Fathers' rights

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Fathers' rights movement is part of the men's movement and/or the parent's movement. It emerged in the 1970s as a loose social movement providing a network of interest groups, primarily in western countries. It is primarily interested with family law and issues affecting non-custodial fathers, mothers, and victims of paternity fraud, including child custody sometimes after divorce, child support, and paternity. The movement is particularly strong in the United Kingdom, Republic of Ireland, Italy, Canada, United States, New Zealand and Australia. The movement received international press coverage following the formation and high profile style activism of the Fathers 4 Justice group in the UK.

Contents

The Fathers' rights movement is related to both the men's rights movement and informed by masculism with some participants see it as a corollary to the women's rights and children's rights movements. It is also related to populism, as it often works against perceived government abuses of power. Its advocates see the movement's encouragement of shared parenting as complementary to, and not at odds with, equity feminism's goal of more equal parenting involvement by both parents contrary to the belief that only women possess a strong parental instinct (that is a Maternal bond).

The fathers' rights movement arose as a result of issues regarding custody of the children in association with changes that have lead to increased rates of separation and divorce.[1] The increased rates of separation/divorce for parents is partially a result of:

  • The decline in the power of religious belief to support marriage[2]
  • The increase in the financial independence of mothers[3]
  • Government policies including[4]
    • The willingness and power of family courts to grant majority or sole custody to mothers
    • The introduction of no-fault divorce in the 1960s making it easier for one spouse to unilaterally initiate divorce
      • The influence of the law, particularly with regard to the introduction of no-fault divorce, on social norms that have weakened the view that marriage is a life-long commitment[5]
    • Changes to child support laws in the 1980s.[6]

As with many social movements, some of the strongest criticisms of men's groups come from other groups and activists. Some feminists and pro-feminist men hold that fathers' rights groups seek to entrench patriarchy and oppose the advances made by women in society.[7]
According to their view, most fathers' rights advocates have joined the movement as the result of negative personal experience during a divorce or custody battle,[citation needed] though advocates do not dispute this, arguing that many men do not realize legal discrimination until after they have experienced it themselves.[citation needed] Critics suggest that the fathers' rights movement casts these personal troubles as pressing social problems and lobby government for a legislative solution,[8] draw on anecdote and "horror stories" to support their claims, and use rhetorical strategies to elicit emotional responses.[6]

Main articles: Adversarial system, Family law, Divorce, and No-fault divorce

Members of the fathers' rights movement criticize the adversarial system currently used in most Western countries to determine divorce and child custody issues. They state that the system is biased against fathers. For example, they suggest that courts help mothers secure child custody by granting them initial custody, creating delay and then denying changes to the status quo thus created, and by granting mothers unwarranted temporary restraining orders.[9][10] They protest the routine use of secretive in camera hearings in some jurisdictions.[11] Fathers' rights advocates suggest that some mothers lie in court to gain custody of their children, and that the reports of some professionals are fraudulent and untrustworthy. They protest that in some jurisdictions these individuals may be given immunity, making an appeal difficult, and they claim this as evidence of both gender bias against fathers and abuse of government authority.[12]
Once a custody has been decided and an order made, fathers complain that family court judges are slow to prevent interference with fathers' parenting time,[10] and may even condone a parent's refusal to allow their children a relationship with the other parent.[13]
Those who challenge for more parenting time face considerable time and expense and risk increased conflict as well as the loss of the parenting time they currently have.[13][4]

Members of the fathers' rights movement claim that governments condone censorship by making it a "crime to criticize family court judges or otherwise discuss family law cases publicly", and that family courts have sanctioned those who do by reducing custody and parenting time, and by imposing monetary penalties.[11]
They criticize the divorce industry and those that benefit from it, claiming that these act with a “vested interest in separating children from their parents.” [14][15][16]

They state that fathers have been driven to suicide by family courts,[17] though others suggest that these fathers likely had violent tendencies over a long period that contributed to the divorce and loss of custody.[18]

Main articles: Family law, Divorce, No-fault divorce, Best interests, Child custody, and Shared parenting

When making custody decisions, members of the fathers' rights movement believe family courts are biased in favor of:

  • geographical/one-parent stability- children should stay in the home they are accustomed to, with the parent who has been the primary caretaker
  • the mother - if there is only one parent, that it should be the mother[19]
  • sole custody – if the couple is in conflict (and in some cases, disagreement about custody is believed to be evidence of conflict)[20]

