RSS

Category Archives: Family Law and the Family Courts

Stories describing just how corrupted the family courts and lawyers have become.

An Obamanation of Healthcare, and the Death of your Conscience


Soon the Supreme Court will decide the fate of one of the most controversial bills the Congress has ever passed, if not the most controversial. The Affordable Care Act of 2010, better known now as Obamacare. The folks over at the Alliance Defense Fund has put together a 2 minute video that spells out the most dangerous provisions in the 2700 page monstrosity. It has very important information that illustrates why the healthcare law will absolutely force a majority of citizens in our nation to act contrary to their deeply held religious beliefs. It specifically mentions the “abortion tax” that you will fund (whether you want to or not, no conscientious objectors, please) with your healthcare premiums. I stumbled onto this video by reading a fellow conservative blog at Two Heads are Better than One. I love to write, but I read about twice as much as I write, because I think it’s important to learn about as many issues as I can, as quickly as I can. Because, as conservatives, we are having everything thrown at us to disrupt and throw us off our game, those in the federal government know very well that their time is short to get all these controls in place, because the American people are AWAKE and the Conservative Rebellion has begun. I urge you to check out The Alliance Defense Fund, and The conservative blog I mentioned, we have to band together as soldiers in the same fight, to repeal the actions of the president and the runaway Congress of the first two and a half years of Obama’s reign as self-appointed Monarch of the United States of America.

The death panel cometh, only we can stop it.

Robert E. Stage Jr.

Advertisements
 

Tags: , , ,

Take One of These, and Call Me in the Morning


This is a transcript of a recent speech given by an OB/GYN to her parish in Columbus, Oh

by Kathleen Lutter

Hello St. Timothy Parishioners! My name is Kathleen Lutter. I have been asked by the Knights of Columbus and Father Hayes to provide a personal witness about the recent Department of Health and Human Services contraceptive mandate.

I am from a large, poor Catholic family of fourteen children, ten of whom are girls! I have been a parishioner at St. Timothy Parish with my husband Ken, for the last 28 years. We have raised three children here in this parish. I am an OB/GYN physician, advocating for women and women’s health issues. My friends and family know that I am much more comfortable in the BACK of church, not here in the front! But I feel compelled to stand here and explain, in very real terms, how the recent HHS mandate is NOT good for women, not good for Catholics and how it is a violation of our First Amendment Rights. Its impact upon me as a Catholic employer and as a Catholic physician is both undeniable and unacceptable.

In August of 2011, the President introduced the concept and, in February 2012, entered into the Federal Register, a mandate that forces all employers to provide for their employees at no cost, sterilization, contraception and direct abortifacient drugs. Most Americans believed that this was just about making birth control more affordable to women. Nothing could be further from the truth. Branded birth control pills are already available to every patient on Medicaid FREE of charge. Working women can purchase generic birth control for $13 dollars for a 3-month supply. The REAL agenda behind the mandate is the inclusion of a drug by the name of ELLA, E-L-L-A. Look it up! It was included by brand name in the mandate. Most were unfamiliar with this drug and falsely assumed that it represented yet another method of contraception. In our enthusiasm to get our pills for free, we allowed the federal mandate of a drug, recently available from France, a relative of RU-486, whose SOLE indication is the medical termination of pregnancy. Also included were Preven and Plan B, drugs that are called “contraceptives” yet if taken more than 48 hours after exposure, represent DIRECT ABORTIFACIENT drugs! The REAL tragedy is that we Catholics did NOT stand up and tell the president that he grossly underestimated our respect for life and our disdain for abortion. Our passive silence has allowed this to move forward faster than most of us can believe. This is now LAW and we have NO moral recourse to object to mandated coverage of the surgical termination of a pregnancy, since we have passively accepted the medical termination drugs.

What then, did you hear about “The Compromise” that the President made weeks after the mandate came out? In a nutshell, the only compromise was to give Catholic physicians and institutions a year to reconsider their beliefs.

So, what does this mean for me as a Catholic employer? I must provide free-ofcharge to my employees, sterilization, contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs.

