HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.free-l
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 09:33:08 -0500
From:         David Garrod <garrod@ECN.PURDUE.EDU>
Subject:      E-Mail to Clinton

     I have tried now several times to send e-mail to supposedly
Clinton`s e-mail address.
75300.3115@compuserve.com

Every time it has come back as undeliverable because of full mail box.

Question:  Has anyone verified that this is Clinton`s or a Whitehouse
mailbox?

Suggestion:  If anyone succeeds in getting through can he/she immediately
post on free-l that there is space in the box, so the rest of us can have
a shot.

Comment: One mailing came back almost immediately saying the mailbox was
full; the longest took about 20 minutes to come back.  So don`t assume
that simply because it did not come back in a minute it was received.

David Garrod

garrod@ecn.purdue.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-receipt-to: "glover" <glover@msmailgw1.arlut.utexas.edu>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.free-l
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 16:23:47 U
From:         glover <glover@MSMAILGW1.ARLUT.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: RE: WIS. CS LAWs - Citing the judge

>With respect to:
>
>Some ideas for the work ahead:
>
>1a) Compile a list of "Anti-Fairness" statutes for the area of interest,
>    county, state, federal.
>1b) Review the voting records of the individuals responsible.
>1c) Publish those records and distribute to the appropriate support groups
>
>2a) Have people send information into a central clearing house giving such
>    information as:
>         His attorney's name & Bar #
>         Her attorney's name & Bar #
>         Judge's name and court
>         etc.
>         etc.
>         etc.
>3) Same for social workers
>4) Same for mediators
>
>
>This is a good idea. I would need guidance on how to go about getting this
>information, but am willing to do work as time permits (time is at a high
>premium for me, as it probably is for all in midst of divorce/custody.
>
>Unquestionably the need is for organization and mobilization. This is our
>challenge in 1993 and beyond.
>
>Mark

A database design/format is certainly needed, but it has been suggested that
much of this data already exists in some areas, e.g. P.A.C.E. I will begin
in my area (Austin, Tx) to look for sources but I am not too optimistic. The
group I have encountered (I will spare the organization name) did not impress
me at all but I may go back looking for data. I will post to this group when
information is located regardless of the source.

Also, it may seem petty and self centered, but I'm mad as hell with this
system, in particular, the way men have been exploited in divorces. I feel
that there should be an effort for men and by men to address this sickness
once and for all. In reality though we should support and encourage all of
those who wish to be fair and equitable even though they may be ex-wives or
attorneys ;-).

Dennis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.free-l
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 11:06:35 EST
From:         Byron=Bollas%HQ%Rational@VINES1.RATSYS.COM
Subject: Re: Statistics

I called the Family and Probate Court Administrative Office in Boston this AM.
I was informed that no statistics are kept in Massachusetts on percentage of
fathers who get custody vs. percentage of mothers that do. They told me I'd
have to go to every court house in the state and compile that information
myself.

I am running down some other potential sources of info that I have. should any
come to fruition I will post the results to the list.

Byron
(to borrow Rama's phrase which I hope he doesn't mind me using...
A Custodial Father in Massachusetts)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.free-l
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 09:50:46 EST
From:         Mark Charalambous <vicorp!mc@UUNET.UU.NET>
Subject:      Re: GAL advice needed

Paul

On the question regarding "details involved in your marriage", I have about
1 1/2 (single-spaced) typed pages.
On the question of "details leading to the separation", I have 3 1/4 pages
(I have to explain the circumstances leading to the restraining order).
On "negative qualities of your spouse", I have 1/2 page.
On "statement regarding your future plans", I have 1 1/4 pages.
On "reasons why you feel you would be a better custodial parent", I have 2/3
of a page.

The negative things I say are in the "details leading to the separation",
and "negative qualities" sections.
On the "future plans" and "why I'm better" sections, I gear it almost all
with respect to the needs of the children; why they will be better served
by me, and why they haven't been served by my spouse's actions since the
separation.

As I looked at this, I see that 3 1/4 pages is a lot; however, I have to
explain in detail the circumsatnces of the separation, because unfortunately
for me, she engineered things to appear in her favor if just the legal/criminal
actions are looked at.