As a result Fathers' rights activists report that fathers often become nothing more than "visitors" in their children's lives after separation and divorce.[21] Stating that "children need both parents",[22] they call for greater equality in parental responsibility following separation,[23] and claim that it is an abuse of power for the state to take more than half custody away from a willing, competent parent or for the state to collude in disrupting a loving relationship between a father and his children.[24]
Members of the fathers' rights movement state that children can suffer if they grow up without equal or equivalent parenting time with both parents, and children denied this are more prone to low academic achievement, juvenile crime, teen pregnancy, teen substance abuse, depression and suicide.[25][14][26] They add that the correlation of these problems to "fatherlessness" is stronger than to any other variable including poverty.[27] Members of the fathers' rights movement call for laws creating a rebuttable presumption of 50/50 shared custody.[28] Such laws require parents be directed to develop a mutually agreeable parenting plan. If they are unable to do so, judges order an equal time-share of physical custody between the parents, unless it is not practical or in the best interests of the children. An otherwise non-custodial father would therefore spend more time with his children, increase his caretaking responsibilities, and likely pay significantly less child support to the other parent. Fathers' rights advocates note that the presumption for such shared parenting is rebuttable and that custody decisions would still be based primarily on the best interests of the children. They point to studies which show that children are happier with shared parenting.[29] They believe that though conflict between parents is damaging to the children in any parenting arrangement, shared parenting is particularly beneficial for the children in a situation of parental conflict.[20]

Critics of the fathers' rights movement argue that while there is sometimes bias against fathers in custody decisions, a US study that indicates that mothers are not unfairly favored in custody cases since when fathers contest do custody, they win joint residential or sole custody 70% of the time,[19] though these conclusions have been criticised on methodological grounds.[30]
Critics disagree that "fatherlessness" alone leads to problems children may experience. Researcher V. C. McLoyd has pointed out that families without fathers are likely to be poor; and it is the negative effects of poverty, rather than the absence of a father, that lead to negative developmental outcomes.[31] Researcher Mavis Hetherington found that 75% of children do well following divorce.[32] Critics say that in promoting shared parenting, the fathers' rights movement focus on the needs and wants of fathers as well as symbolic issues of "rights", "equality", and "fairness", rather than on the nuts and bolts of actual parenting[33] and the developmental needs and wishes of children.[34] They state that the father's rights movement ignores the actual division of labor between parents prior to separation and divorce, and gives little attention to how children would actually be parented.[33]
Critics also claim that some fathers' rights groups are more interested men re-establishing paternal authority related to their children and their ex-partners rather than actual involvement with children and that shared parenting ignores the dynamics of power and control in cases of domestic violence and child abuse.[35][36] They suggest it is detrimental to expose children to conflict and abuse between their parents.[37]

Critics have pointed out that shared parenting would result in a substantial decrease in child support the otherwise non-custodial parent – usually the father – would have to pay, and question whether this is a motivator.[38][36] Even if ordered, they suggest that many fathers will not provide 50% of the child care after separation.[citation needed]

See also: Child Support, Advocacy, Single parent, Sociology of fatherhood, and Paternity fraud

The fathers' rights movement protests the amount of child support paid by non-custodial parents. They challenge current methods of determining child support, and support guidelines based on a Cost Shares model, in which child support would be reduced to the actual out of pocket expenses incurred by the custodial parent.[39] They state that fathers are currently left with little or no discretionary income to enjoy with the children during their parenting time, which is not in the interests of the child.[40] They link child support to the issue of shared parenting, calling it "taxation without representation".[41] They protest the imprisonment without trial of fathers who do not pay child support.[42]
Critics respond that generous child support is in the best interest of the children, and they criticize the Cost Share model proposed by Fathers' rights advocates because it focuses on the living standard of divorcing parents relative to each other, discarding the notion that children be supported at the same level after a divorce.[43] They point out that even with the current model fathers pay a relatively small percentage of the total income of a single mother's household (19% according to one US study).[44] Further, non-custodial parents often underpay the owed child support.[45] While fathers may be imprisoned for refusal to pay child support if they are unable to pay they are often not held in contempt.[46] Imprisonment is a last resort, after all other avenues of collection have been exhausted.[47]

Main articles: Domestic violence and Emotional abuse

Since allegations of violence and abuse may be made in the context of conflictual divorce, members of the fathers' rights movement defend fathers by stating that men and women act abusively in about equal percentages[48] and that it is extremely rare for fathers to abuse their children.[16] They argue that when abuse occurs, the perpetrator is usually someone other than the father, and that it occurs after the father has been separated from his children.[17][16] They contend that false claims of domestic violence and/or child abuse[16] are encouraged by the inflammatory "win or lose" nature of child custody hearings and that in cases of alleged domestic violence or abuse, due process is not followed: fathers are presumed to be guilty rather than innocent, just because they are men.[16]

