May 8, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Hallo Olivier,

Es ist gut dass es scheint dass Du in guter Stimmung bist und dass wir noch einmal unsere Gedanken austauschen koennen.

Zuerst noch, und nebenbei, Ich habe noch die Webseiten in Bezug auf den Hungerstrike in Berlin.  Gerade gestern oder am vorherigen Tag hatte ich mit Bezug auf Dein Schicksal Links zu Karin Jaeckel’s Beschreibung der Umstaende Deines Freispruch’s eingesetzt.

Freispruch ist ja Bloedsinn.  Mir fehlt viel am deutschen Wortschatz.  Darum werde ich jetzt lieber zwei englische Begriffe gebrauchen: “exoneration” (Freispruch auf Grund dessen dass die Unschuld des Angeklagten bewiesen wurde) gegenueber “acquittal” (Freispruch auf Grund dessen dass die Schuld des Angeklagten nicht bewiesen werden konnte).  Das Letztere heisst dass der Verdacht der Schuld immer noch besteht.

Du, viele Andere und ich wissen dass in Deinem Fall das Gerichtsurteil eine Farce ist.  Es tut mir leid dass Du, wie auch viele andere, so durch die Muehle gedreht wurdest.

Olivier, im Bezug auf dass Jugendamt gibt es in jedem englisch-sprachigen Land (sogar in Indien) so etwas wie das Sozialamt (Social Services), welches in vielen Laendern eine Abteilung hat die man unter verschiedenen Namen kennt: z. b. Kinderamt (Children’s Services) oder Jugendfuersorge (Youth & Welfare).  Diese Jugendaemter in den verschiedenen englisch-sprechenden Laendern arbeiten mit den ihnen entssprechenden Familiengerichten sehr eng zusammen (so ungefaehr verbunden und politisch gleichgerichtet wie es die Gestapo und die Volksgerichtshoefe waren) .

Diese Familiengerichte wurden in den spaeten sechziger und fruehen siebziger Jahren speziell erstellt; um die Scheidungsverfahren zu beschleunigen die sich aus den enorm grossen Arbeitsrueckstaenden der normalen Gerichtshoefe ergaben - als die sogenannte verschuldensunabhängige Ehescheidung die neue rechtsverbindliche Sozialnorm wurde.

Die Beschleunigung der Gerichtsverfahren in den Familiengerichten konnte nur dadurch erreicht werden indem man die Prozesse so vereinfachte wie es in vergleichbaren Volksgerichtshoefen aller totalitaeren Regierungen ueblich war und ist.  Damit gibt es in Familiengerichtsverfahren schwache Rechte sondern nur starke Richtungen.  Eine gute Zahl der nordamerkanischen Rechtsanwaelte (darunter sogar Richter) nennen die Familiengerichte “kangaroo courts” (korrupte Gerichte).

Dadurch wurde dann auch in der sogenannten freien Welt der Wunsch von Marx, Engels und Lenin, der Wunsch auf die freie Liebe (heute nennt man das “sexual freedom”; Ich konnte keinen deutschen Ausdruck dafuer finden), zur Tatsache, indem man ganz einfach den Ehevertrag undurchsetzbar machte und dann in fast allen Faellen der verschuldensunabhängigen Ehescheidungen den Ehemaennern die Schuld auflegte.

Ich weiss nicht viel von franzoesischen Familien-Statistiken, aber in allen englisch-sprachigen Laendern sind sie sehr leicht genau so schlimm (oder vielleicht noch schlimmer) als die welche in Deutschland zutreffen.  Ich weiss aber dass die familien-feindlichen Dinge in Spanien sich jezt immer schneller den internationalen Normen anpassen, obwohl Spanien noch vor wenigen Jahren mit dem feministischen Sozialfortschritt etwas zurueckgeblieben war, bedeutend mehr zurueck als es in Deutschland der Fall war.

In der Abwesenheit von genauen Vergleichstatistiken die es andererweits beweisen, moechte ich suggerieren dass jedes andere Jugendamt irgendwo in der Welt Dir oder anderen Auslaendern gegenueber gleichmaessige Unrechte ausueben wuerde.

Nach meiner Ansicht wird sich nicht viel mit der Durchfuehrung der internationalen Agenda fuer die geplante Zerstoerung der Familie aendern, so lange nicht bis Maenner und Vaeter sich so effektiv und international vernetzen wie es feministische und aesserst linke Rechtsanwaelte, Richter, Sozialarbeiter, Sozialwissenschaftler and andere solche Aktivisten es tun.  Dass die letzteren es tun ist einfach eine Tatsache.  Sie vernetzen sich ausserhalb der oeffentlichen diplomatischen Regierungsverbindungen.

So lange das stattfinded wird die westliche Welt stetig zugreifend korrupt, bis sie zum Ende - innerhalb von hoechst Vier Generationen und dem roemischen Reich gleichend - unter ihrem eigenen Gewicht zusammenfallen wird.  Die westliche Welt wird nicht mit einem Knall sondern mit leisem Gewimmer verschwinden, da die stetig fallenden Geburtszahlen es dazu bringen werden dass die eingeborenen Bevoelkerungen durch die grossen Geburtszahlen anderer Voelker ersetzt werden.  Genau wie beim Untergang des roemischen Reiches finden nun grosse Voelkerwanderungen statt (die durch die Vereinten Nationen sehr stark gefoerdert werden).  Man will es damit ermoeglichen die Weltbevoelkerung bei dem Jahr 2150 bis auf eine Milliarde Menschen oder weniger herunter zu bringen, um den Einfluss der Menschheit (die man als ein Karzinom auf dem Angesicht der Mutter Erde ansieht) als ertragbar zu veringern.