Oh yes, about 1/5 of a page for "describe the positive qualities of your
spouse".

---Mark
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: State University of New York - Central Administration
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.free-l
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 07:49:28 EST
From:         PAUL BRUCKER <BRUCKEPJ@SNYCENVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Congressional E-mail
              26 Jan 1993 15:57:08 GMT from <kkopp@UXH.CSO.UIUC.EDU>

On Tue, 26 Jan 1993 15:57:08 GMT koppenhoefer kyle cramm said:
>  The first question is: Is congress on e-mail ?
>
>  If so, where can I find a list of their addresses.  I am particularly
>interested in Illinois congressmen.

   I gleaned this from the Village Voice...

     ...ISIS (Integrated Systems and Information Services), which gets
     hooked up this month, will allow any lawmaker who requests it to
     have e-mail access to the global Internet computer network and all
     of the so-called X.400 e-mail gateways, which include AT&T Mail,
     MCI Mail, and other business-oriented systems. All told, ISIS will
     allow Congress to reach out to nearly every significant business
     leader, researcher, and educator in the free world--tens of millions
     of people. Yet the plan omits one key detail: Publishing a directory
     of electronic mail addresses so that *you* can write to *them*.

      "A lot of congressmen are not to keen on that," says James P. Love,
     director of Ralph Nader's Taxpayer Assets Project. "Several members
     have Internet access right now, but it doesn't do much good [for
     citizens] unless you have their address, and they consider that
     private." The reason Congress wants to retain that privacy is obvious:
     legislators already consider themselves besieged by numerous interest
     groups--the last thing they want is to give the electorate another
     medium for getting in touch with them.

     Article written by Joe Abernathy.


                                 Paul
                            bruckepj@snycenvm
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.free-l
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 11:00:19 EST
From:         kalrark%phu020.cis.smithkline.com@SMITHKLINE.COM
Subject:      Re: GAL advice needed

>Paul
>
>On the question regarding "details involved in your marriage", I have about
>1 1/2 (single-spaced) typed pages.
>On the question of "details leading to the separation", I have 3 1/4 pages
>(I have to explain the circumstances leading to the restraining order).
>On "negative qualities of your spouse", I have 1/2 page.
>On "statement regarding your future plans", I have 1 1/4 pages.
>On "reasons why you feel you would be a better custodial parent", I have 2/3
>of a page.
>
>The negative things I say are in the "details leading to the separation",
>and "negative qualities" sections.
>On the "future plans" and "why I'm better" sections, I gear it almost all
>with respect to the needs of the children; why they will be better served
>by me, and why they haven't been served by my spouse's actions since the
>separation.
>
>As I looked at this, I see that 3 1/4 pages is a lot; however, I have to
>explain in detail the circumsatnces of the separation, because unfortunately
>for me, she engineered things to appear in her favor if just the legal/criminal
>actions are looked at.
>
>Oh yes, about 1/5 of a page for "describe the positive qualities of your
>spouse".
>
>---Mark
>

I am from PA, I was asked such questions by the evaluator.  I submitted the
information on about 160 pages in a three-ring binder.  Most of the volume was
in appendices.

I ran into the usual deliema of volume vs readability.  But, I did not want to
be in a position where I would leave anything out.  You basically have one
chance.

Most of the information was not read by the evaluator, but when I challenged him
on that he was put in a very defensive position.  After all they are supposed to
read what you provide them, even though in reality they do not.

May I suggest that the longest part in such a document should be "reasons why
you feel you would be a better custodial parent".

I had lots of positive qualities of my X, but they were not related to
parenting. e.g. "she is an excellent cook".

I took the approach that I did not want to be too negative overall but at the
same time I did want to pretend to be positive about the whole issue. Basically,
I took the divorce because I was sick of the situation and you cannot sugar-coat
it.

Rama Kant Kalra
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: State University of New York - Central Administration
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.free-l
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 13:44:18 EST
From:         PAUL BRUCKER <BRUCKEPJ@SNYCENVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: email for Clinton/Gore
              21 Jan 1993 15:51:09 PST from <Michael.Condry@ENG.SUN.COM>

   I tried the Clinton/Gore E-mail address...it did not work.
   Something about an "unknown listserv address."