Critics dispute statistics about domestic violence: while they agree that there are male victims of domestic violence, they note that most victims of domestic violence are women.[49] They maintain that despite the claims of the fathers' rights movement, women rarely make false allegations of domestic violence and child abuse[50][51][52] and argue that fathers' rights activists are trying to roll back protections for battered women.[53] Critics agree that domestic violence can escalate during a separation but also argue that an increase in violence can actually trigger the break-up. [54] They contend that child abuse may also intensify during separation and that this explains why child abuse and domestic violence are often first reported during custody hearings.[55]

Main articles: Parental alienation and Parental alienation syndrome

Members of the fathers' rights movement state that some mothers interfere with the father's parenting time, some to the extent of alienating the children from their fathers, and that any such parenting interference should be stopped.[56][57] Members of the fathers' rights movement claim that Parental Alienation Syndrome may occur if a parent unjustly deprecates and criticizes the other parent or stepparent in front of the children during divorce, custody hearings and upon remarriage of a parent, as a result disturbing the child's relationship with the other parent.[57][58][59]
Critics point out that Parental Alienation Syndrome is not considered a syndrome by the American Psychological Association,[60] and that it has been rejected by some members of the legal community.[61] Critics report that Parental Alienation Syndrome can be used by abusive fathers as a weapon against appropriately protective mothers in order to win custody.[62][61] In a 1996 report the APA noted the danger that psychological evaluators might minimize domestic violence and "may accuse [the mother] of alienating the children from the father and may recommend giving custody to the father in spite of the history of violence."[63]

At the local level, many fathers' rights groups spend a large portion of their time providing support for newly separated fathers. In many cases these groups also campaign for a greater consideration of the rights of grandparents and women (especially step mothers) in second marriages.

Fathers' rights group meetings have an ethos of self-help. Some fathers advocate their own cases with some success, but problems can easily arise at times where self-representation occurs with delays and attempts to address issues outside family law.[64]

Rivalry and infighting often occur in fathers rights groups and members have been hurt in power struggles.[65] [66] Father's rights activists themselves have admitted that infighting between groups and individuals is a problem for the movement.[67][68][69][70]Internal strife is one factor that lead to the disbanding of Fathers 4 Justice in the U. K.[71]

Main articles: Fathers' rights movement in the UK and Child Support Agency

The fathers' rights movement in the UK consists range of groups, ranging from charities, self-help groups to civil disobedience activists. The movement can be traced to the founding in 1974 of Families Need Fathers, though the organization does not see itself as a fathers' rights organisation, pointing out that its primary focus is on the children's right to have a meaningful relationship with their fathers. FNF provides self-help support groups, promotes research into shared parenting, and lobbies political for legal changes in the family law system in the UK. It has been credited with several successes.[13] The founding of Fathers 4 Justice in 2003 brought the cause of fathers' rights to public attention with high-profile stunts with members dressing as comic book superheroes and other easily recognizable characters to scale public buildings and monuments. With time their protests became increasingly controversial, and internal strife divided the group. The group was officially disbanded in January 2006 following a suggestion that Prime Minister Tony Blair's son be briefly kidnapped, though further protests by a F4J splinter group, the 'Real F4J', have occurred. In the UK, fathers' rights groups have advocated for changes to the Child Support Act including child support, shared parenting and access to children[72] and lack of enforcement of court orders.[73][74] Pressure from the fathers' movement has influenced the UK Government, which published a draft Children (Contact) and Adoption Bill in February 2005[75] that aims to widen judges' powers in dealing with parents who obstruct their ex-partner from seeing their children.

Fathers' rights groups began in Australia in the 1970s with the founding of organizations such as the Lone Fathers Association. Other well-known groups include Equality for Fathers, Dads Against Discrimination, Fathers Without Rights, and the Shared Parenting Council.[76][77] As with other fathers' rights activists, Australian organizations focus on issues of erosion of the family unit, custody, access, child support, domestic violence (including false allegations, and violence against men), child abuse, maintenance, the reintroduction of fault into divorce proceedings, biased and adversarial court systems and secrecy issues. Groups have successfully garnered media, as well as influence on politicians and legal reform.[76] On May 22, 2006, Australia passed the "Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Act 2006" making both parents responsible for decisions about their child through the concept of ‘equal shared parental responsibility’, but did not order that the child must spend equal amounts of time with each parent.[78] While appreciating the Act as a step in the right direction, fathers' rights groups saw it generally as disappointment[79]

Fathers rights activists often point to Title IV-D of the Social Security Act,[80] which provides financial incentives to states for collection of child support, as having created a financial incentive for states and courts to deny them custody. They argue that the financial incentives, which are often conveyed upon local courts based on the total number of dollars collected in child support, discourage joint support awards or awards to dads, who often make more than moms. Members of the fathers' rights movement also point out that these financial incentives have been used to campaign against shared parenting laws.[81]

Members of the fathers rights movement note that in Michigan, the units that perform child support order establishment and enforcement services, the various county Friends of the Court, receive local funding directly from taxpayers and funding converted from the Michigan Title IV-D program, and as a result, more than in any other state, child support in Michigan is paid indirectly to the custodial parent and is first paid to Michigan, and that this is a result of the self interest of the Friends of the Courts, and an indication of the role of self interest in general, for maximizing the amount of child support collected.[82] Members of the fathers' rights movement also point to certain cases from Michigan. Robert Parker was sent to jail based on a child support order that did not exist.[83][84] and as a result he lost his job. Ruth and Dale Akers almost lost their home after the Wayne County Friend of the Court charged them child support for the child they had together, falsely asserting that the mother of the child was his first wife.[85] When Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox's Paykids initiative held a contest to encourage kids to make drawings for billboards with the theme of encouraging the payment of child support,[86] many fathers felt that the Attorney General was attempting to turn their children against them, and the initiative was promptly dropped.

In 2004, some Massachusetts voters were offered a chance to vote on a non-binding ballot question about creating a legislative presumption for joint physical custody. One such question was "Shall the state representative from this district be instructed to vote in favor of legislation requiring that in all separation and divorce proceedings involving minor children, the court shall uphold the fundamental rights of both parents to the shared physical and legal custody of their children and the children's right to maximize their time with each parent, so far as is practical, unless one parent is found unfit or the parents agree otherwise, subject to the requirements of existing child support and abuse prevention laws?" Of those voters choosing to answer the above or similar non-binding ballot initiatives, 84.5% voted approval and 15.5% voted disapproval.[87]

In contrast, in North Dakota, voters rejected a proposed statutory measure by a margin of 56% to 43%.[88] The new section would have provided for joint physical and legal custody unless either parent was ruled unfit by clear and convincing evidence, that parents would have to develop a joint parenting plan, with a court becoming involved only if parents could not agree and that child support payments could not be greater than the actual cost of providing for the basic needs.[89] The North Dakota State Bar Association opposed the initiative. Lawrence E. King, the president of the NDSBA, questioned how could parents who could not agree on their own to child custody be expected to make a mandated 50/50 custody arrangement work, which is what Measure 3 would have required. King stated that Measure 3 shifted bargaining power to non-custodial parents. He wrote that Measure 3 was not about children's best interests, but about "the unhappiness of some non-custodial parents." Finally, King claimed that he believed that a main goal of Measure 3 was the reduction or elimination of the non-custodial parent's child support obligation.[90]

Members of the fathers' rights movement believe that some advertisements that were used to help defeat shared parenting in North Dakota, and were 95% paid for by the North Dakota Bar Association, utilized scare tactics and were filled with "lies and misinformation." Members of the fathers' rights movement encourage the state bar association to consider, heed and return to the mission statement of the Family Law Section of the American Bar Association in 1952:

"The ultimate purpose of this organization shall be to bring about improvement in the laws of the several states relating to marriage and divorce and allied phases of family life, to the end that the law, in both philosophy and procedure, may tend to conserve, not disserve, family life; that it may be constructive, not destructive, as to marriage; that it may be helpful, not harmful, to the individual partners and their children; that it may be preventive, rather than punitive as to marriage and family failure."[91]

Michigan Parent's Rights Activists such as Dads of Michigan and Moms of Michigan seek passage of HB 5267,[92] a bill that would allow for a presumption of joint physical custody in the case of divorce as long as both parents live in the same school district, there is no clear and convincing evidence that a parent is unfit, unwilling or unable to care for the child, and makes no changes in child support payments. They held an Equal Parents Week Rally in Lansing, MI in October 2006 in support of the bill.[93]

Some fathers' rights campaigners argue that parenting time should be used indiscriminately to replace contact, visitation and residence. The term visitation is particularly objectionable to fathers' rights activists, who believe that this term reinforces the idea that only one parent raises the children. It is perceived that there is a stigma associated with treating one parent as resident and the other as non-resident. The term absent parent is felt by many to be particularly pejorative. Other terms which have raised the hackles of fathers' rights activists include single parent family - the preferred term here being single parent household, based on the truth that there are always two parents to a child. Male role model and father figure are other terms which campaigners feel are used as unacceptable euphemisms for father. Some have also called into question the term biological father

Public supporters of the fathers' rights movement, include divorced (and subsequently widowed) Live Aid founder, Bob Geldof,[citation needed] Irish writer and journalist John Waters and ex-UK Home Secretary David Blunkett.

Waters fought a legal case for access to the daughter he had by rock star Sinéad O'Connor, and highlighted what he saw as injustices in the treatment of men in his weekly column in The Irish Times.[citation needed]

David Blunkett resigned as Home Secretary on 15 December 2004 after it was revealed that he had sought fast-tracking of a visa for an ex-lover's nanny. His claim that he had resigned in order to pursue a paternity claim,[94] unwittingly made him a champion of the fathers' rights movement.[citation needed]
Karen DeCrow, former president of the National Organization for Women stated "shared parenting is not only fair to men and children, it is the best option for women",[95] and that “part of ending sexism involves eliminating the inhuman practice of awarding a parent ‘visitation’ to his or her own child.”[96]


Fathers' rights members have been criticized for harassment, threats and illegal activities, including fraud.[97]
Activists have been convicted of stalking[98] and have "terrorised" women and children while wearing "paramilitary uniforms and black masks",[99].[100][101] The UK fathers' rights group, Fathers 4 Justice, disbanded in early 2006 after some members suggested briefly kidnapping the five-year-old son of Prime Minister Tony Blair as a publicity stunt.[102]
Court staff and their homes have been threatened and their offices vandalized by militant activists,[103]. A family court judge was allegedly shot by Darren Mack, who has also been charged with the murder of his estranged wife.[104] Mack saw himself as a martyr for fathers' rights[105] Members of the fathers' rights movement have been criticised for having excused his actions and even Glenn Sacks, a leader in the movement has noted that "the not insubstantial lunatic fringe of the fathers' rights movement see [Mack] as some sort of freedom fighter."[106]
Threatening behavior from fathers' rights activists have also been reported by legislators[107] and women opponents at legislative hearings have reported harassment and threats of physical harm made towards them.[108][109]

Men's movement including:

Some of the major Parents/Fathers/Children's rights organizations include:

See List of family separation research articles

  • Fathers Rights Survival Guide by Mike L. Weening
  • Fathers after Divorce by Michael Green
  • Shared Parenting Jill Burrett & Michael Green
  • Myth of Male Power by Dr. Warren Farrell
  • Father and Child Reunion by Dr. Warren Farrell
  • The Case for Father Custody (1999) ISBN 0-9610864-6-7 Online copy here
  • Torn Apart: True Stories of Excluded Fathers (2005) by Tim Willis ISBN 1-904977-30-8
  • Fathers' Rights: Hard-Hitting & Fair Advice for Every Father Involved in a Custody Dispute by Jeffery Leving, Ken Dachman
  • GUIDE TO FATHERS RIGHTS by Attorney Ronald Isaacs.
  • Dedicated Fathers Audio Book Series by Marvin L. Chapman

