From: noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (aaron.l.hoffmeyer)
Subject: Central Ohio FACE April Newsletter
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 01:57:21 GMT
Followup-To: alt.dads-rights

       The Central Ohio Fathers And Children for Equality Newsletter 
                                   April, 1992

========================================================================

"I wanted to punish him...." 

Editorial by Aaron L. Hoffmeyer

Apparently this weekend there was a movie on TV that was rather
interesting. In the movie a single mother of two teenage sons - two
sons that have not done very well for themselves (one has dropped out
of school, the other is a window washer) - tells her sons that she
wants them to go to their father and try to start a relationship with
him. They are curious - she has never wanted them to be involved with
their father before.

She admits to them that she has done the best she could for them, but
that her best was probably not enough. She knows they are lacking
something and thinks that maybe their father can help them. The sons
are intrigued. They want to know why their father hasn't been involved
with them. She tells them that during the divorce, she accused their
father of abusing her and them and had him ordered to stay away. Then
she admits to them that she had been wrong to tear their father away
from them and that they should have been able to be involved with him.
Finally she admits that the father had not abused her or them, but she
had accused him of abuse because, "I wanted to punish him...."

I stated "apparently" above because a friend at work related this movie
to me. I did not see it. I don't have a TV - my soon-to-be-ex-wife has
both of our TVs. Oh, she's also accused me of abusing her and of
abusing my two sons.

One of the consequences of the passage of Senate Bill 3 last year has
been an increase in the number of abuse allegations in divorce cases in
Ohio. Because the courts do not log and track statistics about divorce
cases, no one can be certain exactly how bad the problem has become.
However, it is understood that the only legitimate reason for the
courts to find against shared parenting as the default custody award to
both parents is that if one parent is proven to be "unfit" or abusive.

Attorneys in Franklin County have noticed the dramatic rise in abuse
allegations in divorces. In fact, one attorney believes that
allegations have probably more than doubled since the new law went into
effect. Laws are changing throughout the United States and most
states now have laws on the books regarding custody similar to Ohio's.
Coincidentally, allegations of abuse during divorces throughout the
United States have also increased dramatically.

So, this issue of the newsletter will address the allegations of abuse
during divorces. It also looks at the involvement of Children's
Protective Services in divorce cases where allegations of child abuse
have been made, and at Children's Protective Services in general.
Because this is such a touchy issue, let me make this perfectly clear -
NO ONE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ORGANIZATION OR ANY RATIONAL HUMAN BEING
FOR THAT MATTER WOULD EVER CONDONE ABUSE - EVER! The usual issues of
access, child support, biases within the system, and parenting are also
addressed.

Next, I want to touch on a local trouble spot. Franklin County is
considered a fairly progressive county in the state in regards to
domestic relations and divorce. However, there is much room for
improvement. Recently, several of the judges have stated that the
reason that most fathers are filing for shared parenting in Franklin
County is not so they can have increased exposure to their children,
but to get out of paying child support.

In fact, in cases where the father and mother make virtually the same
salaries and have been awarded equal time with the children, they have
ordered the father to pay the mother 50% of the child support
obligation. Evidently, they feel that sticking it to the father will
prevent fathers from filing for shared parenting for purely selfish
reasons. They find it hard to believe that any man wants to be involved
with his children. Well folks, such an attitude is pure sexism and bias
against men.

Several judges have also declared that there is no such thing as "a
temporary award of shared parenting." Therefore, these judges (and
their sidekick referees) are placing the children solely with the
mothers and giving fathers visitation until the final divorce decree.
Then they use the fact that the mother has been the primary caretaker
to award "residential parent" status to the mother. Again, another
example of sexism and bias against men.

One final note: last month, Joseph Pilat, the Director of the Franklin
County Child Support Enforcement Agency, expressed that Ohio's laws
were not fair to fathers - or nonresidential parents as they are known
to the courts. He felt that it was our job to get that injustice
corrected. As a county administrator, he can only work within the
guidelines that the state gives him. He also advised us that there are
two methods for getting your support reassessed when you have a change
in income (such as you lose your job).

One method is to go to CSEA and ask them to do a new assessment. They
can't do one until six months after your situation has changed. Also,
according to their guidelines, they probably won't be able to find that
your payments should be lowered. The other method is to file for
immediate relief through the courts. Even though in this instance you
have to pay lawyers fees and filing fees, this is the better way to go.
So, you have to decide whether getting your child support payments
lowered by $20 per month is worth spending $500 in legal fees. That
CSEA provides attorneys for custodial, Ahem, residential parents at no
charge and that they investigate their claims immediately - well, just
another example of the sexism and biases in the system.

So, we still have a steep hill to climb. The laws in this state are
still biased against men and noncustodial or nonresidential parents.
Even though many states now have laws to enforce visitation and access
to the children, Ohio still does not. The media and the legislature are
not sensitive to our predicament. We have to wage this war on our own.
Stay involved.

========================================================================

Social Workers Targeted When Parents Are Guilty

Editorial by Lisa Applegate, Franklin County Social Worker

As a social worker for Franklin County Children Services, I think
something needs to be said. It amazes and outrages me that the media,
certain attorneys and certain judges continue to point the finger of
blame at social workers (I refer to recent articles regarding a
specific caseworker).

Does anyone know, or care, that one social worker for Franklin County
Children Services can end up carrying as many as 35 cases? That
averages to 105 children per worker (if no family has more than three
children; some have up to seven). A caseworker services the children,
parents, courts and relatives; implements all therapeutic plans for the
family; and does all the paperwork required by the state. Keep in mind
that many of these families are in crisis and are not involved with the
agency on a voluntary basis.

Also, there are workers who service up to the same number, or higher,
of foster or adoptive homes and the children in those homes. They also
teach required training classes for people who wish to become licensed
foster or adoptive homes. Too, they do all the necessary paper work
required by the state. If a worker is lucky, he or she will only have
25 to 30 cases. There are almost always issues of physical and sexual
abuse, neglect, drug and alcohol abuse, violence and criminal
activities, and possibly emotional or mental disturbances. These
problems may be seen in the parents, the children or both.

