September 30, 2013
To whom it may concern,
It occurred to me tonight as I lay wide awake that our
family court system justifies everything
they do with "the best interest of the child.”
Women can put their children up for adoption. They can just walk away no questions asked and never have to pay a lick of child support. Why? Because lawmakers say it is in "the best interest of the child."
Under the "safe haven" law a woman who elects not to be a mother to her infant child can take that child to a hospital, church or police/fire station and drop the child off. She can walk away, no questions asked and never have to pay a lick of child support. Why? Because the lawmakers say it is in "the best interest of the child."
Fathers who do not get the privilege of being the primary care giver must pay child support. In some cases they may still have to pay even if they have 50/50 custody. Why? Because lawmaker/JUDGES say it is in "the best interest of the child."
There is no safe haven law for unwed or divorced fathers. Once they are proven to be the father of a child they are on the hook for child support until that child reaches the age of majority or the courts says so. The mother can spend the child support she receives in any way she sees fit and does not have to prove where the money is spent. She can spend it on shoes, makeup, alcohol, or drugs and is still eligible to collect benefits from the state because she is under employed. Why? Because the lawmaker/JUDGES say it is in "the best interest of the child."
A father that falls behind on child support is labeled as a deadbeat. He faces losing his driver’s license, business license, and passport. He can face felony charges and even thrown in jail ripping him out of his child's/children's lives. Why? Because lawmaker/JUDGES say it is in "the best interest of the child."
A father that loves his children can provide a loving, caring and nurturing home for his children may not be able to get 50/50 custody. They may be stuck with the minimum "parenting time" (the courts way of doctoring up visitation). Minimum guidelines may only be a few hours a week and every other weekend. Why? Because JUDGES say it is in "the best interest of the child."
A vindictive mother falsely claims a father is abusive. Immediately the courts suspend fathers parenting time until the matter can be investigated. It may take months, even years before the matter can be resolved. A father's right to due process is violated and they are ripped from their children's Lives even though he is a loving and caring father whose only crime may be loving his children too much. Why? Because JUDGES say it is in "the best interest of the child."
I could go on all night. The bottom line is JUDGES that can't even tell us our child's favorite color are telling us what is in our children's best interest. JUDGES hide behind "the best interest of the child" to justify the horrible atrocities that take place in family court on a daily basis.
Here is my question to those same lawmakers. If every guideline and law you pass or approve is in "the best interest of the child".....Why is abortion still legal?
Figure that one out and get back to me?
Women can put their children up for adoption. They can just walk away no questions asked and never have to pay a lick of child support. Why? Because lawmakers say it is in "the best interest of the child."
Under the "safe haven" law a woman who elects not to be a mother to her infant child can take that child to a hospital, church or police/fire station and drop the child off. She can walk away, no questions asked and never have to pay a lick of child support. Why? Because the lawmakers say it is in "the best interest of the child."
Fathers who do not get the privilege of being the primary care giver must pay child support. In some cases they may still have to pay even if they have 50/50 custody. Why? Because lawmaker/JUDGES say it is in "the best interest of the child."
There is no safe haven law for unwed or divorced fathers. Once they are proven to be the father of a child they are on the hook for child support until that child reaches the age of majority or the courts says so. The mother can spend the child support she receives in any way she sees fit and does not have to prove where the money is spent. She can spend it on shoes, makeup, alcohol, or drugs and is still eligible to collect benefits from the state because she is under employed. Why? Because the lawmaker/JUDGES say it is in "the best interest of the child."
A father that falls behind on child support is labeled as a deadbeat. He faces losing his driver’s license, business license, and passport. He can face felony charges and even thrown in jail ripping him out of his child's/children's lives. Why? Because lawmaker/JUDGES say it is in "the best interest of the child."
A father that loves his children can provide a loving, caring and nurturing home for his children may not be able to get 50/50 custody. They may be stuck with the minimum "parenting time" (the courts way of doctoring up visitation). Minimum guidelines may only be a few hours a week and every other weekend. Why? Because JUDGES say it is in "the best interest of the child."
A vindictive mother falsely claims a father is abusive. Immediately the courts suspend fathers parenting time until the matter can be investigated. It may take months, even years before the matter can be resolved. A father's right to due process is violated and they are ripped from their children's Lives even though he is a loving and caring father whose only crime may be loving his children too much. Why? Because JUDGES say it is in "the best interest of the child."
I could go on all night. The bottom line is JUDGES that can't even tell us our child's favorite color are telling us what is in our children's best interest. JUDGES hide behind "the best interest of the child" to justify the horrible atrocities that take place in family court on a daily basis.
Here is my question to those same lawmakers. If every guideline and law you pass or approve is in "the best interest of the child".....Why is abortion still legal?
Figure that one out and get back to me?
