Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    What does your lawyer say?
    
    As I'm sure you're painfully aware, "legally" and "practically"
    are worlds apart in this situation.  I have no experience to
    offer (I am satisfied with shared custody), but sympathize with
    you.  Divorced fathers get the short end of the stick in custody
    situations all too often.
    					Steve

    I would suggest talking with Jim YODA:: Baranski... he has had the
    legal fights, so could give you the insight from a fathers point
    of view.  He has been very outspoken in mennotes and womannotes,
    and you might want to check there... but it seems to be that accordiing
    to Jim, you will be out of luck...
    
    Gale

	Courts will usually award sole custody to the mother, especially for 
	small children; the non-custodial parent may be given liberal visitation
	rights, but again, the reality of such rights depends on the 
	cooperation of the custodial parent.  

	One seemingly necessary criteria in getting custody awarded to the 
	father seems to be the agreement and consent of the mother! (half :-)
	Otherwise, taking custody from the mother may involve proving her an 
	unfit parent, where "unfit" would involve abuse of child or substances,
	or other inability to care for herself and/or the child.  It may also
	involve proving that the father can provide a "better" situation for 
	the child, where this proof may have to overcome the automatic 
	supposition that a child belongs with its mother....

	Even shared physical custody takes *active* cooperation of both parents,
	especially the mother, since sole maternal custody is "the norm".

	The court is supposed to be concerned primarily with the welfare of the 
	child.  It is perhaps unfortunate that this seems sometimes to be 
	determined by rote or by precedent rather than by the individual 
	circumstances.

	However, talk to a lawyer for the actual details, since these differ
	from state to state.  Note that contested divorces/custody arrangements
	are likely to be expensive wrt legal fees - as well as your patience.

		Helen

    Helen,                        
                                  
    Is your reply, .3, based on experience?  To your knowledge, is there
    a concept such as "the prefered parent", ie the one which can provide
    the best all around environment which would include: role model,
    values, belief, etc. which in the end predispose the child to becoming
    a contributing and responsible member of the society?
                                    
    Also, I am aware of the courts' deference to maternal custody. 
    Has anyone ever sued for custody based on civil rights?  To the
    best of my understanding, the Supreme Court of the U.S. through
    numerous decisions has said that each case must be decided on the
    basis of individual merit giving unsullied consideration to the
    players in the case.  Does this extend to civil/family cases?  That
    very issue was one which got Bork into trouble in that he applied
    "norms" as a method for deciding some sort of employment/sexism  
    case without considering the individuals.
                                    
    I guess the questions is, just because a high proportion of women
    historically have been given physical custody, can the court use
    that as the basis for making decisions around my case?  (I know
    that they do, is there a way to force the court to back off of that
    approach, ie lot of publicity, what have you?)
    
    Also, at what age can a minor child decide where he/she wants to
    live?
                                    
                                    
                                    
                                    
                                    
                                    
                                    
                                    
                                    
                                    
                                    
                                    

    To obtain SOLE custody of your child is difficult at best.  I can
    only tell you that if you try, it's going to cost you a small fortune
    like at least $25,000 to start.
    
    First, is the child a female?  If so, stop here. You don't stand
    a chance.
    Second, did the mother fool around? If so, stop here. Judge: That
    doesn't mean she's a bad mother, just a lousy wife. (pretzel logic).
    Third, are you willing to subject yourself and your child to court
    appointed psychologic analysis?  If so, stop here.  Usually, the
    judge will say the child is too young for analysis.
    Fourth, does the mother abuse drugs, alcohol, does she abuse the
    child?  If so, stop here.  The burden of proof is on YOU!! You'd
    be amazed at the sudden saintlihood of your ex.
    
    And I could go on!  I have exhausted quite a few different angles
    in trying to obtain custody,(feeling like I'm to blame when it doesn't
    work), and the bottom line is this:
    
    			*****  YOU DON"T STAND A CHANCE  *****
    
    I have been assured that when my daughter reaches an undetermined
    age (around 10 yrs. old), that if she wishes to live with me, I
    must still fight to gain custody.  Not often will a judge go against
    the mother's wishes, even if the child wants to be with the father.
    Again the burden and expense of obtaining custody is solely on your
    shoulders.
    
    I do recommend one approach for you.  Fight for your children, if
    that is what you want to do, but always, always, be there for whatever
    time is alloted for you.  Show them, that even though there were
    restrictions around the time you could spend with them, you were
    there, every single time.  It's been three years, and I KNOW my
    daughter is in love with her dad.
    
    Mean Gene!
    

    As a matter of fact, I have an appointment with a lawyer this very
    afternoon and I will be discussing that very thing. I'll reply
    tomorrow and let you know what I've found out.
    
    Steve

I find it difficult to side with fathers wanting custody.

My wife's biggest pain in life is when her exhusband took the children
during a court custody battle.  He's a real asshole, and has demonstrated
such over and over again in the ten years since the decision.

Ever since then, my wife has had hassles about seeing the children.
Occasionally, the ex husband has withheld them when she was supposed
to have them for the weekend (court schedule).

It's a joint custody, but he is "main custodial parent" (New Hampshire).
So he has kids during school time, and we have them during three weekends
a month, every other school midyear vacation, and six weeks in the middle
of the summer.  So he has them about two thirds of the year.

Apparently, what happened, is he was drinking alot, she finally gave
up on marriage, and left the house and took the kids with her.  He
went to court.

Some teacher in their school suggested that since the father stayed
at home more (he's a writer, she's a psychologist/educational
administrator/teacher), that the kids should be with him during "school"
time and with mom during "play time".

The judge bought it, and it's been problems ever since.

Actually, things are changed a bit now since the older one started
college this year and is on his own.

But the ex is so wierd, it's hard for me to imagine siding with fathers
wanting custody, although in reality I can't imagine anyone as wierd as
this guy.

/Eric

    re: .7
    
    NOBODY who's like that should have custody of children, no matter
    what part of the conception process they happened to be handling.
    
    DFW

    RE: .7
    
    I don't think you can be considered an unbiased observer of this
    issue.
    
    Had you been married before, and lost your children to your ex-wife,
    I think you might be more sympathetic to the plight of many men
    who end up being weekend fathers to their children.
    
    There are male assholes and there are females assholes who happen
    to have children. 
    
    In these days of equality, I don't think one sex can claim asshole-
    superiority over the other.     
    
      Alan

    re: .7, .9
    
    To put it another way, you could take the story in .7, change `wife'
    to `husband' and vice versa, change `father' to `mother' and vice
    versa, and change `he' to `she' and vice versa, and you have the
    exact same story that many men have, or more accurately that many
    wives of divorced men have.
    
    Clay

    Somewhere back there someone asked a question about when a minor
    child could make the decision as to when he/she could decide with
    which parent they wanted to stay with.  I had this exact situation
    come up when I was 13.  The judge in the family court decided that
    I was sure I knew what I was doing and allowed me to make up my
    oown mind.  (For the record, I moved in with my father and step
    mother and have been happy ever since.  Especially after seeing
    what my mother has done in the past 12 years or so!!)  Multiple
    moves (My brother went to 7! different high schools in 5 years before
    he graduated!) wierdness like that.
    
    				Rob
    

    Well, here goes. Here's what I found out at the lawyer's last night.
    
    The first thing you have to keep in mind, is that the judge's sole
    concern is the child. It really doesn't matter what YOU think of
    your x, or she of you. What it boils down to, is that if the child
    is doing well, is well adjusted, doing well in school, and is not
    experiencing any problems that any other child would face, the 
    judge WILL NOT move him/her from that environment.
    
    There has to be some pretty serious problems THAT YOU CAN PROVE
    in order for the judge to CONSIDER moving the child.
    
    What if the child wants to move you say???? Well, there is NO SET
    LAW that says that when a child reaches the age of 12, he/she
    can speak for themselves. 12 is generally considered to be the age
    when a child MIGHT know what they want. Some children are more
    mature than others. One child might convince a judge at age 12,
    another might not until age 14/15.
    
    To make a long story short, unless the X is beating the kid, or
    letting it run around naked, or letting it starve, forget it.
    
    I don't know about the rest of you, but the only thing that keeps
    me going is the knowledge that when my son reaches the age of 15
    or 16, he'll be old enough to tell his mother to take a hike and
    come out here on his own.
    
    
    Steve

    re:.11
    
    In which state and what year were you allowed to make your own
    decision?
    
    What procedure did you have to execute?
    
    How did your mother feel...did she play the guilt thing?

    After much looking and inquiring, I have come up with only one sure
    fire way to gain custody of your child.
    
    	** Pray the old lady bites the bullet!! **
    
    Being the child's natural parent will assure you custody. (as long
    as you've been a good boy & had no part in the mother's demise!;^/)
    
    This is one small thing that helps keep me going!!
    
    Mean Gene!
    

    Re: .14
    
    I hate to say it, but being the natural parent is no guarantee.
    It is quite common for a child to be awarded to a relative of the
    mother's if the mother dies.  I know of a case where a mother has
    in her will that her kids are to go to a non-relative (a former
    subsequent wife of the ex-husband) rather than to the father.  I
    don't know how well that would stand up in court.
    
    Really, I think that fighting for sole custody is the last thing
    you want to try.
    				Steve

    I agree, there is no guarantee.  But;
    
    	If you can show that you are a competent parent, that you have
    always been present at all visitation times, and that your lifestyle
    is proper for child raising, then I believe,(opinion only) that
    the courts are predisposed to placing the child with the natural
    parent.  
    	Of course, if your lifestyle can be proved to be detrimental
    to the child, you won't gain custody.  But here, the burden of proof
    to prove you unfit, is on the other person attempting to steal your
    child.  You, as the natural father, are the person the courts are
    first inclined to give custody to.  'Course if you have a f*!&ng
    b*%!ch of a Xmutha-in-law, like mine, yes, there are no guarantees!!
    
    Mean Gene!
    

.15>    I hate to say it, but being the natural parent is no guarantee.
.15>    It is quite common for a child to be awarded to a relative of the
.15>    mother's if the mother dies.  I know of a case where a mother has
.15>    in her will that her kids are to go to a non-relative (a former
.15>    subsequent wife of the ex-husband) rather than to the father.  I
.15>    don't know how well that would stand up in court.
    

    
    Guess what Steve... IT WON'T STAND UP IN COURT...  take it from
    one who has been there... That is exactly what I wanted to do, place
    it in my will that my mom and dad would get custody of the kids
    IF I should pass away... My lawyer did hours (at $50.00 an hour)
    of research for me, and when reading the results of her reserach, the 
    courts will award the child to the other natural parent of a divorce, 
    unless that person can be proven unfit...
    
    Even if the custodial parent has remarried, if the new spouse has
    NOT adopted the kids, then custoday will be taken from him/her and
    revert back to the other natural parent..  
    
    I find it very sad that, that is the case... but...
    
    Also RE: age...  MASS does not consider 12 to be of age enough to
    choose, as I had a 12 year old and she was not given a say - had
    she been given, she still would have chossen to stay with me, but
    she was not even given that opportunity...
    
    FWIW,
    Gale

    Actually, the courts are *extremely* inclined to award custody to
    the natural parent(s), even in many situations where any reasonable
    person would not let the people within 100 yards of a child.
    
    Such has been the case in many abuse cases - the parent(s) are sent
    to jail or put on parole for a few weeks or months, the child is
    taken out of the foster or relative's home he/she was in, placed
    back with the parents, to experience more abuse.
    
    So, if your ex dies, and his/her new spouse has not adopted the
    children, chances are *extremely* good that the children will be
    given to you.
    
    Elizabeth

I did try for custody of my children, I even thought I had a chance.
My  ex- was arrested and convicted of arson, but 10,000 dollars later, I was
broke and she still had the children.

Ken

    Re:.13
    I am/was in Illinois.  They year was around '76.
    
    Procedure? hm. it's been a while.  It was really convoluted.  We
    were living in south carolina at the time, and my father here in
    Il.  We were visiting here for the summer.  when we were due to go
    back I had decided that I would rather stay here.  My mother then
    had to come up here for the court stuff.  There was not a lot of
    hassle in that part.  She tried the guilt stuff, but like most children
    I had been exposed to it most of my life and was immune to it ;-)
    
    My sister wanted to stay also but she was only around 7 so the judge
    figured she really didn't know what she was talking about.  (you
    know how coherent most 7 year olds are)
    
    				Rob

	(you know, it's unnerving to find 17 new replies in little over a day!)

	Sorry, it's been a while, and my questions (and my own case) were more
	involved with shared custody.  Some amount of the 'parent==mother'
	feeling comes from those discussions (see below), as well as from
	listening to other people's situations - both good and bad.

	I DID meet a lot of questioning from my lawyer and others involved 
	with me and my son as to whether I *really* wanted shared custody, 
	since they felt that sole custody was so easily attainable.  (btw, 
	yes, I did want shared custody; sharing parenting was never our 
	problem, and I can't see separating a child from a parent who cares 
	for him/her).  

	Somewhere I have a copy of the NH guidelines for recommending joint 
	custody; the overwhelming theme is that the parents have to be able
	to work *together* when dealing with issues involving the kid.  Not
	easy if the divorce was/is "unfriendly".  The guidelines were obviously 
	taken from some legal text, but I'm not sure whether it was actual 
	case law (as in citable as precedent).  I could dig it out to key in, 
	fwiw, but that's not the problem we're discussing here.  Note that
	if you're NOT talking about NH, the rules are probably different.
	
		Helen

RE: .0

What does it take for a man to win custody?

It takes a mother who is negligent, abusive, a substance abuser, or who does
not want the children.

In the past ~10 years the amount of fathers who recieved custody has risen from
.5% to 5%.  This does not include cases where the mother was unfit. This
increase almost solely is due to mothers who do not want the children, mother's
who in most cases are carreer oriented.

If you don't fit into one of these categories, forget it.

Also keep in mind that any and all agreements, court orders, *, can and will be
modified at any time based on a narrowsighted view of what is 'in the children's
best interest'.  It is impossible to "promise" anything, and justice, fairness
or equality have no bearing. 

In Ma, you can look forward to having your pay automatically attached for 28-40%
of your *gross* pay, about half your take home pay, for child support.  It does
not matter what the children's expenses are, or what your expenses are, no if
ands or buts.  The only way to have the amount of child support changed is by
agreement of the parents. 

Any expense that you have when you have the children is irrelevent.  Any Life
Insurance benifits must go to the custodial parent.  You will be required to
carry medical insurance and dental insurance for the children (and most likely
the custodial parent), and pay half or all of the uninsured medical expenses.
You may be sued for the expenses of a college education when the time comes. 

You will only be able to get joint custody if both parents agree.

You will have little or no say over important decisions in your children's life,
and at any time the parents disagree, the courts can be called in to make the
decision regardless of what promises or agreements have been made.  The
custodial parent can do what they will, and the noncustodial parent must take
the issue to court, and the court will most likely side with the custodial
parent as better knowing what the best interests of the children are. 

The custodial parent may move where ever they wish within the state, or they may
leave the state for a ''career'' move if they wish; it does not matter if this
will hamper the noncustodial parents relationship with the children; it does
not matter if this will 'change the child's environment'.

Jim Baranski 

    Jim... One disagreement...
    
    I was ordered to keep insurance on the kids, and the ex to only
    pay for half the uninsured medical, and only if he agreed that the
    medical was an okay reason... (so, he says ear infections are not
    okay reasons to take the kids to the doctor, so I end up paying
    all the uninsured medical)...  Plus, I am NOT the benificary to
    his life insurance.  I had to take 100,000 out on him, and make
    the payments myself every week/month/year in order to collect for
    the girls if I should be so lucky to have him pass away into another
    life! Oh, and I did get my divorce in MASS...
    
    Gale

    
    RE: .22
    
    Jim, you state the situation in MA VERY well from my own experiences.
    My "X" only wanted me to have my sons (then 11 & 14) on Sunday
    afternoons,however, I TOLD her IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS that I would
    not accept ANYTHING less (nor did I seek more) than 50% Physical
    Custody.  She backed down BEFORE court, knowing that our sons also
    wanted 50-50 and that there was NO WAY she could prove me "unfit".
    This was even before "Judge G.", where Physical Custody was the
    ONLY thing we "agreed" on...  As for your statements on the
    "financials" and the way they are usually one-sided, I can attest
    to that fact as well as that what your NECESSARY expenses (taxes,
    insurance costs, etc.) aren't even looked as well as how much time
    you have the kids as long as you're a "male" in this state.... 
    It's just the straight % of your gross that is looked at!!
    
    Someday MAYBE we can have sexual equality in the divorce courts...
    
    					Joe

    AS of July/Aug this year, there was put into place an algorithm
    in MASS for child support payments.  This algorithm takes into account
    the costody parent income, the number of children, and the non
    custody parent income. Depending on where you fall into the ranges
    is depending on how much child support is now awarded. I know my
    divorce was final in June, and my lawyer had told me if I held off
    for another 2 months, I could recieve MORE support under the NEW
    and APPROVED guidelines... I didn't want more than what I was
    requesting, so I didn't wait... I do know that for a custodial parent
    who earns a very good salary, the child support is very drastically
    reduced... that surprised me.... For example:  (not real numbers)...
    
    If I make 100.00 a month, I am entitled to 200.00 a month child
    support, but if I make 1000.00 a month, I'm only entitled to 50.00
    a month...
    Seems to me that the amount it takes to raise that child didn't
    change just because an income did... why should one pay less because
    one now makes more?

    re .25
    
    > Seems to me that the amount it takes to raise that child didn't change
    > just because an income did... why should one pay less because one now
    > makes more?
    
    This is the flipside of phenomenon men call "How deep are your
    pockets?"   Men have been living with this for years.   That a woman
    would make such a comment is thoroughly amusing.
    
    - M
    

    1.	Jim & Joe:  When was your divorce?           
                                                 
    2.	re:.25  Do you know the exact formula?  Is it the "Maine Formula?"
                                                 
    3.	I have not heard of automatic wage attachment?  Could someone verify
    that this is true across the board?  That would constitute a awful
    bookkeeping/administrative nightmare for the state.
                                                 
    4.	What does the LAW say?  Does anyone have a thorough and sound synopsis
    of Family/Civil law which applies to divorce?
    
    5.	Has anyone (presumably male) appealed a divorce decision on
    the grounds that their civil rights (sexual discrimination) were
    violated?
        

    EXact formula:
    
    No, I don't know it... my lawyer went through it with me... It did
    indeed give me a LOT more than I was asking for, however, the irony
    of it all was that with my next raise, had I waited the two months,
    it would have pushed me into another "classifcation", and given
    me a LOT less than what I was asking for... but at the time I didn't
    know that..
    
    RE: automatic wage...
    
    The answer is YES it is across the board, and "almost" state
    reciprocal... a little insight here:... my ex was working in NY,
    with his parent headquarters in Ohio (he works for Roadway Trucking)
    .. I was going to have to petition Ohio to have his pay attached...
    until we (lawyer & I) were in the court room hallway, my lawyer was talking
    to another lawyer, and she mentioned to him about petitioning Ohio,
    and he said "No, you don't have to do that anymore... Mass has even
    gone as far as saying that IF the company does any business with
    anything in Mass, [Ex: Roadway trucks drive through MASS], the pay
    can be automatically attached... she got the reciprocal ruling and
    sure enough, it was true, and had JUST passed the first of this
    year (this was in March)...... so the judge decreed that his pay
    would be attached, and asked me if I wanted the back payments he
    has not made ($14,400) attached also.. I said no (He could not have
    survived had I said yes!), that part was "forgiven".. and in four
    weeks I recieved my first check from Roadway...

    
    Hope this helps a little...
    
    Gale

    We were divorced in RI.  She still lives there with my daughter
    and I live in MA.  If we go to court for any reason, ie., more support,
    custody, whatever, which state do we go to court in?  Which state's
    guidelines regarding support do we go by??  If RI has a different
    formula than MA, who's do the courts use?  Does it depend on who
    is initiating the court action, or maybe where the child resides?
    
    Anyone know??
    
    Mean Gene!
    

This is directed towards reply #.22 and any others that feel the same way.

Not every mother who gives up custody of her child is negligent, abusive,
a substance abuser or career oriented.  In fact, I enjoyed being a full
time mom right up until my ex moved in with his girlfriend.  The last thing
I wanted was to work full time and have less time with my sons.  I had sole
custody of both sons for the first four years after my divorce.  When my
youngest was twelve he decided he wanted to live with his dad and step-mother
and be in a "real" family.  Because of his desires and the sibling rivalry
(my sons are as different as my ex and I) we had the custody changed from
sole on my part to joint with each of us having physical custody of one
child.

Some moms give up custody because they want their children to be happy.
Now I have two happy childrent instead of two who were very bitter and
angry at each other as well as their dad and myself.

It also angers me to hear the non-custodial parent bitch about how much
they have to pay out.  My ex used to tell me the same thing until he took
custody and found out what it actually costs to raise a child.  His comment
then was "How did you manage?"  My answer to him and others out there, is
whether your child lives with you or not, you still have some responsibility
to pay for his/her needs.  Yes, there are some of you non-custodial parents 
out there that feel as though you are being bled dry.  There are also some
of us who work two jobs just to make ends meet and don't expect our ex's
to bleed.

