Molly Olson, Rep. Tim Mahoney Fight for Minnesota Joint Custody Bill
Molly Olson and the shared parenting organization Center for Parental Responsibility are fighting for joint physical custody in Minnesota. She and her allies face a stacked deck comprised of the usual suspects--domestic violence advocates, attorneys, and misguided feminists.
I spoke with Olson (pictured) a couple weeks ago and she is a very determined woman. Her ally, Rep. Tim Mahoney (DFL-St. Paul), has taken up this cause, too.
From New law could make fathers' rights come smoother (Minneapolis City Pages, 2/4/09):
In Minnesota family courts, judges decide what's best for the kids on a case-by-case basis. But fathers' groups are pushing to change the law so that judges must favor shared parenting time, known as joint physical custody. Minnesota would become one of two states with such a legal preference.
Historically, the state's courts have not favored this arrangement because of concerns that shuttling between parents could be disruptive for a child. Custody often went to mothers, who tended to be the primary caregivers...
Rep. Tim Mahoney (DFL-St. Paul) has made it his mission to change the law. Divorced twice, Mahoney paid through the nose to get joint physical custody...He says conversations with his constituents convinced him that the law should change. Dozens of men have told him they pay child support but find it difficult to visit their children because of poor relations with the mother, he says. "They don't give a damn about the money. Mostly what they want to do is see their kids."
Over the past five years, Mahoney has introduced bills to change the law. His legislation has included an exception for victims of domestic violence, but advocates for battered women remain unconvinced.
Last year, Mahoney proposed a study group to look at the effect of changing the law. Mahoney's bill passed last spring after Rep. Michael Paymar (DFL-St. Paul) tacked it onto another piece of legislation.
In August, the study group met for the first time. Members included advocates for victims of domestic violence, parents, and fathers, as well as family law attorneys, academics, and two judges.
The study group reviewed academic research on divorce and custody and heard from people on both sides of the debate. The Minnesota Chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, several anti-domestic violence groups, and the Minnesota State Bar Association's Family Law Section opposed changing the law, and fathers' advocacy groups favored it.
While there were more than enough people willing to give their opinions on the idea, the study group faced a paucity of information specific to Minnesota. There are no studies that document if fathers are actually being treated unfairly in court. The state's only data shows that joint physical custody decisions increased from 6 percent in 1986 to 23 percent in 1999.
After four months of meetings, the panel could only recommend to the Legislature that more Minnesota data be collected and the issue studied further. Mahoney and co-sponsor Saltzman were sorely disappointed.
"Certainly I think that the deck was set," Mahoney says. "I think there were a number of people that were very uncomfortable with the idea going in." He estimates that about 70 percent of the panel was initially against joint physical custody.
Panelist Molly Olson founded the Center for Parental Responsibility, a group that advocates for joint physical custody. She says study group membership seemed biased from the start. "People are either from organizations that have opposed this, or have opposed this individually," she says, "or they don't work with fit fathers."
But other panelists said the group was open-minded and fair. The problem was not bias, but rather a lack of information, says study group member Jeff Edleson, a professor at the University of Minnesota who researches domestic violence. "There were grievances of both moms and dads who were concerned about their cases," he says. "What I wanted to see and I didn't see, was any data."
One of the judges on the panel, Heidi Schellhas of the Minnesota Court of Appeals, also found the lack of information frustrating. "Shouldn't we figure out whether there is a problem, and if there is a problem, what is it?"
But Mahoney says the issue needs to be addressed, and soon. "My intent this year," he says, "is to move this bill forward."
The issue is being debated in the comments section of the Minneapolis City Pages--to join the discussion, click here.
To write to reporter Erin Carlyle, click here.
As for the opponents' "Gee whiz, we have no idea if joint custody would even work" shtick, see my co-authored column HB 5267 Will Help Michigan’s Children of Divorce (Lansing State Journal, 5/28/06) to learn what research says about joint custody.
While Carlyle's article gives too much weight to joint custody's opponents' weak arguments, it is relatively fair. This is a pleasant surprise, given City Pages reporter Beth Walton's terribly misleading coverage of the Holly Collins parental kidnapping case.
In that case, City Pages served as unabashed cheerleaders for a mother who several Minnesota courts found: medically abused her kids; alienated her kids from their decent, loving father; buried practically everyone around her--including her own mother--in a staggering array of false accusations; and ultimately kidnapped the kids (and another father's baby boy) and held them in Holland for 14 years.
To learn more about the Holly Collins case, see my findings on it here.
|
| More from Glenn Sacks
Stumble It!