A caseworker never knows if she will encounter one issue or all of the
above. The only way to try and ensure a child's safety with these kinds
of dysfunctions would be to live with the birth parents 24 hours a day
or have a juvenile court system that would remove these children
permanently from their homes the first time something serious happens,
instead of giving parents chance after chance, year after year.
Regardless of new laws, this scenario continues to occur.

Statistics for social-work standards reflect that 10 to 15 cases can be
carried and adequately serviced by one worker. Social workers are in
one of the lowest paid professions. Most social workers are competent
people who truly care and do the best job they can in a system where
the impossible is often asked. If fingers need to be pointed to an area
of blame, they should be pointed to an overburdened system and a lack
of responsibility on the part of parents - parents who perhaps should
not have been parents in the first place. There are not enough service
workers to do the job, and we have a government/justice system that
conservatively reinforces the hierarchy. Social work is a hard,
dangerous and challenging job; social workers are undercompensated and
rarely are appreciated for the good they do or the changes they make.

SOURCE: The Columbus Dispatch, March 7, 1992

========================================================================

Suspected Child Abusers on State List

By Alan D. Miller, Dispatch Urban Affairs Reporter

[EDITOR's COMMENT: Because of the changes in Ohio law as provided by
Senate Bill 3, one of the only ways that a divorcing parent can insure
a sole custody award is to make significant allegations of abuse,
whether sexual or physical, against the other parent. If all people
involved in the investigation of such allegations were reasonable and
levelheaded, they would make note of the divorce situation and that the
parent making the allegations might have ulterior motives. However,
when allegations of child abuse get reported to Children's Protective
Services, the parent who is accused of abuse virtually loses all
rights. And Children's Protective Services is predisposed to
substantiate those allegations of abuse. Children's Protective Services
can be the strongest ally of a divorcing parent making allegations of
abuse, and for the other parent, their worst nightmare.

There is an interesting book that was published in 1990 written by
Richard Wexler entitled Wounded Innocents - The Real Victims in the War
Against Child Abuse. Get it. Read it. Understand that you could become
a victim of a Gestapo-like system that can deny you due process, equal
protection under the law - these people can take away your children at
their whim - and they do.

The situation is way out of hand. It is time to expose what these
people are doing, and to start to correct a horrible system. The
solutions are obvious. Read this book. We must move to make these
changes and to expose Children Protective Services for what it is -
immediately. We must minimize the negative affect that these agencies,
present throughout the United States, can have on our lives.]

State government has branded nearly 600,000 Ohioans as suspected child
abusers and keeps their names deep within the Department of Human
Services.

Most people probably don't know they are on the Central Registry on
Child Abuse and Neglect or that it exists.

The number of names on the list represents one in 12 adult Ohioans and
is nearly the same as the population of Columbus.

The department doesn't know for sure, but some, if not many, probably
were never convicted or even charged with a crime. Some names appear
more than once, but the department cannot determine how many.

Anonymous complaints to a child protective services agency -- sometimes
false accusations made during a neighborhood dispute or domestic
squabble -- landed some people on the list.

Agencies in all 88 counties are required to submit the information to
the state within 24 hours of receiving a complaint of abuse or
neglect.

The list is used only by child protective services agencies across the
state to keep track of suspected child abusers and ultimately to
protect children, said Eric Kohring, the official spokesman for the
state Human Services Department on the registry.

It is closely guarded and is not available to anyone outside the
system, including law enforcement agencies, Kohring said.

"Hogwash," says Graham Jeambey, of a national support group called
VOCAL: Victims of Child Abuse Laws. "I can guarantee you that people
outside the system can get access to that information."

Keeping such a list is "pure Gestapo," said Jeambey, a Denver resident.
"You can only think of it in those terms."

The Ohio legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union said the
list raises constitutional questions, and is "mildly reminiscent of the
Inquisition and the 1950's blacklists of suspected Communists."

"This really goes against the whole presumption of innocence doctrine
that lies at the heart of our justice system," said Kevin O'Neill from
the ACLU headquarters in Cleveland. "We'll have to look into this. This
is very disturbing stuff."

Similar registries have been challenged unsuccessfully in at least half
a dozen states. A federal judge in Florida, however, ruled in 1990 that
the state law requiring a registry of suspected child abusers was
unconstitutional.

Ohio law prohibits sharing the information outside the child protective
services system. But other states with which Ohio may share the
information allow their human services departments to use state
registry information for things such as screening people who seek to
adopt children or provide foster care.

In situations in which Ohio caseworkers "substantiate" that abuse of a
child occurred, the name of the alleged perpetrator stays in the
registry for 10 years, Kohring said.

In cases in which abuse is "indicated but apparently the evidence was
not strong enough to prove it," the name of the accused stays in the
list for five years. Even the names of people who are cleared of
accusations against them are kept on the list for three months after
the case is closed.

The case of someone reported a second time -- even if found innocent
the first time -- most likely would be treated differently, Kohring
said.

"If a person is accused again, even though it may not be clear that the
alleged perpetrator did it, it would weigh more heavily against that
person," he said.

Mary Louise Dyess, Franklin County Children Services director for
intake and investigation, said her department provides the required
information to the state on each case it receives, but it does not
routinely use the information during the course of an investigation.

"We don't always get the information back from the state in a timely
manner," Dyess said. "It's used basically when the staff feels there
might be information on the registry that would be helpful."

The central registry of suspected child abusers was created by state
law in 1966, was in operation by 1971 and was computerized in 1981,
Kohring said. In addition to the names of alleged perpetrators, it
includes the names of victims, brief descriptions of the alleged
violation, and the outcome of the investigation. Most states have
similar systems.

Information reported to the state by the 88 county children protection
agencies has been inconsistent for much of the time the list has been
kept, Kohring said, and that is why even the department isn't sure
exactly how many names are on it.