                          Paul
                        bruckepj@snycenvm
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII
content-length: 2201
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.free-l
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 12:59:24 PST
From:         Michael Condry <Michael.Condry@ENG.SUN.COM>
Subject:      RE: 1993: Year of the Divorced Father

I think that fathers who are CP's are at least equal in
unfair treatment to the women. I am just understanding the NCP
situation (my daughter moved into her mother's after 5 years)
So I would strongly support year of father.  just my 2c

Michael

> From @PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU:FREE-L@INDYCMS.BITNET Mon Jan 25 12:39:05 1993
> Subject:      RE: 1993: Year of the Divorced Father
> X-To:         FREE-L%INDYCMS.BitNet@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU
> To: Multiple recipients of list FREE-L <FREE-L%INDYCMS.BITNET@pucc.Princeton.E
 DU>
>
> Simply a motion, I'll second it.
> ______________________________________________________________________________
 _
> To: FREE-L%INDYCMS.BitNet@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU
> From: Fathers' Rights and Equality Exchange on Fri, Jan 22, 1993 7:15 PM
> Subject: 1993: Year of the Divorced Father
> RFC Header:Received: by msmailgw1.arlut.utexas.edu (2.00/GatorMail) with
> SMTP/TCP;22 Jan 93 19:14:58 U
> Received: from PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU by pucc.PRINCETON.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
>    with BSMTP id 8915; Fri, 22 Jan 93 20:08:17 EST
> Received: from PUCC.BITNET (NJE origin LISTSERV@PUCC) by PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU
> (LMail V1.1b/1.7e) with BSMTP id 4101; Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:26:58 -0500
> Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:53:49 EST
> Reply-To:     "Fathers' Rights and Equality Exchange"
> <FREE-L%INDYCMS.BitNet@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU>
> Sender:       "Fathers' Rights and Equality Exchange"
> <FREE-L%INDYCMS.BitNet@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU>
> From:         Mark Charalambous <mc@VICORP.COM>
> Subject:      1993: Year of the Divorced Father
> X-To:         free-l@indycms.iupui.edu
> To:           Multiple recipients of list FREE-L
> <FREE-L%INDYCMS.BitNet@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU>
>
> How about it? It would look good immediately following "Year of the Woman",
> don't you think?
> For those that might prefer "Year of the Father", or "Year of the NCP",
> realize that a "Year of the Divorced Father" would focus attention on issues
> relative to just "Fathers" and "NCPs" as a matter of course (laws are always
> gender-neitral, and any focusing on the plight of divorced fathers would
> automatically shine light on fathers in general).
>
> What does it take to declare a "Year of...?"
>
> --Mark
>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mts: smtp
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.free-l
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 16:21:44 -0500
From:         finger@ADRA.COM
Subject:      GAL advice

Mark Charalambous writes:

> Though what I will eventually submit has certainly benefited from the
> information gleaned from the responses and the reading I've done ("Mom's
 House,
> Dad's House", "Divided Children" by Michael Wheeler), I'm still in a quandary
> over this basic dilemma:
>  On the one hand, typical advice for fathers is "you *must* take the high
>  road". Don't rag too much about your ex as you may be seen as shrill etc.
>  I have heard this from virtually all quarters, so I believe there must be
>  more than a kernel of wisdom to this advice. However, on the other hand,
>  it is also true that courts are most likely to give custody to fathers ONLY
>  IN CASES WHERE THE MOTHER IS SEEN AS "UNFIT".  It seems that the father
>  *has* to denigrate his spouse, at least to the extent that she be perceived
>  as "unfit".

I got the same advice. My feeling is that it's as much for the lawyers
benefit as yours. If either of you get the judge angry, you'll pay the
price in this case and your lawyer will have problems with him/her in
the future. The high road is "safest" for you both. It's also the least
likely to get you custody IMHO.

In Massachusetts, the policy (unspoken, of course) is to award custody
to the father only in cases where there is clear neglect, physical (not
emotional) danger, or the child is older than 12 and states a
preference as my daughter did.