  1. ^ The Determination of Child Custody. The Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University and The Brookings Institution. Retrieved on 2007-03-22.
  2. ^ Divorce on the rise in Catholic Europe. Catholic News Agency (2006-05-25). Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  3. ^ Dobson, Roger (2006-08-20). Wealthy women set the pace in divorce stakes. TimesOnline. Retrieved on 2007-03-22.
  4. ^ a b Baskerville, Stephen (June 2004). The Fatherhood Crisis: Time for a New Look?. NCPA Policy Report No. 267 ISBN #1-56808-136-7. National Center for Policy Analysis. Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  5. ^ Maldonado, Solangel (2005). Beyond Economic Fatherhood. University of Pennsylvania Law Review. Retrieved on 2007-03-22.
  6. ^ a b "The Rhetoric of Rights and Needs: Moral Discourse in the Reform of Child Custody and Child Support Laws". Social Problems 19 (4): 400-420. 
  7. ^ Dr Michael Flood. The Australian National University National: Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health. Retrieved on 2007-02-05.
  8. ^ Smyth, Bruce. "Child support Policy in Australia: Back to basics?". Family Matters (67). 
  9. ^ Select Committee on Constitutional Affairs Fourth Report. House of Commons, Parliament UK (2005-02-23). Retrieved on 2007-03-18.
  10. ^ a b National Fatherhood Initiative's Ad Campaign Insults African-American Fathers. GlennSacks.Com and Daily Breeze, Los Angeles (2004-05-25 Daily Breeze, Los Angeles). Retrieved on 2007-03-14.
  11. ^ a b Baskerville, Stephen (2006-04-04). Banned in Boston. LewRockwell.Com. Retrieved on 2007-03-18.
  12. ^ "MND NEWSWIRE", Men's News Daily, 2004-12-05. Retrieved on 2007-03-17.
  13. ^ a b c The Operation of the Family Courts. House of Commons Constitutional Affairs Committee Family Justice (2004-11-08). Retrieved on 2007-03-18.
  14. ^ a b Baskerville, Stephen (December 2002). The Politics of Fatherhood. childrensjustice.org: American Political Science Association. Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  15. ^
  16. ^ a b c d e Baskerville, Stephen (May 2006). Family Violence in America The Truth About Domestic Violence and Child Abuse. Retrieved on 2007-03-14.
  17. ^ a b Baskerville, Stephen (Summer 2003). Divorce as Revolution. The Fatherhood Coalition, also Salisbury Review vol. 21 no. 4. Retrieved on 2007-03-22.
  18. ^ Crary, David. Fathers' Rights Groups Decry Court Process. The Associated Press.
  19. ^ a b Boston, Gabriella (2005-07-10). Custody's high stakes. The Washington Times. Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  20. ^ a b Farrell, Warren (2006-03-21). Three Judicial Biases About Moms, Dads and Children. Retrieved on 2007-03-12.
  21. ^ "Wilks", "James" (June 1995). Fathers have rights, too - child custody inequities - Column. Retrieved on 2007-03-14.
  22. ^ Ballard, Travis. Mitigating the Effects of Divorce on Children. National Congress for Fathers and Children. Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  23. ^ Shared Parenting Council Membership. Shared Parenting Council. Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  24. ^ An APPEAL to the PARENTS of AMERICA about the DESTRUCTION of the AMERICAN FAMILY. American Coalition of Fathers and Children. Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  25. ^ Shared Parenting: Common Objections versus the Facts. American Coalition of Fathers and Children: The Liberator Volume 32#3 (Fall 2005). Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  26. ^ Joint Custody and Shared Parenting. Children's Rights Council (November 2005). Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  27. ^ For sake of kids, pass law presuming joint custody. DesMoinesRegister.Com (2007-03-20). Retrieved on 2007-03-28.
  28. ^ Why Howard suddenly started to talk about custody battles. theage.com.au (2003-06-21). Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  29. ^ HB 5267 Will Help Michigan’s Children of Divorce. American Coalition of Fathers and Children (also Lansing State Journal) (2006-05-08 (printed in Lansing State Journal)). Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  30. ^ McNeely, Cynthia J. (1998). Lagging Behind the Times: Parenthood, Custody, And Gender Bias In the Family Court. FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 25:891]. Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  31. ^ http://www.deltabravo.net/custody/deconstruct.php
  32. ^ http://www.virginia.edu/insideuva/2000/09/hetherington.html
  33. ^ a b Flood, Michael. "Separated Fathers and the Fathers’ Rights Movement". Feminism, Law and the Family Workshop, Law School, University of Melbourne. Retrieved on 2007-03-12. 
  34. ^ Kolata, Gina (November 1988). "Child splitting: many states now favor joint custody. But it's not always the happiest arrangement". Psychology Today. Retrieved on 2007-03-24. 
  35. ^ Michigan National Organization for Women, Mandated Joint Physical And Legal Custody Bill
  36. ^ a b Callander, Debbi; Martin Dufresne, Janet Menezes and Ellen Murray. On Abuse, Shared Parenting, & the System. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  37. ^ Govorun, Olesya (November 21, 2002). Joint-custody arrangements good for children of divorce -- but only if there is no parental conflict. Ohio State Research News.
  38. ^ American Bar Association, Guide to Family Law: Effect of Joint Custody
  39. ^ Rogers, R. Mark (2001-05-05). The “Cost Shares” Child Support Guideline: A Working, Superior Alternative. Guideline Economics. Retrieved on 2007-03-12.
  40. ^ Wilson, KC (2004-09-15). The Subversion of Child Support. IFeminists.Com. Retrieved on 2007-03-17.
  41. ^ Farrell, Warren (January, 2001). Father and Child Reunion How To Bring The Dads We Need To The Children We Love. NY: Jeremy P. Tarcher/Putnam. Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  42. ^ Sanderson, Mitchell; Stephen Baskerville (2007). and , Grand Forks letter: Deadbeat editorial one-sided. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  43. ^ [Laura W.] (February 15 2005). The "Cost Share" model of child support guidelines. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  44. ^ Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council (1994). America's Fathers and Public Policy: Report of a Workshop. National Academies Press, p. 5. 
  45. ^ U.S. Census Bureau News (August 23, 2006). Child-Support Receipt Up; Reliance on Public Assistance Down. Press release. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  46. ^ Davis, Matthews & Quigley, P.C., Enforcement Of Judgments, Child Support And Visitation, The Lawyer's Perspective
  47. ^ Nolo. Child Support: Enforcement of Child Support FAQ. Nolo. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  48. ^ October’s Domestic Violence Awareness Month Ignores Many Victims. American Coalition of Fathers and Children also Omaha World Herald, Daytona (October 2006). Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  49. ^ Rennison, Callie Marie. Intimate Partner Violence and Age of Victim, 1993-99. U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  50. ^ Flood, Michael (March 2005). Fact Sheet #1: The myth of false accusations of child abuse. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  51. ^ Flood, Michael (March 2005). Fact Sheet #2: The myth of women’s false accusations of domestic violence and misuse of protection orders. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  52. ^ McDonald, Merrilyn (Spring 1998). The Myth of Epidemic False Allegations of Sexual Abuse in Divorce Cases. Court Review. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  53. ^ Flood, Michael (August 2005). Fact Sheet #3: How the fathers’ rights movement undermines the protections available to victims of violence and protects the perpetrators of violence. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  54. ^ Bancroft, R. Lundy (1998). Understanding The Batterer In Custody And Visitation Disputes.
  55. ^ Bancroft, R. Lundy (1998). Understanding The Batterer In Custody And Visitation Disputes.
  56. ^ Equal Parents Week Highlights Need for Family Court Reform. GlennJSacks.Com also Lansing State Journal 2002-09-26. Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  57. ^ a b Hayward, Stan. A GUIDE TO THE PARENTAL ALIENATION SYNDROME. UK Men and Father's Rights. Retrieved on 2007-03-15.
  58. ^ Rand, Deirdre Conway. "The Spectrum Of Parental Alienation Syndrome (Part I)". American Journal of Forensic Psychology 15. Retrieved on 2007-03-11. 
  59. ^ Rand, Deirdre Conway (1997). "The Spectrum Of Parental Alienation Syndrome (Part II)". American Journal of Forensic Psychology 15 (4). Retrieved on 2007-03-11. 
  60. ^ Statement on Parental Alienation Syndrome. American Psychological Association (2005-10-28). Retrieved on 2007-03-11.
  61. ^ a b The Leadership Council on Child Abuse and Interpersonal Violence (2006-07-12). Child Abuse Experts Applaud Legal Community for Rejecting Parental Alienation Syndrome. Press release. Retrieved on 2007-03-12.
  62. ^ Dalton, Clare; Leslie M. Drozd, Hon. Frances Q.F. Wong (2006). "Navigating Custody and Visitation Evaluations in Cases with Domestic Violence:A Judge’s Guide": p. 19. Retrieved on 2007-03-12. 
  63. ^ 1996, American Psychological Association Presidential Task Force on Violence And The Family, American Psychological Association
  64. ^ O (Children), W-R (A child), W (Children) for an example of an Appeal brought without the assistance of lawyers, but by members of Families Need Fathers and Fathers 4 Justice
  65. ^ Kates, Elizabeth (1998). NCFC Dispute With ACFC (web site). The Liz Library. Retrieved on March 30, 2007.
  66. ^ Dew, Berkshire Eagle Staff, Jack. "Fatherhood Coalition Ousts Leader", North Adams Transcript, August 1, 2005. Retrieved on March 30, 2007.
  67. ^ fathersrightsblow and krp (June 10, 2006). "Father's Rights Groups - Like Pushing A Car Uphill With A Rope More options". alt.dads-rights.unmoderated. (Google Groups). Retrieved on March 30, 2007.
  68. ^ Julian Garcia (NYDADS@delphi.com) (November 27, 1994). "American Fathers Coalition - An Idea to Help". bit.listserv.free-l. (Google Groups). Retrieved on March 30, 2007.
  69. ^ Richards, Lionel (18 April 2004). Re 50 / 50 residence the right target. Retrieved on March 21 2007.
  70. ^ Richards, Lionel (3 May 2004). Re 50 / 50 residence the right target. Retrieved on March 21 2007.
  71. ^ http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article531077.ece
  72. ^ Dyer, Clare (2003-05-23). Contact ban for hated father. The Guardian Unlimited. Retrieved on 2007-03-18.
  73. ^ Dyer, Clare (2005-03-02). Fathers get raw deal on child access, say MPs. Guardian Unlimited. Retrieved on 2007-03-18.
  74. ^ Collier, Richard, Sally Sheldon. "Unfamiliar territory", The Guardian, November 1, 2006. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  75. ^ UK Children (Contact) and Adoption Bill
  76. ^ a b Kaye, Miranda; Julia Tolmie (1998). "Fathers' Rights Groups in Australia and their Engagement with Issues in Family Law". Australian Journal of Family Law 12: pp 19-68. Retrieved on 2007-03-24. 
  77. ^ Flood, Michael (2004), Backlash: Angry men's movements in "The Battle and Backlash Rage On: Why Feminism Cannot Be Obsolete" Ed S.E Rossi, Xlibris Press
  78. ^ Watts McCray Lawyers (2006). "A Layman's Guide to the Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Act 2006" (pdf). Retrieved on 2007-03-25.
  79. ^ Fatherhood Foundation (31 March 2006). Flawed Family Law Reform Passed by Senate. Press release. Retrieved on 2007-03-25.
  80. ^ Title IV-D of the Social Security Act
  81. ^ Rogers, R. Mark. ACFC presentation (video). American Coalition of Fathers and Children. Retrieved on 2007-03-18.
  82. ^ "Title IV-D and Michigan", A Child's Right.Net, 2004. Retrieved on 2007-03-17.
  83. ^ "DADS and MOMS of Michigan eNewsletter: YouTube Interview With Robert Parker", DadsofMichigan.Org, November 2006. Retrieved on 2007-03-17.
  84. ^ Parker, Robert. You Tube interview (video). You Tube. Retrieved on 2007-03-18.
  85. ^ "Child Support Enforcement Demands Man Pay Ex-Wife Child Support for Child", GlennSacks.Com, 2006-11-21. Retrieved on 2007-03-17.
  86. ^ http://www.wane.com/Global/story.asp?S=2341704
  87. ^ Associated Press. "Results of local, regional ballot questions", Boston.com, 2004. Retrieved on 2007-02-02.
  88. ^ North Dakota Secretary of State (2006-12-04). General Election - November 07, 2006, Statutory Measure No.3. North Dakota State Government. Retrieved on 2007-02-03.
  89. ^ North Dakota State Government. Initiated Statutory Measure No. 3 (Word). Retrieved on 2007-02-03.
  90. ^ King, Lawrence E.. "A Message From President Lawrence King", State Bar Association Of North Dakota.
  91. ^ ACFC on the defeat of shared parenting in North Dakota. Retrieved on 2007-03-18.
  92. ^ Michigan State Government. Michigan Bill HB 5267. Retrieved on 2007-03-18.
  93. ^ Equal Parents Week Rally in Lansing, MI
  94. ^ "Blunkett quits as home secretary", BBC News, 15 December 2004. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  95. ^ "Welcome to California Shared Parenting Alliance", California Shared Parenting Alliance. Retrieved on 2007-03-18.
  96. ^ Family law reform helps children. Sunday Gazette Mail (West Virginia). Retrieved on 2007-03-18.
  97. ^ Coates, Sam. "Fathers 4 Justice split by infighting", The Times, 2005-06-08. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  98. ^ “Stalker: lesson learned”, Herald-Sun, 30 September 2004
  99. ^ BBC News. "Australian militant fathers under fire", BBC, 25 July, 2002. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  100. ^ “Threat to crack down on vigilante group.” The Age, 25 July 2002
  101. ^ Militants harassed woman, daughter.” The Canberra Times, 6 August 2002
  102. ^ Womack, Sarah, George Jones. "Fathers give up campaign", The Telegraph, 19 January, 2006. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  103. ^ Travis, Alan. "Militant fathers intimidating court staff", The Guardian, December 31, 2004. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  104. ^ Associated Press. "Police expect Reno suspect to surrender: Pawn-shop owner sought in judge’s shooting, killing of his estranged wife", MSNBC, June 14, 2006. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  105. ^ "Caught In The Crossfire: Who Is To Blame For A Wife's Death And A Judge's Shooting?", CBS News, February 24, 2007. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  106. ^ Sacks, Glenn (June 19, 2006). Do I Even Need to Say This?. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  107. ^ "Message proves unsettling", Times Union, June 26, 2006. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
  108. ^ http://www.owjn.org/custody/lobby2.htm
  109. ^ Morgan Bolton, Michele. "Custody Bill Fight Turns Frightful: Women's Groups Say They Are Being Threatened Over Their Stance On Legislation", Albany New York Times Union, April 21, 2006.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../f/a/t/Fathers%27_rights.html"