Posted on 05/09/2002 8:43:28 AM PDT by Pern
Edited on 07/20/2004 11:46:47 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Mary Outlaw Fritts evaded the law for nearly eight years allegedly to keep her daughter safe.
Three weeks ago, Fritts decided to face a felony charge of parental abduction and return her 15-year-old daughter, Emily, to her former husband, whom she had accused of abusing the girl when she was 7.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesdispatch.com ...
Ah, that old trick. How often do we hear this in a child custody case? And what percentage is false, I wonder?
Give me a break. If it was true or even probably true, why would she allow her child to return to that "monster" ? Sounds like she had no choice (not getting along with the daughter, maybe?)
This subject hits home to a lot of people. Most fathers who end up in a custody fight walk into the court room with 2 strikes against them just because they're not a woman. My ex pulled this crap on me and while it was immediately seen for the dirty and underhanded tactic that it was, it still put my daughter through a lot of hell in the couple of days that it lasted. Women pull these dirty moves because there are no consequences for knowingly making false acusations like this. I'm not trying to get in anyone's face here. But if it happens to you, it's real easy to take the side that says it's an ex wife taking a cheap shot.
For all we know the woman was mental and took her child. Since the tests revealed that that this husband likely did not commit the acts she was accusing him of.
I should have been more clear in my comments. I guess my point really was a realization of any mother who has to resort to this kind of action---when justified.
IF it is true, and the father was into incest, the mother was a heroine, not a criminal.
Maybe they do not know the full consequences but they certainly do intend to do harm to the man. Just last night a friend of mine told me about a situation where her step-mother was so manipulative that she trumped up a story similar to this one--about her daughter-in-law's husband, insinuated it to her father who then went around telling friends and family. It was downright wicked and evil. My friend saw that it was some sort of spiritual attack on her family and does not hate her father or step mother but she will not be around them either. This woman has caused the man to have his entire family desert him.
........she was willing to dramatically change her life to protect her child
I guess my point is that her story is not particularly believeable. 4 out of 5 doctors found no evidence of abuse (5th one unsure?) and then 8 yrs later she returns the kid to her father, the child abuser?
15 yrs old is not old enough to fend off a child abuser, just read the papers everyday and you can see that. Her story smells, to me. I doubt that woman who ran off to New Zealand 6 or 7 yrs ago to avoid her husband would ever bring her kid back before she turned 18. The kind of tactic used by this woman is a fairly common one, however, with little side effects if its proven untrue. Another popular one is having restraining orders issued against the husband, without warning or misconduct. A friend of mine lived out of hotel for 6 months, waiting to get his stuff back from the house he owned, while his two kids were miserable living with their mother; but of course the kids had no say in the matter. When it comes to family matters, no one party is always at fault, but IMO men usually end up on the short end, (because of how family law is.. )
It's not so much whether they understand the full consequences, it's that they understand that there be no negative ones for them. People who pull stunts like that had better hope that I never win the Lotto and buy myself a position as a judge in the domestic courts. If I did, anyone who would stoop that low would immediately lose their case and be hit with harshest type of sanction or punitive damages that I could dish out.
Some people have no problem whatsoever with using their own child as a pawn and a tool for revenge and are quite willing to drag them through hell as long as they get what they want. The government could care less about people's lives being ruined and society goes along with (and follow like sheep) anything that has the label of "for the children", regardless of whether or not it's going to screw up the kid for life. As long as they can convince themselves that the intentions were good, they won't have any problems with these tactics.
Family law isn't just a preditory function of the apathetic judicial and legislative branches. It is also a very big business in both the public and private sectors. My state (Ohio) collects and distributes more than $970,000,000 yearly and this amount increases every year. The child support enforcment divisions charge the parent paying child support (almost always the father) an additional 2% for the honor of having his wages garnished like someone convicted of tax evasion would. The agencies 2% cut is over $19,000,000. Then the state of Ohio contracts Bank One to send out the support checks. This year the state will pay Bank One $52,000,000 for this service.
The number of active participants in the divorce and custody industries has swelled in the past 10 years. These days it's not just mom's lawyer, dad's lawyer and the judge. Now they are joined by a 3rd lawyer for the kids. This 3rd lawyer passes the buck to a child/family counsellor who he orders one or both parties to pay for. The sheer number of cases has created new positions for magistrates and court-appointed mediators as well. All of these positions have support staff to handle the paperwork and scheduling. These are the reasons why none of this will change. The divorce rate will stay at current levels (55%) or increase because of the financial incentives involved and because the idustry employs hundreds of thousands of people.
But the total number of divorces will decrease, because less people are getting married, percentage-wise. Look at the stats for the last 5 yrs; it's quite noticeable (Heritage Found. did a study..)Marriage is a bum deal for most men, and the word is definitely out. . However, the child support mechanisms you mentioned will stay in place, as will the mechanism for recovery of those funds..
No-fault divorce was the beginning of the end, IMO; coupled with all the other cultural trends... But until "men" become organized (like women have) to fight the tyranny of the "Family Court business" practices and rules, nothing's going to change, I agree..
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.