Sehr wahrscheinlich wird sich bis zum unvermeidlichen Zusammenbruch nichts mehr aendern.   Es gibt nichts Neues unter der Sonne.  Das letzte Mal, in 1945, wurde bis zum bitteren Ende noch immer gesungen: “Wir werden weitermarschieren, bis alles in Scherben faellt…” obwohl alles schon in Schutt und Asche zerfallen war.  Ich war 10 Jahre alt als das zu Ende ging und muss nun - wie Andere meines Alters nahe am Ende meines Lebens - den Anfang eines anderen, noch groesseren Zusammenbruches erfahren.

Alles Gute,

Walter

P.S.: Die Zahl der einzelnen Besucher meiner Homepage ist waehrend der letzten 12 Monate um 2,5 Millionen angestiegen und gleicht damit im Totalen pappa.com in der weltweiten Rangstelle.

Posted in Divorce, Family, Feminist Jurisprudence, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

May 2, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

The Times (Britain)
1 May 2008

Vengeful mothers leave good fathers powerless to see child, says judge
By Rosemary Bennett, Social Affairs Correspondent

A senior judge spoke out against child access law yesterday, saying that
the courts were powerless to help decent fathers to see their children if
vengeful mothers stood in the way….(Full Story)

Posted in Divorce, Child-Custody Awards, Feminist Jurisprudence, Child Abduction | Print | No Comments »

May 2, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

The Australian
3 May 2008

Divorce law robs talented spouses
By Kate Legge

The legal notion that sports stars, artists and professionals with
exceptional talent deserve better than a 50-50 split in divorce settlements
is being watered down under pressure from the equal rights lobby, a top
judge has warned.

Speaking before his retirement yesterday from the Family Court, judge Paul
Guest said failing to take into account a husband or wife’s exceptional
talent or skills in divorce settlements risked the “dumbing down of family
law”…. (Full Story)

Posted in Divorce | Print | No Comments »

April 29, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

From http://marriage.rutgers.edu/Publications/pubtoptenmyths.htm

The Top Ten Myths of Divorce

Discussion of the most common misinformation about divorce

David Popenoe

1 Because people learn from their bad experiences, second marriages tend to be more successful than first marriages.

Although many people who divorce have successful subsequent marriages, the divorce rate of remarriages is in fact higher than that of first marriages.¹ [Sources]

2 Living together before marriage is a good way to reduce the chances of eventually divorcing.

Many studies have found that those who live together before marriage have a considerably higher chance of eventually divorcing. The reasons for this are not well understood. In part, the type of people who are willing to cohabit may also be those who are more willing to divorce. There is some evidence that the act of cohabitation itself generates attitudes in people that are more conducive to divorce, for example the attitude that relationships are temporary and easily can be ended.² [Sources]

3 Divorce may cause problems for many of the children who are affected by it, but by and large these problems are not long lasting and the children recover relatively quickly.

Divorce increases the risk of interpersonal problems in children. There is evidence, both from small qualitative studies and from large-scale, long-term empirical studies, that many of these problems are long lasting. In fact, they may even become worse in adulthood.³ [Sources]

4 Having a child together will help a couple to improve their marital satisfaction and prevent a divorce.

Many studies have shown that the most stressful time in a marriage is after the first child is born. Couples who have a child together have a slightly decreased risk of divorce compared to couples without children, but the decreased risk is far less than it used to be when parents with marital problems were more likely to stay together “for the sake of the children.”⁴[Sources]

5 Following divorce, the woman’s standard of living plummets by seventy three percent while that of the man’s improves by forty two percent.

This dramatic inequity, one of the most widely publicized statistics from the social sciences, was later found to be based on a faulty calculation. A reanalysis of the data determined that the woman’s loss was twenty seven percent while the man’s gain was ten percent. Irrespective of the magnitude of the differences, the gender gap is real and seems not to have narrowed much in recent decades.⁵ [Sources]

6 When parents don’t get along, children are better off if their parents divorce than if they stay together.

A recent large-scale, long-term study suggests otherwise. While it found that parents’ marital unhappiness and discord have a broad negative impact on virtually every dimension of their children’s well-being, so does the fact of going through a divorce. In examining the negative impacts on children more closely, the study discovered that it was only the children in very high conflict homes who benefited from the conflict removal that divorce may bring. In lower-conflict marriages that end in divorce—and the study found that perhaps as many as two thirds of the divorces were of this type—the situation of the children was made much worse following a divorce. Based on the findings of this study, therefore, except in the minority of high-conflict marriages it is better for the children if their parents stay together and work out their problems than if they divorce.⁶ [Sources]

7 Because they are more cautious in entering marital relationships and also have a strong determination to avoid the possibility of divorce, children who grow up in a home broken by divorce tend to have as much success in their own marriages as those from intact homes.

Marriages of the children of divorce actually have a much higher rate of divorce than the marriages of children from intact families. A major reason for this, according to a recent study, is that children learn about marital commitment or permanence by observing their parents. In the children of divorce, the sense of commitment to a lifelong marriage has been undermined.⁷ [Sources]

8 Following divorce, the children involved are better off in stepfamilies than in single-parent families.

The evidence suggests that stepfamilies are no improvement over single-parent families, even though typically income levels are higher and there is a father figure in the home. Stepfamilies tend to have their own set of problems, including interpersonal conflicts with new parent figures and a very high risk of family breakup.⁸ [Sources]

9 Being very unhappy at certain points in a marriage is a good sign that the marriage will eventually end in divorce.

All marriages have their ups and downs. Recent research using a large national sample found that eighty six percent of people who were unhappily married in the late 1980s, and stayed with the marriage, indicated when interviewed five years later that they were happier. Indeed, three fifths of the formerly unhappily married couples rated their marriages as either “very happy” or “quite happy.”⁹ [Sources]

10 It is usually men who initiate divorce proceedings

Two-thirds of all divorces are initiated by women. One recent study found that many of the reasons for this have to do with the nature of our divorce laws. For example, in most states women have a good chance of receiving custody of their children. Because women more strongly want to keep their children with them, in states where there is a presumption of shared custody with the husband the percentage of women who initiate divorces is much lower.¹⁰ [Sources] Also, the higher rate of women initiators is probably due to the fact that men are more likely to be “badly behaved.” Husbands, for example, are more likely than wives to have problems with drinking, drug abuse, and infidelity.

_______________

The information shown above is from The [US] National Marriage Project:

Leadership

The project is co-directed by two nationally prominent marriage experts. David Popenoe, Ph.D., a professor and and former social and behavioral science dean at Rutgers, is the author of Life Without Father, Disturbing the Nest, and many other scholarly and popular publications on marriage and family. Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, Ph.D., an author and social critic, writes extensively on issues of marriage, family and child wellbeing. She is the author of Why There Are No Good Men Left: The Romantic Plight of the New Single Woman (Broadway Books, 2003), The Divorce Culture (Knopf, 1996) and the widely acclaimed Atlantic Monthly article “Dan Quayle Was Right.”

The list of the Top-Ten Myths of Divorce attracted my attention because of the comments provided in Item #10 in the list. Somewhat more comprehensive and to-the-point views of the cited Brinig and Allen report provide more relevant information. For example:

The proportion of divorces initiated by women ranged around 60% for most of the 20th century, and climbed to more than 70% in the late 1960s when no-fault divorce was introduced….The Brinig-Allen study also explodes the myth of the brutish husband, finding, for instance, that cruelty is cited in only 6% of divorce applications in Virginia, one of the few states that still uses fault grounds for divorce….adultery cases are evenly split between men and women…. (”Look who doesn’t want a divorce,” Alberta Report, January 11, 1999, page 30)

Brinig and Allen, the authors of the report “These Boots are Made for Walking: Why Wives File for Divorce,” found that “who gets the children is by far the most important component in deciding who files for divorce, particularly when there is very little quarrel about property, as when the separation is long.” They found that to have or to be assured that they will get the children (and “child-support” payments) “the probability that she’d file increases to .69,” while “if the husband got custody, the probability that the wife files would decrease to .32.” (Table 7. How much do the numbers matter?)

In divorcing families with children, depending on locality, wives file for divorce in between 75 percent to 85 percent of the cases.

Note also the last statement under Item #10 in the list: “Also, the higher rate of women initiators is probably due to the fact that men are more likely to be “badly behaved.” Husbands, for example, are more likely than wives to have problems with drinking, drug abuse, and infidelity.”

That statement is pure speculation and not corroborated by any research nor by any citations of such research. The statement appears to be based on another myth, namely that women always tell the truth. That “truth” is largely debunked in the report by Brinig and Allen and in a variety of similar studies (e. g.: Divorced Dads : Shattering the Myths : The Surprising Truth About Fathers, Children, and Divorce (Hardcover - 288 pages (October 1998) J P Tarcher; ISBN: 087477862X ) Review).

For example, in the vast majority of cases wives file for divorce, and they file not because of adultery by their husbands or because they were being physically abused (the latter is theleast important reason of all stated by wives - alleged in only about six percent of the reasons given for divorce) but because they are bored with their marriages.

The myths and slander of men who are “badly behaved” and “are more likely than wives to have problems with drinking, drug abuse, and infidelity” are most likely founded in the myth that women don’t lie. However, even supposedly objective social researchers are not yet quite ready to examine the true circumstances of that reality. The impact of decades of incessant and all-pervasive indoctrination by feminists is often difficult and sometimes impossible to shed by those who are members of the captive audience of the feminist-controlled and -dominated education system.

Posted in Education, Media Bias, Divorce, Child-Custody Awards, Family, Feminist Jurisprudence | Print | 1 Comment »

April 24, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Hello Tom (I presume),

Your inquiry, re: Father-custody - outcomes in children of divorce

Thanks for your phone call.

I am not commenting here in a specifically constructive manner, as far as the topic of interest to you is concerned. All I am doing here is to copy-and-paste a few of many relevant references listed or otherwise shown at http://fathersforlife.org. To be more specific would require many hours, even days of work. Sorry, but I cannot do that for you. I only have the time to point you into the general direction for the right information. (However, I am giving you a few items of general advice.)

You can find these and many other related references by using the search input field at the upper right-hand corner of virtually every web page at http://fathersforlife.org. The search string to enter is:

outcome children father-custody

Here goes:

• The case for Father-Custody
  By Daniel Amneus, Ph.D.
  The Case for Father-Custody is a well-researched and valuable source of information and statistics relating to fatherlessness. The book is accessible as a an easily navigable PDF file at Fathering Magazine

[The end notes in that book are an excellent source for citations relating to what you need for your case. The book itself contains many excellent quotes (see end notes for citations) that will provide you with exactly what you are looking for. Although the book is a bit dated, the information it contains is still true. –WHS]

• The following is a collections of links to more articles and study reports that focus on father absence or fatherlessness.

