Across U.S., Non-Custodial Parents Sue

Across U.S., Non-Custodial Parents Sue

September 30, 2004

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
by Wendy McElroy
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

At least 28 federal class action suits in 28 states have been filed in the
last two weeks on behalf of non-custodial parents (NCPs). The defendants are
the individual states.

The plaintiffs claim to represent an estimated 25 million non-custodial
parents -- primarily fathers -- whose right to equal custody of minor
children in situations of dispute is allegedly being violated by family
courts across the nation.

Family law is traditionally a state matter, but the federal government has
assumed greater control in the area over the last few decades. Thus, the
plaintiffs are appealing to the Constitution, U.S. Supreme Court precedent
and acts of Congress "to vindicate and restore their various inalienable
rights."

In short, federal law is being asked to trump state practice in custody
matters.

According to the suits, state practices appear to be "willful, reckless,
and/or negligent fraud, deceit, collusion, and/or abuse of powers" with a
"systematic pattern of obstructing, hindering, and/or otherwise thwarting
the rightful and lawful conclusion of due process" of non-custodial parents
in child custody proceedings.

In particular, fathers protest the widespread practice of almost
automatically granting sole custody to mothers in divorce disputes.

The 28-plus class action suits are identical, as any future suits will be.
The ultimate goal is for every state and U.S. possession to be represented
in one large consolidated action. Indeed, Torm L. Howse -- president of the
Indiana Civil Rights Council and coordinator of the suits -- says that
paperwork is under way for submission to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation, a legal body which has the authority to transfer such multiple
civil cases to a single district court.

If this happens, every single non-custodial parent in America will be
represented by the class action suit, which is nothing more than a lawsuit
brought by one person or a small group on behalf of an entire class who
shares a grievance.

What specific relief is being sought?

The sweeping legal goals are spelled out in a press release. The main relief
sought from federal court is the immediate "restoration/elevation to equal
custodial status" of all current non-custodial parents against whom no
allegations of abuse or neglect have been proven and who have an ongoing
relationship with the child.

The establishment of equal custody embraces several other reliefs.

For example, the "prohibition of custodial move-aways of minor children
[more than 60 miles] from their original physical residences with natural
parents." Also, the "abolishment of forced/court-ordered child support in
most cases." Support of the child would be borne by each parent during their
own parenting time.

The Plaintiffs argue for restoration of equal custody not merely for the
sake of non-custodial parents but also for children's welfare. The press
release cites a much-touted study entitled "Child Adjustment in
Joint-Custody Versus Sole-Custody Arrangements," which was published in the
APA's Journal of Family Psychology. The study concluded, "Children in joint
physical or legal custody were better adjusted than children in sole-custody
settings, but no different from those in intact families."

In this sense, the suits also advocate children's rights.

Other reliefs being sought are financial in nature; some of them take the
suits into murky areas. For example, the suits ask for "reimbursement" from
custodial parents to non-custodial parents of any state-ordered child
support that exceeded the "maximum limits of federal law." This ceases to be
an appeal to constitutional or parental rights and instead pits one set of
civil law against another, with retroactive penalties being imposed.

In addition, the suits ask for "various damages against the Defendant [the
state named] in the aggregate value of $1,000,000 payable per Plaintiff."
The court awards would be "executable upon all monies, property, chattels,
assets, goods, pecuniary interest and anything whatsoever of any value"
owned or controlled by the State. The suits request that "an appropriate
portion" of the award be provided by the liquidation or direct transfer of
title of "unused, abandoned, or unnecessary state property and assets."

The number of non-custodial parent plaintiffs who sign on to a federal class
action cannot be predicted but it could run into millions; the collective
damages could run into billions or even trillions of dollars. Unfortunately,
this gives the appearance of pursuing profit rather than justice.

When asked to elaborate on the amount of damages, Howse clarified, "We are
preparing, later this week, to offer proposed settlements that will waive
the vast majority of damages, among other things, in exchange for a quick
restoral of equal custody rights, a few forms of tax abatements/credits to
balance what custodial parents have enjoyed for years and some other basic
and related issues, like the setting up of neutral visitation exchange
centers, and the like."

He added, "It has never been about winning large amounts of money from the
states ... It's about restoring the lives of our children, and restoring our
own lives."

I genuinely hope the settlements come to pass. Stripped of their financial
demands, the suits could go a long way toward removing what I believe to be
the worst laws governing child custody in disputed divorce.

At bare minimum, they are raising the profile of an issue that will not go
away: the crying need of non-custodial parents, especially fathers, to know
their children.

And the equal need of children to embrace both parents.


------------------------------------------------------------
Eliminate the impossible and whatever
remains, no matter how improbable, must
be the truth.

---- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle ---

How about a couple of links or phone numbers to sign on?
"Dusty" wrote in message
...
Across U.S., Non-Custodial Parents Sue

September 30, 2004

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
----
by Wendy McElroy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
----

At least 28 federal class action suits in 28 states have been filed in the
last two weeks on behalf of non-custodial parents (NCPs). The defendants
are
the individual states.

The plaintiffs claim to represent an estimated 25 million non-custodial
parents -- primarily fathers -- whose right to equal custody of minor
children in situations of dispute is allegedly being violated by family
courts across the nation.

Family law is traditionally a state matter, but the federal government has
assumed greater control in the area over the last few decades. Thus, the
plaintiffs are appealing to the Constitution, U.S. Supreme Court precedent
and acts of Congress "to vindicate and restore their various inalienable
rights."

In short, federal law is being asked to trump state practice in custody
matters.

According to the suits, state practices appear to be "willful, reckless,
and/or negligent fraud, deceit, collusion, and/or abuse of powers" with a
"systematic pattern of obstructing, hindering, and/or otherwise thwarting
the rightful and lawful conclusion of due process" of non-custodial
parents
in child custody proceedings.

In particular, fathers protest the widespread practice of almost
automatically granting sole custody to mothers in divorce disputes.

The 28-plus class action suits are identical, as any future suits will be.
The ultimate goal is for every state and U.S. possession to be represented
in one large consolidated action. Indeed, Torm L. Howse -- president of
the
Indiana Civil Rights Council and coordinator of the suits -- says that
paperwork is under way for submission to the Judicial Panel on
Multidistrict
Litigation, a legal body which has the authority to transfer such multiple
civil cases to a single district court.

If this happens, every single non-custodial parent in America will be
represented by the class action suit, which is nothing more than a lawsuit
brought by one person or a small group on behalf of an entire class who
shares a grievance.

What specific relief is being sought?

The sweeping legal goals are spelled out in a press release. The main
relief
sought from federal court is the immediate "restoration/elevation to equal
custodial status" of all current non-custodial parents against whom no
allegations of abuse or neglect have been proven and who have an ongoing
relationship with the child.

The establishment of equal custody embraces several other reliefs.

For example, the "prohibition of custodial move-aways of minor children
[more than 60 miles] from their original physical residences with natural
parents." Also, the "abolishment of forced/court-ordered child support in
most cases." Support of the child would be borne by each parent during
their
own parenting time.

The Plaintiffs argue for restoration of equal custody not merely for the
sake of non-custodial parents but also for children's welfare. The press
release cites a much-touted study entitled "Child Adjustment in
Joint-Custody Versus Sole-Custody Arrangements," which was published in
the
APA's Journal of Family Psychology. The study concluded, "Children in
joint
physical or legal custody were better adjusted than children in
sole-custody
settings, but no different from those in intact families."

In this sense, the suits also advocate children's rights.

Other reliefs being sought are financial in nature; some of them take the
suits into murky areas. For example, the suits ask for "reimbursement"
from
custodial parents to non-custodial parents of any state-ordered child
support that exceeded the "maximum limits of federal law." This ceases to
be
an appeal to constitutional or parental rights and instead pits one set of
civil law against another, with retroactive penalties being imposed.

In addition, the suits ask for "various damages against the Defendant [the
state named] in the aggregate value of $1,000,000 payable per Plaintiff."
The court awards would be "executable upon all monies, property, chattels,
assets, goods, pecuniary interest and anything whatsoever of any value"
owned or controlled by the State. The suits request that "an appropriate
portion" of the award be provided by the liquidation or direct transfer of
title of "unused, abandoned, or unnecessary state property and assets."

The number of non-custodial parent plaintiffs who sign on to a federal
class
action cannot be predicted but it could run into millions; the collective
damages could run into billions or even trillions of dollars.
Unfortunately,
this gives the appearance of pursuing profit rather than justice.

When asked to elaborate on the amount of damages, Howse clarified, "We are
preparing, later this week, to offer proposed settlements that will waive
the vast majority of damages, among other things, in exchange for a quick
restoral of equal custody rights, a few forms of tax abatements/credits to
balance what custodial parents have enjoyed for years and some other basic
and related issues, like the setting up of neutral visitation exchange
centers, and the like."

He added, "It has never been about winning large amounts of money from the
states ... It's about restoring the lives of our children, and restoring
our
own lives."

