Our Time is Now (Fathers): Family Court

Showing posts with label Family Court. Show all posts

Child custody case to study constitutional protections

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

A court hearing is scheduled tomorrow on arguments that allege the basic child custody procedures used by judges in Bradley County, Tenn., are unconstitutionally biased in favor of one parent.

According to Thorne, the case before Circuit Judge J. Michael Sharp is testing the court procedures used in the child custody case of 3-year-old Kate Hopkins, which began in 2007.

After more than two years in court and five different judges, the case is set for trial beginning May 27 in Sharp's courtroom. But Sharp is hearing the constitutional issues before the rest of the case is heard.

Attorney Jeffrey Miller will argue on behalf of fit Tennessee parents and their children, and an attorney from the Tennessee attorney general's office, Warren Jasper, is expected to argue on behalf of the standard procedures.

According to a statement from Thorne, one of the procedures that will be challenged is the "80-day rule" created by local judges. It automatically takes effect as soon as a child custody case is filed, allowing one parent only 80 days a year with the child while the other parent is allowed 285 days – regardless of circumstances.

The rule, Miller argues, discriminates against one parent, violating the principle of equal protection as well as due process, since it is imposed without a hearing.

Click here read more about this case.

Gay sperm donor denied son access

Wednesday, April 23, 2008

Civil liberties groups demanded radical reform of family law after a gay man, who donated sperm to a lesbian couple, was refused rights to his biological son.

Dublin's High Court ruled that the man, who had been friends with the women, should have no guardianship or access to the child and the toddler would be better off with the couple. The landmark ruling is the latest case to expose serious gaps in family law, fathers' rights and a lack of legislation on same-sex couples.

The Unmarried and Separated Fathers of Ireland warned the decision could end up being a major setback for fathers' rights. Legal spokesman Donnacha Murphy said: "Legislation may further the issue of inequality in Irish family life. The only way to achieve ultimate equality is by an amendment to the constitution."

How much would you like to bet if the those mommy need more money they will hit him up for child support and win.

Child support Corruption

Friday, March 28, 2008

Panel: No anti-dad bias in custody verdicts

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Divorced fathers are not discriminated against by social workers in decisions on child custody, according to a committee that included experts from the government, and academia.

read more here

Why am I not surprise. Every Court Judge said this.

Israel Fathers Child Custody Rights Groups Intensify Demonstrations

Monday, March 17, 2008

By Joel Leyden
Israel News Agency

Ra'anana, Israel ---- March 16....(INA) - Fathers and children rights custody groups in Israel protesting gender bias discrimination in court custody cases have intensified their public demonstrations.

Last week hundreds of divorced and single fathers met in Tel Aviv to demand joint and or equal custody in a non-violent protest covered by both Israel TV and several local newspapers. The fathers are demanding that the Israel Knesset, Israel family court judges and Israel child welfare departments adopt reforms in the existing Israel Family Custodian Act of 1962 which states that all children under the age of six will automatically have custody under their mother, unless the mother is violent, drug abuser or negligent.

Fathers 4 Justice Israel hijacked all media attention at the Ra'anana annual marathon

read more here

When will the world realizes that fathers are just an important mothers are. I can only said if they truly before that fathers don't have a place in a child life, then fathers shouldn't have to pay child support or provide medical coverage for the child.

BREAKDOWN OF MICHIGAN'S FAMILY COURTS BY TONY TAYLOR

Thursday, March 13, 2008

Ex-spouses may see faster enforcement of child-visitation rights

Monday, February 11, 2008

A pilot program that is speeding up the enforcement process when a divorced parent violates a court-ordered child time for an ex-spouse was given top priority status and unanimously endorsed by a legislative budget subcommittee Wednesday.

Similar legislation to HB22 was given the same status a year ago but was ultimately voted down in the House.

Those and other concerns raised last year have been addressed in the current bill, the proposal's sponsor, Rep. Julie Fisher, R-Fruit Heights, told members of the Legislature's criminal justice appropriations subcommittee.

HB22 doesn't override the section of the law dealing with steps a divorced parent must follow when an ex-spouse violates parent-time schedules remains in place. It offers a stopgap measure to the process, which has been criticized for years by fathers' rights groups who say designated and scheduled time with their children can be suddenly changed.

"And nothing happens, not in reality," a father from Boulder, Colo., told the Deseret Morning News after his Thanksgiving time with his two children in Layton was denied by his ex-wife.

"I got out of the car and she came to the driveway and said she had made other plans and wouldn't change them," he said. "The visit was scheduled, she knew I was on my way. She just turned and walked back into the house."

Possible abuse is nearly always the implied reason for a sudden refusal of a visit by a noncustodial father, advocates for the legislation in Utah said. The fact is, the only recourse is to seek court action until weeks and months after an incident.

"Besides, what good is it going to do to service a court order on someone who is violating a court order already?" he said. The state relentlessly demonizes dads who don't pay child support but hardly does a thing when a visit is canceled.

"That's a loud and clear message: money is more important than time with a parent," he said.

The state child support collections section is relentless for back child support, but they virtually never enforce missed child time because an incident is over so fast and fathers who try to make up the time rarely get it back anyway, advocates say.

That's what the bill is designed to do, Fisher said, noting that was the motivation behind the original bill passed last year.

The pilot program that has been under way in 3rd District Court involves going back to court, but a judge can call for the immediate involvement of a mediator to settle a time dispute.

E-mail: jthalman@desnews.com

TAKEN INTO CUSTODY

Sunday, November 18, 2007

Dr. Stephen Baskerville has written yet another great book regarding men's issues. This new account proves beyond a reasonable doubt that men truly require assistance instituting new legislative action.

How family courts operate as if there is no Bill of Rights, denying parents their constitutional legal protections.

Taken into Custody exposes the greatest and most destructive civil rights abuse in America today. Family courts and Soviet-style bureaucracies trample basic civil liberties, entering homes uninvited and taking away people's children at will, then throwing the parents into jail without any form of due process, much less a trial. No parent, no child, no family in America is safe.

The legal industry does not want you to hear this story. Radical feminists, bar associations, and social work bureaucracies have colluded to suppress this information. Even civil libertarians look the other way. Yet it is a reality for tens of millions of Americans.

go to amazon to buy book,

This book is selling out fast in most stores, My Copy is on back order at my local book store. Baskerville as done it again, exposing the truth , which many other groups don't like.