORNIA     CRC of California,
               P.O. Box 3195, Redwood City, CA 94064-3195
               [phone]  Valerie Ozsu

FLORIDA        CRC of Florida,
               113 W. Tara Lake Dr.,Boynton Beach, Florida 33436
               [phone], Piotr Blass

GEORGIA        Georgia Council for Children`s Rights
               P.O. Box 70486, Marietta, GA 30007-0486
               [phone], Sonny Burmeister

INDIANA        Indiana Council for Children`s Rights
               P.O. Box 2348, Indianapolis, IN 46206
               [phone]  Voice Hotline
               fax [phone]

               Fathers United
               9405 Kleinman Rd, Highland, IN 46322
               [phone] Voice Hotline

               Parents and Children Together
               P.O. Box 413, Lafayette, IN 47902
               [phone] Shirley Mennen

               There are approx 10 other groups state-wide

ILLINOIS       CRC of Illinois,
               P.O. Box 786, Pekin, IL 61555-0786
               [phone]  Ann Danner

IOWA           Fathers for Equal Rights,
               3623 Douglas Ave., Des Moines, IA 50310
               [phone], Dick Woods

KANSAS         CRC of Kansas
               5516 Mission Rd, Fairway, KS 66205-2721
               [phone], Roger Doeren

KENTUCKY       CRC of Kentucky
               Pumkin Ridge Farm, Pellville, KY 42364
               [phone]  Tracy Cox

MARYLAND       CRC of Maryland
               417 Pershing Drive, Silver Spring, MD 20910
               [phone],  Harvey Walden

MASSACHUSSETTS Concerned Fathers of Mass
           P.O. Box 2768, Springfield, MA 01101-2768
               [phone] George Kelly

MICHIGAN       CRC of Michigan
               P.O. Box 416, Lawton, MI 49065-0416
               [phone]  Heather Rowlinson

NEW JERSEY     New Jersey Council for Children`s Rights
               P.O. Box 615, Wayne, NJ 07470-0615
               [phone]  Erich Sturn

NEW YORK       CRC of New York
               P.O. Box 313, RD 3, Endicott, NY 13760
               [phone], Kim Broedecker-Frey

OHIO           CAPRA
               227 S. Roanoke Ave., Youngstown, OH 44120
               [phone]  Andy Cverko

           (There are six subsidiary groups in the state)

PENNSYLVANIA   P.E.A.C.E.
               20 1/2 S. Bradford St.,
           Allentown, PA 18103 Gary Onuschak

TEXAS          Texas Children`s Rights Coalition
               P.O. Box 12961, Capitol Station, Austin, TX 78711
               [phone]  Eric Anderson

VERMONT        Vermonters for Strong Families
               R.R.1, Box 284A, E. Montpelier, VT 05651
               [phone] Fred Tubbs

VIRGINIA       Fathers United for Equal Rights and Women`s Coalition
               P.O. Box 1323, Arlington, VA 22210-1323
               [phone]  Paul Robinson

               CRC of Virginia
               3029 Yakima Rd, Chesapeake, VA 23325
               [phone]  Michael Ewing

               Fathers United for Children
               c/o Abbey Interiors
               8935 Patterson Ave., Richmond, VA 23229
               [phone]  Murray Steinberg

Thanks, Alan Yasutovich and Dr. UNOHOO.

Now, off with her he.. er, uh, I mean, off to bed....

Aaron L. Hoffmeyer
[e-mail]