I genuinely hope the settlements come to pass. Stripped of their financial
demands, the suits could go a long way toward removing what I believe to
be
the worst laws governing child custody in disputed divorce.

At bare minimum, they are raising the profile of an issue that will not go
away: the crying need of non-custodial parents, especially fathers, to
know
their children.

And the equal need of children to embrace both parents.


------------------------------------------------------------
Eliminate the impossible and whatever
remains, no matter how improbable, must
be the truth.

---- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle ---

The only place I've seen links and additional info is at: AngryHarry.COM

"SCREWEDBYJUDGEJAMESREED" wrote in message
...
How about a couple of links or phone numbers to sign on?
"Dusty" wrote in message
...
Across U.S., Non-Custodial Parents Sue

September 30, 2004

"Dusty" wrote in message
...
The only place I've seen links and additional info is at: AngryHarry.COM

"SCREWEDBYJUDGEJAMESREED" wrote in message
...
How about a couple of links or phone numbers to sign on?
"Dusty" wrote in message
...
Across U.S., Non-Custodial Parents Sue

September 30, 2004

....and we would have known this,...how?
(until someone asked)

ACFC
http://www.acfc.org/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,133875,00.html

FOXNews.com
Wednesday, September 29, 2004

Across U.S., Non-Custodial Parents Sue
by Wendy McElroy
At least 28 federal class action suits in 28 states have been filed in the
last two weeks on behalf of non-custodial parents (NCPs). The defendants are
the individual states.

The plaintiffs claim to represent an estimated 25 million non-custodial
parents - primarily fathers - whose right to equal custody of minor children
in situations of dispute is allegedly being violated by family courts across
the nation.

Family law is traditionally a state matter, but the federal government has
assumed greater control in the area over the last few decades. Thus, the
plaintiffs are appealing to the Constitution, U.S. Supreme Court precedent
and acts of Congress "to vindicate and restore their various inalienable
rights."

In short, federal law is being asked to trump state practice in custody
matters.

According to the suits, state practices appear to be "willful, reckless,
and/or negligent fraud, deceit, collusion, and/or abuse of powers" with a
"systematic pattern of obstructing, hindering, and/or otherwise thwarting
the rightful and lawful conclusion of due process" of non-custodial parents
in child custody proceedings.

In particular, fathers protest the widespread practice of almost
automatically granting sole custody to mothers in divorce disputes.

The 28-plus class action suits are identical, as any future suits will be.
The ultimate goal is for every state and U.S. possession to be represented
in one large consolidated action. Indeed, Torm L. Howse - president of the
Indiana Civil Rights Council and coordinator of the suits - says that
paperwork is under way for submission to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation, a legal body which has the authority to transfer such multiple
civil cases to a single district court.

If this happens, every single non-custodial parent in America will be
represented by the class action suit, which is nothing more than a lawsuit
brought by one person or a small group on behalf of an entire class who
shares a grievance.

What specific relief is being sought?

The sweeping legal goals are spelled out in a press release. The main relief
sought from federal court is the immediate "restoration/elevation to equal
custodial status" of all current non-custodial parents against whom no
allegations of abuse or neglect have been proven and who have an ongoing
relationship with the child.

The establishment of equal custody embraces several other reliefs.

For example, the "prohibition of custodial move-aways of minor children
[more than 60 miles] from their original physical residences with natural
parents." Also, the "abolishment of forced/court-ordered child support in
most cases." Support of the child would be borne by each parent during their
own parenting time.

The Plaintiffs argue for restoration of equal custody not merely for the
sake of non-custodial parents but also for children's welfare. The press
release cites a much-touted study entitled "Child Adjustment in
Joint-Custody Versus Sole-Custody Arrangements," which was published in the
APA's Journal of Family Psychology. The study concluded, "Children in joint
physical or legal custody were better adjusted than children in sole-custody
settings, but no different from those in intact families."

In this sense, the suits also advocate children's rights.

Other reliefs being sought are financial in nature; some of them take the
suits into murky areas. For example, the suits ask for "reimbursement" from
custodial parents to non-custodial parents of any state-ordered child
support that exceeded the "maximum limits of federal law." This ceases to be
an appeal to constitutional or parental rights and instead pits one set of
civil law against another, with retroactive penalties being imposed.

In addition, the suits ask for "various damages against the Defendant [the
state named] in the aggregate value of $1,000,000 payable per Plaintiff."
The court awards would be "executable upon all monies, property, chattels,
assets, goods, pecuniary interest and anything whatsoever of any value"
owned or controlled by the State. The suits request that "an appropriate
portion" of the award be provided by the liquidation or direct transfer of
title of "unused, abandoned, or unnecessary state property and assets."

The number of non-custodial parent plaintiffs who sign on to a federal class
action cannot be predicted but it could run into millions; the collective
damages could run into billions or even trillions of dollars. Unfortunately,
this gives the appearance of pursuing profit rather than justice.

When asked to elaborate on the amount of damages, Howse clarified, "We are
preparing, later this week, to offer proposed settlements that will waive
the vast majority of damages, among other things, in exchange for a quick
restoral of equal custody rights, a few forms of tax abatements/credits to
balance what custodial parents have enjoyed for years and some other basic
and related issues, like the setting up of neutral visitation exchange
centers, and the like."

He added, "It has never been about winning large amounts of money from the
states ... It's about restoring the lives of our children, and restoring our
own lives."

I genuinely hope the settlements come to pass. Stripped of their financial
demands, the suits could go a long way toward removing what I believe to be
the worst laws governing child custody in disputed divorce.

At bare minimum, they are raising the profile of an issue that will not go
away: the crying need of non-custodial parents, especially fathers, to know
their children.

And the equal need of children to embrace both parents.

Wendy McElroy is the editor of ifeminists.com and a research fellow for The
Independent Institute in Oakland, Calif. She is the author and editor of
many books and articles, including the new book, "Liberty for Women: Freedom
and Feminism in the 21st Century" (Ivan R. Dee/Independent Institute, 2002).
She lives with her husband in Canada.

Respond to the Writer

Copyright 2004 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.
FOX News Home: http://www.foxnews.com/index.html

"YooperBoyka" wrote in message
...

...and we would have known this,...how?
(until someone asked)

Bite me, YB. It was a tough day... so sue me for not doing the search for
a link for you. Jeesh, the nerve of some people!

"Dusty" wrote in message
...

"YooperBoyka" wrote in message
...

...and we would have known this,...how?
(until someone asked)

Bite me, YB. It was a tough day... so sue me for not doing the search
for
a link for you. Jeesh, the nerve of some people!


Dude,...this kinda **** interests me,
....but I've gotten kind of accustomed to virulent trolls
spouting stuff without a real source.
Cite,...or lose your credibility.
It's kinda why I was prying you to comment on the articles you post.
I have no idea what direction your "argument" might be headed
if you just post what someone else wrote.
I could logically ask "What's your point?" after each one.

....and I prefer "Yoop" if you're going to shorten my handle.
"**** off Yoop" will work.

Most in this group [alt.child-support] are quite familiar with Dusty and his
credibility...I am not sure I can make the same claim for you.

"YooperBoyka" wrote in message
...

Dude,...this kinda **** interests me,
...but I've gotten kind of accustomed to virulent trolls
spouting stuff without a real source.
Cite,...or lose your credibility.

I'm behind you on this on, Yoop.

Dusty, a source would be really helpful. Make the interesting stuff more
credible for us. I'm all for spreading the news, but give us a reliable
source and a link.


"YooperBoyka" wrote in message
...

"Dusty" wrote in message
...

"YooperBoyka" wrote in message
...

...and we would have known this,...how?
(until someone asked)

Bite me, YB. It was a tough day... so sue me for not doing the search
for
a link for you. Jeesh, the nerve of some people!


Dude,...this kinda **** interests me,
...but I've gotten kind of accustomed to virulent trolls
spouting stuff without a real source.
Cite,...or lose your credibility.
It's kinda why I was prying you to comment on the articles you post.
I have no idea what direction your "argument" might be headed
if you just post what someone else wrote.
I could logically ask "What's your point?" after each one.

...and I prefer "Yoop" if you're going to shorten my handle.
"**** off Yoop" will work.

Thank you very much!
"Dave Briggman" wrote in message
...
ACFC
http://www.acfc.org/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,133875,00.html

FOXNews.com
Wednesday, September 29, 2004

Across U.S., Non-Custodial Parents Sue
by Wendy McElroy
At least 28 federal class action suits in 28 states have been filed in the
last two weeks on behalf of non-custodial parents (NCPs). The defendants
are
the individual states.

The plaintiffs claim to represent an estimated 25 million non-custodial
parents - primarily fathers - whose right to equal custody of minor
children
in situations of dispute is allegedly being violated by family courts
across
the nation.

Family law is traditionally a state matter, but the federal government has
assumed greater control in the area over the last few decades. Thus, the
plaintiffs are appealing to the Constitution, U.S. Supreme Court precedent
and acts of Congress "to vindicate and restore their various inalienable
rights."

In short, federal law is being asked to trump state practice in custody
matters.

According to the suits, state practices appear to be "willful, reckless,
and/or negligent fraud, deceit, collusion, and/or abuse of powers" with a
"systematic pattern of obstructing, hindering, and/or otherwise thwarting
the rightful and lawful conclusion of due process" of non-custodial
parents
in child custody proceedings.

In particular, fathers protest the widespread practice of almost
automatically granting sole custody to mothers in divorce disputes.

The 28-plus class action suits are identical, as any future suits will be.
The ultimate goal is for every state and U.S. possession to be represented
in one large consolidated action. Indeed, Torm L. Howse - president of the
Indiana Civil Rights Council and coordinator of the suits - says that
paperwork is under way for submission to the Judicial Panel on
Multidistrict
Litigation, a legal body which has the authority to transfer such multiple
civil cases to a single district court.

If this happens, every single non-custodial parent in America will be
represented by the class action suit, which is nothing more than a lawsuit
brought by one person or a small group on behalf of an entire class who
shares a grievance.

What specific relief is being sought?

The sweeping legal goals are spelled out in a press release. The main
relief
sought from federal court is the immediate "restoration/elevation to equal
custodial status" of all current non-custodial parents against whom no
allegations of abuse or neglect have been proven and who have an ongoing
relationship with the child.

The establishment of equal custody embraces several other reliefs.

For example, the "prohibition of custodial move-aways of minor children
[more than 60 miles] from their original physical residences with natural
parents." Also, the "abolishment of forced/court-ordered child support in
most cases." Support of the child would be borne by each parent during
their
own parenting time.

The Plaintiffs argue for restoration of equal custody not merely for the
sake of non-custodial parents but also for children's welfare. The press
release cites a much-touted study entitled "Child Adjustment in
Joint-Custody Versus Sole-Custody Arrangements," which was published in
the
APA's Journal of Family Psychology. The study concluded, "Children in
joint
physical or legal custody were better adjusted than children in
sole-custody
settings, but no different from those in intact families."

In this sense, the suits also advocate children's rights.

Other reliefs being sought are financial in nature; some of them take the
suits into murky areas. For example, the suits ask for "reimbursement"
from
custodial parents to non-custodial parents of any state-ordered child
support that exceeded the "maximum limits of federal law." This ceases to
be
an appeal to constitutional or parental rights and instead pits one set of
civil law against another, with retroactive penalties being imposed.

In addition, the suits ask for "various damages against the Defendant [the
state named] in the aggregate value of $1,000,000 payable per Plaintiff."
The court awards would be "executable upon all monies, property, chattels,
assets, goods, pecuniary interest and anything whatsoever of any value"
owned or controlled by the State. The suits request that "an appropriate
portion" of the award be provided by the liquidation or direct transfer of
title of "unused, abandoned, or unnecessary state property and assets."

The number of non-custodial parent plaintiffs who sign on to a federal
class
action cannot be predicted but it could run into millions; the collective
damages could run into billions or even trillions of dollars.
Unfortunately,
this gives the appearance of pursuing profit rather than justice.

When asked to elaborate on the amount of damages, Howse clarified, "We are
preparing, later this week, to offer proposed settlements that will waive
the vast majority of damages, among other things, in exchange for a quick
restoral of equal custody rights, a few forms of tax abatements/credits to
balance what custodial parents have enjoyed for years and some other basic
and related issues, like the setting up of neutral visitation exchange
centers, and the like."

He added, "It has never been about winning large amounts of money from the
states ... It's about restoring the lives of our children, and restoring
our
own lives."

I genuinely hope the settlements come to pass. Stripped of their financial
demands, the suits could go a long way toward removing what I believe to
be
the worst laws governing child custody in disputed divorce.

At bare minimum, they are raising the profile of an issue that will not go
away: the crying need of non-custodial parents, especially fathers, to
know
their children.

And the equal need of children to embrace both parents.

Wendy McElroy is the editor of ifeminists.com and a research fellow for
The
Independent Institute in Oakland, Calif. She is the author and editor of
many books and articles, including the new book, "Liberty for Women:
Freedom
and Feminism in the 21st Century" (Ivan R. Dee/Independent Institute,
2002).
She lives with her husband in Canada.

Respond to the Writer

Copyright 2004 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.
FOX News Home: http://www.foxnews.com/index.html