August 16,
2006
Column #1,303
Advance for August 19, 2006
The Need for Shared Parenting
by Mike McManus
John Murtari, 49, is sitting in a Syracuse jail for two weeks as I write, and
has refused to eat or drink to protest "gross and repeated injustice" by the
court system in a custody battle over access to his son, Domenic, 13.
From the state's perspective, he is a deadbeat dad, who owes $60,000 in child
support.
However, the initial support level was not based on his income, but the $70,000
he once earned as a software engineer for a defense firm. When the company
filed false reports, he says he blew the whistle and was fired the next day.
Though president of his own software firm, his earnings are half of what he used
to make. The first injustice is that his child support level was set far too
high. Second, the court allowed his wife to move to Colorado, in spite of his
protest. She's studying for a third college degree, which she could have
pursued in New York State. Why should any court allow a divorced parent to move
so far away that child visitation by the parent left behind is almost
impossible?
If Domenic visited him, John had to fly to Colorado, pick him up, bring him
back, and then return with him to Colorado. Three round trip tickets cost
$1,000 per visit. But the court would not allow him to deduct that from his
child support payments. That's a third injustice.
Fourth, he repeatedly filed for modifications of his child support level, and
was denied. He was assigned a public defender who told him, "John, just pay the
money. You'll see your son when he is 18."
John has been paying $50 a month, which is skimpy. However, he estimates he has
spent $60,000 in support of his son, but none of it counts in the court's eyes.
In the last seven years, he flew out four times a year for visits, and picked
him up for vacations in New York twice a year. "How many of those could I have
traded away - and not lost our relationship?" he asks.
So he sits today in debtor's prison, to call attention to the plight of divorced
parents denied regular access to their children. John told me before going to
jail that he would not eat or drink and would force the prison to keep him alive
with a feeding tube. For ten days the jail refused to do so. His weight dropped
from 155 pounds to 127. His blood pressure fell to a dangerous level.
Stories appeared in local newspapers, and a feeding tube was inserted. He
asserts, "This is not suicide wish or hunger strike. My goal is not to hurt
myself but to make them expend an uncomfortable amount of effort to keep me in
custody."
There has to be a better answer and there is. It is called "shared parenting,"
or "joint custody," which is granted in only 16 percent of cases. According to a
study by the American Psychological Association, "A major advantage of joint
custody may be its ability to address the high rate of current father absence
subsequent to divorce. Joint custody has been correlated with increased father
involvement."
Second, "Joint custody versus sole maternal custody was associated with
adolescent's positive adjustment. Several studies found that increased and
reliable visitation by the noncustodial parent (usually the father) predicted
positive adjustment of children."
Feminists oppose joint custody on grounds that child support will be reduced.
However, "the consensus of studies" found that "child support is either
increased" or not significantly different. A fourth benefit is that there is
"decreased re-litigation" with shared parenting, and less conflict between
spouses in general.
Thus, research proves what common sense would suggest. Shared parenting results
in greater father involvement, more financial support, less litigation and
happier children.
David Levy, an attorney who is President of the Children's Rights Council,
reports another great impact of joint custody. States with the greatest amount
of joint custody enjoyed a big drop in divorce rates. The six states with the
most joint custody are, in order, Montana, Kansas, Connecticut, Idaho, Rhode
Island, and Alaska. The states with the highest decline in divorce in the
1990s were Alaska, Kansas, Connecticut, Illinois, Montana and Idaho.
Why?
"If a parent knows that he or she will have to interact with the child's other
parent while the child is growing up, there is less incentive to divorce," says
Levy.
Here's a political issue for this political season.
Candidates for governor or state legislatures: why not fight for more joint
custody to support kids and lower divorce rates?
|
|
Since 1981...
2000+ Columns |
|
CURRENT ARTICLE |
|
Febrary 9,
2022: Column 2113: My Farewell Column: Happy Valentine's Week |
|
Recent Columns |
|
Writing Columns About
Marriage |
|
Will Abortion Be Made Illegal? |
|
Restore Voting Rights to Ex-Felons |
|
Progress in Black-White Relations |
|
Marriage Is
Disappearing |
|
Catholic Priest Celibacy Should Be Optional |
|
Blacks Must Consider Marriage |
|
The Need to End Catholic Priest Celibacy |
|
More Lessons For Life |
|
Lessons For Life |
|
Rebuilding Marriage in America |
|
How To Reduce Drunk Driving Deaths |
|
The Value of Couples Praying Together |
|
A Case for Pro-Life
|
|
End
The Death Penalty? |
|
Christian Choices Matter |
|
The Biblical Sexual Standard |
|
The Addictive Nature of Pornography |
|
Protecting Girls from Suicide |
|
The Worst Valentine:
Cohabitation |
|
Pornography: A Public Health Hazard |
|
Sextortion Kills Teens |
|
Cohabitation: A Risky Business |
|
Recent Searches |
|
gun control,
euthanasia,
cohabitation,
sexting,
sextortion,
alcoholism,
prayer,
guns,
same sex marriage,
abortion,
depression,
islam,
divorce,
polygamy,
religious liberty,
health care,
pornography,
teen sex,
abortion and infanticide,
Roe+v+Wade,
supreme court,
marriage,
movies,
violence,
celibacy,
living+together,
cohabitation,
ethics+and+religion,
pornography,
adultery,
divorce,
saving+marriages |
|