|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vol.
8, No. 1
The Fourteen Percenter
April 2005
A publication for parents on the wrong
side of the standard possession order.
– I see my child two days out of
every fourteen; 14%. That's not
enough. – |
Rebuttal
|
|
For years,
the San Antonio Express-News
identified male friends of
the mother as ‘husbands’ or,
even worse, ‘fathers,’ in
cases of child abuse. This
gives the real dads a bad
name. Finally the Express-News
began identifying boyfriends
as just that, boyfriends,
and not the father or step-dad
(see
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA022005.1B.paramour.c52f8734.html
). But the paper still wants
to blame men for many of society’s
ills. A recent letter set
the editor straight: |
|
|
Investigate
mommy also |
|
Thank you for publicizing
the child abuse committed
by mothers' boyfriends.
The article "Child
abuse by boyfriends examined"
reported that mommy's boyfriend
was accused in the deaths
of four of 11 children in
2004 in Bexar County and
that "birth mothers
and fathers still make up
the lion's share of abusers
— 77 percent in Texas last
year."
But to put these statistics
in perspective, you must
list the number of mothers
responsible for abusing
their own children. According
to recent national statistics
from the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services,
"Women also comprised
a larger percentage of all
perpetrators than men, 58
percent compared to 42 percent"
(http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/factsheets/canstats.cfm
).
Please do examine mommy's
boyfriend when investigating
child abuse. But please examine
mommy as well. More than boyfriends
and natural fathers, mothers
are the No. 1 perpetrators
of violence against children.
Don Mathis
|
|
Resources |
The Fourteen
Percenter is an international
newsletter that seeks to promote
equal parenting rights in
the US, the UK, and worldwide.
We welcome feedback, as well
as any article, poem, or review
relating to the child-parent
bond. Send your letters
to
FourteenPercenter@yahoo.com
.
The Fourteen
Percenter thanks A-1
Product Distribution for donation
of their printing services.
Typesetting, binding, and
laminating are other services
available at 2015 McCullough
in San Antonio, TX. Contact
210-734-9355, 800-652-8477,
or
http://www.a1laminating.com/index.cfm
|
Remember these Quotes:
A child is not likely to find
a father in God unless he
finds something of God in
his father. Glen
Wheeler
In the Criminal Court you
see bad people at their best,
where in the Family Court
you see good people at their
worst. Anne
Hollonds
In Hollywood, an equitable
divorce settlement means each
party getting 50 percent of
the publicity. Lauren
Bacall
Justice is like a train
that is nearly always late.
Yevgeny
Yevtushenko
One of the most obvious
facts about grownups to
a child is that they have
forgotten what it is like
to be a child. Randall
Jarrell
|
Reconsider - Criminal Jury
- 'sine qua non' of Family
Law Reform, by John Murtari
Sorry for the Latin there.
What does it mean, literally:
'without which - not.'
You want equal parenting?
You want to keep Child Protective
Services from taking your
kids on a hunch – and 'temporary'
orders that last for years?
We can talk about equal
parenting, or better 'procedures'
for social workers, and
laws that say 'clear and
convincing' evidence is
required before a Judge
intervenes in your family
life -- but are they the
essential elements in real
reform? Maybe
not.
How about this simple
concept: If a former spouse,
or social worker wants to
interfere in your relationship
with your children and get
'Family Court' to intervene
-- there is just one hurdle
they have to overcome.
They have to get a criminal
prosecutor to indict you
for a serious crime (with
malintent being a 'demonstrated'
serious threat to the safety
of your kids). You
get the protection of a
Jury of twelve and they
need a unanimous verdict
against you. How does that
sound? Oh, and if the Jury
finds you guilty – you are
going to jail for a while
(of course).
Now, you don't have to
go through all this. You
are free to negotiate, mediate,
and arbitrate first with
the other party (whether
that is a former spouse
or Child Protective Services).
But both sides know what
the standard of proof is,
and that twelve people are
going to hear the facts.
Good parents, average
parents, and poor parents
– all equal parents.
A Jury – do you want
that much protection? Shouldn't
there be more factors. Custody
is so complicated – what
about all the subtle forms
of mental abuse? My
spouse doesn't care about
the kids – they just want
to use the kids to control
me. The kids don't
want to be with my spouse
– they want to be with me!
We 'know' the parents are
abusing the kids, but we
can't prove – we need to
get the kids out of house!
I want to move away to get
a better job and make more
money for my children –
what do you mean I can't
take the kids with me unless
my spouse is a criminal?
Don't they have a right
to something better?
What about all that?
A Jury – should 9 out
of 10 murderers go free!?
Maybe we should feel uncomfortable
about our present jury system?
How could O.J. Simpson go
free after committing murder?
Probably many of you had
heard of this old civic
lesson, "better to
let nine guilty people go
free, than convict one innocent?"
Does that make sense – we
'know' they did it. Why
would you let a murderer
or child abuser go free
to commit more crime?
I once had a 'junior'
Senate Staffer for Senator
Clinton tell me that it
was better to separate 9
kids from parents, than
let one live in an abusive
environment? Do we
understand that when you
separate a kid from parents
– that is awful abuse also?
To save one you abuse nine?
What does all this flow
from? What is the underlying
assumption? Your right to
Family is a great right
– the ability to raise and
nurture and be present to
your own children (and they
to you) – just as valued
as our Freedom.
I have had the chance
to spend a lot of time in
jail holding cells waiting
to be arraigned. You know
what? About 90% of those
people were exactly guilty
of what the police arrested
them for. Why go through
all the expense of procedures,
protections, and also run
the risk of letting these
people go? Just convict
the whole bunch! To
be more specific, what if
90% of Black men under 25
are guilty of the crime
they were charged with –
just convict them all?
We do not do that, because
freedom is a great right.
Hopefully our society is
now recognizing family is
a great right. Please,
let's not resort to scientific
studies or the laws of averages
for policy justification.
I don't care if 90% of bald-bearded-men
over 45 (like me) are bad
parents – I walk into Court
an equal parent to my child.
What about that? A Jury
- protector of our freedom.
Maybe we need something
better? Family law
is so complicated.
It is so hard to get enough
evidence to get a jury conviction.
There are so many personal
factors involved. We need
to build a lot of flexibility
into the law, get some impartial
experts involved to do evaluations,
and of course make a recommendation
based on the 'best interest
of the child.' Does that
sound good? It pretty
much describes the system
we have right now.
Your feedback is welcome.
John
Murtari,
jmurtari@AKidsRight.org
|
Report from Robert Schoolcraft
Here is an interview by Robert
Schoolcraft ( ajc@tampabay.rr.com)
with A.J. Comparetto (author
of "The
Ultimate Stop Dirty Divorce
Success System,"
http://www.divorceproblems.com/).
Rob: To me you are Mr.
Comparetto; can I call you
AJ here?
Mr. Comparetto: You know
you can. Look, just because
I am a lawyer, I put my
clothes on the same way
you do.
Rob: You mean that I
and everyone else maintain
this false vision of an
attorney?
AJ: Absolutely! That
is one reason that so many
people who are going through
a divorce get into trouble.
For some reason they think
lawyers are different or
above them or are going
to magically solve all of
their divorce problems.
Rob: I am not sure I
understand.
AJ: Well, one of the
reasons that lawyers don't
want you to get my course
is that they don't want
you to know the truth behind
dirty divorce. Lawyers want
to give you that warm fuzzy
feeling that they can make
everything better. But they
also want to prolong the
money supply chain.
Rob: Are you referring
to the Dr. Phil show last
year?
AJ: Exactly. You had
a man and women getting
divorced and each of them
had their attorney with
them. Dr. Phil was trying
to mediate to help stop
‘the dirty divorce.’ He
would say something to one
person whose attorney would
interrupt that person's
answer. The attorney's objective
was to ‘stoke the fire.’
Then the other attorney
would make a retort and
stoke the fire some more.
The bottom line was that
neither attorney was going
to allow their client any
flexibility. The fire got
hotter and hotter.
Rob: If I remember correctly,
didn't Dr. Phil give up
in disgust?
AJ: Yeah, he could not
get to the real issues because
he couldn't separate the
attorneys from the clients.
Rob: A friend of yours
is going through that right
now, correct?
AJ: Well he became a
friend after he purchased
my course. That’s how I
got to know him. He called
one day to tell me how much
it had helped him.
