Monday

Child Custody and Support House Bill 1075

I think I feel really sick now after reading this article. I thought Florida might have been a potential safe haven even though I have been unsuccessful in the court system thus far.

What the fuck is this? What is going on?
Child Custody and Support: Provides directive to Division of Statutory Revision to retitle "Dissolution of Marriage; Support; Custody" as "Dissolution of Marriage; Support; Time-sharing"; revises definitions applicable to child custody & support; revises provisions relating to presumption of good faith for psychologists making specified determinations; revises provisions relating to modification of support; revises provisions relating to development of parenting plan; provides for orders of temporary support for children whose time-sharing is temporarily modified due to military service; provides for motions for temporary child support adjustment when changes in circumstances or financial ability have not yet been established as permanent; revises provisions relating to presumption of parent's income for purpose of establishing support obligation; provides for time-sharing & parental responsibility in paternity judgments.
Please somebody, do something! The Father's Rights supremacists have the upper hand. This bill in a slap in the face to victims and survivors as we know that abusers will continue to abuse us through the system, now citing "time-sharing."

Sure, it isn't about labels, it is about safety and justice, neither of which can exist with laws like this. I can't fully speak on this right now. I'm pissed, and frightened.  How can I ever heal?

5 advocates for peace:

ADadEveryDay said...

What the hell? This bill isn't about YOU!!! Or the FATHER... It's about CHILDREN and what's equitable for them. For the state to automatically assume that the mother is the better caretaker is fundamentally unjust. Why do you reduce this issue to gender? Why do you automatically assume that the mother is always the victim?!?! Instead of putting every case into the cookie cutter that you yourself lived, why not try and start from a position of FAIRNESS? I'm going to do whatever I can to get this adopted in my home state of OK. Good for the FL govenor and his state!!!!!

Rj said...

I only chose to publish your comment so that my "other readers" can jump in your ass. Who asked you?

No one automatically assumes that the mother is the better caretaker; however, if you read my follow-up article, you will see I addressed the topic of who provided the MAJORITY of the care for the child while in the home. I didn't assume anyone was the victim, however, this BLOG is for VICTIMS and SURVIVORS..did you read that part??

Unless you have read my entire blog, which is not my entire life story, you don't know what I have lived in order to put any case into a cookie cutter...

Fairness, in your sense, doesn't have a damn thing to do with this shit, okay?????

Nancy R. Koerner said...

What are we? In the Middle Ages? It is all about gender! I am not a man-hater. I don’t even consider myself a feminist. In fact, twenty years after-the-fact, I now have a wonderful husband and we are very happy together. There are a lot of good men out there. But I also know first-hand what it’s like to have to relinquish my kids to an ex-husband because I didn’t have the money to support them. Not as well as he could. How could I? He carefully hedged his bets. He kept the house in his name, made sure the bank accounts were in his name, and constructed a sure-fire scenario that would leave me penniless in the event of a split. Don’t you realize that is part of the domestic violence syndrome? The control issues? As victims we are forced to stay in abusive relationships because we have ZERO choices. Here’s a thought – how about the government stepping in and creating some sort of “pre-alimony” clause in which there is equal financial distribution between the parents until the decision can be made based on what’s REALLY best for the children.

Did I want to prevent my children from being with their father altogether? Hell no!! I wanted them to have the opportunity to benefit from whatever positive influence their father could provide. In my case, he actually did have some good qualities. But sometimes, things just have to calm down first. And sometimes, one of the children prefers to live with the dad and the other with the mom. After all, they are not collectively “the kids.” They are individual people with their own minds and hearts and preferences.

And “time-sharing” our kids? What are they? Condos? Are children now to be treated as “property,” just as abused wives are treated as “property?” Why don’t we just all get outfitted with full burquahs and have our cheeks branded, and risk getting stoned to death by our husbands for some supposed infraction?

ADadEveryDay said...

Where do I begin?

I saw your comment and there was a "Post a response" button, so I went for it. If you just want an echo chamber for your own rantings, there's a way to achieve this...

You (RJ) and another poster both made comments with some of the same themes. I'll try to speak to the cogent part:

Kids can't be divided equitably (aka Children are not a condo):
Why not? We're only talking about dividing time. That's *exactly* why we have schedules/calendars/clocks in our lives.

Look--*any* divorce arrangement is less optimal for kids than having 2 parents that get along and are living together. But with that option off the table, it makes sense to look for the most equitable arrangement possible. So why not start with a 50-50 position? Some parents might choose to game the system to continue exerting control. They see divorce as a way to punish a spouse for leaving a bad situation. They see the kids as pawns in that game. But speculative motives aside, if it's proven that EITHER parent isn't pulling their own weight or harming the child, then the visitation ratio can be adjusted to reflect that. Now, you (two above) have argued that since "typically" women do more of the rearing than guys do, that a 50/50 (time-sharing) arrangement is inherently unfair. This issue was actually addressed by UCF's Farrah M. Cato in the article referenced above:

"Women often do a greater amount of the parenting, such as housework and carpooling", Cato wrote, "but that doesn't mean that women are better parents, or that men can't or shouldn't be

involved." --The Seminole Voice (http://www.seminolevoice.com/Seminole_Voice/article.asp?ID=765)

I would also add that just as some of the typical *provider* responsibilities shift to the mother during the divorce, so should some of the *maintaner/child rearing* responsibilities go the father.

I think that lowlifes who abuse their wives are the lowest scum on the planet. There should be more severe penalties (by an order of magnitude) for proven repeated domestic abuse offenders. They should be stigmatized in the same way child molesters are. There should be registration databases and everything. But that's not what this bill is really about. It's about putting good parents on
equal footing regardless of sex. Men don't have a lock on the crappy spouse/parent game. Is it any more in the interest of the child (with the current setup) to have a neglectful mother and a good father who automatically has the burden to prove he's the better parent? Every situation is unique. This bill will start from a position of fairness--50/50 (time-share) and leaves room to alter that ratio when mitigating factors are taken into account.

Rj said...

Hey Dad, where should I begin?

This is not a personal attack on YOU, it is an attack on the ignorance that prevails surrounding situations like this, that put victims at further risk.

Again, I question, you DID read what type of site this is, right?

Dividing time still isn't as simple as you put it. Show me a study that says that dividing time 50/50 is good for a child's emotional well-being. You're not dividing time like you're cutting apples, this is a life...a person with feelings and needs.

You're right about parents punishing others through divorce and using the system. Those parents, by right, are ABUSERS extending their abuse into the court system--male or female.

And that's great for Farrah Cato, however the LAW should not be obligated to tell you how to be a DAD (okay, or MOM), just like the law shouldn't have to ORDER you to pay child support...You should do it because you know that children have basic needs that have to be provided for. You should spend time raising your child and sharing the responsibility because that's what you're SUPPOSED to do if you care about the outcome in the long run.

Would you propose that we need court orders to tell you to take your wife out more--to dinner, to concerts? Or a court order to stop taking advantage of your friends or co-workers?

Do you want to live in a police state?

Hell yeah, some responsibilities should shift, but don't use the divorce to finally enlighten you to wake up to the fact that you are, and have been a father.

Now, I'm glad that you detest lowlifes. But because there ARE NOT severe enough penalties, and there are not even enough PROSECUTIONS, nor are enough women even reporting the abuse, not only out of fear for their abuser, but out of fear of the system that continues to perpetuate violence against women....until such a time when equality exists on that level and domestic violence is brought to the forefront, WE CANNOT "START FROM A POSITION OF FAIRNESS ie 50-50."

If you had a racing bike, and I a tricycle, and we are to complete a race, given the same amount of time to finish....is that fair?

Hey, do you watch wrestling? Think of it as a handicap match.

I praise the good dads...I really do. But I ask that you read some more reports and stats on the tragedies that are done to women, and how they affect the children. You know good damn way things aren't equal.