Since 1989, reporting has been fairly consistent, he said. In 1989,
91,563 names were added to the state registry of suspected child
abusers. In 1990, another 95,367 names were added. And in 1991, another
101,587 were included.

There is no hearing process by which someone on the list may seek to be
removed, Kohring said. The state will tell people whether they are on
the list of they write to the Ohio Department of Human Services, Office
of Child Care and Family Services, 65 East State Street, Columbus, Ohio
43215. The state will verify the authenticity of the inquiry before
releasing information, he said.

Kohring said anyone who feels his or her name should not be on the list
can submit a letter stating the reasons. "They are entitled to due
process by submitting a letter that becomes part of the file," he
said.

A former head of the Ohio ACLU, Columbus lawyer Benson Wolman, said he
testified at the Statehouse against the registry's creation. "There are
no questions that it has constitutional problems," he said.

One big problem, he said, is that complaints against those on the list
are often made anonymously. Virtually all are investigated by a child
protective services agency, but the accused may never know who
complained.

"The problem is, the Constitution, generally speaking, gives a person
the right to be confronted by his or her accuser," he said. "The cloak
of secrecy is the enigma here. If the registry is kept, the problem
arises that a person cannot remove that stigmatization."

========================================================================

Child Savers or Family and Constitution Abusers?

Editorial by Aaron L. Hoffmeyer

Children Protective Services (CPS) employees run rough shod over the
Constitution and are empowered to do so. A CPS caseworker told me that
anytime there are any marks of any sort on your children, the parents
are guilty of child abuse. CPS in Franklin County substantiated abuse
against a divorced mother when the father took the child to their
offices during visitation because the child had a blue mark that
resembled a bruise on her face. It was from a blue popsicle.

Public opinion is such that if you are involved with Children's
Protective Services, you must be guilty of child abuse. Otherwise,
people might believe that you actually condone child abuse. A mistrial
was declared in a Texas case after a juror admitted she voted for
conviction even though she really believed the defendant was innocent.
She had been afraid to vote not guilty because she didn't want to be
labeled as someone who "condones child abuse."

In a case in California, a child who was hit in the eye by a baseball
was taken from his mother - along with his 18 month old sister because
a school teacher and school nurse contacted CPS workers. The 18 month
old daughter was placed in an orphanage where she was traumatically
abused. It took the mother almost a month to get her children back.*

And last summer in Franklin County, a young mother of three murdered
her children within 15 minutes after her electricity had been shut off
- a young mother who had begged CPS to relieve her of the burden of the
three children for almost a year. She had asked that CPS workers place
the children with their fathers, but CPS refused, insisting that the
children should be with their mother. Because of that attitude, the
mother had to stay on AFDC, could not get an education, had to live in
poverty, and snapped.

We have over-empowered incompetent people to affect dramatic "cures" or
solutions to the child abuse and neglect problem. Approximately 90% of
their case-load is due to trivial cases, cases of false allegations
(such as during divorce disputes), accidental injuries to children
(they do happen folks), and cases where the parents are simply poor.

CPS workers will take children away from poor parents and place them in
foster homes - sometimes permanently, when poor people have their
utilities shut off. When they give the children to foster parents, they
also give the foster parents up to $500 per child per month to provide
for those children, but they can't and won't give any money to the
parents.

3% of the cases handled by Children's Protective Services are cases of
serious abuse - where real, violent physical abuse took place. 6% of
the cases they handle involve real sexual abuse. There is no doubt in
these cases and in these cases, CPS agency's decisions are definitely
in the best interest of children. However, approximately 90% of the
cases handled by CPS agencies are for trivial or false allegations or
"financial neglect" - people are just too poor and need relief. In
these cases CPS agencies make victims of the parents and children,
rather than help anyone. And the time they spend on these cases takes
away from the time they could be spending on legitimate cases. But,
they are inspired to inflate the numbers of legitimate cases, because
counties, states and the federal governments give them money based on
the number of cases they handle.

And now we find out that probably all states (except Florida) maintain
a registry of "suspected" abusers and trade the list amongst
themselves.

Have your children ever been bruised? Did you send them to school with
the bruise apparent or keep them home? Better think twice next time.

To quote Lisa Applegate, Franklin County CPS worker, whose full
editorial appears in this issue....

"The only way to ensure a child's safety ... would be to live with the
birth parents 24 hours a day or have a juvenile-court system that would
remove these children permanently from their homes the first time
something serious happens, instead of giving parents chance after
chance, year after year."

CPS has a term for this action - it is called a "parentectomy". What is
something serious - worthy of a parentectomy? Well, child abuse, of
course. What is child abuse? Well, according to Dodi Brobeck, Franklin
County CPS worker, it is child abuse "anytime there are any marks
visible on the children." What is something else that is serious? Well,
neglect, of course. What is neglect? [According to Ohio law it when a
child's "condition or environment is such as to warrant the state, in
the interests of the child, in assuming his guardianship." In Illinois,
it's failure to provide "the proper or necessary support ... for a
child's well-being." In Mississippi, it's when a child is "without
proper care, custody, supervision, or support." In South Dakota, it's
when the child's "environment is injurious to his welfare." Lest any
South Dakota CPS worker still hesitate, the Legislature added that
"this chapter shall be construed in favor of the state."

What else is neglect? Anything a CPS worker wants it to be. And these
are some of the things they want it to be:

The National Committee for Prevention of Child Abuse (NCPCA) spent more
than $2.5 million in fiscal year 1988 (not including what state
affiliates spent) to tell us that parents are guilty of neglect of they
give their children money to go to McDonald's for breakfast too often.

NCPCA also has some advice for detecting child abusers. If someone
looks at a young girl and says "Wait `til she grows up," that "might
indicate" that the adult is a child molester. And then there's the
California psychologist who says that if a child has a "fear of
monsters" and laughs and imitates the sound of a playmate passing gas,
the child may have been molested.

Parents have been deemed child abusers or neglecters for not letting
children watch television after 7:30 P.M., and for being late to pick
up children after school.

