Posted on 11/26/2002 4:57:11 AM PST by RogerFGay
Call me pessimist if you like, but the ONLY way that this industry can be dismantled is is to starve it to death. How...? Not by refusing to pay the extortionate court orders...? No, they planned for that. It would only tighten their grip. No, from what I can see, will rpobably have to "take one for the team" and focus on preventing any new entrants into the arena. Warn them, show them what will most likely happen. Encourage them to get vasectomies. Get one yourself if you haven't done so already. We had a hard time getting any good attention from federal, state, and local governments before 9/11. Getting any now will be even less likely. I know that in my state, every time that the fathers managed to get the legislature to look at this, all they do is put together a panel loaded with man-haters and after months of study only reccomend changing some of the legal terms and re-working the guidelines so that everyone gets their order increased. Fight to keep any new, draconian laws from being passed, but the future is where this will be resolved. They will have to be starved out.
Unfortunately, I do have some experience with Family Courts. First advice: if YOU or yours ever get entangled with them or any agency (Social Services, Child Protective, divorce, allegations of any type of violence or abuse) GET A LAWYER... A GOOD ONE. I'll make a couple other comments about this article:
One tool at their disposal is restraining orders, which exclude fathers (or mothers) from their children for months, years, and even life. These orders are routinely issued during divorce proceedings, usually without any evidence of wrongdoing... are doled out "like candy." "Restraining orders and orders to vacate are granted to virtually all who apply," and "the facts have become irrelevant,"
This is ridiculously accurate. Both of the loving women at different times in my life employed the courts for this. Getting a "temporary restraining order" required ZERO evidence... the more recent one got this because I "yelled at her" two years before the order was issued. That was the primary evidence for which the judge granted a restraining order for 60 days. This was not ever again brought up, but if we had ever gone to trial (separation/divorce is on hold), that would have been one item of evidence _I_ would have been using to say she was a bit nuts.
As it is, the judge has said "in conference" that he will not even consider ordering "joint custody" unless both parties ask for that. So, though we have been working very well together, go to dinner, etc. together, don't holler at each other, make school and medical decisions together, and so on, simply because one of the parties requests sole custody, he will decree that joint custody is out of the question. Guess who has the hammer then, even if the mother has some mental health history...
Professional associations and "revolving doors" connect family courts to executive branch agencies that handle child protection and child support enforcement. These agencies likewise can be said to have a interest in removing children from their fathers. Judges also wield substantial powers of patronage, ...
Not only that, but the judges end up favoring the positions of Dept.Soc.Services, even when they have been demonstrably and admittedly at fault. Judges work with the SS representatives on a daily basis and do not wish to have a tense relationship with them, and therefore favor them regardless of the facts. Needless to say, many of those in the SS are activists who are anti-fatherhood.
What is unprecedented is the commodity in contention. Children serve as the tool or even weapon in disputes among contending parties, not only parents but government officials. Control of children brings control over adults...
ADULTS, not just MEN!!! I know a man who was falsely accused of abuse, and DSS told his wife that if she did not join forces with them against him, SS would take the children away from HER, too. There was no evidence, nothing the children said or did to lead to this case... just an SS vendetta. Do not say they have no power to do it; you're wrong if you think that. As a result, the guy had to leave his home, and children, and was under restriction for the three years it took to get the facts out in a court.
Family Courts, where you do not face your accuser and are not tried by a jury of your peers, are the most dangerous political institution in this country and are totally out of control.
Humbly submitted:
I've had worse done to me.
I've got a few billion swimmers frozen should I ever get crazy enough about someone to change my mind, on my doctor's request.
You want my advice?...Go to your doctor and flush that ice cube. You can have fresh ones extracted later if you ever want to put that bullseye back on your forehead.
I understand that in some states, you can be stuck paying child support for STEP-CHILDREN if they become accustomed to your standard of living.
I've heard that too. I think it is happening in Seatle, but it's hard to find details about it. Step dads, and eventually boyfriends will be teed up for business. I avoid women with kids like the plague...damaged goods.
Two things: No marriage and no children, mean no government control over your money or your life, and you dont end up having to buy a house for someone you hate.
The government already has more than enough control over people's lives. Take a look at the numbers...federal, state, and local income taxes, payroll taxes, sales tax, gas tax, cigarette taxes...they take more than half of what a productive individual works for. Why would anyone knowingly put another 20-50% at risk?
I feel very sorry that you'll never experience the joy of watching your child/children grow up. You'll miss enjoying some of the best pleasures that this world can give. I can understand your cynical point of view as my hubby's ex did quite a number on him too. But he wouldn't change a thing with the two precious angels we have been given and I would never think of doing anything to take them away from him. You just need to find a woman who does have compassion and love in her heart and not greed.
If I should ever change my mind, I've got some frozen mini-me(s) out there. LOL!
There are lots of children in my extended family, so I have plenty of experience with the baby thing, except that I can leave them with their parents (YAY!)
I find a woman with compassion and love in her heart every week, then she sees my house and turns into a Sucubus. (re:South Park)
Cheers.
Sorry, I won't be taking a chance on being worked over again. I don't know how many times I've heard "There are a lot of good women out there who would never do that." Maybe so, but all it takes is one bad one to ruin your life.
I'll be the first to admit that my ex-wife was one-in-a-million. There are approxiamtely 140,000,000 women in the US...that means that there are another 139 of her out there somewhere....I don't like those odds.
I just checked.
You could only guess where; California, Washington, Oregon and New York.
Why does this not surprise me?
Cynical and proud of it!
I don't need anyone to achieve greatness. If I did, then it wouldn't have been mine to have in the first place.
And back on the "cynical and proud" thing, a pessimist looks at a half glass of water and says it's half empty. An optimist looks at it and says it's half full. In walks the cynic...he looks at that glass, then at the optimist and pessimist and says "Which one of you a**holes drank half of my water?!"
I'll not take that risk, thank you. I'll consider it my contribution to the future of marriage, because someday women are going to take note of how difficult it will be to find a decent husband.
It already is difficult to find a decent husband! Just try and remember that it takes two to tango.
I'm not bragging, but I have no shortage of availble women to choose from. I am well established and I own a number of homes and an apartment building that I rent out.
Something about Real Estate makes some women go weak in the knees. It sure as hell aint' my sterling personality, I'll tell you that.
I am serious, and committed to sex. I didnt label all women either. Just the female ones.
Forgive me, but too complicated.
What about somebody like me who ownes 100% of my property, with a girlfriend who doesnt own anything beyond a great set of -um,..legs? Yeah, legs, thats it.
WHat you propose would be a great deal for HER, whereas I would lose. Why not a document that says you get what you brought, and that is it?
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.