Stephen Baskerville: Interview for El Visitante Newspaper in Puerto Rico

This article was originally published in Spanish and is available for download here.

Denuncia “guerra” contra la paternidad y la familia
Vivian Maldonado Miranda
entrevistas@elvisitante.biz

Since a decision of Puerto Rico’s Supreme Court established in the Island the “mutual agreement divorce”, spouses do not need to give an explanation or reason for divorcing. Also by jurisprudence, when both parents are equally able to raise the child, the custody is given solely to the mother, rather than joint custody.

On the other hand, Puerto Rico’s domestic violence law, in an effort to protect woman, establishes that an accused man should be arrested, making him, at least in practice, guilty before the judgment. It is said that there are woman making false accusation against men in an effort to separate them from their children. Also, it is said that the law against child maltreatment focuses more on the rehabilitation of the abusive parent – especially when the abusive parent is the mother – than on the child’s well being.

Now, there are two bills for introducing joint custody as the first option in divorce cases. Both faced the opposition of the main governmental agencies.

At the same time, the Civil Code has been revised. The draft proposed for public discussion:

–Gives equal marriage rights to same-sex civil unions and regular civil unions.

–Recognizing as part of woman’s right over her body the artificial insemination of single woman, using anonymous genetic material, for having a baby who will not have a father.

–Provides for creating a Posthumous procreation will, for establishing that the child will be conceived after father’s or mother’s death.

–Reorganizes the divorce causes, so all divorce process will be a “no-blame divorce”.

–Gives the custody only to the woman, rather than joint custody, when both parents are equally able to raise the child.

– Provides the option for living in separate houses when the couple get married. If the spouses cannot decide in which house the children will live, the court will decide. (It is important to know that traveling distances to workplaces in Puerto Rico are usually short, for this reason it is not common that a happy marriage couple decide to live in separate houses).

–Eliminates the need of marriage for adopting a child.

–Prohibits the use of sexual orientation as a criteria for limiting the custody of children.

–Recognizes the surrogate motherhood agreements. Also, declares the baby born as a result of assisted procreation, “consanguineous son” (instead of adopted) of the people who pay for the procedure, even if their genetic material was not used and they are not the true biological parents.

–Permits sex changes in birth certificates.

Questions and Answers:

1. More than separate laws, Do you think that exists a philosophy promoting the dissolution of the natural family? (If yes, is that philosophy part of the “divorce regimen”?)

SB: Yes, an unfortunate ethic has arisen in some parts of American and Western society to redefine the family virtually out of existence. The divorce regime is certainly a product of that ethic, though it has also contributed to it. The changes in divorce laws and practice over the last 40 years were never debated publicly in the United States or any other Western country. Even more, we have never had a debate on questions of child custody, though this issue is wreaking havoc with our families and society.

2. How is the image of the marriage woman as a victim of the man being used for spreading this philosophy?

SB: The attack on the family and marriage has included an attack on parents and especially fathers. Parents generally are accused of child abuse with few due process protections and often for ordinary parental discipline. In addition, fathers are demonized as “batterers” and “deadbeats,” even when they have committed no recognized offense and been convicted of no crime. They then lose custody of and even access to their children when they are innocent before the law. Research clearly shows that most child abuse takes place in single-parent homes from which the father has been removed, and most domestic violence takes place after separation. The safest place for women and children is in an intact family. Research is also unequivocal that few fathers abandon their children voluntarily. Most fatherless children result from fathers being forcibly separated from their children by courts.

3. When I was a child, a divorced family group was defined as a “broken family”. Now, is just a “type of family”. When did the family definition becomes something variable? When did the attack to natural family begin?

SB: It has developed gradually over more than a century. But it greatly accelerated with the sexual revolution of the 1960s and the divorce revolution of the 1970s. The current controversy over gay marriage is only the latest development, and it probably would not be taking place were it not for the divorce revolution.

4. How are being spread in the United States the laws promoting that children grow up in household without both biological parents?

