American Fathers 4Change with a mission of helping to bring awareness that by increasing the proportion of children growing up with involved, responsible, and committed fathers it will improve the well being of children.
Showing posts with label Family Court Contact Denial. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Family Court Contact Denial. Show all posts
Sunday
Friday
Who's Running For Judge in 2016?
How to get the most signatures to get judges to be accountable to the people?
By concentrating our resources wisely by going to the precincts with the most number of voters.
Thursday
Sunday
Are your children for sale in America’s divorce and family courts?
Are your children for sale? Isn’t that “the law” as we truly know it in America’s divorce and family courts?
As a mom or dad you go in believing that legitimate lawyers and judges are looking out for your children’s so-called “best interests.” At least that’s what they tell you before examining all your mandatory financial disclosures. Then they plot just how long they can keep two parents fighting over their children for profit. We like to think not all are doing it, but how can you ever know when this gold mine is so easy to access?
It’s a barbaric process reminiscent of a Roman Coliseum, and there is no accountability for the malpractice or misconduct. The foxes are watching the chicken coup, like the ethics lawyers in the witch hunt against Leon who were fired for falsifying their time sheets. These are the standard-bearers of lawyer ethics who oversee billing practices that swallow up entire college funds and life savings. Yet unlike others who steal from government, no public charges, ethical or criminal, were ever lodged.
Hard to believe? Look it up in Albany Times Union, July 2013 (Chief Counsel Peter Torncello, Steven Zayas, etc.). Leon’s custody judge was removed from the bench for admitting to sexual misconduct on his handicapped, five year old niece (Bryan Hedges). Two New York Supreme Court judges, Gerald Garson and Thomas Spargowere sent to federal prison for seeking bribes to fix divorce and custody cases. One did it while facing misconduct charges and the other got early release due to colleague references.
Shamelessly, when the lawyer you hire gets done abusing you, he or she is likely to blame the client for the court’s dysfunction, the emotions they needlessly inflame and the costly outcome to your families. And don’t forget the former lawyer on the bench who knows “the game” (according to New York Family Judge Daniel King, per court transcript of January 15, 2014). The power they are abusing today exceeds that of the NSA, IRS and CIA. They exploit your children to get away with this, and an unsuspecting public goes along.
Well like so many model parents sucked in by this government propaganda, Dr. Leon Koziol was unfortunate to end up with an ex-spouse named Kelly Hawse-Koziol. She engaged herself in an evil scheme to replace the birth father with a millionaire, childless substitute named Joseph Flihan of New Hartford, New York. When Leon outright rejected her offer in exchange for an end to so-called “child support,” (as any loving father would), she plotted to destroy his career, and worse, his relationships with his daughters.
All of Hawse-Koziol’s offense petitions since 2006 were dismissed, only one went to trial but required no defense. Her latest one, a protection (gag) order on this website, was dismissed last month on the eve of trial after a mandamus order was signed in New York Supreme Court which challenged it. Hawse-Koziol actually claimed in court documents that she transmitted notice of child relocation to Flihan’s home under e-mail “gmai.com” (“l” character missing) unlike all monthly notices before and after. That’s like testifying that she successfully mailed a letter from a trash can outside the post office. But Family Judge Daniel King accepted her lies. After that, under pressure, he disqualified himself from all litigation, but by then the damage was done. His free speech retaliations were complete.
Of course, a Social Studies teacher at Frankfort-Schuyler Central School had no ability to achieve her evil agenda. But when Leon began seeking recourse and reforms through proper channels, the beneficiaries of this lucrative enterprise joined the gang assault which resulted. Sure we could give you the “rambling” details of a ten year saga, but that would only incur more orchestrated sanctions and outright fabrications, i.e. judge findings of a PhD and Masters degree never obtained and nowhere in any court record to elevate Leon’s support obligations. Hey we’re serious. It actually occurred and has yet to be corrected.
Consequently a parental rights leader in New York City is seeking to lead a protest in Utica to the Joseph Flihan Restaurant Supply Company on Broad Street. Its purpose is to send a message that pots and pans can be sold but not our children. This corrupt family court system must be dismantled. Too many unsuspecting victims, especially our innocent children, learn too late how this system actually operates. If you are from the Utica-Rome area, you already know Leon’s conscientious stand on your behalf, his sacrifices and the continuing witch hunt against him. So you need to join up. Call (315) 380-3420 to register.
Saturday
Family Court is a MAFIA
Divorce Corp. Official Trailer
“I think death would be easier than divorce.” Here’s a look at what’s to come in the new documentary, Divorce Corp.
Posted by Divorce Corp. on Tuesday, December 17, 2013
  |
|
| ||||
|
STOP BY THE NEW FAMILY LAW REFORM WIKI, 
Thursday
From Family Courts To Federal Courts For Civil Rights Protections
Parents Increasingly Turning to Federal Courts for Civil Rights Protections...
Imagine you are in a divorce. You’ve been a dedicated parent and you aren’t a convicted felon or being accused of a crime. Now imagine walking into a local court for a procedural hearing and in a single decree your children are banned from seeing you, speaking to you or communicating in any way based solely on hearsay and allegation. Nothing’s been proven, no due process has occurred to prove anything yet a capricious judge has made a snap decision that changes the rest of your life and your children’s. What would you do?
Unfortunately this scenario is the real life experience of thousands of families across the country. An overzealous or biased Judge makes a snap decision that takes away the most important things in our lives. Whether or not you were the one seeking divorce there’s very little that parents who find themselves in this situation can do. Even when children are banned ‘temporarily’ from their parents, months can drag on to years between court dates and there’s no pause button in life. Milestones go by, alienation grows, bitterness increases and worst of all children experience immense pain and loss. Surprisingly most states have no provisions to intervene when children are banned from their parents yet this is one of the cruelest punishments that a court can levy.
While the US Constitution gives the powers of marriage, divorce and adoption to state civil courts, state civil courts simply ignore their obligations to support the civil rights protections of parents as held in the US Constitution. Parents who can’t afford attorneys can lose their children fighting spouses with access to legal assistance. Children who are the ones ‘protected’ have no say in bizarre custody decisions. Evidence standards are non-existent in family courts in the USA so children can be taken from parents purely on accusation. However, since many courts receive federal aid and recent Supreme Court cases like Turner vs. Rogers have reinforced the concept of due process in divorce many parents are turning to federal courts to seek restoration of their parental rights based on civil rights arguments.
Congressional Testimony: Glen Gibellina to Bill Windsor of Lawless America http://youtu.be/2ytNK_jYf3Y
Friday
What’s So Bad About ‘Mr. Mom’ Dads?
Problem 1: Children who lose contact with their fathers do worse in life.
Problem 2: Single mothers who want to work often struggle with the cost of childcare.
Problem 3: Many non-resident fathers are without meaningful work.
All three of these problems are fairly well established in the research literature. Each also motivates a battery of policy responses, with varying degrees of efficacy. In a recent report on poverty and opportunity from a working group convened by Brookings and the American Enterprise Institute, non-resident fathers received some special attention. (I was a member of the group).
The report notes that the Child Support Enforcement Program has become increasingly effective at establishing paternity and levying child support payments. Good: parenting is a responsibility, regardless of the nature of the relationship into which a child is born. But the payments can also be onerous for non-resident parents, who are almost always fathers, ‘functioning as a tax on their earnings’. The accumulation of child support debt is a particular problem – non-resident parents are currently about $53 billion in arrears for child support – and the Brookings/AEI group suggested that these kinds of debts should be forgiven in certain circumstances.
“Failing to expect both parents to support their children is not only unfair, it reduces marriage incentives, increases poverty rates for custodial mothers and children, and is likely to hurt children,” the report concludes. But we should not make the mistake of assuming that support can only come in the form of cash.
Since most non-resident parents are fathers, there is a tendency for policy-makers to see them primarily in terms of their financial obligations, as walking ATMs. Many of these men are in no position to make serious financial contributions: 41 percent of poor non-resident fathers have been out of paid work for at least a year, according to a recent study conducted by the Urban Institute. Meanwhile, working single mothers are also struggling. Forty percent of those working said that child care costs led them to change jobs or hours worked, according to a recent survey.
So, let’s see…Lots of non-resident fathers are not gainfully employed; single mothers are struggling with childcare cost; and children, especially boys, are suffering from the distance or absence of their father. Here’s an idea: have the fathers look after their children, allowing mothers to get into and stay in work. The savings for the mother would far outweigh child support payments, which could be suspended when the father is providing childcare. What if, rather than squeezing these men for every last nickel, we were to ask them to do childcare instead?
How many fathers could help in this way? According to the National Survey of Family Growth, for the years 2006-2010, there were almost nine million non-resident fathers in the United States. We do not know for sure how many of them are not currently in paid work, but we can produce some estimates. As a group, non-resident fathers are less educated than the norm: 15 percent dropped out of high school and 38 percent have just a high school diploma. Given this educational breakdown, and assuming that non-resident fathers, on average, face the same labor market conditions as their similarly-educated peers, we estimate that 2.35 million non-resident fathers are unemployed. This figure lines up reasonably well with the Urban Institute study referred to earlier.
On paper at least, then, there is a potential reserve army of childcare workers of more than two million. Of course there are lots of reasons why this figure does not translate to the real world. Non-resident fathers are more likely to be incarcerated; they may have addiction or substance abuse problems; and they may be wholly unsuited, in some way, for caring for their own children. Some may not live close-by. But even so, there must be many fathers who could be doing more care. Many of these men might object to doing the unpaid work of raising their children, even if their child support payments were waived. But if they are not active in the labor market, it is hard to see why they ought to take this view: we are talking about their own children, after all.
Right now, the childcare contribution of non-resident fathers is very low, accounting for just 6 percent of total time when the mother is in a single-parent household, and just 1 percent of total time when the mothers is living with a boyfriend, according to research by Ariel Kalil, from the University of Chicago.
No doubt there are practical obstacles to increasing the amount of care provided by non-resident fathers, including some of those discussed above. But perhaps the greatest barrier is the outdated mental model with which these problems are addressed. As my colleague Isabel Sawhill and I argued in a recent New York Times piece (‘Men’s Lib!’), we urgently need to break down outdated gender roles if both men and women are to flourish. Seeing non-resident fathers as potential caregivers is one step in this direction. After all, women can now serve in every role in the U.S. military, so why can’t we start to see men performing a bigger role as parents?
Richard V. Reeves is Policy Director of the Center on Children and Families at the Brookings Institution.
By Richard Reeves
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Why say NO to attorneys in the Legislature?
THE LARGEST CLASS ACTION IN HISTORY
Freedom of speech in the United States
Congress shall make no law...