Letter Template To Your State-Federal Elected Officials Asking Where They Stand On Family Law Reform

#StandupforZoraya #SayHerName, Blogs Followed, Family Court Insanity, Fathers' Rights, PAS is Child Abuse, Petitions, Presidential Election

CAN OUR LEGISLATORS CAN PROTECT US FROM THE HORRORS OF FAMILY COURTS TO IMPOSE EQUALITY STANDARDS?

Should men become husbands and fathers—and many men today are choosing not to—they don’t stand a chance in a court of law if and when they get divorced. Family court judges are hopelessly biased against fathers. Of the two million restraining orders issued each year—85 percent against men—half don’t include any evidence of violence but rely on vague complaints made without proof or evidence. And once an order is issued, it becomes nearly impossible for a father to retain or regain custody or even get to see his own children. “Right under our noses, massive systemic injustice is being visited upon fathers, threatening the very fundamentals of family, society, and democracy,” writes Todd M. Aglialoro.

Should men become husbands and fathers—and many men today are choosing not to—they don’t stand a chance in a court of law if and when they get divorced. Family court judges are hopelessly biased against fathers. Of the two million restraining orders issued each year—85 percent against men—half don’t include any evidence of violence but rely on vague complaints made without proof or evidence. And once an order is issued, it becomes nearly impossible for a father to retain or regain custody or even get to see his own children. “Right under our noses, massive systemic injustice is being visited upon fathers, threatening the very fundamentals of family, society, and democracy,” writes Todd M. Aglialoro.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Let us make the politicians and media aware of all the knowledgewe have of Family Court and Child Protection
Let us make the politicians and media aware of all the knowledge we have of Family Court and Child Protection
The rights of parents to the care, custody and nurture of their children is of such character that it cannot be denied without violating those fundamental principles of liberty and justice which lie at the base of all our civil and political institutions, and such right is a fundamental right protected by this amendment (First) and Amendments 5, 9, and 14. Doe v. Irwin, 441 F Supp 1247; U.S. D.C. of Michigan, (1985).

student-parental-rights-in-public-school-education-
The rights of parents to the care, custody and nurture of their children is of such character that it cannot be denied without violating those fundamental principles of liberty and justice which lie at the base of all our civil and political institutions, and such right is a fundamental right protected by this amendment (First) and Amendments 5, 9, and 14. Doe v. Irwin, 441 F Supp 1247; U.S. D.C. of Michigan, (1985).56248-parental-rights

“My children are a gift that God gave me. The state did not receive those children from God and then forward them on to me with conditions. God gave those children to me. I will stand before Him to be judged on how I raise my children, and I don’t believe it’s appropriate for the state to step in and either play God– or play parent.”  – Utah Senator Mark Madsen, during floor debate on Utah’s HB13.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

votefamily - 2015

The Love and Iron Project

This morning, FathersandFamilies.org put out an excellent call to action on its Facebook page.

Here it is:

“Have you ever wondered where your local State Representative or Senator stands on the presumption for equally shared parenting, or what they think about Judges using discretion to bypass equal parentage and access to children by Non-Custodial families? Well, let’s find out. Fathers and Families is asking today that you go to Google and search your State’s Legislative or General Assembly website to find your State level Representative and Senator (pick one Rep and one Senator) and email both asking where they stand on you being allowed to have equal access to your children and financially supporting them directly, as well as how to deal with Judges who prevent that.

Once both have responded, come back to this post and type the name of the State you are in, the Rep/Senators name, and…

View original post 1,263 more words

Top 5 Reasons to Choose Collaborative Divorce

#StandupforZoraya #SayHerName, Blogs Followed, Family Court Insanity

3.  Efficiency

Ninety percent or more of all divorce cases end up settling, whether before filing a petition for dissolution of their marriage or after the parties have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and many years going through trial but right before a judge hands down a decision.  And even though the vast majority of divorces settle, the vast majority of the cost is associated with preparing for trial, conducting opposition research, engaging in depositions and other discovery techniques, and preparing for and attending hearing after hearing before a final trial.

In collaborative divorce, the attorneys are absolutely barred from engaging in any contested court proceeding, and they focus all of their energy, time, and resources helping the parties reach an agreement.  In the unlikely event that the spouses cannot reach an agreement (similar to all other divorces, collaborative divorce has a settlement rate of around 90%), the collaborative attorneys withdraw and the spouses can engage trial counsel.

The efficiency and cost savings created by the sole focus on out-of-court dispute resolution is cited by many middle class families as the reason they choose collaborative divorce.