The world of the CPS workers seems like something created by Franz
Kafka with an assist from Joseph Heller (or George Orwell). Susan
Gabriel, whose husband Clark was falsely accused of molesting his
stepdaughter, recounts this dialogue with one caseworker:

Caseworker: We know your husband is guilty, you've got to force him
into admitting it.

Gabriel: How do you know he's guilty?

Caseworker: We know he's guilty because he says he's innocent. Guilty
people always say they're innocent.

Gabriel: What do innocent people say?

Caseworker: We're not in the business of guilt or innocence, we're in
the business of putting families back together.

Gabriel: So why not do that with us?

Caseworker: Because Clark won't admit his guilt.

Even some of the people who work in the system are starting to have
second thoughts. "If the level of intrusiveness perpetrated allegedly
to protect children were attempted in any other field, we would be in
court ... we would be in jail, we would have the Supreme Court coming
down with innumerable decisions against us," says Philip Leduc, a
veteran CPS supervisor in Northampton, Massachusetts.]*

This system is a monster that is out of control. This monster is
destroying the lives of children and parents throughout the United
States. It is time to recognize the reality of what is happening.

Remember, these agencies are not "family preservation" services. They
are "children protective" services. They get more state funding if they
can justify to the state that the child abuse problem is 10 times
bigger than what it really is. They get to manage the money that goes
to foster homes, so if they put more children in foster homes, they get
more money. It is a government agency fighting for its fiscal survival
and it will do almost anything to that end.

* These are excerpts from Wounded Innocents - The Real Victims in the
War Against Child Abuse.

========================================================================

Does Anyone Know of a Better Way to Handle the Problem of CPS's
Involvement in Divorce Cases?

by Robert Kirkpatrick, Washington Coordinator for Father's Rights and
Equality Exchange (FREE) and Guardian ad Litem

Yes, and oddly enough, Washington State is doing it.

I'm a GAL with the Spokane County Juvenile Court. It is our job to
specifically advocate for the children, and (fortunately) the courts
pay a LOT more attention to what we say than they do Social Services,
the Attorneys General, the parents or their attorneys. Here's why:

 1.     There is a Federal mandate that a GAL be assigned to any case
 in which abuse is alleged.

 2.     The court recognizes that caseworkers are a) overburdened, and
 b) prone to taking the state's view in terms of the "child's best
 interests." As such, they are predetermined to be error-prone. We, on
 the other hand, manage our case loads by taking on only the number of
 children we can reasonably handle, have greater power and time to
 inquire, and find out much more about cases than the DCFS workers.
 (BTW: The workers we have, on the whole, are thrilled to have us, and
 are very cooperative.)

 3.     We are not attorneys, and are also volunteers. This makes us
 better than attorneys to do the job for a really weird reason. The
 attorneys who do a `quickie' job are preferred by the courts which
 have little money to pay them. The less expensive lawyers (rates are
 the same, hours of involvement differ) are often chosen for economic
 reasons. On the other hand, we will go after really tiny details, and
 spend a great deal of time on each case. The way it works out, we're
 not only the inexpensive solution, but we find things that the
 attorneys don't have the time for. Also, it's a lot less intimidating
 to talk to one of us `regular people' than a lawyer, and people are
 often more willing to talk with us.

The success rate here is better than anywhere else in the country. To
me, I think that says a lot for the concept that Washington employs. We
are also screened beyond belief. All an attorney has to be is a lawyer
to qualify. We get training (ongoing) specific to our tasks, have a
great support system, and have our performance reviewed all the time.
If something comes up, we find ourselves in front of an ombudsman
committee in a flash. We are allowed no errors, the price of mistake is
just too great.

Social workers (Social Service Workers --let's be clear) ARE
overworked. And yes, in many cases they're under appreciated. But then,
they (as a system, not individuals) deserve the perspective people have
about them. Washington has no problem, even with diminishing budgets,
to hire private sector workers to assemble cases, then brief the actual
worker so they can take the appropriate state action. In Spokane
County, we're lucky to have a group which really does believe in the
best interests of the children. Sure, we have some fecal matter in the
positions, but you find that everywhere. On the whole, I think we all
do pretty well.

Other states should take this view. So, yes, there is a better way
--without having a different system. It's a matter of perspective.
Those with the perspective of Lisa Applegate, who wrote the article
[included in this issue - Social Workers Targeted When Parents Are
Guilty], is part of the flotsam. She wouldn't last long here. And it
would be her fellow workers who would encourage her to seek a career in
food service or refuse engineering. I think they would tell her:

"What we concern ourselves with is not ourselves, but the clients we
serve. If you're taking the time to think up and write these kinds of
articles, you are not focused on what we do. You have a different
agenda altogether. And the time you're taking is using up the very time
you say you don't have enough of."

Here is what I say when it comes to dealing with allegations of abuse:

 1.     Expand the Guardian ad Litem/CASA program. Get as much
 pertinent info about the cases as possible, before allowing a court
 determination.

 2.     Give more money to Social Services to do it's job. But at the
 same time raise the minimum qualification levels for caseworkers and
 researchers. Raise them a lot. Set the maximum number of cases Social
 Service workers may carry at one time.

 3.     Require greater substantiation of any allegations of parental
 misconduct.

 4.     Require immediate testing and evaluation of the children
 involved. These tests should be standardized, and should look only
 towards emotional and physical development. Because of the cultural
 diversities, we should not apply a standard of parenting which may not
 be valid.

 5.     Remove all aspects of adversarial methodology from the divorce
 system.

 6.     Require the identification of any individual who makes an
 allegation of abuse which is acted upon. If no action is taken, the
 record should show the REPORTER had made a report, but the record
 should NOT show any names of accused. If the agency DOES act on a
 referral, then all pertinent data should be available. It has moved
 from family to criminal law, and should follow the same requirements.