>So in the case where the mother is a fit mother by conventional standards,
>but a horrible human being otherwise -- particularly in how she abused the
>system to get temporary custody etc -- which path should a father take?
>My take on this so far is to try and accomplish both but wording it all so
>that potential damage to oneself is minimized, but to make sure that I get my
>story

I'm in exactly the same situation. My ex2b and her fiance are both
verbally abusive alcoholics but they never get really plastered around
the kids. The only thing I can do try to mitigate the damage during my
limited visitation time. ...and wait.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.free-l
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 18:00:51 -0500
From:         David Garrod <garrod@ECN.PURDUE.EDU>
Subject:      Gender Discrimination Lawsuit

     The first thing needed in any lawsuit is admissable evidence.
If one is going to try to get sex discrimination overturned by a lawsuit
one needs statistical information on the discrimination.

     With regard to any fathers group saying they could not get that
information, that is BS.  One, of course, cannot expect any help from
the state....they are not going to incriminate themselves, even if they
have the information.  Besides, many of the significant staff positions
in the appropriate department (D.H.H.S. etc) are filled by females who
are highly feminist.  I do not know of a single state that does not
allow access to public records by pulling the files or in many cases
accessing their computers.  It takes considerable time, but anyone or
preferably a group can access the records and build statistics.
(Those I`ve quoted are probably too small a set for a lawsuit in Indiana
and they took about 10 man-days to compile.

     Then after you have the statistics you have to have a clear idea
of what constitutional rights have been violated.
     Then you need expert testimony to demonstrate the violation, and
appropriate briefs to support your arguments.

David Garrod
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Btw: vix.com is also gw.home.vix.com and vixie.sf.ca.us
X-Mts: smtp
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.free-l
Date:         Wed, 20 Jan 1993 23:46:46 -0800
From:         Paul A Vixie <vixie@VIX.COM>
Subject:      Re: GAL advice needed
              20 Jan 93 16:12:48 EST." <9301202214.AA20310@gw.home.vix.com>

> I have receievd a questionnaire from the GAL apointed for my custody case.
> One of the questions asks for me to describe the negative qualities of my
> spouse, another the positive qualities.
> Any advice on what things the investigator will be looking for in these
> questions? Any red flag-type things to avoid?

Yes.  It is very likely that during the disintegration of your marriage and
the subsequent drawing of battle lines and preparations for the coming fight,
you have been drawn to the conclusion that your soon-to-be-ex-spouse is, well,
you might choose the word "crazy".

You may be right, even if you don't have a medical degree.

But right or wrong, stating this opinion (even if it is true) will not help
your case.  The reason?  One of the signs of a truly deranged person is to
believe that "everybody else is crazy".  Likewise, one of the signs of a
co-dependent, or abusive, or paranoid, or XXX (fill it in yourself) is that
they tend to accuse other people of the problems they themselves suffer from.
Of course, ir doesn't happen that way in every case -- maybe not even in the
majority of cases -- but just the same, making such accusations _will_ raise
a red flag and perhaps the GAL's eyebrow.

Stick to the observable facts.  If you feel that you must include conclusions
in your written evaluation of your (ex-)spouse's character, you should be
extremely conservative and back up each conclusion with reports of observed
behaviour and an explaination of how your observations justify your conclusion.

Also, keep it short.  Two to three pages.  As with resumes, if it is really
long the effect will NOT be that it seems more authoritative or complete;
the effect instead will be that noone will read it carefully.

When you are done, find a neutral third party -- someone who has not taken
sides in your fight, ideally -- and ask their honest opinion of whether it
seems "shrill" or one-sided.  Listen carefully to what they say, and go back
and edit it.  At the point in your relationship with your ex-spouse where you
are writing an evaluation of them for a GAL's eyes, the likelihood is very
high that you are not seeing things in general and your ex-spouse in part-
icular very clearly.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.free-l
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 10:06:37 EST
From:         Mark Charalambous <vicorp!mc@UUNET.UU.NET>
Subject: RE: WIS. CS LAWs - Citing the judge

With respect to:

Some ideas for the work ahead:

1a) Compile a list of "Anti-Fairness" statutes for the area of interest,
county,
   state, federal.
1b) Review the voting records of the individuals responsible.
1c) Publish those records and distribute to the appropriate support groups

2a) Have people send information into a central clearing house giving such
    information as:
         His attorney's name & Bar #
         Her attorney's name & Bar #
         Judge's name and court
         etc.
         etc.
         etc.
3) Same for social workers
4) Same for mediators


This is a good idea. I would need guidance on how to go about getting this
information, but am willing to do work as time permits (time is at a high
premium for me, as it probably is for all in midst of divorce/custody.

