lumigan tramadol tadalafil

The Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence’s Testimony Against Shared Parenting Bill

2008-02-05
By

Background: Wisconsin Fathers for Children and Families is trying to get their shared parenting bill out of committee, and recently I asked you to write letters to the Wisconsin Assembly’s Children and Families Committee in support of the bill. Steve Blake, president of WFCF, wrote me and said that he spoke with one of the Committee’s clerks and was told that they are receiving “many, many E-mails” from you in support of the bill.

During the recent hearing on the bill, Tamara Grigsby, one of the legislators on the Committee, stood up and asked, “Why is my mailbox filled up with letters over this bill?!” The Committee has heard testimony but has not voted yet. Below is the testimony against the shared parenting bill from the Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

To learn more about the bill, click here. I make the case for shared parenting in my co-authored column HB 5267 Will Help Michigan’s Children of Divorce (Lansing State Journal, 5/28/06).

Testimony in opposition to Assembly Bill 571
Patti Seger, Executive Director, Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence

Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to provide testimony today regarding opposition to Assembly Bill (AB) 571. I am testifying on behalf of the Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence (WCADV). WCADV is the statewide voice and membership organization of over 70 Wisconsin domestic abuse programs, victims of domestic violence and their children, and citizens who are concerned with ending domestic violence.

AB 571 creates a one-size-fits-all solution to the concerns of some parents who, despite their desire for equalized placement, are not awarded equal placement by the court. While we wonder if this is a resolution that is even desired by all parents, WCADV’s concerns are specifically focused on families affected by domestic violence and the devastating impact equalized placement could have on victim and child safety. Under current law, the courts are already directed by a presumption of joint custody (decision making) and are to enter court orders that maximize the time each parent has with each child. Under 2003 Act 130, the courts additionally must consider the impact of domestic violence on the safety of the children and must make attempts to protect children from further violence whenever possible. AB 571 creates yet another presumption that the courts must equalize placement unless it can be shown, by clear and convincing evidence, that it is not in the best interest of the children to do so.

Despite the overall trend in Wisconsin, and nationally, to recognize the seriousness of domestic violence, particularly within the criminal legal system, abusive men who fight for custody win 70% of contested custody actions, obtaining at least joint physical and legal custody or sole custody. As research has increasingly established, men who are violent and abusive towards their wives or partners often use the legal system as a tactic of abuse after separation and divorce. They pursue custody of the children, equalized physical placement, and unsupervised access as a means to continue to exert control over or to harass their estranged partners. (more…)

Parenting Plan Calendar Software
Shared Ground (R) is an easy-to-use software program designed for divorced parents to track their parenting plan schedules over many years. Parents, attorneys, arbitrators and mediators can generate equitable parenting plans, which is especially useful for parents seeking fair division of their children’s time. MONEY-BACK GUARANTEE. Click here for more information.

10 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.


  • roger

    what is that actual percentage of couples that have ‘domestic violence’ as an issue?? what she is arguing for is the profound minority of couples where this is a real problem will set policy for the vast majority where this is not a problem!

    this is an example of the tryranny of the minority.

    we must break the default assumption that children are the property of women only, and move to a system where parents have equal physical custody and financial responsibility. and if one of those parties does not have financial capability, then they certainly should NOT get physical custody.

  • http://www.false-accusers.com TheManOnTheStreet

    What really pisses me off when this sort of diception is used is that no one on the ‘panel’ questions her information!

    Just one person asking “uhm, excuse me Ms. Andrist, could you please supply us with the peer reviewed statistics to back up your statements? Thank you.” OR “Excuse me Ms. Andrist, could you please supply us with the research information that you’ve based your statements upon? Thank you.”

    Or better yet, as she goes on with her bogus information, lean towards the clerk and very clearly ask “could you get me the most current Federal statistics, preferably by the CDC, on DV? Thanks.” “Please, continue Ms. Andrist.”

    WHY!? Why doesn’t just one person ask? If these folks are supposedly “for the people, by the people” blah blah… they why don’t the do their effing jobs?!

    It would take nothing at all for them to see that her information is bogus and either disreguard or gawd forgive, charge her with false testimony!

    DAMMIT to hell!

    TMOTS

  • steven deluca

    Using fear tactics has always been the way feminist push their agenda. Why don’t they list all the mothers that have injured and killed children and then suggest that children are statistically safer with fathers than with mothers.







Right.

Man up.

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

Search