SOURCE: USENET, alt.dads-rights, March 21, 1992

========================================================================

Divorce's Atom Bomb: Child Sex Abuse

by Eric Felten

Summary: The charge - sexually abusing a child - has surged in divorce
and custody proceedings. Fathers are the prime targets. Many
accusations are false, made to hurt a spouse or to ensure sole custody,
say some experts. Others believe the increase reflects actual abuse.

Two years ago, Chris Knight found himself at the nexus of three of the
decade's most controversial issues: the growing number of child sex
abuse allegations, the belief that many cases of abuse involve
organized satanic rituals and the assertion that memories of sex abuse
are repressed for years and only recognized later through therapy.
Knight was accused of molesting his 13-year-old daughter when she was
very young. In fighting the accusation he has lost his marriage, any
contact with his two daughters and well over $100,000 in legal fees.

His case is one of the most extreme in what many psychologists and
lawyers say is an explosion of child abuse charges that arise in
divorce proceedings. In some cases the charges are true. In a majority
though, say many experts, they are not. Occasionally, the charges are
fabrications, brought maliciously by a parent eager to injure an
estranged spouse and deny custody. Most often false allegations start
with small mistakes and misunderstandings that take on a life of their
own as the social workers, family, therapists, police, attorneys,
activists, psychologists and judges take up the charges.

Child sex abuse charges are almost always tricky; emotions run high and
the only evidence often is the word of a young child. But when
allegations are made (usually against the father) in the middle of
divorce or custody battles, the charges are even more troublesome: They
may be the product of deep-seated animosities and distrust, or even
downright vindictiveness. Just making the allegation usually means
winning custody for the year or more of legal proceedings, even if the
accused is found innocent. The threat or use of charges of child sex
abuse is such a powerful weapon that lawyers now call it the atom bomb
of divorce litigation. And as breakups have become less and less civil,
more and more angry parents are going nuclear.

The allegation explosion: Gordon Blush spent the 1980s working with
Karol Ross at the Macomb County family services clinic, making
recommendations to judges in divorce cases and in custody and
visitation disputes. Early in the decade the two noticed the increasing
number of child sex abuse cases in their practice. "About 1982 or 1983
we began to see a proliferation of allegations regarding sexual abuse
in the context of custody or visitation disputes," says Ross. "Up until
that time it was allegations of spousal abuse or substance abuse."

The trend was noticed by others involved in divorce litigation as well.
"I started doing child custody cases back in 1980 and one rarely, if
ever, heard an [abuse] allegation," says Melvin Guyer, an attorney and
professor of psychology at the University of Michigan. "By the
mid-eighties the first of them started, and it was just like a
wildfire." He served as a co-counsel for Eric Foretich, who was accused
by his ex-wife, Elizabeth Morgan, of molesting their daughter and was
later found innocent. Guyer and others say the case, with its
international publicity (Morgan's parents took their daughter to New
Zealand and Morgan was jailed for one year for not allowing access of
the daughter to Foretich and for Contempt of Court) did much to
encourage child abuse allegations in divorce disputes.

"A decade ago nobody was doing more than one or two of these cases, so
no one was getting much of a sense of what was going on," says Gail
Benson, a family law attorney in Detroit. "As the load increased,
lawyers like me stopped and looked around and said, `I've got so many
of these, there must be a problem.'" The problem, she claims, is an
explosion not in abuse, but in dubious allegations.

Worried such allegations were becoming a trend and troubled by the
large number of accusations they believed to be untrue, Blush and Ross
looked at 24 cases they had been involved with to see if they resembled
one another. They found similarities they labelled the "SAID
syndrome": sexual allegations in divorce. They reported the findings in
1987 in the Conciliation Courts Review.

The two argued that charges made in divorce or custody fights of any
kind are colored by animosities of the breakup and litigation and
should be investigated carefully. "What people don't realize is that in
divorce situations and visitation disputes, there are all kinds of
underlying agendas, all kinds of underlying power struggles, and kids
align with one parent of the other," says Ross. "Kids are extremely
leadable. They can be led to say certain things without actually
realizing cognitively or intellectually what it is they are saying."

These complexities are often ignored, partly because it is believed
children would have no reason or ability to make up such charges,
partly because family courts err on what they see as the side
protecting the children. "Many of these cases, especially where divorce
is involved, are pursued, resolved, prosecuted and penalized totally
without justification or warranted evidence," says Blush.

Courts are becoming suspicious of sex abuse allegations in divorce
cases, but the number of charges still seems to be rising. Ross says,
"We thought that by the end of the eighties it would subside, but it's
more vicious than ever."

SOURCE: Insight magazine, November 25, 1991

[EDITORS COMMENT: This is less than 1/4th of the article. The article
also states that children's protective services report that "half of
the cases were believed to involve abuse; in 33 percent no abuse was
believed to have transpired; and in the remaining cases (17 percent),
the investigators could reach no determination." Thus, even according
to advocates for abused children, advocates that are predisposed to
find guilt, only half the charges of child sex abuse made in divorce
proceedings are believed to be true. There is great reason to think
that the percentage of false reports is higher.]

========================================================================

Divorced Dads Face Visitation Difficulties

Original Article by Florence Shinkle

The divorce is over. The mother gets custody. The father gets
visitation every Wednesday and every other weekend. After a year, he
sees the child only on occasional weekends. After four or five years,
they need to reintroduce themselves each time they meet.

Why do so many divorced dads drop out of sight? A statistic in a recent
edition of Time magazine set the figure at a staggering 50 percent. The
St. Louis Post-Dispatch interviewed psychologists about the reasons and
they described such factors as:

v       The father's lack of communication skills and
	resulting inability to sustain a one-on-one post divorce
	relationship with his child.

v       The father's absorption in a new life or wife.

v       The children's tendency to blame fathers for the
	marital breakup.

v       Resentment over financial obligations and life-style changes
	on everyone's part.

Missed by a mile, said fathers who contacted us. "Resentment over
financial obligations and life-style changes" was the only hypothesis
that approached the truth of their predicament, they said. Their
ex-wives' vindictiveness was at the heart of the problem.