• Effects on children of removing a father from the life of a child., Center for Children’s Justice

• The Consequences of Fatherlessness — The [US] National Center for Fathering

• Effects of Fatherlessness on Children – Social Consequences.
  Statement of Bill Wood and Jay Gell, Children’s Legal Foundation, Charlotte, North Carolina

• National Review: Fatherlessness: The Root Cause: The link between crime and fatherlessness is astonishing, By Dave Kopel, Independence Institute

• Turning the Corner on Father Absence in Black America, A Statement from the Morehouse Conference on African-American Fathers; Washington, June 16,1999

• Fatherlessness is the greatest social problem in Canada, Canadian Children’s Rights Council

• THE FACTS ON FATHERLESSNESS, Prepared for the Fatherhood Foundation by Bill Muehlenberg, Australian Family Association - August 2002

• Transforming the Culture of Fatherlessness, by Rev. Robert A. Sirico, Acton President

• Boston Globe: The black rebellion against fatherlessness, By Eugene F. Rivers III | July 9, 2006

• Townhall.com: Fatherlessness A Problem for Kids, Not Mothers, By Maggie Gallagher
  Tuesday, June 12, 2001

  That is a fairly weighty collection of facts and opinions regarding fatherlessness. It is important to note that even the U.K. lately joined the choir singing praise of fatherhood, sort of, but nevertheless welcome after more than eight years of continuous slander, vilification and demonization of fathers. Here it is, the first pro-father commentary after about ten years in an official party organ in the U.K.:

thisislondon.co.uk: Married parents are best, admits Blairite think tank

That is all nice and good, although it is obvious that the U.K. is a late-comer in the debate on fatherlessness and may need a while longer to catch on to what is going on in that department.

It seems that Maggie Gallagher deserves the last word on what we should be after.

In the early ’80s, Becky Peck was one of a new generation of women experimenting with what optimists dub alternative family forms. She chose to use an anonymous sperm donor to create a deliberately fatherless household. Just her and her cuddly babies. Sixteen years later, she tracked down the DNA provider, David Ross. After making sure her motives were not financial (i.e. meeting his kids wouldn’t cost him any money), David was thrilled. Instant family — no diapers to change, no college to pay for. What’s not to love?

But why would a woman who chose anonymous sperm donation suddenly decide at that late date to attach a face and a name to the DNA? The kids, of course. In spite of all the love a mother could provide, they still longed for Daddy. Becky never planned on that. Too many women still don’t.

The actress Calista Flockhart, Miss Ally McBeal, adopted a baby. She recently confessed to the New York Post, “I want more children. I guess it would be nice to have a husband, too, and if you know where I might find the right one, let me know. But meanwhile, the baby is all I really want.”

Maybe so. But what does her baby want, or what will he want a year from now? Children’s hearts will keep fracturing until more mothers, especially privileged mothers, recognize that giving their baby everything he needs includes giving him a loving father. That’s the old, stubborn idea of marriage, the place where a man and woman pledge themselves in love, not only to each other, but to their future children.

As President Bush said so bravely and truthfully, “a child’s greatest source of security today is not only knowing ‘my mom loves me’ and ‘my dad loves me,’ but also that Mom and Dad love each other. If we are serious about renewing fatherhood, we must be serious about renewing marriage.”

But wait a minute, that means that what the children need comes first, and that mutual love between the two parents, marriage for life, that is, will be a necessary social obligation for parents! Exactly!!

Children’s hearts will keep fracturing until more mothers, especially privileged mothers, recognize that giving their baby everything he needs includes giving him a loving father.

Those quotes are from the Fatherlessness — Main Page at Fathers for Life.

There is more:

• UN survey on what ails the world’s children — The state of …

  Father custody children were higher in all outcomes (academic achievement and adjustment) than those in mother custody families”

The following google-search will provide more specific returns for the whole Internet (159 entries on the search-return list)

Using a search term that fits what you are specifically looking for reduces that to three entries on the search return list:

The search string: “better outcomes” children “father-custody” “when conflict”

The search returns:

[PDF]
The Future of Children

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML better outcomes. The average for each group of children ….. mother or father custody is. inherently better for children, … www.futureofchildren.org/usr_doc/vol4no1ART9.pdf - Similar pages - Note this

JSTOR: Life-Span Adjustment of Children to Their Parents’ Divorce

When conflict between parents is marked, frequent con- tact with the ….. On a few outcomes, children were better off in father-custody households. … links.jstor.org/sici?sici=1054-8289(199421)4%3A1%3C143%3ALAOCTT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-W - Similar pages - Note this

[PDF]

Managing the impact of separation and divorce on children …

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
children’s adjustment improves when conflict declines after divorce (Kitzmann & Emery, …… Advantages of father custody and contact for the psychological …
auseinet.flinders.edu.au/files/resources/auseinet/divorce.pdf - Similar pages - Note this

You sounded as if you are pressed for time, but it also seems that you feel that by presenting facts in your favour you can influence the outcome of your custody hearing in your favour. Being pressed for time is real, but the assumption that you will be able to influence the outcome of a custody hearing is largely an illusion. On average, custody decisions are in about nine out of ten cases in favour of the woman. Facts have little, and endemic anti-male bias of the courts everything, to do with that.

I strongly recommend that you read the following book:

Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family

More and purchase information for “Taken Into Custody” at http://www.stephenbaskerville.net/

There is an important thing that you should consider doing. Get in touch with a local fathers rights organization. Here is a directory that you can use to find such an organization near you.

All the best,

Walter Schneider
http://fathersforlife.org

Posted in Divorce, Men's Issues, Child-Custody Awards, Family | Print | No Comments »

April 17, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

For many people the term divorce industry means absolutely nothing. It does, however, mean something to two minor sectors of the population:

1. Activist and advocates for pro-family rights and pro-fathers-rights consider the terms divorce industry and fatherlessness to be strongly related. They feel that fatherlessness is tearing apart the fabric of our once-functioning society. They have reason to believe that the divorce industry causes fatherlessness, that is: the removal and the consequences of that removal of fathers from the lives of those fathers’ children.
2. For feminists in non-governmental organizations and in government (whether elected or simply employees of the government bureaucracy), the divorce industry and the fatherlessness produced by the divorce industry matter not at all other than that they wish for the epidemic of fatherlessness to escalate and that they feel that the concerns by fathers-rights activists and by pro-family advocates are a nuisance that at the very least needs to be ignored.

Fatherlessness and the consequences of fatherlessness are growing inexorably, year by year. A steadily growing number of children in all developed nations - roughly a third and more of all children - have no fathers in their lives to guide them, to set rules, to be role models and protectors to their children.

Fathers very seldom abscond their families voluntarily. Virtually all fatherlessness of children is caused by the governments’ sponsorship, promotion and enforcement of anti-father and outright father-hostile sentiments and policies that are being actively promoted and put into play by members of the divorce industry.

When children are present in families, women file for divorce in roughly 75-85 percent of the cases (depending upon country), while without children in a family the dissolution of that family is being initiated by a woman in only two instances for every instance of family dissolution by a man.

The chart shown to the right depicts a typical composition of government departments and of government-sponsored private organizations and interest groups that promote and benefit from the government-promoted concept of fatherless families (a.k.a. sole-mother families or single-mother families). The chart illustrates the composition of the divorce industry in the United States (Source: Statement of Bill Wood, and Jay Gell, Children’s Legal Foundation, Charlotte, North Carolina, [US] Ways and Means Committee, 2001 06 28; footnote 69)

Everyone possessing a bit of common sense is likely to have concerns about the escalating trend towards increasing fatherlessness. Those concerns are well-justified and born out by scientifically-valid findings from research studies done by reputable researchers, studies that meet acceptable academic standards, studies like those quoted in the statement by Bill Wood and Jay Gell to the US Ways and Means Committee. Note that those studies are not creations by fathers rights activists, but that fathers rights activists quote from studies by independent and objective researchers.

Nevertheless, the feminists - whose goal it is to destroy the institution of the family, thereby to create massive fatherlessness and the gradual deconstruction of our Christian cultural heritage - dismiss valid social research regarding fatherlessness as myths and substitute unsubstantiated opinions based at best on nothing more than advocacy research done on selective and biased study samples from whom no valid projections to the general population can be made. Nevertheless, they call such opinions “facts” and they call the scientific truth “myths”. (For example: MYTHS AND FACTS About Fatherlessness)

Such feminists apparently feel justified in replacing the scientific truth with a fanciful reality of their own making because they obstinately believe, imply and even assert that feminists never lie, are therefore always right, and that anyone who disagrees with their outlandish and unsubstantiated opinions must quite simply be wrong.

To discern which side in the debate is right - feminists who promote the deconstruction of our society, or people who wish to promote the constructive evolution and growth of the western cultural heritage and society - one should have a look at a few of about 50,000 web pages and articles that address the subject of fatherlessness and not merely buy into the claims regarding fatherlessness promoted by feminists and published by the largely feminist-dominated and -controlled media.

One of the most-important and most-comprehensive compilations of studies of the impact of fatherlessness is the following: Experiments in Living: The Fatherless Family, by Rebecca O’Neill; Sept. 2002, CIVITAS. It wins hands-down in refuting feminist claims that assert positive and constructive consequences of fatherlessness. It is not surprising that such studies do not support feminist claims and are therefore never mentioned by family- and father-hostile feminists.

Posted in Divorce, Education, Censorship, Shared Parenting, Family, Propaganda Exposed, Feminist Jurisprudence, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

April 15, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

The international networking by English-speaking jurists, judiciary activists, activist judges, and by their adjuncts (non-governmental organizations) is fast and - if not efficient - extremely effective. Therefore it frequently happens that innovative laws and forms of punishment for ostensible criminals make their appearance simultaneously or only separated in time by extremely short intervals in many different English-speaking countries throughout the world.

For instance, in English-speaking countries, drivers-licence removal is a popular and longstanding form of punishment (it has been around for a decade and more) for minor crimes, primarily the “crime” of falling into arrears with child support payments - not necessarily through any personal fault. In English-speaking countries, drivers-licence removals as a form of punishment spread like a wildfire.

Curiously, as Sanford Braver reports in Divorced Dads : Shattering the Myths, where reasonable child access exists for fathers expunged from their families (in the majority of the cases through no fault of their own), child-support payments are voluntarily made in more than 90 percent of cases and often in excess of the specified amounts. About six percent of fathers ordered to pay child-support default on some or all of their payments. At most half of those (about three percent of all divorced dads) are truly “deadbeat dads”. The others are often unable to pay all or pay only part of what they are ordered to pay - because they can’t make ends meet. They have fallen on hard times, such as having become under-employed, unemployed, sick, disabled, hospitalized, incarcerated (very often for outstanding child-support arrears), and even having died (quite often through suicide) and having been buried - as child-support obligations extend in many jurisdictions even beyond the grave.

Germany appears to lag a bit behind in the application of drivers-licence and professional licence removal for the enforcement of compliance with sentences for minor crimes that very often are not crimes at all but nothing other than the inability by idividual (amost exclusively men) to conform to government-imposed financial liabilities.  What will be coming next for a German man so unfortunate will be a life in which he, as a “criminal” (often a debtor with unpaid compulsory child-support obligations), is hobbled by the lack of a drivers licence, by the lack of professional licences and by seriously restricted abilities to earn a living and to pay obligations, instead of having to live a life shackled to the walls of a debtors prison. Is the imposing of the lack of freedom of movement or the freedom to earn a living any more humane than having one’s freedom of movement restricted by the walls of a debtors prison? One so sentenced is always assured good meals and a bed in debtors prison. Moreover, the place is heated and is a lot more comfortable than a cardboard box at -35°C in a back alley.

The appended translation of a German-language news item and of the related introductory comment shows that Germany is in the process of taking the important first step in the removal and denial of the constitutionally guaranteed right of freedom of movement in the cases of perpetrators of minor criminal offences. The step to extend the form of punishment that we have become accustomed to for the so-called crime of having fallen on hard times and defaulting on child-support payments will surely follow soon in Germany, too. Let’s hope that the German people will not experience the escalating oppression by the divorce industry to such an extent that it drives up the suicide rates for men even more, as happened in all English-speaking countries.

The remarkable aspect of such outlandish and illogical forms of punishment is that they are invented by bureaucrats and by judicial activists. There never has been, and is not now, any public clamour by the general public to implement novel punishments for so-called crimes that never were and still aren’t a concern of the public. Those crimes, and especially the “crime” of being guilty of having caused a “no-fault” divorce and its consequences or the “crime” of having fallen into arrears on payments that finance the government-sponsored filching of the children one never wanted to be deprived of, are entirely caused by the crazed ideology that drives our governments. It is not that the public has become so depraved that it now is intent on destroying society, but that our governments create “crimes” by manufacturing the conditions that allow the governments to rationalize that the inevitable “crimes” that are the consequence of government-manufactured conditions need to be fought and punished to make the people comply with undemocratic government edicts. That is not a condition of freedom, it is an escalating spiral of causes and consequences in an increasingly totalitarian society.

In the English-speaking countries there is a growing awareness that idiotic allegations of so-called crimes and even more idiotic forms of punishment, such as the removal of the means to make a living, are being driven by an insane ideology that calls for the world-wide implementation of the agenda for the planned destruction of the family and even of the whole Western cultural heritage and traditions.

German people will have to learn that, too. As the comments identified in the appended translation show, some Germans are well on the way to understand what is going on. Let’s hope that, to fully understand, Germans will not have to go all the way to chaos. One would almost think that people who were not all that long ago ordered to fight to the last bullet - until all would turn to rubble and ashes - would by now have enough of radical ideologies that invariably lead to totalitarianism.

–Walter Schneider
http://fathersforlife.org
____________
Translation of German Text

The drivers licence is for the majority of people the foundation for earning money through a job, thereby to pay for taxes, social insurances and the necessities of life, and through that to be enabled not to become a burden on the pockets of the taxpayers. This “prestige value” is so negative that it is possible to implement drivers-licence removal as a form of punishment, so that those that are sentenced are even less able to participate in an acceptable manner in our society.

When young people experience the removal of the basis of their capability to earn money trough jobs, they will no longer be able to create personal wealth and will be unable to pay fines. Therefore monetary fines will become inappropriate. Furthermore, those children won’t be in a position that enables them to become the necessary role models for their children that will motivate the latter to become productive and self-satisfied adults. Later, those children cannot become good parents. They either will have no children, or their children will become a burden on orphanages and foster homes, with all of the well-known consequences.

Is it then that our ministers lost all touch with reality and with realistic-practical thinking? Is that a sort of declaration of bankruptcy of spirit and morality? How much stupidity and moral turpitude can we accept from our lawmakers (in the majority jurists)?

Greetings,

Herbert Greipl

The German Federal Council [Upper House] intends to implement drivers-licence removal into list of punishments in penal code

Berlin: (hib/BOB) The Bundesrat [Upper House] intends to anchor prohibition to drive as part of the penalties provided in the penal code. It presented a draft of a law to that extent (16/8695). The States Chamber expects from that a noticeable impact, on those sentenced, of the [withholding of the] “definitive prestige value” provided by a drivers licence. The Bundesrat argues that, time and again, it happens that there are cases in which the imposing of a monetary fine will, under the personal and economical circumstances of those sentenced, not result in the desired effects. Alternatively, incarceration would in the circumstances of specific cases be disproportionately hard. Drivers-licence removal could thereby be classified as an independent major punishment, without the necessity to have to impose incarceration or a monetary fine. A further example would be not-so-serious deeds with extremist backgrounds - often with application of violence. A relatively large portion of young offenders are affected, according to the government. For such people the removal of the drivers licence could be “a shot across the bow”. The Federal Government agreed to evaluate the proposal.

Mailinglist papa-info - always well informed
e-mail: papa-info@listserv.shuttle.de
web: http://listserv.shuttle.de/mailman/listinfo/papa-info

Original German text

Der Führerschein ist für die Mehrzahl die Grundlage mit beruflicher Tätigkeit Geld zu verdienen und somit Steuern und Sozialversicherung und auch Unterhalt zu bezahlen und nicht dem Staat auf der Tasche zu liegen. Und dieser “Prestigewert” ist so negativ, dass man ihn als Strafe wegnehmen kann, sodass sie dann noch weniger in der Lage sind, in zumutbarer Weise am Wesen unserer Gesellschaft Teil zu nehmen?

Wenn jungen Menschen schon die Grundlage zum beruflichen Geld verdienen genommen wird, so können sie keinen Besitz schaffen und auch keine Geldstrafen bezahlen. Damit sind Geldstrafen für sie ungeeignet. Aber sie sind so auch nicht in der Lage für ihre Kinder das Vorbild zu sein, das notwendig ist, damit diese sich zu tüchtigen, für die Gesellschaft nützlichen und selbst glücklichen Erwachsenen entwickeln können. Diese Kinder können später selbst keine guten Eltern sein. Entweder sie haben dann selbst keine Kinder oder ihre Kinder werden zu Wirtschaftsobjekten zur Belegung von Heimen und Pflegefamilien mit allen bekannten Folgen.

Haben unsere Minister schon jeden Realitätssinn und realistisch-praktisches Denken verloren? Ist das eine Art Bankrotterklärung für Geist und Moral? Wieviel Blödheit und Schlechtigkeit müssen wir Bürger uns noch von unseren Gesetzesmachern (die Mehrzahl sind Juristen) bieten lassen?

Gruß

Herbert Greipl

Bundesrat will Fahrverbot auf Zeit in das Strafgesetzbuch aufnehmen
Recht/Gesetzentwurf

Berlin: (hib/BOB) Der Bundesrat will ein Fahrverbot auf Zeit im Strafgesetzbuch verankern. Er hat dazu einen Gesetzentwurf vorgelegt (16/8695). Die Länderkammer verspricht sich davon eine deutliche Wirkung auf den Verurteilten wegen des “deutlichen Prestigewerts”, die ein Führerschein mit sich bringe. Der Bundesrat argumentiert, immer wieder kämen in der Praxis Fälle vor, in denen die persönlichen und wirtschaftlichen Verhältnisse des Verurteilten für eine Geldstrafe nicht geeignet seien, die mit ihr verfolgten Zwecke zu erfüllen. Andererseits erscheine eine Freiheitsstrafe nach Lage des Falles oft unangemessen hart. Das Fahrverbot könne hierbei als selbstständige Hauptstrafe aufgewertet werden, ohne Geld- oder Freiheitsstrafe verhängen zu müssen. Ein weiteres Beispiel seien nicht ganz so schwerwiegende Taten mit extremistischem Hintergrund - oft unter Anwendung von Gewalt. Ein verhältnismäßig hoher Anteil gerade junger Täter sei betroffen, so die Regierung. Für solche Menschen könne der Entzug des Führerscheins ein wirkungsvoller “Schuss vor den Bug” sein. Die Bundesregierung hat zugesagt, die Anliegen zu prüfen.

Mailingliste papa-info - immer gut informiert
e-mail: papa-info@listserv.shuttle.de
web: http://listserv.shuttle.de/mailman/listinfo/papa-info

Posted in Divorce, Men and Women Work, Men's Issues, Family, Feminist Jurisprudence, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

April 7, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Dr. Albert Mohler’s blog features an entry today that is very favorable of Stephen Baskerville’s book “Taken into Custody”, a damning expose of the widespread corruption in the government-designed and -run divorce industry: a conglomerate of racketeering involving not only legislators, judges, prosecutors, social workers, police and bureaucrats but also a host of private-industry adjuncts to the government’s sector of the divorce industry, namely: child-support enforcement and similar agencies (in whom many politicians have a vested interest); psychologists; psychiatrists; mediators; lawyers; bar associations; law societies; universities; journalists; reporters and other interests in the media, and so on.

As Professor Stephen Baskerville describes in his book, all of those parties, especially those connected with the family-court system, conspire to intrude and insert themselves into families - even into the most intimate parts of family life - to expunge loving fathers from their families and their children’s lives, to apprehend and control children for the purpose of financially and emotionally devasting fathers (but not exclusively just fathers), to control women (for example, so as to dictate to women that they must choose between being married to the fathers of their children or to lose their children).

“Taken into Custody provides overwhelming evidence that a major reason for the existence and cancerous growth of what Dr. Albert Mohler calls the “Divorce Industrial Complex,” is the overwhelming greed and corruption that permeates the divorce industry.

“Taken into Custody” was popular from the time the first printing was released in the summer of 2007, but even now, quite a few months later, its popularity and appeal are still growing.  Last night the reader reviews at amazon.com for “Taken into Custody” numbered 37. This morning their number had increased to 41, all of them favorable and five-star rated. The most remarkable thing about those reviews is that amongst them is not a single one written by a family- or father-hostile feminist.  Just a few years ago that would have been unimaginable, while a dozen years ago Stephen Baskerville would have had a very serious problem with finding a publisher willing to produce and distribute his book.

The vast majority of the reader reviews originated in the USA, but quite a few are from reviewers in other countries, such as the U.K., Sweden, Australia and one with an origin identified as “International”.

There is apparently as of yet no review by a Canadian reader. I should have written one, but have not yet finished reading the book, having received it, finally, and after two inexplicably failed attempts, just a couple of days ago.  I will make up for my missing review as soon as I am through reading “Taken into Custody.”

The fundamental issues discussed in “Taken into Custody” are not exclusive to the USA.  They are endemic of all English-speaking nations (as Stephen Baskerville identified with numerous examples and citations pertaining to many of those nations).  Still, they are applicable to - to mention a few such nations other than the USA - Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, the countries of the former Soviet block, India, Japan, Egypt, Spain, Italy, France, Holland, Germany, Canada, South Africa, and so on.  The preceding list of countries is based on what is being reported to and discussed with me by fathers and by pro-father- and pro-family activists from around the world.

If you haven’t yet obtained a copy of “Taken into Custody”, get one, and you will find out that - if you dare to dream of having a family - civil rights and liberties are only an illusion.  You will also find out that families make up the fabric of society, and that society is being destroyed when governments engage on a deliberate war designed to rip families apart.

As I am reading “Taking into Custody,” I cannot help but feel that the views I have held for years are confirmed.  We managed in the ostensibly “free” West to install absolute totalitarianism by the government bureaucracy.

Posted in Shared Parenting, Men's Issues, Divorce, Media Bias, Child-Custody Awards, Family, Propaganda Exposed, Feminism, Feminist Jurisprudence, Child Abduction | Print | No Comments »

February 22, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

News By Us

My Wife Became Legal and I Became Illegal
By Carey Roberts on Feb 22, 08

Each year the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and similar federal laws funnel $1 billion to help abused and battered women - or so we are led to believe. A good part of that money goes to immigrants who claim to be victims of domestic violence.

Last Fall I wrote a three-part exposé that revealed how an immigrant woman’s restraining order becomes a gold-plated meal ticket that entitles her to preferential treatment by immigration authorities, free legal services, and a generous helping of welfare services.

One woman whose father had been falsely accused of abuse and forced from his home wrote me, I believe the Violence Against Women Act should be called the “Women Get What They Want Act. “[ www.renewamerica.us/columns/roberts/070912 ] ….(Full Story)

Posted in Divorce, Men's Issues, Feminist Jurisprudence | Print | No Comments »

February 14, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Military deployment often causes family conflict and serious problems with parenting.

The Army Times
2006 12 25

Changing their tune

Programs ease the plight of single leathernecks

…Some who marry while in the Corps will have a long-lasting relationship. Unfortunately, for many married couples, the stress of military life can cause an irrevocable rift and lead to divorce. Divorce, needless to say, has both financial costs and emotional strains for all involved. Financial expenses such as legal and civilian attorney fees, the costs of dividing property, possibly child support and alimony, and the costs of separate living places put even more stress on the Marine. The emotional stress associated with child custody and care issues and adjustment to being single again can be extremely difficult….(Full Story)

The Army Times

Custody hearing goes on despite deployment

The Associated Press
Posted : Tuesday May 29, 2007 10:36:15 EDT

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — While Spc. Mary Hollingsworth dispensed weapons at Camp Anaconda outside Balad, Iraq, there was another battle waiting for her at home.

During her deployment, the father of her 5-year-old son filed legal papers trying to get custody. Victor Diaz Jr. portrayed Hollingsworth as more interested in being a soldier than taking care of her son.

Hollingsworth shipped home from her National Guard duties a month early to appear in court, and she has custody — for now.

“I shouldn’t have had to leave before they did,” she said, referring to her unit. “I had to. I mean, we’re talking about my son.”….(Full Story)

The Army Times

Mom, AWOL over child custody, turns herself in

By Katharine Webster - The Associated Press
Posted : Friday Jun 8, 2007 6:07:47 EDT

CONCORD, N.H. — A New Hampshire soldier charged with deserting while trying to ensure her 7-year-old daughter’s safety at home surrendered to the Army in New Jersey on Tuesday, her lawyer said.

New Hampshire National Guard Spc. Lisa Hayes, 32, of Rindge, took emergency leave from Iraq in February after learning of possible domestic violence in her ex-husband’s home, lawyer Linda Theroux said.

The Army extended her leave briefly three times, but finally refused further extensions and charged her with being absent without leave March 25, then with desertion a month later….(Full Story)

The Army Times
2008 01 21

Editorial: Fix custody rules

A New York appeals court has upheld a 2006 ruling that should send chills through the ranks.

The ruling forced divorced Spc. Tanya Towne to give up full physical custody of her son to her ex-husband — simply because she was deploying to Iraq….(Full Story)

It is ironic. The problem of a parent losing his children as a result of military deployment has been around for many years.  Predominantly and almost exclusively fathers lost child custody on account of their deployment.  Nevertheless, it took the relatively rare case of a woman losing child custody to bring the problem into view.

The Army Times
2007 10 22

Handling custody after a divorce

Each state has its own laws on child custody, but generally speaking, there are two forms: legal and physical. Each form of custody provides a parent with different rights, and it’s crucial that parents seeking custody of their children know the different forms of custody and what each form means for them and their wallet….(Full Story)

The Army Times

Deployed troops protected from custody fights

By Pauline Arrillaga - The Associated Press
Posted : Thursday Jan 31, 2008 11:15:50 EST

It had become an unintended and heart-wrenching side effect of war: Some deployed military parents left battling on two fronts, for the country they are sworn to defend and the children they were losing in custody disputes because of that duty.

Now family advocates are hopeful that a change to a federal law will help protect these men and women in uniform from having to fight for their kids while serving their country….(Full Story)

However, there is another issue that none of the articles published in The Army Times address.  That is the problem of a man coming back after having served overseas or having even been a POW and finding upon his return that he has to face massive child support arrears and possible incarceration on account of that.

2003 04 04

The Gratitude of Home and Country

Military dads seek fair child support

By Marilyn Gardner | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor ; 2003 04 02

Like many military reservists, Mark Wetzel took a pay cut when he was called for active duty last year. Instead of the $31,000 he earns as a nursing assistant in a Philadelphia hospital, he received $27,000 as a Navy corpsman serving in Kosovo.

But one thing didn’t change: his child-support payments. A family court declined to reduce the $899 a month he pays to his estranged wife and two children.

As more National Guard and reserve units are deployed for the war in Iraq - 216,800 have been called to active duty so far - more noncustodial parents find themselves in the same circumstances that Wetzel did. If they fall behind in child-support payments because of reduced wages, they could incur penalties when they return home…. Full Story

The article in the Christian Science Monitor does not mention another consequence for children of non-custodial dads who served in the military.  It should have.  There have been numerous instances where family courts restricted or even prohibited children of servicemen and ex-servicement who are non-custodial dads from having access to their fathers.  The courts hold that their heroic fathers are trained killers and cannot be trusted to come into contact with their children.

There are other, related issues.  I recall that when I went to school that in every ten of the students in my school there was one who experienced that his father got killed or went missing in action.  The last 10,000 POWs returned ten years after WWII from Russia.  Many of them had gone missing in action and then tried to rejoin their families, of whom many had already declared them dead.

That problem still  occurs today.

2003 03 20

Another “privilege” of being a man.  Just in time for another war….

Iraq Blog [Raed vanished at the end of May 2003.  I wonder why and how.]

Things on Iraqi TV today:

….
-yesterday the last 500 prisoners from the Iraq-Iran war were being exchanged. I can’t believe they are still doing this, …that war ended in 1989. every Iraqi family can tell you a hundred heart br[e]aking stories about things that happen when you have thought you[r] brother/father/son is dead and he suddenly appears after 10 years.

:: salam 12:21 AM [+] ::

Posted in Divorce, Men's Issues, Child-Custody Awards, Family | Print | No Comments »