Whether I pay for the services directly, or pay the insurance premium indirectly, I am condoning and sponsoring abortion against my religious convictions. I am only eligible for a religious exemption if I both care for and employ exclusively Catholic individuals. Lastly and perhaps more frightening to me, is the February 2013 date which marks the end of my year’s reflection on my stance on abortion. By this date, I must comply with and accept my role in providing medical abortions to my staff and patients, if asked. If I fail to comply with the HHS contraceptive and abortion drug mandate, my access to patients who use Medicare, Medicaid, TriCare, Champus and other federal programs is cut off!

Either comply with the mandate OR release from my care all of my seniors, my disabled patients, my impoverished patients, my immigrant and refugee patients and my military family patients. Break a commandment or break my vocation? I took an oath in May of 1984 at my medical school commencement which is widely known as the Hippocratic Oath. I will close with a portion of that oath…

I WILL FOLLOW that method of treatment, which according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patient. I will neither prescribe nor administer a lethal dose of medicine to any patient even if asked, nor counsel any such thing nor perform these acts. I will have the utmost respect for every human life from fertilization to natural death and reject abortion that deliberately takes a unique human life.

Hippocrates circa 460 BC

Please consider joining the Knights of Columbus . . . as they embark upon a letter writing campaign, in support of our brave bishops and clergy. Join with people of

ALL faiths in an attempt to seek legislation to protect the conscience of our

Catholic physicians and health care workers and to rescind the HHS mandate.

Dr. Kathleen Q. Lutter

Courtesy of the Ohio Liberty Council

 

Tags: , ,

ROE v. WADE was and is a SHAM, a FAKE, and a FRAUD


Lets frame this as a Legal Argument first,  how the laws of 46 of 50 states were subverted and usurped by 7 0f 9 Justices on the Supreme Court on January 22nd, 1973. Then we will look at other interesting facts and issues.

Lets look to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, I know that is a novel idea in today’s “modern” and “progressive” America, but I digress, let’s do it anyway, we may start a trend.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I introduce you to the Declaration of Independence:

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the  political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of  the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God  entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should  declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are  endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,  Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are  instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That  whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the  People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation  on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most  likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that  Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and  accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while  evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are  accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same  Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is  their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future  security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the  necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.

… and, The Declaration’s companion document, the United States Constitution:

The Preamble states,

       We The People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Ok lets dig in. If the founders believed in a self-evident truth, that we were created equal, and since we were created equal, our creator had endowed us with certain unalienable rights, that among these were LIFE, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of HAPPINESS. We should not find ourselves so distantly removed from these self-evident truths that are as true today, as they were hundreds of years ago.

The Declaration goes on to say,

To secure these RIGHTS, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

You read that right, government is instituted among Men to, SECURE the rights that God Gave Him, not the Government.

The Constitution states,

Were going to make a MORE perfect Union, one that establishes JUSTICE, insures DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY, one that provides for the common defense, one that promotes general WELFARE, and finally a Government that will SECURE the BLESSINGS of LIBERTY to ourselves and our POSTERITY.

Now, If the Declaration says we were created, and that we have unalienable, God given rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness, and equally the Constitution goes on to say that the very reason Government is in existence is to secure the blessings of ourselves and our Posterity, how can any government, local, state, or federal, deny the rights their supposed to protect, to the weakest among us, defenseless children in the womb? And especially on the flimsy excuse that the Supreme Court majority opinion used, privacy.  So, lets bare that out quickly. Since privacy is king, can I murder someone because i’m behind closed doors? No. Of course not. But I was in private?!  What a simply terrible excuse.

For more information on the origin of The Declaration and The U.S. Constitution look up Sir William Blackstone and John Locke.

Watch this video dated 1/22/1973. Walter Kronkite tells the world that the Supreme Court has overturned anti-abortion laws in 46 states. Watch closely at the 2:08 mark, and see the usual suspects.

And now watch this one, of the original plaintiff in the case, “Jane Row”. She shares the truth, and her Christian conversion.

Progressives have been using “the Majority of one” and the court system for a very long time!
Its called Legislating by Judicial Fiat. You see, 46 of 50 States already had enforced the high and moral ideas of the Declaration and Constitution. But two legal challenges were filed, one in Georgia and one in Texas against the state laws forbidding abortion. The alias “Jane Roe” was used for Norma McCorvey, on whose behalf the suit was originally filed, alleging that the abortion law in Texas violated her constitutional rights and the rights of other women.. The defendant was the district attorney of Dallas County, Texas, Henry B. Wade.

