lumigan tramadol tadalafil

ACFC Brings Back North Dakota Shared Parenting Initiative

2007-08-13
By

“It is the policy of this state that the courts shall award joint legal and physical custody in divorces and separations, when requested by either parent, if neither parent is found unfit or a danger to the children by clear and convincing evidence. The definition of joint physical custody (equal physical custody) shall be a rebuttable presumption of equal time with the children; or any written time-sharing agreement agreed upon by the parents.”–The North Dakota Shared Parenting Initiative, 2007 version

The American Coalition for Fathers and Children’s North Dakota affiliate has brought back the North Dakota Shared Parenting Initiative. The highly controversial Initiative qualified for the November 2006 ballot but was defeated 57-43. The NDSPI has been refined and a major flaw has been removed, and it is getting good press coverage in North Dakota. The NDSPI’s goal is to have the Initiative on the November 2008 ballot.

There was a substantial backlash against the Initiative last year. In my co-authored column North Dakota Shared Parenting Initiative Will Help Children of Divorce (Grand Forks Herald, 7/18/06), ACFC Executive Director Mike McCormick and I explained:

“A misguided collection of federal and state officials, divorce attorneys and women’s advocates have all united to oppose a simple proposition: children need both parents.

“The North Dakota Shared Parenting Initiative is based on the belief that all parents have a fundamental liberty interest in the care and custody of their children, and that no fit parent can lawfully be denied custody of his or her children. Under the Initiative, when family law courts adjudicate a divorce, unless there is clear and convincing evidence that a mother or father is unfit, all parents will have joint legal and physical custody of their children…

“Under current North Dakota law, joint custody is rare unless both parents agree to it, and mothers seeking sole custody usually get it.  The North Dakota Concerned Citizens for Children’s Rights Committee, which was formed specifically to fight the NDSPI, claims the status quo is what’s best for kids. Yet according to a meta-analysis of 33 studies of children of divorce published in the American Psychological Association‘s Journal of Family Psychology, children in shared custody settings have fewer behavior and emotional problems, higher self-esteem, better family relations, and better school performance than children in sole custody arrangements.

“The CCCRC claims that the Initiative places the interests of parents over the interests of children. Yet when psychologist Joan Kelly examined children of divorce, she found that they “express higher levels of satisfaction with joint physical custody than with sole custody arrangements,” and cite the “benefit of remaining close to both parents” as an important factor. An Arizona State University study queried adult children of divorce, and found that more than two-thirds believed “living equal amounts of time with each parent is the best arrangement for children.”

“Government officials have publicly asserted that the NDSPI will cause the state to lose federal reimbursement funds for child support enforcement. However, former Federal Reserve Bank economist R. Mark Rogers, an influential policy analyst on child support, asserts that these claims are groundless.

“Former lieutenant governor Lloyd Omdahl opposes the NDSPI and Shared Parenting because, he claims, ‘children fare better under the care of a mother than a father.’ Yet according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ new report Child Maltreatment 2004, when one parent is acting without the involvement of the other parent, mothers are almost three times as likely to kill their children as fathers are, and are more than twice as likely to maltreat them.
  
“Omdahl also claims that ‘in the majority of divorces, it’s the men who want to get out of the marriage.’ Yet a study by economists Margaret Brinig and Douglas Allen found that most divorce petitions are filed by women, and that they do so in part because they know they can expect to obtain sole custody of their children. In only 6% of cases women claimed to be divorcing cruel or abusive husbands. 

“Under the NDSPI, courts will instruct divorcing parents to develop a joint parenting plan. If the parents cannot agree on a plan, the court will facilitate one which will protect and nurture the loving bonds children share with both parents. Does a child deserve anything less?”

The recent Associated Press article about the Initiative is Another go at joint custody initiative (8/7/07). To donate to support the Initiative, click here. To contact the NDSPI, write to info@ndspi.org or call 701-331-0410.

The Best Interests of the Child
How to Save Our Child When We Can’t Save our Marriage–New DVD set from Dr. Warren Farrell, foremost expert on children of divorce
www.BestInterestofChildren.org
37 views
Didn't make Oprah's Book Club. And Ronnie doesn't care. Man up. Buy the book now on Amazon.com. Or listen to Ronnie tell a story at escaping-from-reality.com.


  • Robert Stevens

    If at first you don’t succeed try…try again. Good going guys!
    Now I don’t mean to rain on you parade, but even after we pass such a law, whether its North Dakota or elsewhere, it is going to take years of enforcement. We will have to pass complimentary legislation to back it up. We will have to impose on judges, severe penalties for not obeying it. I know some of these arrogant and corrupt old bastards, they will have to made to obey it and some of them will have to go to jail to get the point across. Then we are going to have to pass , then enforce some new laws to stop some the false claims of abuse. Again some women and some “government tyrants” will have to go to jail to make it clear, this is the way it is! If you lie and make a false claim of abuse to win a custody case you automatically get 2 years in federal prison. If a judge does not order joint physical/legal custody he is removed from the bench, charged and they fail to find a good reason for not ordering joint custody, then he goes to prison, I suggest five years. These people have no respect for fathers or men, if they can’t learn to espect us , we will have make them fear us.
    It is going to be a long and hard battle. We will have to get very tough on those who decide they aren’t going to respect the rights of all parents. It will take years, even if we do all this. Now don’t stop keep going!

  • http://www.antipeonage.0catch.com Roger Knight

    It is a good idea, but North Dakota’s voters have to grasp that the federal funds are THEIR money to begin with, and why spend those funds on a state bureaucracy that wrecks havoc on our constitutional rights?

    What they are trying to do is put fault, meaning due process of law, back into divorce. Without requiring proof of unfitness as a parent, sole custody is a deprivation of liberty and property without due process of law.

    As all child support and alimony orders under a no-fault divorce regime are void as deprivation of property and liberty without due process of law, then of course we have the fundamental right to refuse payment.

    As such orders are not convictions of crime, we have the Constitutional right to refuse our labor, statutorily enforced by the Antipeonage Act.

    Unless and until we are willing to refuse payment, then no one will listen to us.

    We should say: Since you will not listen to us, you must not need our money!

    If you insist on extortion and peonage, then we have the option of total refusal of compliance.

    The First Amendment allows us to plead our case with our fellow citizens.

    The Second Amendment is for when people don’t listen.

  • mruffolo

    “when requested by either parent”

    So a feature of joint custody plan in ND is unilateral (one party needs to agree), not bilateral (two parties need to agree).

    Custody 101

    Now the joint decision is bilateral (unless the kid’s lawyer agrees).

    Mothers rarely desire joint custody, because it means more control of the child and information, more money, and more favoritism by family judge for women.

    Default is sole custody to the mother. The father is in a world of hurt with this decision by the judge. The father has no vote in the decision making for his kids; however, he must pay money every decision made by the mother.

    Joint and or sole custody is a money deal.

    Recall that physical custody is different, so a separate issue. The judge decides who the child will be with about twenty-seven days of the month (the loser gets about four days a month – “every other weekend”).

  • The Biscuit Queen

    If we hammer long enough at this it will come to fruition. It is the right thing to do. ACFC is a great organization, keep up the wonderful work!







Right.

Man up.

Buy the book now on Amazon.com. Or listen to Ronnie tell a story at escaping-from-reality.com.

Search