Additionally, for those of you who are on speaking terms with the ex or 
ex-to-be try deciding as much as you can before you go to a lawyer.   Once
you get two lawyers with little cash registers going off in their heads,
things you might be able to settle on your own can never be resolved.  My ex
and I had one lawyer for both the divorce which cost about $450 and the
change in custody (not sure how much, my ex didn't send me a bill).

For those of you out there reading this who feel you want to fight for
custody, remember this, single parenting is tough.  It's the quality of time
you spend with your kids not the quantity that's important.  Some day your
child may want to live with you, or your ex may want a "break" from parenting.
It used to be that people looked at a mom who gave up custody as a bad person.
Thank god, things have changed.  As much as I miss my son on a day to day basis,
I'd rather he'd be happy and healthy.  Even my parents have come to realize
the situation is much better now than it was.  Well meaning friends and 
relatives can put a lot of pressure on people going through divorce, but unless
they've been in the situation it is often best not to take all their advice to
heart.

I belong to a single parent's group and there are a lot of women in similar
situations as myself as well as single father's.  It really helps to have
friends like this to talk with.

Susan

    Susan,
    
    I have a reply in MENNOTES (.8) on Child Custody and it seems you
    feel very much like I do concerning our children's happiness and
    custody.  
    
    Friends and relatives made me feel like an unfit mom for agreeing
    to let her live with her father after five years with me.  
    
    Do you think we're in the minority?  Seems that way after reading
    the many entries re: Child Custody.
    
    
    Rosemary
    

    re.30
    thank you for speaking up.
    i too gave up custody of my daughter for the same reasons.she is
    much happier in a structured family situation than she was with
    me.
    i pay child support and cover her insurance.i dont feel that i have
    been given a rotten deal and i do think that it is my responsibilty
    to contribute something(though it is not much).
    
    i do feel that some men have been "taken to the cleaners" as far
    as child suport go.
    there is a guy at work that makes under 9:00 an hour and has to
    pay a 100.00 a week plus pay any medical bills.he has two kids.
    i know that it does not seem alot of money,but he has had to move
    in with relatives because he can not afford to live on his own.
    these types of situations just dont seem right to me.
    i am very lucky that that has not happened to me.
    i also feel that the tide is turning and that women are getting
    what the men have been going through all these years.
    
    k.d.

    	Gaining custody of my two sons from my x-wife was an expierence
    based opon practicality.  They disliked living with her and her
    new husband and they made their lives a living hell (5 and 7 year
    old boys are capable of that) and when I asked for custody, I 
    was gladly given it.
    	I would say to fathers wanting custody of their children that
    if the child/children are really unhappy then your chances of
    getting custody peacefully might be pretty good.  If the children
    are stable and happy then you most likely have a losing battle on
    your hands.
    
    R.

    For fathers with divorce/custody problems, I have reproduced the 
    application form for F.A.I.R., (Fathers' Advocacy Information 
    Referral) a non-profit fathers' advocacy group.  Presumably, the group 
    supports a variety of resources and activities including: research, 
    expert witnesses, lobbying, networks of social workers and attorneys, 
    newsletter, insurance, etc.  I cannot attest to the quality of the 
    organization.  I just sent in my $50, and I will report on my 
    satisfaction with the organization.  Does anyone have any experience 
    with this or other such organizations?

                                   F.A.I.R.
                       The National Fathers Organization
                          VEPCO Office Bldg., Box 389
                               Camden, DE  19934
                                 800-722-FAIR
                                 302-697-2026
    
    
    ( )  COUNT ME IN!  Here's my $50 for MEMBERSHIP FOR ONE FULL YEAR which 
         includes access to F.A.I.R. services and subscription to the 
         monthly newsletter. (Complete entire application)
    
    ( )  I Care!  Here's my $20 for a one year subscription to F.A.I.R.'s 
         monthly newsletter.  (Complete application to dotted line)
    
    
                            MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION
                                (Please Print)
    
    Name:______________________________________  Date:__________________
    Address:___________________________________  Age:___________________
    ____________________________  Zip:_________  County:________________
    Home Phone:_____________________   Work Phone:______________________
    Occupation:_________________________________________________________
    
    ....................................................................
    
    Marital Status:
    
         1( ) Single (Never Married)        4( )Married (Never Divorced)
         2( ) Legally Separated             5( )Divorced & Remarried
         3( ) Separated	                    6( )Divorced
    
    Who wanted to break up the relationship?
    
         1( ) Myself	          2( ) The Mother          3( ) Both
    
    How did you learn about F.A.I.R.?
    
          ( ) Paper	           ( ) Radio                ( ) TV
          ( ) Friend	           ( ) Other____________________________
    
    Children:
                   	SEX                 AGE
    
                   	(M) (F)             _____
                   	(M) (F)             _____
                   	(M) (F)             _____
                   	(M) (F)             _____
    
    Who has custody of your child(ren)?
    
         1( ) Myself	2( ) The Mother     3( ) Joint     4( )Other
    
    Have you ever been denied visitation by the children's mother?
    
                   	( ) Yes             ( ) No
    
    Have you ever withheld child support because you were unable to visit 
    your child(ren)?
    
                   	( ) Yes             ( ) No

    The Sunday Boston Globe's "NH Weekly" section contained a multi-page
    article on the problems fathers have in child custody arrangements.
    It also mentioned an organization, whose name I don't recall, but
    it was NOT F.A.I.R.  I'll go look at it and enter what information
    I find.  The article (actually, a series of related articles) was
    very interesting.
    					Steve

The *worst* part of the whole process is the 'loaded gun' pointed at your head
to come to an '''agreement'''.  The mother can choose whatever terms she wishes,
and you ***have*** to '''agree''' to them, or be pounded into the ground by
legislative law.  Try "negotiating" in that situation. 

RE: .23

As noted, Gail, that was before recent laws came into effect.

RE: .25

Those cannot be real numbers that you are using Gail.  In my experience the 9K$
raise my childrens mother got from 15K$ to 24K$, netted me a whopping 7$ a week
decrease in child support. BFD.  Plus, her living expenses halved from moving
from Boston area to Lebenon NH. 

"Seems to me that the amount it takes to raise that child didn't change just
because an income did... why should one pay less because one now makes more?"

You have an error here you are 'being paid less because you make more', not,
"why should one pay less because one now makes more".

I can agree with what I think you meant.  But I think it should be applied to
the father's as well. Why should you have to pay more child support if you make
more money?

RE: .27

Monday November 9th, 1987, after being seperated for 1.5 years, hoping things
would get better.

Automatic Wage Attachment is now the default.

"4. What does the LAW say?"

You'll have to ask more specific questions.

RE: .29

Typically the Court where your divorce was filed retains jurisdiction.  I
imagine it is possible that if you both wanted to change the jurisdiction to
another court you could.

RE: .30

I did not mean to imply that in fact "every mother who gives up custody of her
child is negligent, abusive, a substance abuser or career oriented." However,
statistically it is so.  The fact remains that for a father to get custody, the
*mother* must agree.  Your case also was several years after your divorce. I
believe that the numbers I have were considering 'new' divorces.

RE: costs of support

I don't give a *damn* *how* much it costs, *I* want to spend it on *my* sons.
That is a more important issue then 'how much'.  Right now I figure I am paying
112% of my sons expenses.  If I had them *I* wouldn't bitch about how much it
cost, but I don't have them I sure as hell *am* going to bitch!

"My answer to him and others out there, is whether your child lives with you or
not, you still have some responsibility to pay for his/her needs."

Each parent should have equal rights and responsibilities to the children.

No Offense Susan, but have you read many of the other notes related to Divorce,
Child Custody, and Child Support?  Many of these issues have been hashed out N
times already, and it might be better to look at them then rehash them out again
here.  I would really appreciate it, and so would my blood pressure. :-} 

RE: .34

I have talked to FAIR, and have not found them, or any of the other father's
organizations in the Boston area (many of the references that I had were to
organizations which seem to have died off; prehaps because nothing can be done)
to be very helpfull.

I'd like to see as much of that Globe article as possible.  I don't get the
Globe.

Jim. 

 

 

    I'll be posting parts of the Globe series in TAMARA::MENNOTES, as
    I think that's the best place for it.  Look for it later tonight.
    				Steve

    re.36
    i dont know if you are yelling at me about "costs to support" jim,
    but i dont thing that anyone wants to see their children want for
    anything.my ex also realizes that if he asks for much more than
    what he is getting,that i wont have a place to live,i wont be able
    to pay car maintance so i can get to work.
    thus i wont have a place to bring her on weekends or a way to get
    her. i am lucky that he knows that the time i spend with her is
    worth more than a lot of money.
    
    do judges take these sort of things into consideration?
    
    kelly

    I do not think that it is up to the court system to determine whether
    or not a parent can afford to support a child.  The court should
    determine what is *required* to support a child.
    
    As mature, adults it is our responsibility to provide for our children.
    Divorce does not minimize our responsibilities.  It is up to us
    to find a way to manage our lives so we meet our responsibilities.
    
    If an agreement can be arranged between two divorced parents that
    compensates for variances in income that is between the two parents.
    
    When and if a judge determines what a non-custodial parent can afford
    to contribute to the support of minor children and makes that the
    child support decree it seems to me the court has an obligation
    to also determine what the custodial parent can afford.  Then the
    judge can go to the Stop and Shop and tell them that the following
    person only has to pay 40% of her grocery bill, likewise with the
    landlord, the electric company and the fuel company.
    
    Sorry, it is a question of money and the determination of how much
    money it costs to provide for children is so simple the whole argument
    seems ridiculous.

    I am beginning to agree with a few individuals that have suggested
    that ability to provide for children should be a determining factor
    in custody issues.  
    
    I think that the author of .38 has done that with her ex.  She has
    relinquished custody to the father because his income provides the
    best situation for their daughter. 
    
    This is very commendable...as is her determination to do whatever
    she can to contribute to the child's care.
                                              
    It also sounds like they decided this outside the courts...that
    you and I as tax-payers were saved a great deal of money by their
    realistic approach to a sensitive issue.
    
    My hat goes off to this young woman!

RE: .38

I don't remember blasting you Kelly...

But, no, the judges do *not* "take these sort of things into consideration".
The only one's who can are the parents, and if the custodial parent doesn't
want to take in into consideration, the noncustodial parent is *screwed*!

You have a lucky family!

    Doesn't it seem a bit odd that society and/or the courts tell only
    divorced parents what they *must* spend to support their children?
    
    A judge would never think of bringing a married couple into court,
    and demand that they provide for their children in a manner that the
    court deems appropriate. If the married couple feels that they can
    only *afford* to spend X dollars per week on their children, then
    they will only *spend* X dollars per week.
    
    Yet courts will *order* a non-custodial parent to spend X plus Y
    dollars, too often without any consideration as to whether he/she
    can realistically afford the ordered payment.
    
    Something is real screwy with this logic.
    
      Alan                  

These are my responses to "Men and Custody" in the November 12, 1987  Boston
Globe "NH Weekly" 

A big thing is made how fortunate men are now to get "Joint Legal Custody".
Joint Legal Custody is a joke.  The Custodial Parent can and does do whatever
they wish.  Possession is nine tenths of the law, and you have to go to court
to contest any issue.  Meanwhile the issue will probably become moot, and like
as not the court will agree with the Custodial Parent. This is in no way
'joint'. 

The big deal is that mothers still get the physical custody, and the fathers
are still "visitors". And many fathers are left without the ability to make use
of their visitation rights because of financial problems, harassment from the
custodial parent, distance and time problems.  The prevailing attitude is that
'if he wants to see the children then let him overcome the obstacles'. This
often results in the father and the children unable to make the most of their
rights to spend time together.

Courts give mothers custody because supposedly the biological tie between child
and mother is stronger then that between child and father.  This may be have
been traditionally true in the past, but it is no longer necessarily true. More
fathers have a deep interest in their children even before they are born;
including diapering.  

Another chimera is that fathers are incapable of caring for children,
especially infants.  The fact is that a father deserves the same chance that
*every* first time mother has to learn to care for children. Being a parent is
not an innate ability that the female sex has; being a parent can be, and is a
learned behavior, and can be learned by either sex.  No parent is a perfect
parent, and no parent deserves to have their children taken away from them
because the parent is imperfect. Two imperfect parents are better then one
prefect parent even if one such perfect parent existed.

More Later...
                             
Jim.

    "Joint Legal Custody" was invented to keep fathers from fighting for
    custody.  It sounds like a great idea, but as .43 suggests, it means
    absolutely nothing.
    
    - M