4.  Interdisciplinary

In the collaborative process, there is a recognition that divorce is not just a legal process; it is also an emotional and financial process.  That is why most collaborative cases involve a neutral facilitator, who usually has a mental health license, and a neutral financial professional.

The neutral facilitator helps clients cut through the clutter of emotionally-charged issues and focus on what is most important to them (such as their children) rather than focus on rigid positions.  The neutral financial professional can help enlarge the pie (by, for example, figuring out the most tax advantageous options for the clients) and help ensure there is financial transparency in discussions.

The interdisciplinary nature of collaborative practice is most important for those going through an emotionally-charged divorce or those concerned about the financial aspects of a divorce agreement.

5.  Creativity

When a judge makes a ruling, he or she is bound to rule within certain parameters of the law.  In collaborative divorce, on the other hand, the parties may agree to virtually anything so long as it does not violate the public policy of Florida.

Spouses who want a pet custody schedule or a parenting plan that includes grandparent visitation – end results that a judge simply could not order – and anyone who wants a family-tailored result rather than a court-imposed rigid fiat are best served by the creativity of collaborative divorce.

Justice is the most sacred part and the most incomparably binding part of morality.”Scott Adams By “family courts,” it should be clarified that it means all courts dealing in private family matters…ranging from actual “family” courts…Read More

Get the News Media Attention on Family Law Reform

W r i t e O N E L e t t e r — A Worldwide Event! The injustice of the Family Court System, and it’s agencies that are supposed to help…Read More

ABC Family Law Blog

Divorce is difficult, but not all divorces are created equally.  Here in Tampa Bay and Greater Sarasota, more and more people are choosing to resolve their family law issues via the collaborative process.  Collaborative divorce is a method of dispute resolution where the spouses agree from the beginning that they are each going to retain attorneys who will work as settlement specialists and who will not engage in court battles.

Here are the top 5 reasons any Florida couple considering a split should choose collaborative divorce:

1.  Privacy

Rather than have their dirty laundry aired in a public courthouse, spouses going through a collaborative divorce resolve all issues through privileged and confidential discussions in a private conference room.

This can be especially important for business-owners, professionals, and high-profile Florida residents who are concerned about the public release of either financial details or embarrassing personal shortcomings.

2.  Respect

By its very nature…

View original post 611 more words

“The lives of the children and their families can forever be changed by our action – or inaction”

#StandupforZoraya #SayHerName, Blogs Followed, Family Court Insanity, Fathers' Rights, PAS is Child Abuse, Petitions, Presidential Election

 

dysfunctional-family-courts-2015The Supreme Court’s Parental Rights Doctrine75aa1-youtube2bchannel2bart2b-2b2015Our nation has consistently maintained that parents possess a fundamental right to raise their children as they see fit.
This belief has been upheld by our judiciary in numerous Supreme Court cases that reflect the American people’s longstanding commitment to parental rights. The excerpts below are drawn from key Supreme Court cases protecting the right of parents to raise their children. It is critical that we place the current Supreme Court doctrine on parental rights into the explicit text of the United States Constitution in order to preserve the vital child-parent relationship. Florida Parental RightsThe principles below are referred to as the Parental Rights Doctrine.

Case index:

· Meyer v. State of Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923)
· Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925)
· Prince v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944)
· Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629 (1968)
· Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972)
· Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632 (1974)
· Moore v. East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494 (1977)
· Smith v. Organization of Foster Families, 431 U.S. 816 (1977)
· Quilloin v. Walcott, 434 U.S. 246 (1978)
· Parham v. J. R., 442 U.S. 584 (1979)
· Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (1982)
· Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292 (1993)
· Washington v. Glucksburg, 521 U.S. 702 (1997)
· Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000)

It is the natural duty of the parent to give his children education suitable to their station in life.  – Meyer v. State of Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923)56248-parental-rightsThe fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the State to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. The child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.  – Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925)keep-an-open-mind-2016It is cardinal with us that the custody, care and nurture of the child reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder. . . . It is in recognition of this that these decisions have respected the private realm of family life which the state cannot enter.  – Prince v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944)· Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629 (1968)

