CPF Newsletter

Stay informed on our latest news!

Manage my subscriptions

Donate to CPF here!
Help us do more...

   

 


       Help support
The Fatherhood Coalition
        by using our
     Amazon Smile
donation account when
making purchases at
        Amazon

medium_Amazon smile icon.jpg

Ever wonder how that
Massachusetts judge
who took your children
away and stripped you
of your house and assets
got to sit on the bench?
All judges were approved,
usually by unanimous,
vote, by the Governors
Council at a public hearing.
The audio for their
hearings over the last
couple of years can be heard here:

Courtesy of Patrick McCabe


File:ErnestBelfortBax.JPG

A must-read:
'The Fraud of Feminism'


A younger Tolkien

J.R.R.Tolkien, author
of 'Lord of the Rings',
on Marriage

User login

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
Home | Blogs | mccabepatrick's blog

Opponents of Shared Parenting Offer Disingenuous Argument

The opponents of shared parenting offered a very twisted view of the issue in their letter to the editor (Forcing Shared Parenting would protract conflict, May 25, 2014 Boston Globe).  In the case of divorce shared parenting is forced on no one.  Shared physical custody is what married parents have until the state takes an action against them.  Sole physical custody is what is being forced on families every day.

When our courts do choose to make a decision regarding custody they are supposed to make it based on the best interest of the children, unfortunately this is seldom the case.  Usually the courts choose to take custody away from one parent or the other making  winners and losers of the parents, unfortunately the children are always losers in these situations.

The opponents of shared parenting claim that treating people as equals would protract a conflict.  Common sense would suggest otherwise; treating people as equals is the best way to minimize disagreements.  They further claim that treating people as equals harms children; this claim is not only ridiculous it is obscene.

I do agree that there is nothing wrong with our current law; however our courts do not honor that law.  Legislation that makes the courts focus on shared parenting would make them focus on the best interests of the children, rather than focusing on making winners and losers and promoting conflict.  This is what they are supposed to be doing it is a shame that we need additional legislation to get them to obey our current laws.

It is unfortunate that these opponents are also responsible for the Legal Services Family Law Task Force which provides legal counsel to only one parry in a divorce proceeding.  Such lop sided representation, with the other side being unrepresented results in some of the most unfair and repugnant cases in family court.  While legal services are properly considered a great asset in most cases, in family court this practice results in the opposite.

It is time our courts treat our families to the justice they deserve and the law demands