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

On Wed, 27 Mar 1996, fathers wrote:

> >By Raymond Hernandez, NYTIMES, 3/27/96
> >
> >ALBANY, March 26 - New York State's highest court issued a ruling today
> >intended to give divorced parents who have custody of their children more
> >freedom to move out of the state, even if it means they are leaving behind
> >former spouses who have visitation rights.

In Colorado, the CP can move, but the NCP can deduct the costs of
visitation from the child-support.  This includes air-fare, motel, and
ground transportation.  It is usually a stipulation that is put in by the
NCP's lawyer.

They should allow the NCP to deduct these costs whether or not the visits
are actually made, to compensate the NCP for the loss of his relationship
with his children.

> >The ruling was consistent with a trend among New York's politicians and
> >judges to put the well-being of the child above the desire to keep the
> >family together.  For example, Gov. George E. Pataki, Attorney General
> >Dennis C. Vacco and Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani have all called in recent
> >months for changes in the way the authorities determine whether to keep a
> >child with abusive parents.  They have said that instead of focusing on
> >holding a family together, more weight should be given to the needs of the
> >child.

Interesting, both Pataki and Giuliani are Republicans.  They also have
been doing quite a bit to simply "drive out" the poor, elderly, and
unemployed.  NY law requires separate bedrooms for male and female
children, a separate bedroom for the parents, and no more than two
children per bedroom.  A 2 bedroom apartment in Manhattan rents for over
$2000/month.  If a woman can't earn enough to pay those expenses, she can
live in Suburban New Jersey for $800/month.  A 3 bedroom house in
Pennsylvania rents for 800/month, and Pensylvania has less stringent
bedroom requirements.  In southern Colorado, my ex-wife pays $350/month
for a 3 bedroom house, in a white-collar suburban neighborhood.

> >The decision also comes as a growing number of states are trying to balance
> >the rights of noncustodial parents - generally fathers who have visitation
> >rights - with the rights of custodial parents, most of them mothers, to
> >begin a new life after a divorce.

Unfortunately, all decisions relating to child-support, visitation,
custody, and relocation are based on the situation confronting a woman in
the first 6 months after the divorce.  Even though circumstances may
change dramatically within 2-5 years (remarriage, career, children
starting school, children easier to care for....) the ONLY review the
courts consider is requests to INCREASE child-support (because maternal
lawyers typically get 1/3 of the increase).

> >In the last decade, high courts in at least 20 states have upheld the right
> >of a custodial parent to relocate, even if the move made it harder for the
> >other parent to see his or her child.

Conversely, the courts have given no consideration toward needs of the
NCP.  He is punished by loss of visitation if he relocates.  His
child-support is INCREASED if he earns more money as a result of the
relocation.  He is laid-off or looses promotion opportunity if he does not
relocate, and the court can impute the increased income if he refused to
take a promotion because he choosed not to relocate.  Catch-22.

> >The courts have ruled that many custodial parents have no choice but to
> >move because they have remarried or found new jobs, legal experts in the
> >custody field said.

Either situation SHOULD merit an automatic reduction in child-support.
Instead, the laws have been carefully designed so that the ONLY change is
the INCREASE that occurs when the NCP FATHER's income actually or
theoretically could increase.

I took the trouble to read the entire dissolution of marriage law for my
state, interviewed 3 lawyers (paying $100/consultation), and finally
retaining one who could help me "write my own settlement".  I completed a
settlement that exceeded the requirements of the state, and at the same
time assured me of custody in the event of her misfortune, protected me
from future increases in either child-support or health-care.  The judge
was reluctant to accept it, but assented when my wife told him she was
getting married the following month.  The decree was issued May 27th and
her marriage was June 9th.

I was the petitioner and she was the respondant.

What is most remarkable is that I have actually honored the terms of this
settlement even when it was unconcionable to do so (her moving, her
squandering a $25,000 inheritance, my moving, her refusal of visitation).

> Andy Duncan
> dadman@sound.net
>
> One half of all parents are fathers.

Not quite.  Being a father is more than just ejaculating sperm.  A true
father commits himself to the health, safety, and security of his
children, and makes the sacrifices necessary to assure that health,
safety, and security are provided.  This may include empowering the
mother to establish a career, get remarried, and live responsibly.
This empowerment often includes saying "No" to selfish and wreckless
acts of the mother.  It often means telling her to "get a job" when she
calls and tells you she wants $500 to take the kids to DisneyWorld.  It
means NOT increasing a payment because her new husband doesn't want to
work.  It means holding her accountable for her commitment to the children
when she wants to leave them with the kids' step-aunt for a few weeks.

There are many times when I'm sure my ex-wife wishes that she could just
say "keep your money and let me have my way".  Later, when she has reaped
the rewards of responsible living (like finishing college instead of
dropping out), she is almost grateful. (Not quite grateful enough to
request that the child-support be reduced :-).





From rballard@cnj.digex.net Fri Mar 29 02:27:15 1996