Rob: Isn't he the one
that got thrown in jail
a couple times and lost
tens of thousands of dollars
in his battle so far? What
helped him so much?
AJ: He did not realize
that both the attorneys
for him and his ex were
really the ones stoking
the fire. Like everyone
else he thought ‘my attorney
knows what he is doing,
I'll just let him handle
it.’
Rob: And what happened?
AJ: Well they would all
go to court, the attorneys
would start stoking the
fires and my friend would
get so angry that he would
jump up and say, “That’s
not true,” and argue with
the judge. Next thing you
know he is in jail.
Rob: Well how did the
course help him?
AJ: In the course I give
a lot of guidelines. One
of the things I talk about
is getting your emotions
under control.
Rob: Well you talk about
so many in your course.
Is that why everyone is
after you trying to shut
down your course?
AJ: Well, I am an attorney,
but I am not a divorce attorney.
I've been there and done
that.
Rob: So they don't want
you to get this knowledge
out.
AJ: Well the bottom line
is this, divorce is big
business. Divorce
has become an industry with
thousands of people who
make money off of people’s
divorce. Also imagine you
are a divorce attorney and
your client has taken my
course. No matter what you
or the opposing attorney
does, you can't stoke the
fire. At $250.00 an hour
or a lot more – how much
money will you lose if you
can't keep both sides fighting?
Rob: I am starting to
get it, so I am going to
end here. I just can't believe
that with so much good stuff
in your course that attorneys
who say they want to ‘help’
their clients would be so
against it.
AJ: It doesn't fit into
their bottom line.
(The Fourteen Percenter
makes no endorsement for
the above products or services.)
|
Read the Washington Times
|
On March 28, a second American
Coalition for Fathers and
Children (ACFC) newspaper
advertisement -
https://www.acfc.org/advertisingcampaign.htm
- ran in the Washington
Times National Weekly
Edition. This ad is endorsed
by some of the most eminent
and respected leaders in America.
In addition to the national
officers of ACFC, the following
names appear on the ad: Phyllis
Schlafly, President, Eagle
Forum; Paul Weyrich, Chairman
and CEO, Free Congress Foundation;
William J. Murray, President,
Religious Freedom Coalition;
Dr. Don Wildmon, President,
American Family Association;
Concerned Women for America;
Michael J. McManus, President,
Marriage Savers; Dr. Allan
Carlson, author, "Fractured
Generations;" William
Greene, President, RightMarch;
Pacific Justice Institute;
Urban League of Northern Virginia;
Heather Higgins, Chairman,
The Independent Women's Forum;
Dr. Mark I. Klein, MD, board
certified psychiatrist; Bryce
Christensen, Associate Professor,
Southern Utah University;
David M. Wagner, Associate
Professor, Regent University
School of Law; John Eisendrath,
Executive Producer, ABC's
"Alias;" Dr. Warren
Farrell, author, "Father
and Child Reunion;" Glenn
Sacks, columnist and nationally-syndicated
radio talk show host; David
Buchanan, author, "Gendercide
and Human Rights"
These names cannot be ignored.
These are eminent leaders
who speak to the President
and members of Congress on
a regular basis. They head
organizations with hundreds
of thousands of members and
followers.
These leaders are sticking
their necks out for us. They
sympathize with our plight,
support our efforts, and are
willing to back us further.
It is now up to us to act.
These people cannot fight
our battle for us. We are
now on the national stage,
and what we do will be seen
by the world.
This ad presents an inescapable
choice to elected officials:
Either our charges are without
merit, in which case why are
they being endorsed by leaders
of this stature? Or our charges
are true, in which case a
major national scandal is
being ignored by our elected
officials.
Either way, it demands attention,
and that is all we are demanding:
An investigation into allegations
of government wrongdoing alleged
by millions of American citizens
and a full report to the American
people.
Here is what you can do:
· Copy
this ad and circulate it to
your elected officials and
to the media.
· Solicit
local endorsements, and run
the ad in your own local newspapers.
· Some of the
organizations listed above
have local affiliates. Contact
them and offer to create a
coalition for mutual support. |
|
Go
to
www.acfc.org and make
a contribution in support
of these efforts.
Stephen Baskerville, President;
Michael McCormick, Executive
Director; ACFC |
|
|
|
|
|