HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: shedevil@vix.com (Anne P. Mitchell JD)
Newsgroups: alt.child-support,alt.dads-rights,alt.parents-teens,misc.kids,soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Hillary Clinton - Family Values?
Date: 20 Jul 1992 22:59:48 -0700
Organization: Fathers' Rights & Equality Exchange
NNTP-Posting-Host: gw.home.vix.com

In The American Spectator, August 1992, there is a discussion of
Hillary Clinton's views on reform measures for children and the law.
One of her major points is that she believes that children from the
age of 12 on up should, when the interests of the parents and the
child diverge, be able to take their parents to court and testify
against them.  In addressing this element of her proposals in her
article "Children's Rights: A Legal Perspective", Hillary Clinton
says, in "answer" to the concerns of critics of these reforms:


	"I prefer that [court] intervention into an ongoing
	family be limited to decisions that could have long-term
	and possible irreparable effects if they are not resolved.
	Decisions about motherhood and abortion, schooling, cosmetic
	surgery, treatment of venereal disease, or employment,
	and others where the decision or lack of one will significantly
	affect the child's future should not be made unilaterally
	by parents.  Children should have a right to be permitted to
	decide their own future if they are competent."


As the author of the article says, "In other words: 'Don't worry,
we'll still leave mundane decisions to the discretion of parents, it's
just the important ones they can't be trusted with.'"

Give me a break!...is there a person among us who would have and
could have made informed and reasoned decisions with such far reaching
and permanent ramifications, when they were *12* years old?  Or even
13, or 14!

I've said it before [though maybe not here] and I'll say it
again... the #1 reason why I would not even *consider* Bill Clinton
for president, is Hillary Clinton.
-- 
   LOOKING FOR:  Stewart Woodward, Hobson Woodward, Lorna Taylor & JJ Lancey
I am: Anne Mitchell, mom, & founder of the Fathers' Rights & Equality Exchange
Ask me about FREE!  FREE files available via anonymous ftp 128.45.1.1; dir /pub
			DE STELLA MARTIS VERE VENISTI
Newsgroups: alt.child-support,alt.dads-rights
From: richard.donovan@factory.com (Richard Donovan) 
Newsgroups: alt.child-support
Subject: CLASS ACTION SUIT
Date: 25 Jul 92 17:08:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-1243v.32bis
Reply-To: richard.donovan@factory.com (Richard Donovan) 

John :
    Hi : I agree. Read the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of
1980 and its Code of Fed Regs, and the Child Abuse Prevention Act of
1980 and its CFR and be stunned to learn that the FEDS have been paying
bounties to the states to take children and have parents declared
mentally ill. It does not matter whether you are a CP or NCP, if you
have children it could happen to them as it has already happened to
thousnads of children and that is the necessary basis to have standing
in a class action suit.
   The fact that auditing is not required to *start* until next year
ought to make it the *scandal* of the decade, but that depends in part
on the media and getting organized.
   The money comes out of AFDC, SOcial Security and Medicaid, 3 of the
biggest sink holes in the Fed Budget. Begins to make sense, doesn't it?
Hope to hear from you here or on FatherNet BBS (718)494-1719.
From: richard.donovan@factory.com (Richard Donovan) 
Newsgroups: alt.child-support
Subject: RE: HILLARY CLINTON - FAM
Date: 25 Jul 92 17:17:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-1243v.32bis
Reply-To: richard.donovan@factory.com (Richard Donovan) 

Try reading the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Acvt of 1980 ( PL
92-272 ) and its Code of Fed Regs and tell me what the *state's*
interests are in children.
                                                                                            
Newsgroups: alt.child-support,alt.dads-rights,alt.parents-teens,misc.kids,soc.men,soc.women
From: hrose@eff.org (Helen Trillian Rose)
Subject: Re: Hillary Clinton - Family Values?
Organization: The Evil Fascist IRC Admins From Hell, Inc.
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 16:57:59 GMT

Anne> == Anne P. Mitchell JD <shedevil@vix.com> 

 Anne> Give me a break!...is there a person among us who would have and
 Anne> could have made informed and reasoned decisions with such far
 Anne> reaching and permanent ramifications, when they were *12* years
 Anne> old?  Or even 13, or 14!

Yes, there are people like that, and that is what the Court is supposed
to decide. Whether or not the person in question is one of those people.

It doesn't say "All 12 year olds ....". There *is* a basic level of
competency that the court must decide whether or not it exists in the
person.