Who argued the case:

Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee were the plaintiff’s lawyers. John Tolle, Jay Floyd and Robert Flowers were the defendant’s lawyers. You really should do some indepth research on these two women and on Norma McCorvey “Jane Row”. Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee are feminest classmates who attended Texas law school together. The two attorneys used Norma to promote their Pro-death stance, and to get it shoved through the courts. Norma McCorvey “Jane Row”, never stepped foot into any court room, throughout the entire proceedings. She also never had an abortion, and now has three daughters.

Who voted for and against the Roe v. Wade decision:

The majority: Harry Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Chief Justice Warren Burger, William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall, Lewis Powell and Potter Stewart. The dissent: William Rehnquist and Byron White. The majority opinion was written by Harry Blackmun. Concurring opinions were written by Potter Stewart, Warren Burger, and William O. Douglas. Dissenting opinions were written by William Rehnquist and Byron White.

Here is the dissenting opinion by William Rehnquist

I borrowed this from a blog that I follow principlesnotmen.wordpress.com

James Wilson was a signer of the Declaration of Independence, a member of the Constitutional Convention, and a Supreme Court Justice—a Founder if ever there was one.  He wrote a piece called Of the Natural Rights of Individuals.  In it he said this about the sanctity of life:

“With consistency, beautiful and undeviating, human life, from its commencement to its close, is protected by the common law.  In the contemplation of law, life begins when the infant is first able to stir in the womb.  By the law, life is protected not only from immediate destruction, but from every degree of actual violence, and, in some cases, from every degree of danger.”

As with everything our Founders said, this can be nitpicked beyond original intent.  An abortionist could easily say, “But he said ‘first able to stir in the womb.’ That does not mean life begins at conception.”  Well let’s think about that one.

First, back in the 1700’s, did they even understand the idea of “at conception”?  This was a time when doctors still bled patients who were sick in order to get the germs out.  Did they understand the concept of fertilization at a DNA level?  Not likely.  In discussing a child, what else WOULD he have said other than “first able to stir in the womb”?

Second, along these same lines, they did not have the technology to determine a pregnancy until the baby is “first able to stir in the womb.”  They did not have pregnancy tests.  It would have been pointless to talk about life beginning at conception if nobody could even imagine knowing pregnancy (or understanding it) that early.  He seems to be saying, “When you know you are pregnant, you cannot now kill it.”

Ponder this….

Now on to the philosophy of life, but not man’s philosphy, Gods.

Here’s what could be considered the liberal argument for abortion, what if rape, incest, or life of the mother is threatened? Then should we abort? No. Why? Because the bible teaches that we are not our own, we don’t own our bodies, we belong to God, sinner or saint, and we also don’t get to play God over life. Let’s just take one of these to task, rape.

Take Pastor James Robison, of Life Today. Pastor Robison’s mother was raped and he was conceived in that rape. She didn’t abort, and the ministry that God has given him helps feed hundreds of thousands of children. Now, lets contrast that with the thought of him being aborted, look how many people would have missed the blessings of this one man’s life, if it had been taken before he ever got started. Life is precious in the sight of God.

Some say, its just some cells, just suck them out and continue with your life, lets take a biological look at this issue. If the sperm is alive, and the egg is alive, and when the two join, the embryo is alive, if left to its natural course, the child will be alive.

So therefore, we should not kill a child.

That word Posterity in the preamble means that the Constitution protects our unborn, posterity, is our sons and daughters. What if just one of the 49 million children who have been aborted since Roe v. Wade, was the next child to grow into the adult that cured cancer, or cured diabetes, or engineered the next staggering medical breakthrough, we are a nation that is sacrificing our future for our present whims. Abstinence, and adoption, are our highest calling in educating our society on this national tragedy.

“America needs no words from me to see how your decision in Roe v. Wade has deformed a great nation. The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has shown violence and discord at the heart of the most intimate human relationships. It has aggravated the derogation of the father’s role in an increasingly fatherless society. It has portrayed the greatest of gifts ~ a child ~ as a competitor, an intrusion, and an inconvenience. It has nominally accorded mothers unfettered dominion over the independent lives of their physically dependent sons and daughters. And in granting this unconscionable power, it has exposed many women to unjust and selfish demands from their husbands or other sexual partners. Human rights are not a privilege conferred by government. They are every human being’s entitlement by virtue of his humanity. The right to life does not depend, and must not be declared to be contingent, on the pleasure of anyone else, not even a parent or a sovereign.” Mother Teresa

Robert E. Stage Jr.

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

‘Adolph Hitler’ Ordered to be Held In Custody In New Jersey


One day, you take your family to the grocery store to order a decorated birthday cake for your youngest son.  There’s just one problem, they refuse to decorate the cake for you.  Not because you don’t have the money for it.  Not because they ran out of icing or cake.  But, because they refuse to write your son’s name on the cake, his name, Adolph Hitler Campbell. After the story of this incident broke in the local news papers, child protective services showed up on the doorstep of the Campbell’s, ultimately, child services took all four of their children into custody. Three of their four children are named after Nazi figures or terminology. This happened in New Jersey in 2009.

Fast forward to present day. There was a hearing in Superior Court to decide if the children should be held in State custody or be returned to their parents. Superior Court Judge Robert Reed ruled that the children should continue to be detained in the states care. A decision Adolph’s father strongly disagreed with saying  it was based purely on the names of his children rather than the couple’s ability to serve as parents.

“These kids weren’t abused. Our kids weren’t taken because of abuse,” Campbell said. “I’m honest about who I am and what I am.” He further added “If I have to give up my Nazism, then so be it. I’ll do it,” he said. The children are “more my heart and soul and everything than anything.”

The Campbell’s are reported to have separated. An interesting interconnected note is that the Nazi Party recently filed the paper work in Washington D.C. to have their own lobbyist to the Congress of the United States in April, 2012, and were permitted to do so.

Here is one thing to consider. In America we have a constitutional right to the freedom of association, no matter what the social astigmatism is. We are protected from persecution by the government for being associated with any political ideology. If someone wants to follow communist ideology, in America they are free to do so, even though I strongly disagree with their decision in that choice, I support their right to subscribe to communism. Because I support the U.S. Constitution. We have a right to free and open debate.

I do not like anything that promotes Nazism, I find their actions both past and present, to be detestable. However, I don’t support an over reaching all-powerful government bureaucracy whether Federal, State, or Local in nature.

Here is another point of view to ponder.

Muhammad is a very popular name in the world right now, and many young boys are being named Muhammad currently.

In AD 627, Muhammad committed an atrocity against the last remaining major tribe of Jews in Medina: the Qurayza. Muhammad beheaded or had beheaded 750 Jews, adults and prepubescent males, and gathered all the women together as slaves. Muhammad, also had taken to himself a wife, a young girl of the age of around 9. He was middle-aged at the time of their wedding. The Hadith chronicles the story of Muhammad marrying the 9 year old girl of his friend,the girl was named Aisha. The Southern Baptists had gotten into some hot water over referring to Muhammad as a “Demon Possessed Pedophile” in 2002.

If Muhammad hated the Jews, and killed them. And Adolph hated the Jews, and killed them. Why is it more politically correct to name children Muhammad than Adolph. Is it in our psyche as a nation to abhor the name Adolph, because his atrocities were more recent, and closer to the surface of our knowledge than that of Muhammad’s atrocities? I would say that is part of it. However, consider this point of view, or are we so afraid of being politically incorrect to tell the truth about both men, because Islam calls one of them a prophet? Are we to afraid to criticise one because he is a so-called “religious” figure? And, equally, are we so easy to criticise the other one because its socially acceptable to do so?

In America, does the government have the right to take children into custody, because of their name? Where no credible evidence of abuse can be determined beyond a reasonable doubt? Can they break up a family because of your decision to name your children what you seen fit?  Should the authorities be investigating Islamic families that are naming their boys Muhammad?  If the answer is yes, we are in a world of hurt.

Robert E. Stage Jr.

Adolph, with his parents Heath and Deborah

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Family law in Ohio, and how it affects Fathers, Mothers, and their Children


In Ohio, the current statutes are skewed in the favor of the custodial parent when concerning contempt of court proceedings. Let me explain, if you are the non-custodial parent and you are named in your court order to pay child support, if you were to fall behind (even through no fault of your own) after 30 days delinquency you will find yourself on the receiving end of a summons. The CSEA through the Ohio Department of Job and Family Service acts on behalf of the child (also the custodial parent) and summons you to court to answer a charge of contempt. This legal action costs $0.00 to the custodial parent.

Now, if you are the custodial parent, you are able to sever visitation from the non-custodial parent and the children, causing you to be in contempt. When the non-custodial parent wants to remedy this issue and continue visitation he or she must hire legal counsel, pay a fee to the court to have the case heard (most cases $400.00), most attorney fees for this action can run between $600.00 to $1000.00. So to summarize, if you are a non-custodial parent it will cost you, $1000.00 to $1400.00 just to get the custodial parent into court to answer for a contempt charge (this still does not guarantee you will see your children). And if you are a custodial parent, after 30 days delinquency on child support payments, the legal system/state agency becomes your advocate, at no cost to you, and sends a summons to the non-custodial parent.

The fourteenth amendment to the U.S. Constitution section1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

image

Proposed Legislation – State of Ohio – Domestic Relations

Whereas the family has been the foundation of society from the origins of the world. So then, because a child (or children) have been naturally appointed with a father and a mother, and a child (or children) being a gift from God, it is of the utmost importance that they have relationships with both parents to sustain the blessings of this life, and so they do not forget their ancestors and familial heritage.

Also,

Whereas it is good and prudent that governments be instituted among men, and government; being a reflection of the current order of the institution of the American family, I, Robert E. Stage Jr. propose amending the domestic relations segment of the Ohio Revised Code to make the law more equitable among custodial and non-custodial parents.

A. When a custodial parent shall fail to comply with the court appointed enjoyed parenting time for a period of more than 30 days, the CSEA / Job and family services case worker shall, in a written and sworn affidavit notify the county prosecutor of the alleged contempt of court. Upon receiving the sworn affidavit, the county prosecutor shall file a charge of contempt of court against the custodial parent in the court of the original verdict and decree.

(1.) The non-custodial parent must show causal for the aforementioned legal action by acquiring police reports for each infraction of the court appointed enjoyed parenting time order.

(2.) The non-custodial parent shall be wholly responsible for any and all evidence and its gathering (also its delivery to the CSEA / Job and Family Services caseworker).

B. If found guilty of contempt, punishment of the custodial parent shall be equal to the existing statutes for child support delinquency.

(1.) Upon first conviction of contempt, the custodial parent shall be incarcerated for a period of up to 30 days and pay up to a $250.00 fine.

(2.) Upon second conviction of contempt, the custodial parent shall be incarcerated for a period of up to 60 days and pay up to a $500.00 fine.

(3.) Upon third conviction of contempt, the custodial parent shall be incarcerated for a period of up to 90 days and pay up to a $1000.00 fine.

I am submitting this proposal to my state representatives, if you support this proposal please leave your comments stating such. Thank you.

Also, please reblog and share this with Facebook and Twitter with as many people as you can.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Some really good real world advice.


How do you feel about the current state of family law and family courts? I’m sure there are vast differences of opinion when discussing this subject. Many parents want to spend as much time with their children as they can. This makes a split of the family unit really stressful on all those involved, especially children. The courts can only slice the week so many ways to accommodate those parties involved. Also, financial matters come into to play with support orders, alimony and the bickering over who gets to claim the children on their taxes, who carries insurance, etc. A wise man once told me; work as many details out as you can with your ex-partner before either of you ever speak to an attorney. This will save you some money. It may not save you a lot of money, but you’re going to need every bit you can keep. If you are able, have a separation agreement loosely typed up and some idea of what your visitation schedule might look like, you will be well on your way to saving money, and time, if these things are agreed to before hand, it saves the arguing later, thus saving time with the attorney. Any time you can save at the attorney; the better off you are. Time is money! You’re going to find that once you involve the attorney, things usually turn nasty. Attorney’s make money from any deviation they can cause in the case, this includes, but is not limited to, telling you; well you can get a lot more money than you are asking your partner for”, “well you should get to claim both children, instead of alternating years” and of course “now listen here honey, you’ve put in a lot of time and effort into this relationship over the years, now that’s gotta be worth something”! Ideally parents would want to set up an agreeable visitation schedule, an agreeable dollar amount for support and all the particulars of taxes, insurance, etc. Most attorney’s work on an hourly rate, ranging anywhere from $100.00 per hour all the way to $300.00 an hour for “proud” attorney services, of course these numbers can go higher, these are merely the market prices in central Ohio. In any type of “fight”– or “war”; in some divorces, there are winners and losers. The worst part is almost 10 times out of 10 the children are always the losers and the attorneys are the winners and the parents are left somewhere in  the middle “purgatory”.

I was one of those guys who took a referral from a family member for my legal representation for my divorce. Sadly I didn’t do enough homework when it came to researching the attorney before I hired him to represent me. I had mediocre representation at best. I was charged a flat fee of $2700.00 for “divorce with children”. I never received an itemized invoice for services rendered, even after asking for one on several occasions. Whats even worse in my case, I paid for two divorces, just before the paperwork was filed I had given my ex-wife $2100.00 to pay the new house mortgage and incidentals for our children. I later found out, my ex never paid the mortgage, she used the money I gave her to hire an attorney to sue me for divorce. Aint that the luck! Actually she didn’t pay one mortgage payment on the new house she lived in for 14 months, and this is just plain greedy, after being in the new home, she let all her family members throw her a “house-warming” party where she received gifts for moving into a house I paid $2000.00 to have built, that she never paid a dime on for 14 months…. and lived in for FREE. 

Heres another piece of advice I didn’t know until I found myself searching for a “good” divorce lawyer, always; 100% of the time go with the reputable “local yocal” attorney in the municipality where your case will be heard. What this does for you is it  cozys you slightly closer to the judge hearing your case. You really want your attorney and the judge to already have a good working relationship. Think about it. Do you want the guy or gal who has worked with the judge many times over and maybe have shared a drink or a golf game with? Or do you want the guy or gal who has never seen said judge, never! I think you see my point. We all wish justice could be blind, but every now and again; she PEEKS and the scales are tipped! In the real world it really does matter who you know. I know I may sound a little jaded and cynical, but remember folks, I’ve walked the gauntlet already.

When there are children involved in your divorce, always, always, always, involve a family counsellor and a mediator, these two positions are going to be your lifeline! I cannot recommend this strongly enough; because this is where I lost the most ground, I did not do this. Take for instance, getting a counsellor involved, what this does is allows all parties involved to vent to someone other than the person they might despise at that particular moment in time. It saves a lot of unnecessary hurt feelings in what is already a tough situation. Getting a mediator involved will reduce any dis-agreements that pop up along the negotiating process, you know, “bumps” in the road. Also involving a mediator helps with dis-agreements in the future, because if everyone is on the same page and everyone knows exactly what their agreeing to, It’s hard to plead ignorant later over visitation, support, or what ever might be the pressing issue of the day.

You should always use ALL the tools at your disposal! Do extensive research, ask for references from your attorney’s former clients. Use the internet to view forums, and bar association writings regarding certain lawyers. Go to the library, study family law or read books on the psychological effects on children who suffer through such trauma as divorce causes. When you get right down to it; next to a death in the family; there really isn’t any trauma like a divorce. A divorce is the natural world of a child (no matter how bad their environment is) being un-naturally ripped into two pieces. After it is ripped like the tearing of your flesh, then the “distance” of the “divorce altered relationship” begins to set in. Which can cause all kinds of odd reactions from your children, depression, isolating themselves, drawing “dark” pictures and so on.

I will leave you with this, do everything you can to speak respectfully of the other parent in the presence of your child, in their eyes you can “kill” the other parent with just a few careless hurtful words. Always make time to share and talk about how your child(ren) feel, and to an extent how you feel also now, remember divorce is new to you and your child(ren). Take advantage of every opportunity to encourage them to spend quality time with the “other” parent (no matter how devastating your alone time is for you).

I was not afforded many kind words in my divorce, this ultimately destroyed two of the best father daughter, father son relationships you ever witnessed. Now the relationships are dead. I have become as a distant memory in my children’s minds, I have become but a whisper in a hurricane.

Robert E Stage Jr.

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

 
%d bloggers like this: