1. Take Action 2. Get Involved 3. Give a Gift
About | Contact | Home

Fathers & FamiliesTM improves the lives of children and strengthens society by protecting the child’s right to the love and care of both parents after separation or divorce. We seek better lives for children through family court reform that establishes equal rights and responsibilities for fathers and mothers.

F & F’s Robinson Interviewed on Our Efforts to Protect Military Parents from Family Court Abuses (Audio Available)

February 8th, 2010 by Glenn Sacks, MA, Executive Director

Fathers & Families’ legislative representative Michael Robinson discussed our efforts to protect military parents from family court abuses with Rick Ortiz of DadsDivorce Live recently. To listen to the audio of Robinson’s interview, click here.

Robinson has worked with Mark Sullivan of the American Bar Association on federal military parent legislation. Partly due to their work, the National Defense Reauthorization Act (HR 2647), which was signed by President Obama in October, 2009, mandates that the Secretary of Defense produce a report on child custody litigation involving members of the Armed Forces, as well as international intrafamilial abductions of servicemembers’ children.

The Secretary of Defense will submit its report to the Armed Services Committees of the Senate and the House of Representatives by the end of March. This problem affects both fathers and mothers who serve. If you are a military mother or father whose custody rights have been adversely affected due to your service, we want to make sure your story is included in the Secretary of Defense’s report. To submit your story for inclusion, please fill out our form below.

If you are a military parent who has had family law problems, Fathers & Families would like to submit your case to the Secretary of Defense—to be included, please fill out the form here.

Fathers & Families Speaks to Elkins Family Law Task Force, Makes Recommendations

February 8th, 2010 by Glenn Sacks, MA, Executive Director

elkinslogo

“The families that judges see in family court are already fractured, but still capable of inflicting pain on one another and often use the courts to do so…They make navigating the family law system so difficult that even a highly functional person becomes stressed.” — Honorable Donna Petre, Sacramento Bee, 2000

Family law takes up more court calendar time than any other form of law in California, yet it receives the least amount of funding. Moreover, the public’s trust and confidence in the family court system is lower than that of any other area of law the judicial system handles.

The Elkins Family Law Task Force is conducting a comprehensive review of family law proceedings and will recommend to the Judicial Council of California proposals that increase access to justice for all family law litigants.

Last fall the Elkins Family Law Task Force recently issued its draft recommendations and Fathers & Families has submitted its official comments in response. Our comments, which were submitted by F & F Board Member Elizabeth Barton, PhD of the University of California at Irvine, are here.

Fathers & Families’ legislative representative Michael Robinson appeared at the Task Force’s two-day meeting February 1 & 2, 2010 in the Judicial Council Conference Center of the Administrative Office of the Courts in San Francisco. Below is Robinson’s statement to the Task Force.

Madam Chair and Distinguish Member of the Task Force: I am Michael Robinson and I’ve worked as a legislative advocate and policy consultant in Sacramento since the late 1990s. I am here today on behalf of Fathers & Families (F&F), a national organization based in Boston which has offices in Los Angeles and Sacramento.

Before I get started, I want to thank Chief Justice Ronald George for calling for the formation of this Task Force and I also want to thank all task force members for the due diligence that has led to the many well-considered recommendations.

To this end, in general principle F&F agrees with the draft recommendations the Task Force has made so far. We are concerned, however, that many of the draft recommendations are lacking in substantive detail. Nevertheless, we will withhold further opinion until we see the final report, which we hope will contain more detailed and specific language that will become actual legislative draft proposals.

Our comments to the task force were submitted by the deadline along with a cover letter by Elizabeth Barton, PhD from the University of California at Irvine, who is a member of Fathers & Families’ Board.

Over the last nearly 10 years I often recall two very fitting quotes by the Hon. Donna Petre that appeared in the Sacramento Bee in 2000 after she had received her award for implementing a case managing process in her court. The quotes are:

“The families that judge see in family court are already fractured, but still capable of inflicting pain on one another and often use the courts to do so.”

And:

“They make navigating the family law system so difficult that even a highly functional person becomes stressed.”

It is encouraging that some of the Task Force’s recommendations place a stronger emphasis in this area of case management, including improving case data tracking.

Other recommendations go to improving mediation, ADR, and parent resources to help reduce conflict. We believe that the more that is done to reduce parental conflict at the outset, the less unproductive adversarial litigation we’ll have in custody and parenting time cases.

In 2006, I played a major role in Dymally’s AB 402. This bill codified collaborative practice into the family codes. We believe that many of the principles that govern collaborative practice substantially help reduce conflict. They produce a positive outcome in a non-adversarial manner for all parties including the children. Encouraging mentoring of collaborative practice for practitioners and making parties aware of this process will help.

We also believe that better parental education is necessary on the harmful effects that high conflict has on children, and that parental education on this subject should be a part of all mediation orientations.

In our recommendations on the issue of custody mediation, we submitted two additional documents that we feel should be a guiding principle for all parents, mediators and the court from the start of a custody/parenting time case. The first I’d like to mention is “A Child’s Bill of Rights” that was written by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, and the second is “A Parents’ Bill of Rights” that was written by Dr. Frank Leek. I’ve also included them with my prepared comments.

We are concerned that the recommendations do not include anything on enforcing custody/parenting time orders. We hope the Task Force also considers this issue.

On the recommendation to enforce perjury, we certainly agree that there is a need to take this issue seriously, and it is long overdue. One area is the problem of false allegations to obtain TROs and DVPOs. There are also problems with evidence standards. Read the rest of this entry »

Action Alert: Psychology Today Praises Woman Who Murdered Her Husband as ‘Great Revenge’

February 1st, 2010 by Glenn Sacks, MA, Executive Director

Fathers & Families is sending the protest letter below to Psychology Today via regular US mail and email. To add your signature to the letter and send it to Psychology Today, simply click here and fill out the fields.

Letter from Fathers & Families to Psychology Today:

Kaja Perina
Editor-in-Chief
Psychology Today
115 E. 23rd St., 9th Floor
New York, NY 10010
212-260-7210

Dear Ms. Perina & Psychology Today:

In the shockingly irresponsible article “Sweet Revenge” (Psychology Today, January/February 2010), Regina Barreca, Ph.D. praises convicted Texas killer Clara Harris for her “great moment of revenge.” The act for which Barreca praises Harris? In 2002, Harris repeatedly ran over her ex-husband David, as David’s daughter Lindsey sat in the front seat of the car begging Clara Harris not to kill her father.

While Barreca praises Clara Harris, Lindsey, who loved her father and was only 16 years old at the time of the killing, publicly denounced Clara Harris for “the ultimate act of selfishness, caring only about obtaining revenge and thinking not one bit about how her horrible act was going to affect me or my brothers, Brian and Bradley. Anyone who shared my ride in the car that evening, seeing my dad’s face as he was about to be hit, and experiencing the horrible feel of the car bumping over his body would understand that this murderess deserves no sympathy.”

Lindsey says that Clara mistreated and neglected David, and that her father often confided in her how lonely he felt. Coupled with Clara’s temper and evident capacity for violence, David had ample reason to want to get out of the relationship. Instead of letting him go, Clara killed him. Does Psychology Today feel this is praiseworthy?

Besides condoning violence, Barreca’s article also reeks of gender bias. The majority of divorces are initiated by women, not by men, and research shows that women’s decision to divorce often catches their husbands by surprise. These men don’t just lose their wives, they often lose their children, too, and their rationale for feeling betrayed is often far more legitimate than Clara Harris’. Does Barreca also feel it would be “great revenge” for these men to murder their wives?

No type of marital or post-marital violence should ever be condoned, much less praised, and Psychology Today should immediately and clearly distance itself from Barreca’s reprehensible statements.

Sincerely,

Glenn Sacks, MA
Executive Director, Fathers & Families

Ned Holstein, M.D., M.S.
Founder, Chairman of the Board, Fathers & Families

To learn more about the Clara Harris case, see my co-authored Houston Chronicle column Suppose Roles Had Been Reversed in Clara Harris Case (1/27/07).

Success: Bill to Protect Disabled Parents from Family Court Abuses Passes Committee Unanimously

January 27th, 2010 by Glenn Sacks, MA, Executive Director

Monday evening Fathers & Families issued an Action Alert in support of Arizona HB 2348, a bill to protect disabled parents from child support and alimony abuses. As usual, your response was overwhelming—we thank all those who participated.

We have just learned that the bill has passed the Arizona House Military Affairs and Public Safety Committee unanimously. We thank Arizona House Member Frank Antenori, who sponsored the bill, as well as Mark Beres of the American Retirees Association and the ULSG, and Fathers & Families’ legislative representative Michael Robinson, who worked with Beres. Robinson was also instrumental in the passage of a similar bill, SB 285, in California last year.

We will be following the bill as it advances through the Arizona legislature—thanks again to all of you who responded to our Action Alert and participated.

F & F is also working with advocates and legislators on similar legislation in Texas and New Mexico, and is laying the groundwork for legislation in Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Indiana, and Illinois. It also appears that a failed 2009 legislative effort in Iowa has been revived by CA. SB 285’s passage. In addition, a U.S. Congressman has taken up this issue and we are helping him craft a federal bill which we expect will be introduced in the near future. To learn more about the bill, click here.

The abuses being committed in family court concerning disabled parents’ VA benefits remind many F & F supporters of their own experiences in family court–a lack of respect for the law, violations of due process, fathers (and sometimes mothers) being financially plundered and shook down for money they don’t owe, etc.

F & F is creating real, tangible family court reform today. Give to the organization which fights for you by clicking here.

Together with you in the love of our children,

Glenn Sacks, MA
Executive Director, Fathers & Families

Ned Holstein, M.D., M.S.
Founder, Chairman of the Board, Fathers & Families

Video: ‘Don’t Make Me Choose’

January 26th, 2010 by Glenn Sacks, MA, Executive Director
YouTube Preview Image

Fathers & Families supporter Katrina McKenna sent us this video she made in support of shared parenting. The video can also be seen at her blog at www.ineedboth.com.

Action Alert: Support Bill to Protect Disabled Fathers from Family Court Abuses

January 25th, 2010 by Glenn Sacks, MA, Executive Director

Arizona HB 2348 will help protect disabled fathers (and mothers) from child support and alimony abuses–to email and fax a letter in support of the bill, click here.

The hearing on the bill is Wednesday January 27, so please act ASAP.

Although federal law is clear, judges are often ignoring it and calculating veterans’ disability compensation into divorce settlements as a divisible asset. Very often these payments are the only assets a veteran has. When judges include it as income, it creates great hardship for those veterans, who rarely have the resources to hire legal help to contest the taking of their benefits. HB 2348 will help end this practice–to email and fax a letter in support of the bill to all members of the Arizona House Military Affairs and Public Safety Committee to express your support for HB 2348, click here

Veterans’ service-connected disability compensation is intended to financially compensate a military veteran disabled in the line of duty. This compensation is not an asset, or property–it is awarded to a veteran that has lost some/all physical or mental ability to work, or maintain a daily routine. Veterans’ disability compensation is tax exempt and not classified as ‘income’ by the IRS. Under federal law, VA disability compensation is non-transferable and cannot be awarded to a third party under any legal process whatsoever.  VA Disability compensation is not remuneration for employment, and it belongs solely to the disabled veteran that has suffered the disability. Many family court judges are ignoring all of this–to email and fax a letter in support of the bill to all members of the Arizona House Military Affairs and Public Safety Committee to express your support for HB 2348, click here

Last year Fathers & Families’ legislative representative Michael Robinson successfully worked to pass California SB 285 (sponsored by Democratic Senator Rod Wright), which protected disabled veterans’ VA disability compensation. Advocates and legislators from several other states have contacted us about SB 285, seeking to pass similar legislation in their states. Arizona House Member Frank Antenori’s HB 2348 is the first of these to make it to committee–to email and fax a letter in support of the bill to all members of the Arizona House Military Affairs and Public Safety Committee to express your support for HB 2348, click here

F & F is also working with advocates and legislators on similar legislation in Texas and New Mexico, and is laying the groundwork for legislation in Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Indiana, and Illinois. It also appears that a failed 2009 legislative effort in Iowa has been revived by CA. SB 285’s passage. In addition, a U.S. Congressman has taken up this issue and we are helping him craft a federal bill which we expect will be introduced in the near future.

The abuses being committed in family court concerning disabled parents’ VA benefits remind many F & F supporters of their own experiences in family court–a lack of respect for the law, violations of due process, fathers (and sometimes mothers) being financially plundered and shook down for money they don’t owe, etc.

F & F is creating real, tangible family court reform today. Give to the organization which fights for you by clicking here.

Together with you in the love of our children,

Glenn Sacks, MA
Executive Director, Fathers & Families

Ned Holstein, M.D., M.S.
Founder, Chairman of the Board, Fathers & Families

New Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown Co-Sponsored F & F’s Shared Parenting Bill

January 18th, 2010 by Glenn Sacks, MA, Executive Director
s-brown

MA. Senator Scott Brown, former F & F Executive Director Dan Hogan, J.D., Ph.D., and F & F Founder Ned Holstein, MD, pictured at an F & F meeting

[Update: Scott Brown won the election and is now a US Senator. Fathers & Families is resolutely non-partisan and works with legislators on both sides of the aisle who sympathize with F & F's primary goal of family court reform and protecting the loving bonds children share with both parents after divorce or separation. We congratulate Brown.]

The race to fill the late Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat has become a national media story, as polls show that upstart Massachusetts Republican State Senator Scott Brown (pictured) has pulled even with favored Democratic Party candidate Martha Coakley, Massachusetts’ Attorney General. President Obama has come to Massachusetts to try to save the race for Coakley–this in a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans 3-1.

Senator Brown has been a co-sponsor of Fathers & Families’ Shared Parenting Bill, has met with F & F Board Chairman Ned Holstein, MD, and has spoken at a F & F meeting. Dr. Holstein explains:

Our Shared Parenting Bill, which Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick has publicly pledged to sign, would end the barbaric practice of judges stripping fathers (or sometimes mothers) of custody of their children without a sound, stated basis. Family courts must protect the relationship between children and both parents after a divorce, instead of allowing an angry mother (or father) to push the other parent out.

Fathers & Families recently circulated the message below to its Massachusetts members concerning some of Brown and Coakley’s positions, and we urge our members to vote on Tuesday, January 19.

Distinct Differences Among Senate Candidates

The three candidates hoping to fill the US Senate seat of the late Teddy Kennedy have distinctly different records on some of the issues of concern to Fathers and Families members. In alphabetical order, the candidates’ records are given.

Scott Brown

* Shared Parenting: As a member of the Massachusetts legislature for over five years, Senator Brown has clearly supported a presumption of shared parenting after divorce. In fact, he was a co-sponsor of Fathers and Families’ HB 1460, a bill which calls for just such a presumption. As a child of divorce, he also has supported shared parenting in conversations with me. Members may recall that Brown spoke at a Fathers and Families meeting.

* Restraining Order Abuse: We are not aware that Senator Brown has taken any public position on the abuse of restraining orders.

* Gerald Amirault Parole: We are not aware that Senator Brown has taken any public position on this issue (see below for a description of this matter.)

Martha Coakley

* Shared Parenting: We are unaware that Attorney General Coakley has taken any position concerning shared parenting. We phoned her campaign headquarters requesting information, but so far have not received a return call. Should we receive a response, we will let you know as soon as possible.

* Restraining Order Abuse: Coakley has been a supporter of current restraining order policies as Middlesex County District Attorney from 1999 to 2007 and as Attorney General since 2007. She has also supported mandatory prosecution of restraining order violations, even when those violations are trivial, unintentional, or harmless.

I appeared on the Greater Boston television show with Coakley and hostess Emily Rooney, as well as a member of Fathers and Families who had been the victim of a questionable restraining order. His ex-wife had invaded his home without invitation and had begun rummaging through the contents. Our member called the police to have her escorted out. They did so, but our member ended up as the recipient of a restraining order for this incident. Coakley defended restraining order policies on the show, and did not acknowledge the need for any changes.

* Gerald Amirault Parole: Amirault was convicted of preposterous child sexual abuse charges in the 1980’s in the notorious Fells Acre Case. He was imprisoned for many years. In 2001, the Massachusetts Parole Board stated, “It is clearly a matter of public knowledge that, at the minimum, real and substantial doubt exists concerning petitioner’s conviction.”

Indeed, it is hard to know how anyone could be convicted of raping a young girl with a two-foot butcher knife without leaving any injuries, or of tying naked children to trees within view of a highway and visitors to the childcare center. But Coakley lobbied hard and persistently to keep Amirault in prison to avoid embarrassing the Middlesex County District Attorney’s office that had originally prosecuted him. As a result of her efforts, Amirault spent three more years in jail until he was finally paroled during the Romney administration. The Wall Street Journal recently criticized Coakley’s handling of Gerald Amirault’s parole here.

Joe Kennedy

We are unaware of any public position by Mr. Kennedy on any of the three issues listed above. His campaign manager promised to ask Mr. Kennedy his positions, and we will report those if and when we get a response.

As a 501c3 charitable organization, Fathers and Families expresses no preference for one candidate over another. We do, however, urge you to vote on Tuesday, January 19, keeping in mind that there are many important issues on which to judge a candidate, not just those of concern to Fathers and Families.

See you at the polls Tuesday.

Together with you in the love of our children,

Ned Holstein, M.D., M.S.
Chair of the Board

F & F Helps Introduce New AZ Bill to Protect Disabled Fathers from Child Support/Alimony Abuses

January 18th, 2010 by Glenn Sacks, MA, Executive Director

“[J]udges nationwide have routinely ignored the U.S. Code and calculated veterans’ disability compensation into divorce settlements as a divisible asset and…in calculating child support awards. Very often these payments are the only assets a veteran may have. Unlawful attachment creates great hardship for those veterans who rarely have the resources to hire legal help to contest the taking of their benefits.”

One of the reasons Fathers & Families has partly focused on California legislation is that because of the state’s influence and prestige, the successes we’ve had in California often spread to other states.

For example, in 2005, Fathers & Families and its legislative representative Michael Robinson successfully worked to pass SB 1082 to protect military parents’ custody rights. Since 2005 similar legislation has been passed in dozens of states, often with our assistance, and we’ve also had some success with federal legislation on this issue.

Now Fathers & Families and Robinson are again spearheading important family court reform legislation, this time to protect disabled veteran fathers from child support and alimony abuses. Last year we helped pass California SB 285 to protect disabled veterans’ VA disability compensation from being seized, attached, levied, or divided for child support or alimony. SB 285, sponsored by Democratic Senator Rod Wright, added an existing federal statute, 38 U.S.C. 5301, to California’s Codes of Civil Procedure.

Advocates and legislators from several other states have contacted us about SB 285, seeking to pass similar legislation in their states. The first is Arizona House Member Frank Antenori’s HB 2348. Robinson worked with Major Mark Beres, USAF (retired), who is associated the American Retirees Association and helped craft the newly-introduced bill. The bill currently has 13 co-sponsors and is likely to pick up more as the legislation proceeds.

F & F is also working with advocates and legislators on legislation in Texas and New Mexico, and is laying the groundwork for legislation in Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Indiana, and Illinois. It also appears that a failed 2009 legislative effort in Iowa has been revived by CA. SB 285’s passage. In addition, a U.S. Congressman has taken up this issue and we are helping him craft a federal bill which we expect will be introduced in the near future.

Senator Rod Wright’s Fact Sheet for SB 285 explains:

Although United States Code, Title 38, Section 5301 is very clear in its wording and intent, civil court judges nationwide, including courts in California have routinely ignored the U.S. Code and calculated veterans’ disability compensation into divorce settlements as a divisible asset and not treated the same as SSI in calculating child support awards. Very often these payments are the only assets a veteran may have. Unlawful attachment creates great hardship for those veterans who rarely have the resources to hire legal help to contest the taking of their benefits.

Veterans’ service-connected disability compensation is intended to financially compensate a military veteran disabled in the line of duty. This compensation is not an asset, or property, and should not be used to calculate a veteran’s net worth. Disability compensation is awarded to a veteran that has lost some/all physical or mental ability to work, or maintain a daily routine. Veteran’s disability compensation is tax exempt and not classified as ‘income’ by the IRS. VA disability compensation is non-transferable and cannot be awarded to a third party under any legal process whatsoever. Even after the veteran has deposited these funds into their personal bank account they are federally protected from attachment or seizure. Disability compensation belongs solely to the disabled veteran that has suffered the disability…

By restating federal law governing veterans disability benefits in the Family Code attorneys, judges and government officials will get clear notice such assets are protected from attachment. This should help avoid unnecessary hardship and litigation for veterans who frequently do not have the legal resources to contest an unlawful seizure.

F & F Concludes Most Successful Fundraising Campaign Ever—in the Face of the Worst Economy Since the Great Depression!

January 18th, 2010 by Glenn Sacks, MA, Executive Director

More people gave money to Fathers & Families in 2009 than ever before, and our revenues shot up almost 80% from 2008.

In a year when almost all non-profits’ revenues have declined and many are laying off employees, F & F’s revenues shot up and we are expanding.

More revenue equals more staff, which means more work, more progress, and more victories. We thank all of you who stepped up.

Fathers & Families is succeeding because we are devoted to the critical task of engaging in the political process on a professional level.

As they say, “money is the mother’s milk of politics.” Next month we’re introducing half a dozen family court reform bills–give to the organization which fights for you by clicking here.

Together with you in the love of our children,

Glenn Sacks, MA
Executive Director, Fathers & Families

Ned Holstein, M.D., M.S.
Founder, Chairman of the Board, Fathers & Families

John Tesh Discusses F & F’s Holstein’s Views on ‘Sudden Divorce Syndrome’ on His Radio Show

January 17th, 2010 by Glenn Sacks, MA, Executive Director

teshJohn Tesh,  longtime host of the television program Entertainment Tonight, and host of the John Tesh Radio Show syndicated on 360 stations, discussed Fathers & Families‘ Board Chairman Dr. Ned Holstein’s views on “Sudden Divorce Syndrome” on his show last Thursday. According to one poll, 25% of divorced men say they were completely broadsided by their partner’s request for a divorce.

Holstein, MD, a Harvard-trained public health specialist, explains that there is a physical toll from divorce, brought on by excess stress. He notes:

The Top 5 causes of human stress are: 1) the death of a child 2) the loss of a spouse 3) the loss of a home 4) serious financial woes and 5) losing a relationship with a child….four of these five are involved when someone goes through a divorce…

According to a study done by the American Journal of Psychiatry, blood pressure and cholesterol levels rise and the risk of heart disease and coronary failure increases sharply. Other problems associated with Sudden Divorce Syndrome include diabetes and cirrhosis of the liver, in part because distraught people may turn to unhealthy behaviors, like drinking, after a break up. Divorced men are nine times more likely to commit suicide than divorced women.