--Helen

--
Helen Trillian Rose             	email eff@eff.org for EFF info
Electronic Frontier Foundation   	irc operators: operlist@eff.org
Systems and Networks Administration	Flames to: 
<hrose@eff.org, hrose@cs.bu.edu>	women-not-to-be-messed-with@eff.org
Xref: sparky alt.child-support:2173 alt.dads-rights:1517 alt.parents-teens:1056 misc.kids:19407
From: root@dogear.spk.wa.us (Bob Kirkpatrick   )
Newsgroups: alt.child-support,alt.dads-rights,alt.parents-teens,misc.kids
Subject: Re: Hillary Clinton - Family Values?
Date: 23 Jul 92 03:31:09 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Dog Ear'd Systems of Spokane, WA

JLB155@psuvm.psu.edu (Jennifer Brown) writes:

> FIRST, I couldn't post to all groups at once (don't know why not).
> Broken up into alt.child-support,alt.dads-rights,alt.parents-teens,
> misc.kids  AND  soc.women,soc.men.  So if you're gonna followup, you
> may as well add either set to the list, if you can, so that the others
> get to see your response.

Why do you think that Usenet has newsgroups?

If you're going to post to every possible group you can think of, then
you defeat the whole purpose of individual newsgroups.

Yes, I know that altnet is an anarchy, but it's a cooperative anarchy.
Please respect the newsgroup boundaries, and only crosspost when it's
absolutely crucial. Not crucial to your point, crucial to the net. The
size of your readership isn't an issue.

Thanks in advance for your cooperation.

---
Bob Kirkpatrick  --  Dog Ear'd Systems of Spokane, WA
root@dogear.spk.wa.us           bobk@dogear.spk.wa.us
From: M20614@mwvm.mitre.org (Hugh Pritchard)
Newsgroups: alt.child-support
Subject: Class-action suits
Date: 21 Jul 92 12:59:09 GMT
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean VA 22102

Class-action suits can be brought against particular and specified entities
(persons, business entities, governments [if they choose to allow themselves
to be sued]).
 
How can a suit be brought against an entire CLASS of people?
 
How does Alan Yasutovich propose that an entire class of people all be served
notice that their day in court is coming?  Newspaper ads?
 
No, this is properly the domain of legislatures.  Get the state and Federal
laws changed -- a daunting prospect.  (The nation couldn't even get the
Equal Rights Amendment passed, which stated simply that discrimination
based solely on sex was henceforth to be illegal.)
 
**  Hugh Pritchard,  hapritch@mitre.org,  703/883-6616
From: jsw@cray.com (Jon S. Wood)
Newsgroups: alt.child-support
Subject: Re: FAMILIES & MENTAL ILLNESS
Date: 29 Jul 92 15:28:30 GMT
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.

In article <1196.561.uupcb@factory.com> richard.donovan@factory.com (Richard Donovan)  writes:
>Hi Dan :
>    Reading the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 ( PL
>-92-272 ) and the Code of Fed Regs, and the Child Abuse Prevention Act
>of 1985 and its CFR should be enough to persuade you that there is a
>national policy where the FEDS give money to the states for breaking up
>families and calling them mentally ill or dysfunctional and pay starts @
>$25,000 per child taken per year!! Aduits are supposed to start NEXT
>year, 1993.
>   It pays for Law Guardians, Shrinks, and must take place in court.
>                                                                                                                             


  Could you, Richard Donovan, please explain this adpotion assist.....
act of 1980 to me. I am thoroughly confused about your repeated
messages about it. How does it affect me, a non-custodial parent?

jon
Xref: sparky alt.child-support:2324 alt.dads-rights:1677 alt.parents-teens:1117 misc.kids:20134
From: tjc50@ccc.amdahl.com (Terry Carroll)
Newsgroups: alt.child-support,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Is it...Jacobian Meyers?
Date: 24 Jul 92 06:00:48 GMT
Reply-To: tjc50@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Terry Carroll)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <1992Jul21.143152.27270@ll.mit.edu> yasu@ll.mit.edu (Alan Yasutovich) whimpers:
>
>	But she's all we've got!  I'd let an EMT help me if it
>	would save my life.