SB: The “no-fault” divorce laws, beginning in 1969, certainly accelerated the process. But more than the statute law, it was judicial practice that expanded the growth of single-parent homes. Judges simply responded to the new divorce laws by throwing one parent, usually the father, out of the family at the mere request of the other parent. Legislatures then responded by ratifying that process. But they also provided money to subsidize family break-up, such as greatly expanded programs for child support enforcement, domestic violence, and child abuse. These programs have expanded far beyond their intent, and they are now part of the problem.

5. How is the tendency in the 50 states about family laws?– Is the US becoming more “liberal”?

SB: A good number of states are moving toward shared parenting laws, to ensure that children receive the law and attention of both parents following divorce. These laws offer the promise of minimizing the trauma of family break-up and reducing acrimony. The District of Columbia has a strong law, which unfortunately is seldom enforced. Other states debating shared parenting include Michigan, West Virginia, North Dakota, Iowa, and Georgia.

6. What will be the (social, economic…) consequences for the country and the governmental system of promoting family arrangements without both marriage biological parents?

SB: No such human civilization has even been known. Every known advanced society has been based on the two-parent family, where children have both a father and a mother. We are already seeing the consequences in an assortment of social ills that have been directly correlated to fatherlessness: violent crime, substance abuse, scholastic failure, and psychological ills.

7. Why did you think that no -fault divorce is “our most dangerous social experiment”?

SB: Not so much, as most people believe, because it began the process of family dissolution; that was already taking place. Even more, it gave the government a license to actively dissolve families and seize control of children, over the objection of parents who had not given any grounds for divorce or even agreed to one. So the government can take control over your children without you having committed any offense, either criminal or civil. It effectively eliminated the private sphere of life.

8. In one of your articles, you said that the main cause of child abuse is family dissolution. Do you have any studies or statistics that support this statement?

SB: Yes, the research is clear and unquivocal. I cite numerous studies in my forthcoming book, Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Mariage, and the Family. None has been refuted.

9. What would you say to people who argued that for raising a child “the only that you need is the desire to love and care the baby”, that “family composition does not affect children”, and that “being a good parent relies in being a good person rather than sexual orientation or in the type of family”?

SB: The research is very clear that children thrive best when they have the benefits of a mother and a father. Single-parent homes are the source of almost all our social ills, and again, no known civilization has based based on them. Since there is no agreed-upon definition of what constitutes a “good parent” (any more than a “good person”), the safest course is to allow children to have both their parents, even when they are (as they always are) imperfect.

10. What solution do you suggest for discouraging the false domestic violence accusations, without putting woman in risk?

SB: Domestic violence should be adjudicated as violent assault, with appropriate safeguards for the accused and punishments for the convicted. This conforms to our accepted procedures for all other crimes and puts no one at risk. Treated it as a ill-defined matter where the government can evict parents and seize their children with no show of wrongdoing is the source of the problem.

11. What laws have been passed on the states for protecting natural family?

SB: Almost none that are effective. Governments have debated changes in tax law to encourage marriage, but this will make little difference. Some states are trying to protect marriage by defining it as one man and one woman, but this is treating the symptom rather than the cause. Gay marriage will disappear when marriage is strengthened by making it a legally enforceable contract. Shared parenting will also discourage divorce and ensure that children have the closest approximation to an intact family, even when their parents separate.

12. It is said that in the effort of making woman equal as man, now the man is in a legal disadvantage. What do you suggest for making man and woman equal for the law?

SB: Shared parenting will provide for equality between men and women, mothers and fathers, and ensure that children have the love and nurturance of both their parents. Sole mother custody simply perpetuates the gender stereotypes that only women can raise children and only men can provide for them. This is what the feminists have claimed they wanted all along, but now, for some reason, many seem to oppose it.

Stephen Baskerville is the author of Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Mariage, and the Family available for pre-order on Amazon.com:

This entry was posted on Tuesday, June 5th, 2007 at 6:32 pm and is filed under Child Support & Custody, Current Events, Family, Feminism, Media, Men and Mating, Sex & Metropolis, Vox Populi. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. | 160 views | Trackback | Print this page |

| More from Stephen Baskerville, Ph.D.