Unquestionably the need is for organization and mobilization. This is our
challenge in 1993 and beyond.

Mark
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.free-l
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 14:11:46 EST
From:         kalrark%phu020.cis.smithkline.com@SMITHKLINE.COM
Subject:      Re: Congressional E-mail

>  The first question is: Is congress on e-mail ?
>
>  If so, where can I find a list of their addresses.  I am particularly
>interested in Illinois congressmen.
>

Most senior government officials have e-mail addresses.   When I was with the
Navy, I noticed many officials used an e-mail service called Telenet or Omnet.

To send mail to someone on the Omnet here is how you address it:

 mailbox_name%omnet@ames.arc.nasa.gov

Sorry, I cannot be of more help at this time with respect to how to find
out these addresses.

Rama Kant Kalra
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.free-l
From: shedevil@leland.Stanford.EDU (Anne P. Mitchell, JD)
Subject: Family Research Council?
Reply-To: shedevil@gw.home.vix.com (Anne P. Mitchell, J.D.)
Organization: Fathers Rights & Equality Exchange
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 04:37:09 GMT


Have any of you heard of an organization called the Family Research
Council, headed up by someone named Gary Bower?

Annie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.free-l
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 21:26:44 EST
From:         kalrark%phu020.cis.smithkline.com@SMITHKLINE.COM
Subject:      Finally, I got the primary custody.

Just this morning I had sent a message with "I am a CP (so far) father".
                                                       ^^^^^^^^
This evening I found out that I got the primary physical custody or my two
daughters ages 11 and 7.  The X gets them in summer. The legal custody is joint.

For right now, I think it is great.  I may be in court for a modification just
before the summer.

Here are some details:

1. The hearing for permanent custody was on Dec. 14th, 1992 (a Monday).  The
   hearing ran through the 15th.

2. I was recommended for the custody by the evaluator.

3. On Friday the 11th, 1992 at about 3:30pm I recieved a call from the child
   protective services that I was accused of sexual abuse.  Even though I was
   expecting it, it threw me out of kilter.  I demanded that me and the accuser
   be given a lie-detecter test right away.  I told them about the custody
   hearing and my being recommended for the custody.  But inside, boy I was
   scared.  A supervisor of the service agreed to see us right away.  We
   reached there at 5:30pm.  This lady was surely going out of her way to see
   us on a Friday evening.  I had extracted a promise from her that she will
   let me record her and my daughters' conversations.  She agreed.  After
   meeting with us she declared the accusations "unfounded" and she promised
   to give a letter to me on Monday morning before the hearing.

4. I sure had the "unfounded" letter before the hearing.

5. During my testimony in the court was very angry and scared.  I hardly made
   any attempt to hide my anger. Actually I could not.
   I was angry at the X and her slimey
   attorney.  I cleary stated that I was outraged.  Her attorney tried to make
   me loose my temper completely, but that did not work.  He pretended not to
   have enough copies of an exhibit and come near me to share my copy while I
   read a passage from the evaluator's report.  I told him that it was not
   acceptable to me that he come near me.  The judge agreed and he was asked to
   move away.  If I could be calmer than I was, I would have done better.

6. After my testimoney, I appologized to the judge for getting upset.  After
   all he was fair in giving me the primary custody on a temporary basis.

At last I have the responsiblity for my daughters to raise them in a sensible
way.  This may not be the end, but for right now I would like it to be the
begining of the end.  I will continue to take my daughters for a friendly
counselor and continue to be in the state of preparedness to go back to court.

Amen.

Rama Kant Kalra
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU