In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O
X-Status: 


	Rex Ballard - Director of Electronic Distribution
	http://cnj.digex.net/~rballard
> From: Wilson, Johnny 
> 
> The comments below are forwarded for your information and action.
> 
> The Actions of Militant NOW members creating a gender war of
> misinformation is playing right into the hands of the divorce lawyer
> status quo.  This will only benefit those in NOW with a personal agenda of
> stifling equality. 

Joint Custdoy isn't all it's cracked up to be.  I have joint legal 
custody.  About the only time my co-custodian (ex-wife) called me for 
"consultation" was:
	1.	When my son needed braces (she wanted me to pay for them)
	2.	When she wanted to put him in a foster home.
	3.	When she wanted Jerry to have custody in the event of her death.
I ended up with the following resolutions:
	1.	I asked for a second opinion (the second docter said wait 2 years).
	2.	I told her I would be the only "foster home" she could choose.
	3.	I told her that since Jerry hasn't even offered to adopt and 
		I'm still paying full child-support, that I would enforce the terms of 
		our decree (automatically gives me irrevokable custody the 
		minute she determines she cannot take care of the kids.

I've been paying premium-rate child-support for 5 years, with a 
commitment to another 10 if necessary.  I don't want to void the terms of 
that settlement by going into default.

> Those in the NOW organization who support equality by supporting joint
> custody are being threatened with having their membership revoked.

You mean their contributors WONT be allowed to send them money anymore?
I used to be a member of NOW!  Amneus could be a member of NOW if he 
wanted to pay the $85/year dues.

>      A Rep. told us yesterday,  that NOW is out in force and working the
> House members.  Key phrases from them are: "J C will hurt children.  Abusive 
> fathers will be equal to loving mothers.  Domestic Violence will increase."
>   Here is what a  friend in New York told me today:

I'm suprised the Lawyers aren't THRILLED.  This means that vindictive 
women who don't want to "share" would have to pay an extra $500 for a 
restraining order and an extra $2000 for a background check (if the 
father has even an arrest with charges dropped, it can be turned into a 
case for sole custody.

Even with "Joint Custody", one parent become the "Primary" and the other 
becomes the "Secondary".  Some states are even looking to include 
stepfathers - giving the children the legal status of having 3 parents.

> Paul:
>      New York recently had hearings on whether to adopt presumptive joint
> custody.  James Cook came up here to tetisfy.  We did not go out in full
> force as apparently you did in Georgia.  My employer (Westinghouse) is
> making me work 60 - 70 hrs a wk and I just didn't have time to get
> involved.

> NOW did send in their domestic violence people.  Apparently,
> their strategy was to scare the legislatures into not passing presumtive
> JC because NOW is arguing that it will only make domestic violence worse. 

Before the law gets out of the house, they will have made it so easy to 
challenge joint custody that any man who actually IS abusive could lose 
custody based on police "family disturbance calls".

The strategy is simple.  Fix him a few drinks, wait for him to get nice 
and drunk, start a fight, and push him until he swings.  Then you call 
the police.  By the time the police arrive, she will have a nice "shiner".

They will take him downtown, she will drop the charges, and she can file 
papers the next morning.  My mother did it with my dad - worked like a 
charm.  He hadn't hit her in 20 years of marriage - he swung once.  
Not only did mom get the restraining order, dad ended up in restraints at 
a psychiatric hospital.

They remarried 4 years later and have been married for 40 and 14 years 
(they celebrate both anniverseries).


	Rex


From rballard@cnj.digex.net Sat Feb 24 01:18:39 1996