Earth to Alan: She isn't all you've got.  You don't have her.
-- 
The above is my thoughts, not Amdahl's;   |  Terry Carroll  408/992-2152
The above is not legal advice;            |  Senior Computer Architect
Contents sold by weight, not by volume;   |  Amdahl Corporation
Your mileage may vary.                    |  tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com
Newsgroups: alt.child-support,alt.dads-rights,alt.parents-teens,misc.kids,soc.men,soc.women
From: cfeem@ux1.cts.eiu.edu (Eleanor Midkiff)
Subject: Re: Hillary Clinton - Family Values?
Summary: Kids are pretty helpless 
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 04:44:53 GMT
Organization: Eastern Illinois University
Keywords: Professionals neededJust 

In article <1682BC12C.M18611@MBVM.Mitre.Org> M18611@MBVM.Mitre.Org (Kathy Wilk) writes:




 




 
>  This reminds me of a friend when I was a child and a teen-ager.
>My friend's teen years were VERY hard for her.  Her cousin, who was well
>into his twenties and married, seduced her.  She tried to commit suicide
>but didn't get far enough into the attempt to be admitted to the hospital.
>Her cousin (the married seducer) was approached by a close family friend
>who was gay and 'came on' to him.
>  When all of these things came out, after my friend was grown, and after
>her cousin was divorced, the overwhelming reaction from family and family
>friends was, 'Why bring this sort of thing up?', accompanied by a sneering
>attitude.  It was very hurtful, even to me, and I only witnessed the reactions
>and wasn't directly involved.  I have known the people since I was a child,
>myself.  They would fall into the category of community leaders, by the way.
>What to say or do?  How to handle the rage?
>  I have written before about what helpless victims children are when it
>comes to sexual abuse.  This sort of abuse has not happened to me.  My
>friend was a teen when this happened (I never knew how much the cousin
>forced himself on her, if he did, only that he was much older).  My friend
>asked me to run away from home with her and I said no.  I was having a really
>good (socially) year in high school and all I knew about was the suicide
>attempt, not the seduction.  I wonder today how I could have helped her.
> 
> 
>                        K. Wilk
>                        M18611@MBVM.MITRE.ORG
> 
>            <--********************************-->
> 'Thrusting my nose firmly between his teeth, I threw him to the ground
>  on top of me.' - Mark Twain
>            <--********************************-->

I don't believe that there was anything you could have done, given who you
were and who your friend was.  I, too, had a friend who was abused as a
teen -- and it never occurred to me to tell the authorities, although I
hope that my children, living now, would tell me and/or someone in
authority immediately.  You can't blame yourself for not knowing what to
do.

Eleanor Midkiff
(cfeem@eiu.edu)
Xref: sparky alt.child-support:2229 alt.dads-rights:1572 alt.parents-teens:1090 misc.kids:19665
From: root@dogear.spk.wa.us (Bob Kirkpatrick   )
Newsgroups: alt.child-support,alt.dads-rights,alt.parents-teens,misc.kids
Subject: Re: Hillary Clinton - Family Values?
Date: 25 Jul 92 17:41:27 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Dog Ear'd Systems of Spokane, WA

JLB155@psuvm.psu.edu (Jennifer Brown) writes:

> >> FIRST, I couldn't post to all groups at once (don't know why not).
> >> Broken up into alt.child-support,alt.dads-rights,alt.parents-teens,
> >> misc.kids  AND  soc.women,soc.men.  So if you're gonna followup, you
> >> may as well add either set to the list, if you can, so that the others
> >> get to see your response.
> >
> >Why do you think that Usenet has newsgroups?
> >
> >If you're going to post to every possible group you can think of, then
> >you defeat the whole purpose of individual newsgroups.
> >
> 
> God, can't I even let people know what I did??  EVERYONE else seems to
> think it's okay to cross-post...to SIMILAR groups.  I would've, but could
> not.  If I was able to, I never would have mentioned anything about
> "groups" in my post, and no one would have cared.  But because I told
> people that I was having a problem, I get yelled at??

Perhaps this is time to ask the proverbial question: "If everyone was
jumping off of a cliff to their death, would you do it too?"

You weren't yelled at, you were given a short reminder regarding the
purpose of newsgroup segregation.

> If I'm going to be treated like a child, I may as well "do what I want".
> She's dead!

...and so you make life-threats --in retalliation for being reminded about 
netiquette? 


---
Bob Kirkpatrick  --  Dog Ear'd Systems of Spokane, WA
root@dogear.spk.wa.us           bobk@dogear.spk.wa.us
Xref: sparky alt.child-support:2187 alt.parents-teens:1067 misc.kids:19472
From: peggy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us
Newsgroups: alt.child-support,alt.parents-teens,misc.kids
Subject: Re: Hillary Clinton - Family Values?
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 11:52:04 PDT
Reply-To: peggy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us

In article <5685@grus.cs.nps.navy.mil>, shimeall@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil (timothy shimeall) writes:
> 
> Isn't it surprising that a lawyer would come up with such a proposal
> to expand lawyers' incomes?
> 				Tim

Isn't it surprising that the mother of a twelve-year-old would 
come up with such a proposal to threaten parents' rights?