Routinely, these mothers denied their erstwhile spouses their
court-established visitation rights. When the fathers appealed to the
police or sheriff to get help, the issue was treated as a domestic
dispute, beneath the province of law enforcement authorities.

"You just get so tired of the hassle," said one absentee dad. Like
others, he didn't want his name used for fear his ex-wife would
interfere with his visiting his son. "My ex-wife is always breaking
dates my son and I set up. I went over to pick him up for a camping
weekend we'd planned, and she just met me at the door and told me flat
out, `He can't go.' You just get so tired of the hassle. The
relationship gets so awkward. It's like slow suffocation."


Other fathers said they existed in a state of pervasive insecurity
about their rights, even though their ex-wives had not denied contact
outright. They always felt the arrangement was infinitely fragile. They
said they put up with broken appointments and verbal abuse, convinced
that, if they ever did get back in court, the judicial bias in favor of
mothers would result in a worse situation for them.

Not so, says Margo Green, a specialist in family law with offices in
Clayton, Mo. "In the past five years, the courts have listened to
fathers who say they have been denied visitation," she said. "The
judicial perception that a child should be with its mother during `the
tender years' has given way to the view that a child needs both
parents. Fathers are crucial, and the courts at last understand that."

Q: So the courts give paternal visitation. Then the mother violates the
order. Now what?

A: The father must be willing to go back to court. He must be willing
to fight for what is his. The father should file one of two motions: a
motion for contempt, in which case the court can fine the mother or
withhold child support or even take away custody as a penalty. Or a
motion to modify (the existing decree) asking custody for himself in
view of her violations. If the father files any motion, the court must
look at the situation.

Q: If the mother does not deny visitation outright but persists in
arbitrarily changing plans and curfews, is there a recourse?

A: It depends. If the divorce decree states the father shall have
custody every Wednesday evening from 6 to 9 p.m., and the mother has
not abided by the arrangement, the father should file a motion for
contempt and hold her to it. But if the divorce decree is one of those
old ones providing for "reasonable visitation," then he's in trouble,
and she can make her own little rules.

Q: He has no recourse against her chain-jerking?

A: He must go to court and file a motion to modify, asking the court to
rewrite the visitation provisions more specifically. I tell my clients
when they go in: Get this written up in detail, so if the time comes
that you and your wife can't agree on anything, the courts will have
something to enforce.

Q: Larry Welch of Fathers for Equal Rights told me that one way mothers
get around the visitation orders is to charge the father with sexual
abuse; that is, they manipulate the criminal justice system to their
advantage. What about this?

A: Well, it's true. (California psychologist and author) Judith
Wallerstein said that she found 50 percent of all allegations of that
nature to be unfounded. {EDITOR'S COMMENT: Judith Wallerstein is not a
staunch supporter of joint custody or of fathers' rights. One of her
studies was used by the courts throughout the United States to deny men
joint custody in case after case. It was the only major study that had
many bad things to say about joint custody. For her to make such a
statement - well, it's almost like it came from NOW.]

Q: What's the remedy? What's to keep every obstreperous ex-wife from
using this strategy to prevent visitation?

A: There isn't any way to prevent her from making the charges. The best
remedy is the one I already mentioned: The father fights for what is
his. Regarding the problem with irresponsible sexual abuse allegations,
both the courts and the social service system workers have become more
sophisticated and less likely to overreact to this sort of charge.
That's a point in the father's favor. A second development that I think
is going to be really significant: In the past couple of years,
Missouri courts have changed the custody of a child from one parent to
the other because the lawyers have proved that the parent who
originally had custody alienated the child from the other parent.

Source: S.L.O. Telegram Tribune, March 20, 1992

========================================================================

A Lovely New Business

The following is an advertisement that recently appeared in the
Washington Post.

His new shoes are from Gucci.

Your son's are from Goodwill.

The way it turned out, "for better or for worse" meant only the best
for him and the worst for you and the kids. He's got plenty of money
and he spends it on everything. Everything but his own children.

Don't let him get away with it. Collect the court-ordered child support
you deserve. We specialize in making delinquent parents pay. Even if
your kids are over 18, you may still be entitled to the money. And
don't worry, if we don't collect, you don't pay. Call 1-800-PAY-MOMS.
Get back on your feet again. With our help.

COLLECT CHILD SUPPORT - CALL 1-800-PAY-MOMS (1-800-729-6667)

We're sorry, but we're not allowed to assist AFDC recipients.

SOURCE: The Washington Post, March 22, 1992

========================================================================

Advice from a Father Who Might End Up with Custody

by Rama Kant Kalra, Pennsylvania Coordinator for Fathers' Rights and
Equality Exchange (FREE)

[EDITORIAL COMMENT: The following is advice from one man who has been
successfully waging a custody battle in Pennsylvania (see, we didn't
have to go far to find a man who is on his way to obtaining custody -
just one state over).]

My approach in [my custody battle] has been and will be what I list
below. It has worked for me. It may not work for everybody, but will
definitely not hurt your case. Therefore I feel that my experience is
worth sharing.

 1.     The whole burden of preparation is on you, not on your
 attorney.

 2.     Work with your attorney as a partner, not just as a lay
 client.

 3.     Good attorneys are expensive and obviously busy. They may not
 be able to spend enough time on your case. Therefore, employing a
 good, bold, and ethical attorney is more important than a well known,
 experienced but busy attorney.

 4.     Now, the fact that I have a less expensive and not so busy
 attorney means that she has enough time to work with me. I still do
 lots of leg work myself. This will makes my dollar go far, which is
 obviously very important considering your have to pay "her" exorbitant
 child-support too. I will no longer be paying for her meals.

 5.     You must not be afraid of anything. Such boldness, and the
 winning attitude will bring calmness albeit firmness in your
 testimonies as well as credibility. This was/is the hardest part.

 6.     Do not get bogged down by the crazy evidence game. There are no
 dead bodies or murder weapons, which our courts love to see.
 Tactfully, you can ask that the judge should present evidence that
 he/she is honest/fair and unbiased, along with the evaluators!

 7.     Do not trust anybody, specially the evaluators. Every
 conversation anybody has with respect to your case with these
 evaluators must be tape-recorded. Many of these evaluators are simply
 biased, unethical and dishonest!

 8.     Our anger must be channeled in a constructive way. I know it is
 very difficult due to the immense hurt that we experience in these
 matters.

 9.     Do not let anybody discourage you, have faith in yourself and
 fight as hard as you can for your rights.

 10.    I have given my ex- a long rope to hang herself. She is making
 good use of that. She is continually violating court orders, which
 further strengthens my case. It has been hard, but I will not stoop
 down to her level to deal with her.

 11.    I practiced for my testimonies a number of times.

========================================================================

Lobbying for Fathers' Rights

by Larry Landwehr, a member of Fathers Rights and Equality Exchange
(FREE)

Where do you live?

Do you live in Washington, DC? Do you live in the capitol city of your
state? For most people the answer is "no". Most of us live in other
places.

The capitols are where the laws are made. It's where the legislatures
and the legislators are.

Do you have easy access to them? Can you put in your two cents worth
when a committee holds a hearing? Do you know when a hearing is held?
Again, for most people the answer is "no".

Most legislators go to Washington or to the state capitol after they
are elected and live there. They read the local newspaper there. They
see the local television news there. They become part of the local
culture. They are influenced by it. They become isolated from you and
you from them. You are left behind.

I used to live in Madison, Wisconsin. The two newspapers there were
very self-centered. Why not? They were where the action was.

The city was (and still is) a hotbed of socialist, leftist, liberal,
politically active special interest groups - all with their own
political agenda. These groups make a lot of noise. They hold rallies.
They hold demonstrations. They go to hearings. They become members of
committees. They have power.

The media loves these special interest groups. They can always be
counted upon to generate news. The more extreme and controversial these
groups are, the better. They get a lot of media coverage. This, in
turn, stimulates them to further heights of activism which generates
more stories.

Thus a self perpetuating cycle comes into existence. This interplay
becomes the local culture. Television and newspapers are filled with
stories about these groups. All their protests, speeches and rallies
are covered.

Your legislator gets bombarded from all sides with this. The local
television stations carry it. The local newspapers write about it.
Tabloids and posters promote it. Talk shows on radio discuss it. Your
legislator's new friends talk about it.

Meanwhile, back home, in stodgy old Wausau, Wisconsin, 130 miles north
of Madison, you are forgotten. Your voice isn't heard. You have no
influence.

You might gripe about your high support. You might complain that your
ex isn't letting you see the kids, but maybe they really are happier
living in Alaska.

You might be angry on April 15th when you get no deduction on your
taxes even though you are paying 95% of the support that your kids live
on. Maybe it really ticks you off that your ex just bought a new two
seater sports car even though neither she nor her new "significant
other" have a job. Maybe you don't like the fact that your husband's ex
is getting a third of your paycheck while your own kids do without.

Do you drive to your state capitol to make a speech? Do you go there to
become part of a demonstration against unfair laws? Do you attend a
hearing? No, chances are that you do not.

Let's be practical. It's a giant hassle to take a day off from work to
drive two hours to the capitol and then two hours back.

How about calling your legislator? Well, chances are that you'll get
put on hold - long distance. And when someone finally does talk to you
it'll be some secretary who'll "be sure to forward your message" to
your legislator.

You can join a father's rights group, but you won't get much media
coverage, and what little you do get won't reach your state capitol,
much less Washington, DC.

The problem is that you don't have the local access that the groups in
the capitol have. You don't have their access to the media and you
don't have their sources of information on pending legislation. Your
views never get presented to your legislator.

Well, what are you going to do? I'm glad you asked. The problem is
"getting your views presented to your legislator". The solution is "a
lobbyist".

Yeah, that's right, a lobbyist - a paladin - a hired gun - a champion -
someone who is paid to present your views to your legislator, and to
any other one they can get hold of.

When I did research for a recent paper, I was amazed at how many
lobbying groups there are in Washington. They are having dinners with
members of Congress. They are monitoring voting records. They attend
meetings. They are here, there and everywhere. They have frequent
contact with your legislator. They are effective. They must be. Look at
how many of them there are. Look at the laws you live under.

This is not a harebrained fuzzy-headed idea. This technique has proven
usefulness. Why not co-opt the tools that have been used against you?
Lobbyists give you the most bang for your buck. If you can't be there,
hire someone who can.

We are being totally outgunned in the capitols. If we really want the
laws changed, we have to be the wheel that squeaks the loudest. That's
going to take money.

One person cannot afford to hire a lobbyist. Two people cannot afford
to hire a lobbyist. Even one father's rights group can't afford to hire
a full time lobbyist. The solution is to have several father's rights
groups band together to hire one.

If you belong to a group, present this idea to your group. If you
don't, then send this letter to a group in your state and offer to
contribute some money if they'll work to hire a lobbyist.

If this works out, it can be the beginning of a national network. Once
it gets big enough, we can lobby the government to help pay for our
lobbyists - just like other groups already do.

This could be the beginning of a new era. Don't let it start without
you. Or do you like the current laws?

========================================================================

Lawyers Win in 7-year Divorce Case

Knight-Ridder Newspapers

WASHINGTON - One of the nation's most prolonged and bitter divorce
cases ended yesterday at the Supreme Court. The lawyers won.

The couple, who disputed virtually every major and minor issue during a
seven-year Los Angeles court war, finally agreed on something - that
the $3 million in fees charged by their lawyers was excessive.

So the ex-husband and ex-wife allied to fight the fees all the way to
the Supreme Court. But the court refused to hear their argument that
they had a constitutional right to use new lawyers to cross-examine
their divorce lawyers about the fees.

Millionaires Stanley and Dorothy Diller were the antagonists in an epic
divorce case of almost Dickensian length, complexity and acrimony.
There were 100 court hearings and a marathon trial lasting 49 days. The
court reporter's transcript consumed 5,165 pages in 20 volumes.