Project Fatherhood FL 11- 2015The values of parental direction of the religious upbringing and education of their children in their early and formative years have a high place in our society. —  Even more markedly than in Prince, therefore, this case involves the fundamental interest of parents, as contrasted with that of the State, to guide the religious future and education of their children.  —  The history and culture of Western civilization reflect a strong tradition of parental concern for the nurture and upbringing of their children. This primary role of the parents in the upbringing of their children is now established beyond debate as an enduring American tradition. – Wisconsin  v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972)Amendment 14 US Constitution - 2015This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. – Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632 (1974)DO NOTHING JUDGES - 2016Our decisions establish that the Constitution protects the sanctity of the family precisely because the institution of the family is deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition. It is through the family that we inculcate and pass down many of our most cherished values, moral and cultural. – Moore v. East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494 (1977)UntitledThe liberty interest in family privacy has its source, and its contours are ordinarily to be sought, not in state law, but in intrinsic human rights, as they have been understood in “this Nation’s history and tradition.”  – Smith v. Organization of Foster Families, 431 U.S. 816 (1977)

We have recognized on numerous occasions that the relationship between parent and child is constitutionally protected.  —  We have little doubt that the Due Process Clause would be offended “if a State were to attempt to force the breakup of a natural family, over the objections of the parents and their children, without some showing of unfitness and for the sole reason that to do so was thought to be in the children’s best interest.” – Quilloin v. Walcott, 434 U.S. 246 (1978)

The law’s concept of the family rests on a presumption that parents possess what a child lacks in maturity, experience, and capacity for judgment required for making life’s difficult decisions. More important, historically it has recognized that natural bonds of affection lead parents to act in the best interests of their children.  —  The statist notion that governmental power should supersede parental authority in all cases because some parents abuse and neglect children is repugnant to American tradition.  —  Simply because the decision of a parent is not agreeable to a child or because it involves risks does not automatically transfer the power to make that decision from the parents to some agency or officer of the state.  – Parham v. J. R., 442 U.S. 584 (1979)

The fundamental liberty interest of natural parents in the care, custody, and management of their child does not evaporate simply because they have not been model parents or have lost temporary custody of their child to the State. Even when blood relationships are strained, parents retain a vital interest in preventing the irretrievable destruction of their family life.
Until the State proves parental unfitness, the child and his parents share a vital interest in preventing erroneous termination of their natural relationship.  – Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (1982)What happened to EQUALITY - 2016“The best interests of the child,” a venerable phrase familiar from divorce proceedings, is a proper and feasible criterion for making the decision as to which of two parents will be accorded custody. But it is not traditionally the sole criterion-much less the sole constitutional criterion-for other, less narrowly channeled judgments involving children, where their interests conflict in varying degrees with the interests of others. —  “The best interests of the child” is not the legal standard that governs parents’ or guardians’ exercise of their custody: So long as certain minimum requirements of child care are met, the interests of the child may be subordinated to the interests of other children, or indeed even to the interests of the parents or guardians themselves.  – Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292 (1993)Due Process Right TFRM - 2016In a long line of cases, we have held that, in addition to the specific freedoms protected by the Bill of Rights, the “liberty” specially protected by the Due Process Clause includes the rights . . . to direct the education and upbringing of one’s children.  —  The Fourteenth Amendment “forbids the government to infringe … ‘fundamental’ liberty interests of all, no matter what process is provided, unless the infringement is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest.”  – Washington v. Glucksburg, 521 U.S. 702 (1997)Do not re-elect bad family court judges - 2016The liberty interest at issue in this case-the interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of their children-is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this Court.  —  In light of this extensive precedent, it cannot now be doubted that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children.  —  The problem here is not that the Washington Superior Court intervened, but that when it did so, it gave no special weight at all to Granville’s determination of her daughters’ best interests. More importantly, it appears that the Superior Court applied exactly the opposite presumption.  —  The Due Process Clause does not permit a State to infringe on the fundamental right of parents to make childrearing decisions simply because a state judge believes a ‘better’ decision could be made.  – Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000)fecfd-unfriendly2bfamily2bcourts

 

Children's Rights

ITS TIME FOR A WIDE-AWAKE RALLY!!.

You know, Abraham Lincoln was the first American President to bring equality under the law to our society, but he is also the first person to see how outrageous it was to harm another human being in such violent and brutal manners. Sadly when we see inside the control of our homes there is often a dominance struggle, which can become quite dangerous and even become the most dangerous place in the world for many of our children.

What if Abraham Lincoln was here fighting for the end of Family Crimes and acts of Terroristic Abuse against those unable to protect themselves, run away, or escape the insanity of their constant threatening life? What would you say to him as he wonders about the equal rights our country has continued to fight for all these years? Would President Lincoln talk to us about…

View original post 347 more words