Posted on 09/21/2009 3:55:32 AM PDT by Kaslin
Dan Brewington is among the latest casualties in a war against fathers that is tearing our nation apart, family by family. The Ripley and Dearborn County (Indiana) court system recently stripped him of his parental rights without reason or cause. He is no longer able to see his daughters despite his history of loving care for them and their strong bond with him.
Mr. Brewington has neither a criminal history nor a Social Services history. He is loved by his children whom he has taken excellent care of their entire lives. He has also demonstrated his ability to successfully parent the children under joint custody with the mother for the past 2 ½ years. Yet his rights were violated during divorce proceedings in which Judge Humphrey of Dearborn County ordered him to have no visitation with his children.
Ordering a man to have no contact with his children is a very serious matter. So there should be some compelling reason for such drastic intervention by the state into the life of a citizen.
As part of court documents submitted during the divorce proceedings, a custody evaluation report was, of course, submitted. In this report, a psychologist named Dr. Connor evaluated Dan Brewington’s parenting abilities. But Dr. Connor was not licensed in the state of Indiana at the time of his evaluation of Dan Brewington. So what was he doing stripping a man of his rights to see his children without proper licensure?
But nowhere in the contents of this unlicensed report was it asserted that Dan Brewington is a danger to his children or, for that matter, anyone else. Had Dan Brewington been a danger to anyone, Dr. Connor would have been required, by Indiana law, to report such danger to the Child Protective Services Department or to the police.
No actions such as the above were required because Mr. Brewington is of no danger whatsoever. The decision to withhold his children from him was based solely on whim and caprice of a judge who was not following the laws and guidelines of the State of Indiana.
The first judge involved in this custody case, Judge Taul of Ripley County, recused himself because of ex parte communications with the Custody Evaluator, Dr. Connor. The case then went to Judge Humphrey of Dearborn County. Judge Humphrey awarded the mother full custody of the children, and stripped Dan Brewington of all parental rights, including any visitation. In the divorce decree this judge awarded items, to the mother, that were not marital assets but were instead material possessions of Mr. Brewington’s family members and friends, to which neither Mr. Brewington nor his wife are entitled.
Dan Brewington has no criminal record and no CPS history. If his parental rights can be taken then anyone’s can. If his civil rights are in jeopardy then so, too, are the rights of anyone reading this column - Democrat or Republican, black or white. If we as adults cannot trust the judicial system to protect our rights then do our children stand even a chance?
Just ask Dan Brewington’ girls. They were not granted a guardian ad litum to represent their interests in this case. And, through no fault of their own, they have a mother more concerned with acquiring material possessions and control over her ex-husband than she is with protecting her children’s best interest.
In a world where so many fathers are absent or uninvolved, how can the State of Indiana deprive an exceptional, committed father the right to see his children? Is it simply because he chose to represent himself in a court of law in Dearborn, Indiana? Or is it because he questioned the authority of Dr. Connor who, in fact, was not lawfully credentialed to intervene in this case? Or did Judge Humphrey rule in malicious retaliation to this father’s attempts to exercise his legal right to advocate for himself?
Clearly, Judge Humphrey violated civil law by restricting this father’s visitation rights with his children without grounds. My efforts to have this judge impeached or disbarred will not cease until Mr. Brewington is allowed to see his children or until the Almighty State of Indiana provides reasons for not doing so.
Only a revolution will resolve America’s current morass.
As astounding as it is dismaying.
God must increasingly abhor His inheritance.
Men are bad. Women are good. Caucasian men are particularly bad. Any questions?
There's the answer; go to court and represent yourself vs. the other party who has a lawyer and you're going to lose. It's a long way back once you do get an attorny, you're laps behind.
Perhaps he couldn’t afford a lawyer, and she could.
Gee. I wonder how that could happen?!??
No.
Parents need to INDIVIDUALLY and as a COUPLE raise their own kids. Be wiser in their choices for a spouse and raist their ONW KIDS. It’s a mindset change against a culture determined to destroy the family. It must be done individually. The COLLECTIVE and COMMUNITY can’t do it and shouldn’t be doing it.
It’s horrible.
Divide and conquer.
True
However in custody case the primary concern of the judge is by statute the welfare of the children.
Obviously the judge is very biased against fathers or has vindictive nature and dislikes this man.
I disagree with you...after my brother fired his lawyers, he started to win, and win big...but he had to put in many, many hours researching and preparing...to date he has beaten 15 different attorneys, filed judical misconduct against a judge, has had 2 attorneys sanctioned....but, if you are going to do this you need to spend many hours preparing for every hearing
guardian ad litem
It is hard for me to imagine a greater tyranny than to have your children stripped away from you like this.
Statutes which are violated every day in every county in the United States.
lawyers, can’t live with em, can’t kill em.
the judiciary are as complicit as the media in this morass we find ourselves in as a country.
As a side note, I totally agree with your tagline.
Yes, what does the next generation of Caucasian men have to look forward to? The Endangered Species List?
Or can you?
Read this guy’s blog - he has some issues. Has ADHD and other unspecified psychological problems. There is nothing wrong with pro se, per se, but when you dump 17 page motions on the court, 9 page letters on your lawyers, accuse your lawyer of incompetence and picket her, you are not going to do well in local courts.
As far as I can tell, he became irate (but not yelling or screaming, so what) when a court-appointed psychologist made a fairly routine decision to let the mom have the right to make the home for two young girls and give the dad the usual Th night, and 1st, 3rd and 5th weekends.
Now, having been through this, it does seem like the end of the world. But there is no way a court is going to order you and the other parent to literally split time. It doesn’t work well most of the time, even for well-meaning parents who agree to it initially.
It appears this guy obsessed about the psych, then insisted he disclose his interviews with the girls. No way that is going to happen - those are highly privileged materials that get disclosed, if at all, to other psychs. Certainly not the dad.
Divorce sucks. Divorce with kids sucks worse.
The Judges no longer care about the law or children. To deprive a child of a father IS CHILD ABUSE.
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census)
90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes
85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes (Source: Center for Disease Control)
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes (Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol. 14, p. 403-26, 1978.)
71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes (Source: National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools.)
75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes (Source: Rainbows for all God`s Children.)
70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Special Report, Sept 1988)
85% of all youths sitting in prisons grew up in a fatherless home (Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of Corrections 1992)
I have to fault the wife pretty heavily in this, not just the courts.
Someday those kids are gonna be old enough to know the truth about such matters and WILLINGLY resume relations with their father. The mother will be seen as a scoundrel and die alone, wondering what she did wrong...
...what goes around...
Part of this, of course, is how fathers are to be replaced by the government. Hence the welfare state that economically penalizes that have fathers present. Then the divorce culture is the other part.
When families split up, fathers are to be marginalized. I personally know of several fathers who face jail if they withhold child support if court-ordered visitation is not granted.
[The thing is, the person most likely to abuse a child is the biological mother, followed by the live-in boyfriend or stepfather.]
The Utopians know that the family must be destroyed for their version of Nirvana to have any possibility of acceptance. That certainly would be the case if most children are raised in government institutions that teach the Official Line.
We are well on our way...
One can only hope.
But I don’t see it happening: there is a web of “support” to keep the woman sheilded from such pisspoor decisions and the decisions reinforced with social approval.. The woman in otherwords, doesn’t have to have anything to do with the man and is supported in that decision.
There is nothing like that for the men.
The kids will believe what they are told by everyone in their lives [since Daddy can’t defend huimself]. I hope it works out but “they” have stacked the deck....
Worth repeating!
My Tagline!
Your children are hostages to govt, may you never find out the hard way. Have children, and your rights go out on a ledge, waiting for a gust of govt attention.
Per my tagline.
Parents, when your kids make plans to marry, sit them down and explain the facts of life. One of those facts is that when you have children, better avoid divorce, or some black-robed tyrant could have as much say in your children’s future, as the mom and dad have. Or more. Stay married and get along, or count on a co-parent you didn’t pick.
And then there’s the child protective services. They don’t need a lot of good reasons to get a warrant to look into every nook and cranny of your house. Or to take your babies out of it.
The law industry protects itself. ANYONE who does not hire a lawyer is a threat to the law industry and must be punished.
Can’t he appeal?
Probably a little strong to say he’s crazy, but I do think he has some issues. Divorce often makes everyone involved a least a little nuts. The days are long gone that a citizen could represent themself in court - there is a presumption of 1) nuttiness and 2) such a loser case that no lawyer would want to touch it.
YEP....what YOU said...
when we have people hitching up so easily and divorcing so easily, the children do not have a chance....
the one good thing about hard economic times is perhaps people will stop divorcing so quickly....they will learn to get along and love and stay together...
those of us who are older and who's parents stayed married, we have to admit it wasn't all a bed of roses for our parents...they had their "moments" too where either one could have walked out the door...
but they couldn't...not only because it was against their religious beliefs, but because economically one without the other could not survive....
ah...no...the live-in boyfriend...yes....
biologically connected males are the safest males to be around children, but all bets are off with live in studs or other males......
children need two parents folks...stop creating children unless you are going to be a permanent fixture....ie....stay married...
you know, I keep HEARING about this kind of thing....but my own personal experience is quite the opposite.. apparently in my county, if you are a male who works for the courthouse, you can get away with all sorts of illegal activity and abuse, and the court will look the other way AND give you anything you want, custody-wise...
The way it happens is that the mom has “no income” and gets court-appointed atty. Dad can’t get that, and can’t afford atty. Courts are biased against dads.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.