-- peggy dolgenos

Newsgroups: alt.child-support
From: jsw@cray.com (Jon S. Wood)
Subject: Re: Please tell me/part 2
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: 30 Jul 92 16:50:50 CDT

In article <1992Jul29.124421.22567@ll.mit.edu> yasu@ll.mit.edu (Alan Yasutovich) writes:
>In article <22826@oasys.dt.navy.mil> lbrown@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Latonya Brown) writes:
>>
>>Hi it's me again.  I have another question to my story.  My daughters
>>father told me that if I take him to court that he'll let them lock
>>him up (because he has stated that he won't pay) and come after me when
>>he gets out.  How and/or can I get a restraining order.  This man already
>>has 2 Restraining orders, they are 3 years from his son and his son's
>>Mother. (PG County area)  He tookxx the door to his son's grandmothers
>>off, just ripped it off.
>>
>>As of yet I have not filed, I do have the paper work though.  I don't
>>know if it's worth the frustration or the harrasment that may come along
>>with it.
>>
>>
>>
>>TONYA BROWN
>
>
>	Well I haven't seen any responses posted to this so I 
>	guess I'll have to pick up the gauntlette  and help this
>	poor woman out.  (I am, of course, presuming that no private
>	mail had been sent)
>
>
>	You need to get a lawyer!
>
>
>
>	There.  How's that?
>
>
>	Hey!  I'm getting good at this!
>
>
>-- 
>	Alan Yasutovich
>	"inquiring  (and nosey) minds WANT TO KNOW!!!"
>	I can remember when "safe sex" meant having a padded headboard!!
>	Tick Tock.....Tick Tock......Tick Tock .....Tick Tock......



Alan, you are wrong. You should have said, 

 You need a good experienced lawyer. A lawyer who will tell you that
it is in your best interest to pack up, shut up and pay your support 
dollars. Your going to get a hot rod up the ass called divorced
settlement and you will be told that 1. it is your right to question
but that is only for fools. 2. Your going to be billed for the rod.
3. you're going to like it because it is in the best interest of 
women. 

Best lawyer advice I've ever needed and received. 

"You have only one right as you lilly **** asshole, the right to
work so you can pay". 

Quote from attorney when he saw the lightbulb go off after explaining
men's rights, father's rights and today's court.

Legal fee.  200.00 

Results: Same as any other hard working "professional" divorce attorney
in the country.

FACT:
Actual quotes
Actual costs
Reality. 

Personal regret>

 That I didn't get become an attorney and work in divorce. The answering
machine has been the divorced attorney's saviour. Now he doesn't
have to hear the man kill himself over the phone, he can read it
in the paper the next day and erase the message on the phone before
he has to listen to it.

Good Day all!

Jon
From: yasu@ll.mit.edu (Alan Yasutovich)
Subject: Re: Is it...Jacobian Meyers?
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 14:30:34 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.233459.11026@nsc.nsc.com> jrr@nsc.nsc.com (Jerry Roe) writes:
>In article <o552NB3w165w@jimmc.chi.il.us> jim@jimmc.chi.il.us (Jim McNicholas) writes:
>>
>>...Imagine if 100,000 men got together and marched on Washington. The 
>>women who would be marching with us the media would think they were 
>>spouses, only to find out they were NCP's as well. Maybe then the media 
>>would wake up!!
>
>Hey, I like that!  Come on, netters - how do we get 100,000 of us all in
>the same place at the same time?  We know there are far more than 100K
>divorced NCP dads in this country, right?
>
>On second thought, never mind, I'm probably being too optimistic.
>

	AIDs activists have no problem doing it!  Funny thing, too.

	*They* have a death sentence.  At least *we* have a fighting
	chance.

-- 
	Alan Yasutovich
	"inquiring  (and nosey) minds WANT TO KNOW!!!"
	I can remember when "safe sex" meant having a padded headboard!!
	Tick Tock.....Tick Tock......Tick Tock .....Tick Tock......
Newsgroups: alt.child-support,alt.dads-rights
From: scottj@gumedlib.georgetown.edu (John L. Scott)
Subject: Re: Reply to Alan Yasutovich
Organization: Georgetown University Medical Library
Followup-To: alt.child-support,alt.dads-rights
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 14:47:47 GMT
X-Posted-From: iamac-1.georgetown.edu
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

Gary Brainin writes in response to Alan Yasutovich:
    [...]
>   ...  Again, recall that I am
>   not taking you to task for asking the original question, but rather
>   for dictating the terms of the answer, then attacking because it has
>   not met your dictation.  If there's only one answer you will accept,
>   at least have the courtesy of telling us what it is so we can parrot
>   it back to you and thus make you go away.
    [...]

To which I reply:

Mr. Brainin, you sir are being far too charitable.  Yasutovich did far more
than ask a question and then attack the answerer because he didn't like the
answer.  He also demanded that another human being take up his now
thoroughly
discredited idea and actually represent the class of NCP in court actions.
He did not ask her if she wanted to spend her time, energy, and money on
his preposterous notion, nor if she was willing to risk her personal and
fledgling professional reputations on it--no, he DEMANDED that she do those
things.  In the course of his demand, he managed to imply that she had
never
do anything "usefull" (sic) and that she had never done any "REAL good".
After he "took her to task", never questioning his right to do so, he asked
if she would cowardly back out of this 'commitment' or think up some mealy
mouthed excuse.  He left no room for her to politely decline as he had
already set up any refusal to do his bidding as worthy of nothing but
contempt.

Just so we don't forget the full magnitude of his presumptuousness, here is
his original post:

] 	Also, I suppose part of the problem would be legal representation.
] 
] 	Well,  We've got a lawyer RIGHT HERE ON THE NET!  She hasn't
] 	given answer to my question written above yet.  I wonder why.
] 
] 	But finally after all this time here's an opportunity for
] 	Annie to:
] 
] 	1) Have a *USEFULL* project which actually might do some good.
] 	2) To work on a NATIONAL level.  We can put aside all the
] 	bullshit about "your state", and put the rubber to the road!
] 
] 
] 	Comeon Annie.  You're a lawyre now!  Will you now be willing
] 	to "put your money where your mouth is", after all this time
] 	that I've taken you to task? or will you:
] 	a) be silent
] 	b) find the back door
] 	c) think up another excuse
] 
] 
] 	Forgive me for my bluntness.  But I consider this to be the
] 	perfect opportunity for you to do some REAL good, and also
] 	consider you to be qualified.
] 
] 	Let's see if Annie is going to become "just another lawyer",
] 	now that she's all done with school, or if she's really
] 	going to come out fighting!

And all this didn't reveal him to be the half the ass he showed himself to 
be in later posts.

-John L. Scott
From: richard.donovan@factory.com (Richard Donovan) 
Newsgroups: alt.child-support
Subject: RE: HILLARY CLINTON - FAM
Date: 25 Jul 92 17:14:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-1243v.32bis
Reply-To: richard.donovan@factory.com (Richard Donovan) 

Hi Peggy:
     It's not suprising, actually its old news. Read the Adoption
Assiatnce and Child Welfare Act of 1980 ( PL 92-272 ) and its Code of
Fed Regulations which place a bounty of $25,000 per child taken by the
states and the bounty is paid by the FEDS. Money comes from AFDC, SOcial
Secutiry and Medicaid!!!! All well managed programs. The money pays for
Law Guardians, Psychologists etc. It must be done in a judicial setting.
   Audits aren't required until 1993.
    Should we tell the Pentagon or call BCCI or ask Keating for his
advice?
        Richard Donovan.
                                                                  
Xref: sparky alt.child-support:2157 alt.dads-rights:1502 misc.legal:14620
From: ekman@netcom.com (Crossly the Glad-Eyed Bear)
Newsgroups: alt.child-support,alt.dads-rights,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Is it...Jacobian Meyers?
Summary: Enough already
Date: 21 Jul 92 19:16:18 GMT
Organization: Home for the Terminally Infirm

Like one of those rat-on-a-stick yap dogs that are continually at your
heels, Alan Yasutovitch has for months now been at Anne Mitchell's
heels, yapping his demand that she perform whatever free service his
current whim dictates.  When he doesn't get his way, he becomes
abusive.

Now that Gary Brainin has taken him to task, he resorts to a plea for
common courtesy.

Alan, your response to Ms. Mitchell was far beyond the most elastic
bounds of common courtesy.  I think parts of it could well be described
as character assassination.

It's painfully evident that you harbor some hostility toward lawyers.
Apparently Ms. Mitchell serves as a focus for your venting of that
hostility.  Why don't you go find an appropriate target and leave her
alone?  You've grown wearisome.
-- 
Crossly the Glad-Eyed Bear              ekman@netcom.com
Home for the Terminally Infirm, Redwood City, California
Newsgroups: alt.child-support