Reconsider
the
Violence
Against
Women
Act
Vol.
9,
No.
12
The
Fourteen
Percenter
March
2007
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.
-
This
recent
essay
appears
in
several
websites,
including
http://www.ifeminists.net/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.92 ,
http://www.krightsradio.com/o7howvawaseparateschildrenfromfathers.php ,
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/22775.html
,
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1784317/posts
,
http://battlinbog.blog-city.com/how_vawa_separates_children_from_fathers_at_male_matters.htm
,
http://www.mediaradar.org/ -
How
VAWA
separates
children
from
fathers
,
http://newsbyus.com/more.php?id=7187_0_1_0_M ,
http://www.worldfathersunion.com/TOPFRAMESET.htm
How
VAWA
separates
children
from
fathers
The
Violence
Against
Women
Act
(VAWA)
was
designed
in
1994
to
give
additional
protection
to
women
who
were
battered
by
their
intimate
partners.
The
VAWA
has
since
evolved
into
a
billion-dollar-a-year
boondoggle
that
looks
the
other
way
on
female
batterers
and
punishes
men
for
acts
they
did
not
commit.
Companion
laws
to
the
VAWA,
such
as
the
Victims
of
Crime
Act
and
Family
Violence
Prevention
and
Services
Act,
funnel
about
$1
billion
a
year
to
provide
victim
services
and
enhance
law
enforcement
efforts.
The
VAWA
has
also
spawned
the
passage
of
about
1,500
state-level
laws
and
programs.
The
VAWA
establishes
the
legal
framework
to
create
perverse
incentives,
to
make
false
claims
of
abuse,
to
escalate
partner
conflict,
and
to
discourage
partner
reconciliation.
The
result
is
to
break
up
families
and
separate
children
from
their
fathers.
It
has
become
de
rigeur
for
women
to
claim
false
allegations
of
violence
in
order
to
gain
the
upper
hand
in
divorce
and
custody
courts.
The
mere
allegation
of
domestic
violence
is
enough
in
many
states
to
affect
the
child's
access
to a
noncustodial
parent.
Programs
instituted
by
the
VAWA
often
leave
kids
in
jeopardy
and
promote
a
society
of
fatherless
children.
The
VAWA
funds
judicial
education
programs
that
have
been
shown
to
be
ideological
and
one-sided.
Rather
than
helping
judges
balance
the
legitimate
needs
of
the
accuser
with
the
due
process
rights
of
the
accused,
the
VAWA
training
sessions
do
the
opposite,
instructing
judges
to
grant
a
restraining
order
if
there
is
any
hint
whatsoever
of a
problem.
Changes
need
to
be
made
in
the
way
courts
handle
domestic
violence
petitions
for
protective
orders,
particularly
when
they
are
requested
or
issued
in
conjunction
with
a
custody
case.
Many
people
uninitiated
with
the
procedures
of
custody
and
criminal
courts
may
believe
that
such
false
allegations
would
be
recognized
and
punished
by
the
judge
as
slander,
as
lying
under
oath,
as
perjury,
or
as
contempt
of
court.
They
are
not.
Such
lies
are
usually
rewarded
with
primary
custody
of
the
child
and
child
support.
Elaine
Epstein,
former
president
of
the
Massachusetts
Bar
Association,
once
revealed,
"Everyone
knows
that
restraining
orders
and
orders
to
vacate
are
granted
to
virtually
all
who
apply…
In
many
cases,
allegations
of
abuse
are
now
used
for
tactical
advantage."
Protective
orders
and
restraining
orders
are
routinely
used
by
women
in
custody
courts.
Many
lawyers
for
men
are
compelled
to
counter
such
orders
with
a
restraining
order
for
their
client.
Such
legal
posturing
side-tracks
any
issue
of
the
best
interests
of
the
child.
In
one
state
alone
(
West
Virginia
),
15,274
domestic
violence
petitions
were
filed
in
State
magistrate
courts
during
2005.
That
year,
14,821
domestic
violence
emergency
protective
order
cases
were
transferred
to
Family
Court
for
hearing.
Ninety-seven
percent
of
the
petitions
were
granted.
Studies
made
by
Men
Against
Discrimination
indicated
as
many
as
67-75
percent
of
those
petitions
were
based
on
questionable
claims
(i.e.,
false
allegations),
but
they
were
enough
to
cast
doubt
on
parents'
ability
to
parent.
The
legal
definition
of
Domestic
Violence
includes
non-physical
actions,
e.g.
stalking,
silent
phone
calls,
threatening
language
etc
and
"low-threshold"
actions
such
as
touching.
Even
if
none
of
these
actions
take
place,
women
are
still
granted
restraining
orders
if
they
claim
they
are
fearful.
Candidates
are
often
coached
to
say
the
word,
"fear,"
when
applying
for
restraining
orders.
Situations
where
assault
has
been
alleged
should
be
heard
by
criminal
courts
and
not
be
treated
as a
untested
slur
on a
man's
character
in
family
proceedings.
The
American
maxim
of
'innocent
until
proven
guilty'
should
apply
to
allegations
of
domestic
violence
just
like
any
other
allegations
of
criminal
behavior.
The
legal
burden
of
proof
beyond
a
reasonable
doubt
should
apply.
This
would
help
women
as
well
as
men.
When
actual
crimes
are
heard
in a
civil
setting,
justice
is
not
served.
A
true
victim
is
not
protected
by a
restraining
order
-
which
are
handed
out
like
tissues
for
crocodile
tears.