The trial judge, Robert Fainer, had approved the fee requests after
recording his observations of the Dillers, who ended a 28-year
marriage.

"Their personalities," he wrote, "explain and justify the substantial
time spent by the lawyers."

"It's probably a textbook case of how two people should not conduct
their affairs," said Beryl Weiner, Mrs. Diller's trial lawyer, whose
firm now is entitled to $1.76 million in fees and expenses. The firm of
Robinson, Robinson & Phillips, which represented Mr. Diller, is owed
$1.23 million.

SOURCE: The Columbus Dispatch, December 17, 1991

========================================================================

Federal Government Again Confirms: Rights + Access = Support

A recent (October 11, 1991) U.S. Census Bureau report entitled "Child
Support and Alimony: 1989" has once again confirmed what fathers'
rights advocates have been saying for years (i.e., frequent and
consistent access to both parents, emotional involvement, and the
preservation of basic rights for both parents following divorce
produces an excellent rate of compliance with court ordered support
payments). Unfortunately, the message has been routinely ignored by an
enforcement bureaucracy dedicated solely to the coercive extraction of
funds from "absent" fathers. It is hoped that those with the power to
implement change realize that the present system is costly, marginally
effective, and for the most part unnecessary, if all states had a
presumption of joint legal custody, plus equal enforcement of access
and support.

Major findings of the report:

v       Fathers with joint custody pay 90.2 percent of the child
	support owed.

v       Fathers with visitation (access) pay 79.1 percent of the child
	support owed.

v       Fathers without either joint custody or access pay only 44.5
	percent of owed support.

v       Fathers have joint custody only 7.3 percent of the time.

v       Fathers have visitation (access) only 54.9 percent of the
	time.

v       Fathers have neither joint custody nor visitation 37.8 percent
	of the time.

It is relevant to note that: 1) all income data above was provided by
mothers with custody; and, 2) another federally funded study (Survey of
Absent Parents - by the Urban Institute and the University of Chicago
for the Office of Child Support Enforcement) previously reported that
"there were substantial differences between custodial and noncustodial
parents in terms of reporting levels of payment."

It would have been very valuable to have collected corresponding data
on the amounts paid or received by other groups separately (i.e.,
fathers without custody, mothers without custody, fathers with custody,
and joint custodial parents). However, this report does serve to
highlight the symbiotic relationships between joint custody, access,
and compliance: MOTHERS WITH CUSTODY REPORT THAT VISITING FATHERS PAY
79.1% OF OWED CHILD SUPPORT, AND THAT JOINT CUSTODY FATHERS PAY 90.2%.
It seems clear that when fathers are guaranteed time for emotional
involvement, the vast majority provide financial support willingly, so
why not redirect the efforts of the child support enforcement program
towards keeping noncustodial parents involved emotionally?

[Copies of the Census Bureau Report are available from the U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 for $2.50. Ask for
"Consumer Population Report on Consumer Income," Series P-50, No. 173
(Order No. 803-005-30020-O-W).

SOURCE: A News Release from the Texas Fathers for Equal Rights - P.O.
Box 15795, Austin, TX 78761

========================================================================

Bedtime: The All-night Affair

by Mickey Tobin

Small children need a routine and a schedule at bedtime, but are often
skilled at prolonging the day, engaging the parent, and making bedtime
an all-night affair.

Hints that might help:

 1.     Talk about your feelings and needs - not about your child's
 unacceptable behavior. "I'm really tired and I need time for myself
 now! I'm frustrated! I have work to do, and I need to be alone."

 2.     Establish a familiar bedtime routine that is geared toward
 winding down: a warm bath, a back-rub, a story, a glass of water and
 into bed with the door closed.

 3.     Pick a reasonable bedtime hour and stick with it, but be
 flexible about what happens in the room if your child is unable to
 sleep. For example, he can talk to the animals, look at a book, listen
 to music - quiet things that can be done in bed.

 4.     Expect her to be able to go to sleep by herself and tell her
 about it. "I'm so happy that you know how to go to sleep by yourself."
 Praise her when she does.

 5.     Satisfy your child's need for affection and acceptance at other
 times of the day: play games, tell stories, take walks, interact
 together instead of side-by-side.

 6.     Make sure your child's need for independence is fulfilled.
 Everyday, ask yourself, "What am I doing for my child that he could be
 doing for himself?" Offer choices, and let him make decisions that
 truly affect his life.

 7.     Most important, during the daytime hours, give encouragement.
 Instead of telling her what's wrong, catch her doing something right.

For information on The Art of Positive Parenting classes, call Mickey
Tobin at (614) 221-7608.

========================================================================

April's special guest speaker will be the Honorable Judge Clifford
Cloud, one of the four Domestic Relations judges in Franklin County. He
looks forward to answering general questions from the group.

========================================================================

POINTS TO PONDER:

Each child has the right to an independent and meaningful relationship
with each parent.

Each child has the right to be free from listening to or being a part
of parents' personal battles.

Each parent has the right and responsibility to contribute to the
raising of his or her child.

Each parent has the right, during time spent with the children, to
follow his or her own standards, beliefs, or style of child raising
without unreasonable interference from the other parent.

Each parent has the right to his or her own private life and
territory.

--

_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_
        ____         ____       ____         ____           __
       / /  \       / /  \     /  \ \       /  \ \         /\ \
      / / /\ |     / / /\ |   / /\ |_|     / /\ \ \       _\ \ \ 
     / /  \/ /    / /  \/ /   \ \/ /_/_    \ \ \ \ \     /\_\ \ \
    /_/ /\  /    /_/ /\  /     \  __ \_\    \ \ \ \_\    \  __ \_\ 
    \_\/ / /     \_\/ / /       \ \ \/_/     \ \ \ |_|    \ \ \/_/
      /_/ /        /_/ /         \ \_\        \ \/ / /     \ \_\
      \_\/         \_\/           \/_/         \__/_/       \/_/

                          Aaron L. Hoffmeyer
                           tr@cbnea.att.com
 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights