Doug Laidlaw (laidlaws{at}myaccess.com.au) writes:
> Andre Lieven wrote:
>
>> Doug Laidlaw (laidlaws{at}myaccess.com.au) writes:
>>> Andre Lieven wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.glennsacks.com/the_betrayal_of.htm
>>>>
>>>> By Glenn Sacks
>>>>       When Gary, a San Diego-based US Navy SEAL, was deployed in
>>>>       Afghanistan
>>>> in the wake of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade
Center, he never
>>>> dreamed that his service to his country would cost him his
little son.
>>>> Gary's son was not taken from him by a terrorist or a
kidnapper. This
>>>> 17-year Navy veteran with an unblemished military and
civilian record
>>>> was effectively stripped of his right to be a father by a California
>>>> court.
>>>>
>>>>       Gary's story, which was the subject of a two-part
Fox News feature
>>>> called "SEAL, Sorrow" earlier this year, is not
an unusual one. Under
>>>> the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement
Act, if a parent
>>>> takes a child to a new state, that new state becomes the child's
>>>> presumptive residence after six months. Because a normal military
>>>> deployment is six months or more, if an unhappily married military
>>>> spouse moves to another state while the other spouse is
deployed, by the
>>>> time the deployed spouse returns the child's residence has
already been
>>>> switched. Since courts lean heavily in favor of a child's primary
>>>> caregiver when determining custody, the spouse who moved
the child is
>>>> virtually certain to gain custody through the divorce proceedings in
>>>> that new state.
>>>>
>>>>       Because of the strict restrictions on travel by
active military
>>>> personnel, the cost of legal representation, and the
financial hardships
>>>> created by child support and spousal support obligations, it is very
>>>> difficult for returning service personnel to fight for
their parental
>>>> rights in another state. Many struggle even to see their
children, much
>>>> less remain a meaningful part of their lives, and the bond
between the
>>>> children and their noncustodial parent is often broken for
years, if not
>>>> permanently.
>>>>
>>>>       Gary has not been able to see his son, who now lives
abroad, in
>>>>       nearly
>>>> nine months. When he calls he can sometimes hear the three
year-old ask
>>>> "when daddy come?" and "where's
daddy?" in the background but he is
>>>> often prevented from speaking with him.
>>>>
>>>>       According to nationally-known family law attorney
Jeffery Leving,
>>>> author of Fathers' Rights , there are three solutions to
the problems
>>>> facing military fathers. First, the federal Soldiers' and
Sailors' Civil
>>>> Relief Act of 1940 needs to be amended to specifically prohibit the
>>>> spouses of active duty military personnel from permanently moving
>>>> children to other states without the permission either of the active
>>>> duty military spouse or of a court. (The primary purpose of the Act,
>>>> whose origins go back as far as the Civil War, is to protect active
>>>> armed forces personnel by mandating that civil actions
against them be
>>>> delayed until after their return from service).
>>>>
>>>>       Second, California laws, which currently do little
to prevent a
>>>> custodial parent from moving children far away from the noncustodial
>>>> parent, need to be changed to prohibit any permanent removals done
>>>> against a deployed military parent's will. Third, the
UCCJEA needs to be
>>>> amended to state that the presumption of new residence
does not apply if
>>>> the children are taken in this wrongful fashion.
>>>>
>>>>       Gary has lost nearly $100,000 so far fighting for
his son and may
>>>>       soon
>>>> be forced to declare bankruptcy, which in turn will destroy the top
>>>> secret security clearance he needs for his job. Worse yet is the
>>>> emotional devastation wrought by his separation from his son and the
>>>> knowledge that he may never see him again. He says:
>>>>
>>>>       "My love for my son cannot simply be brushed
aside as the courts
>>>>       seem
>>>> to believe it can. I can remember holding my little son's
hand like it
>>>> was yesterday. I can remember his cry. I hear it every time I hear
>>>> another child crying."
>>>>
>>>>       "Sometimes I wonder what I risked my life [in
Afghanistan] for. I
>>>>       went
>>>> to fight for freedom but what freedom and what rights mean
anything if a
>>>> man doesn't have the right to be a father to his own child?"
>>>>
>>>> ---------
>>>
>>> Hard cases make bad law.  So many wrong decisions have been handed down
>>> when one party is unrepresented that in my opinion, such cases
should not
>>> be
>>> authority for anything.  The Judges depend on the advocates to tell them
>>> what the law is.  If an advocate knows a point of law that doesn't help
>>> him, he has to  make it known, so that the Judge will come to the right
>>> decision, but that doesn't apply to evidence.  And it isn't the same as
>>> hearing argument from both sides.
>>
>> In other words, as long as the law is only fucking over *thousands*
>> of *men*, who cares ?
>>
>> Uh huh.
>>
>> Since it's the same *government* sending the men out, in such time
>> as not to let them deal with the Family Courts, its the gov't's
>> responsibility, too.
>>
>> But, who cares... they're only men...
>>
>>  Misandrist. 
>>
>> Andre
>
> That is a U.S. issue, and not for me to comment.

Bullshit, since you DID " comment ".

Thanks for showing that not only are you a man hating sexist bigot,
but a bald faced LIAR, too. Figures: Feminism IS lies.

> On what the wife did, the
> Courts have to strike  a balance between allowing the custodial parent
> freedom to move, and not making access for the non-custodial parent
> impractical.

More misandry: " Access " for fathers is misandry, as fathers, just
like mothers, have a right to be full co-parents of their children.

> Sometimes they refuse to allow the custodial parent to move away.

Indeed, as they *should*.

> The "welfare of the child" is always the touchstone.

No, its always the excuse to give more to the mothers, and screw the
fathers.

> Statistics

.... invented...

> quoted by our Chief Judge here show that in contested custody cases, the
> father wins more often than the mother.

Bullshit.

> In uncontested cases, or simple
> consent arrangements, the mother gets custody every time.

Imagine the same standard in other courts: " In uncontested criminal
cases, the defendant gets jail, every time. "

> That might
> simply mean that the father doesn't try unless he has a pretty good case.

The words " might ", when coming from a Feminist, mean " I don't know
SHIT, so I'll just make it all UP. "

> In my first contested custody appeal, (I was for the father) we fell
> foul of another rule.  In some cases, such as who was in the right in a car
> accident, an appeal court will substitute its own decision.  But in a
> custody case, we say that the trial judge has a discretion.

Yeah, not like a judge should actually apply equality before the law,
or any such sissy equal rights, constitutional standard....

> There is no one "right" answer.

LOL ! Didn't *you* write, right above: " In uncontested cases... the
mother gets custody EVERY time " ?

Can't keep track of your bullshit, eh ? I understand.

> And in these cases, the appeal court will not
> substitute its own opinion.

Or, do their jobs...

> If in their opinion, the trial judge exercised
> his discretion "judicially", meaning that he took into account all the
> right things and none of the wrong things, the appeal court won't
> interfere, even if they would have decided the other way.  So we never got
> to argue what was best for the child.  (If the trial judge had given the
> child to the father, the mother would have faced the same obstacle.)

No proof offered ? Claim fails.

In a period when even NOW admits that 84% of single adult households
with children, are of the mother, and yet it whines that " Biased
Family Court System Hurts *Mothers* ", its clear that Feminism demands
equality be MORE than 84% decided for them.

This, of course, proves that Feminists and their gutless lackeys...

Cannot do basic arithmetic. One, therefore, should not give them any
more difficult tasks... like raising children.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
                                    The Man Prayer, Red Green.


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/11/05 12:42:09 PM ---