An
actual
violent
abuser
is
not
subject
to
repercussions
of
criminal
courts.
Like
the
'Boy
Who
Cried
Wolf,'
the
preponderance
of
false
allegations
of
abuse
means
that
the
courts
cannot
give
full
attention
to
cases
of
actual
abuse.
The
current
epidemic
of
false
claims
of
domestic
violence
weakens
the
American
family
by
promoting
family
dissolution
and
discouraging
men
from
marriage.
There
is
little
doubt
that
the
VAWA
has
contributed
to
our
culture
of
false
allegations.
Each
year,
at
least
one
million
false
allegations
of
domestic
violence
are
made,
usually
in
the
context
of a
divorce.
The
result
of
the
VAWA
is
rampant
false
claims
of
abuse.
This
means
that
children
are
removed
from
decent,
loving
fathers.
The
Violence
Against
Women
Act
must
be
radically
altered
or
else
it
will
continue
to
destroy
the
father/child
bond.
Don
Mathis,
Editor
The
Fourteen
Percenter,
A
Newsletter
for
Noncustodial
Parents
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NCP-TX-Grayson/message/8
Responses
Don, Excellent
article
on
VAWA
and
its
effect
on
children.
Warren
Farrell
This is
a
very
well
written
article
and
very
true
about
VAWA.
It
promotes
discrimination
against
men
accused
of
domestic
violence
and
a
presumption
of
guilt
even
after
proven
innocent.
VAWA funds
organizations
that
practice
gender-discrimination
such
as
Life
Span
Center
for
Legal
Services
for
"Victims"
of
Abuse
and
Legal
Aid
Foundation.
Where
else
in
the
world
can
a
mother
that
verbally
and
physically
abuses
her
children
obtain
so
much
free
legal
protection?
Abusive
women
are
always
looked
upon
as
victims
by
the
lawyers,
judges,
and
politicians.
We
need
to
file
a
federal
lawsuit
against
the
United
States
government
challenging
VAWA
as
unconstitutional.
I
certainly
plan
to...
I
won't
keep
quiet
about
the
discrimination
that
I
have
faced.
I
served
ten
years
in
the
military.
I
served
two
deployments
in
the
Persian
Gulf
during
the
first
Gulf
War...
and
for
what?
It
absolutely
sickens
me
that
this
type
of
discrimination
is
promoted
and
funded
by
the
government.
Carlos
C
Great
picture,
great
article.
Very
well
put
together,
lucid,
concise…
In
other
words,
meets
my
criteria
for
good
editorials.
This
should
be
submitted
to
the
San
Antonio
Express-News
and
other
large
outlets.
It’s
a
pretty
incendiary
issue.
Jeanne
Guthrie
Your
article
is
far
better
written
and
much
less
politically
directed
than
the
usual
run
of
material;
it
sticks
to
the
subject
and
avoids
wandering
off
into
political
ranting.
That
is
why
I
selected
it
for
re-publication
on
our
site.
John
T.
Smith,
World
Fathers
Union
Your
writing
is
great,
I
always
enjoy
reading
your
stuff.
Thank
you.
Shelly
Barreras,
Special
Advisor,
Dr.
Mark
Klein
Presidential
Exploratory
Committee
Note
the
quote
from
the
former
President
of
the
Massachusetts
Bar
Association,
openly
acknowledging
the
VAWA
for
its
truer
effects
as
the
VAFA
(i.e.,
Violence
Against
Families
Avenue). I
wonder,
did
she
share
these
views
with
the
former
Governor
of
Massachusetts?
Make
you
wonder
again,
at
least
this
dadi. Walter
Fields
Don,
good
to
see
you
"moving
up"
to
op-eds. And,
Just
in
time
for
Valentines
Day!
Gordon
E.
Finley,
Ph.D.,
Professor
of
Psychology
Florida
International
University
I
think
that
this
topic
needs
to
be
discussed
a
lot
more.
The
VAWA
is a
bill
that
has
been
pushed
by
radical
feminists
to
deprive
children
from
their
fathers,
puts
fathers
and
noncustodial
parents into
slavery, destroys
families,
and
destroys
society.
This
is a
gender
specific
bill
that
discriminates
against all
men
and
fathers.
It
must
be
done
away
with.
Keep
up
the
great
work
in
exposing
this
evil
bill.
Steven
Damron,
fathers-4-justice
Reprints
Regarding
http://www.toledofreepress.com/?id=4855,
the
Toledo
Free
Press
ran
this
letter
in
February,
http://www.toledofreepress.com/?id=4923.
Making
a
point
The
men
and
women
of
Fathers
4
Justice
("Fathers
claim
inequities
in
family
court,"
Feb.
11)
have
a
point.
In
almost
every
divorce
case,
one
parent
(usually
the
mother)
is
'awarded'
custody
of
the
children
-
regardless
if
both
parents
are
fit.
Why?
And
in
the
majority
of
custody
cases,
one
parent
(usually
the
father)
is
ordered
to
pay
child
support,
regardless
if
both
parents
earn
an
equitable
amount.
Why?
These
questions
-
and
others
-
need
to
be
answered.
Children
need
both
parents
-
not
visitors.
Society
is
not
the
only
beneficiary
to
50/50
shared
parenting.
Kids
would
be
better
off
with
equal
access
to
both
parents.
Don
Mathis,
Sherman
,
Texas
Request
for
Articles
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
editor
is
grateful
to
http://a1laminating.com/
for
regional
printing.