Old NCFC Logo
 
 

                   GREATER                           APRIL/MAY/JUNE 1999

                        PITTSBURGH                                            VOL.4  NO.3

                      CHAPTER

           N E W S L E T T E R

Contact:    Kevin Sheahen-President                          37 Seneca Road Pittsburgh, PA 15241

Phone no.     412/854-4799              E-mail: pghdads@aol.com              FAX: 412/835-1362

WELCOME TO NCFC GREATER PITTSBURGH CHAPTER

“THE BEST PARENT IS BOTH PARENTS"

Table of Contents

1999 NCFC National Convention
Father's Day Event
Legislative Update
Member Success Stories
Mission Statement
New Pennsylvania Support Guidelines
Judge Baer is out of Family Division!!
Other Supportive Groups
Pittsburgh Chapter Meetings
Pro Se Help
Children Want Daddies Commentary by Kathleen Parker
"Father" -a poem by Derral Patterson
WE NEED YOU!
Please Renew Your Membership
A Special Thanks
Lecture at Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Current Volunteer Officers of NCFC/Greater Pittsburgh Chapter
Co-operative Parenting for Divided Families
Amicus Brief to be Files Against "Constitutionality" of Violence Against Women Act
United Way
‘JOINT CUSTODY, NOW THAT’S CHILD SUPPORT’
Why being Part of a National Organization for Fathers Rights is Important
The Politics of Fatherhood
New North Hills Fathers Support Network
Board Membership Positions
West Virginia Joint Custody Editorial and Reply
'Chafin Bill'; Senator meddles with divorce
Current Volunteer Officers, Board of Directors and Staff

1999 NCFC National Convention
‘Preserving the Promise of Fatherhood’

        Please register early for the 1999 NCFC National Convention to be held at:

Holiday Inn Central/Green Tree
401 Holiday Drive
Pittsburgh, PA 15220
(412) 922-8100

The 19th annual national convention of the National Congress for Fathers and Children will be held in Pittsburgh from September 23rd to the 25th, 1999. To insure that the convention is a success we are soliciting early registrations from individuals, plus corporate and individual sponsors.

Sign up early! The registration costs will increase from $75 to $85 after May 1, 1999, so it will behoove you to register early. In addition, we would encourage as many members and non-members to stay at the Holiday Inn. There will be activities every evening. These time periods are a wonderful opportunity to meet and network with other people from across the state of Pennsylvania and across the whole country.

A registration form is included as a part of this newsletter or sign-up through the internet.

We are also asking NCFC members to contribute their time and/or $10 toward sponsoring this convention. Please send your commitment of time or money for this important event as soon as possible.

Supporting Organizations Include:

National Congress for Fathers and Children, NCFC’s Pittsburgh Chapter, Michigan Chapter; Joint Custody Association; Coalition for Fathering Families

Tentative scheduled speakers include:

Other speakers that are not confirmed will represent family law issues, the importance of fathers in children’s lives, pro se seminars, legislation topics and children in divorce and paternity situations.

Go to the form and mail it to our office - T.J. Bellaire, 1999 Convention Chair, 37 Seneca Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15241

For more information: 1 800 543-6323 (KID-N-DAD) or 1 800 SEE-DADS

http://www.trfn.clpgh.org/ncfc

http://www.lni.net/tjeb

NCFC, founded in 1981, is the longest lived fathers’ rights organization having a membership elected board of directors. To learn about the practical educational and organizational help offered the men's movement by NCFC, see: http://www.ncfc.net/ncfc

We need YOU!!! Your children need you, too!!!

Tentative Agenda for the 1999 Convention:

 
FATHER'S DAY EVENTS
Fathers Day is Sunday, June 20th this year. There will be a rally on the steps of the Allegheny County City County Building steps on Grant Street in downtown Pittsburgh at 11:00 A.M. Speakers will be announced in press releases before the event.

There will be a choice of two events for families to share Fathers Day together. The first event will be a trip to the Pittsburgh Zoo. The cost will be $6 per person in advance. The main picnic pavilion will be available to all guests purchasing these advance tickets. Bring your own food and beverages. Door prizes will be given away. However, you must purchase the advance tickets to be eligible to win any of the prizes.

The second event will be held at Laser Storm on McKnight Road for an afternoon of fun from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. The activities include three games of laser tag, video games and the sharing pizza and soda. There will be door prizes given away at Laser Storm. The cost is $15 per person.

Please contact Kevin Sheahen if the fee is a hardship and you still want to come and join the fun. Kevin can be reached at 854-4799 or send your payment and request for the zoo or the laser tag to the address on this newsletter as soon as possible.

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
There is only one legislative bill in the Pennsylvania legislature for Presumptive Joint Custody, SB 175, introduced by Senator James Gerlach. The bill is in the Senate Judiciary Committee. According to Greg Warner, Chief of Staff for Senator Stewart Greenleaf, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the committee is waiting on a report about custody issues from the Joint State Government Commission Advisory Committee on Domestic Relations. This report is expected sometime in the fall of 1999. The contact person for the Joint State Government Commission is

David Hostetter, Chief Counsel. Mr. Hostetter can be reached at:

David Hostetter, Counsel

 

 

Joint State Government Commission
Room 108
Finance Building
Harrisburg, PA 17120
(717) 783-9376

After SB 175 leaves the Judiciary Committee, it may or may not be scheduled for public hearings. As you will recall, there were two public hearings in 1998 for this legislation. The Judiciary Committee is using the transcripts from those hearings for this bill. If you would like to be considered to be a witness for this bill if it does go to public hearings, please contact David Hostetter, Greg Warner, or your local state senator.

The next step would be a vote on the senate floor for this bill, then to the House for a vote. If the House amends the bill, then it goes back to the Senate for another vote. The Governor’s signature would be the last stage before presumptive joint custody became law.

As you can tell, SB 175 has a tough road ahead of it before passage. Your input to your local representatives and senators can make presumptive joint custody happen. Become active and ‘press the flesh’ with your government representatives. If you haven’t registered to vote, then go out today and register.

If you can schedule an appointment with your representative to review the importance of this bill and to voice your concern, please call our chapter office to schedule a board member or other NCFC member to attend with you. You can also submit written testimony as the why presumptive joint custody should be enacted in Pennsylvania. Send ten (10) copies of your statement to:

Senator Stewart Greenleaf

 

 

Senate Judiciary Committee
P.O. Box 202020
Harrisburg, PA 17020

Please remember to include a copy of your letter to your local state representative and send us one for our files.

MEMBER SUCCESS STORIES
Bob has had a support order against him for five years. The order was based on his income at the time of the support hearing five years ago. Bob was able to stay current with payments until his company went out of business. Bob’s new job was not as steady and the hourly rate was considerably less. He did not know that the court did not know. Bob went to the Allegheny Family Division office on ten different occasions, each time missing a day’s wages. Bob could not afford an attorney nor could he get one from Neighborhood Legal Services (NLS) because his children’s mother used NLS. The Family Court employees did not help Bob except to send him from one office to another. None of the Family Division’s employees answers were understandable to Bob, nor were their answers clear. As a result, Bob went further and further into arrears without the means nor the understanding about how to properly modify the support order. NCFC helped Bob to understand what a ‘Motion to Modify Support’ was and how they are presented and heard by the court. Bob filed his motion pro se and got his hearing.

NCFC can probably help you understand your situation, too. However, you need to join NCFC because most members are not attorneys and NCFC helps members through networking with other members in similar situations and circumstances. Call (412) 854-4799 to get more information.

MISSION STATEMENT
The mission of the National Congress for Fathers and Children, Inc. is to serve as a national organization, to assist state and local efforts compatible with the goal of assisting fathers to remain actively involved in the lives of their children regardless of marital status. We provide a forum to coordinate local efforts to impact national initiatives and to bring national attention to local concerns of our affiliated organizations and members.

New Pennsylvania Support Guidelines

Child support orders that are either new or will be modified after April 1, 1999, will fall under the new support guidelines. Some major changes are as follows:

If you would like to see what your present support order may change to, please come attend one of our monthly educational meetings or one of our weekly pro se meetings. Call 854-4799 for next available educational meeting or pro se night.

JUDGE BAER IS OUT OF FAMILY DIVISION!!

Allegheny County Family Division and Juvenile Court Administrative Judge Max Baer was removed of his position by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court effective April 16, 1999. During his tenure, as Administrative Judge, the Catch-22 term ‘Baer Bind’ was introduced for his ‘damned if you do damned if you don’t’ stance on shared custody. Five family court watchdog and advocacy groups formed as a result of his autocratic and unconstitutional leadership.

The last straw for Judge Baer came from an appeal to the Superior Court of one of his decisions. In this case, Judge Baer awarded custody of a six year old girl to her foster father. This same foster father had served time in prison for incest when he had gotten his own daughter pregnant. Judge Baer, apparently, ignored the record and gave custody of this little girl to this convicted child molester. The rest is now history.

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has appointed Judge Kathleen Mulligan to be the new Allegheny County Family Division Administrative Judge. Congratulations Judge Mulligan! We look forward to working with you and hope that our needs to oversee the injustices that have proliferated under Judge Baer in Family Division will no longer be necessary for our children.

OTHER SUPPORTIVE GROUPS

Pittsburgh Chapter Meetings

Our chapter educational meetings are open to the public. There is no fee to attend and you do not have to be a member to attend.

When are our meetings? It is easy to remember. Our meetings are always the second Saturday of every month from 10 a.m. til noon.

Location:     Bethel Park Municipal Building

                   5100 Library Road

Time:           10:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.

Parking:       Free

Directions:   Take Route 51 South to Route 88.

                     Turn right to BRIGHTWOOD.

                     Turn right on Brightwood to Library Avenue.

                     The Municipal Building is just across the Trolley Tracks.

Upcoming Educational Meetings

Recent Meetings

The January Meeting was canceled due to in climate weather. The February Meeting featured Kevin Sheahen. Kevin discussed the effects of the new support guidelines in Pennsylvania and how to have successful relationships after divorce. The March Meeting discussed the support court strategies for the income tax effects of children as dependents and the new tax credits for children.

Pro Se Help

Help in understanding Pro Se motions is available on most Tuesdays from 6-11:00 P.M. Topics such as custody, visitation, support, equitable distribution, divorce, discovery and appeals can be reviewed. We have to restrict this service to members but you can join when you come in. Call the office (854-4799) for an appointment.

CHILDREN WANT DADDIES

By Kathleen Parker

Commentary

Published in The Orlando Sentinel, November 17, 1998. Reprinted with permission from Tribune Media Services.

I'm the first to admit, I've been an idiot at least half my life. Others apparently are committed to remaining idiots all their lives and to writing me long, insulting letters.

One who comes to mind is ``Dr. Mad,'' a Colorado obstetrician gynecologist who wrote recently to condemn me for numerous offenses, including my annoying tendency to proffer unpopular opinions, particularly those deemed contradictory to WomanThink. Dr. Mad specifically was angered by a column in which I questioned the wisdom of voluntary single motherhood a la Jodie Foster.

``Not only am I surprised that a woman would voice such an opinion, but your opinions themselves belittle a woman's strength and ability to raise a family,'' said Dr. Mad. ``Who are you to make such judgments and to opine that such women and families constitute an `American Tragedy'?''

Concerning the issue of how a woman versus a man, presumably could voice such an opinion, recent research indicates that women do, in fact, have brains, which sometimes produce opinions at variance with others of the same sex.

As to the question of who am I, specifically, to make such judgments, the answer is: I'm a columnist. That's what I do. Ob-gyns deliver babies and artificially inseminate wonderful women who want to become pregnant without the nuisance of a man. I write opinions, which, unpleasant as this sounds, involve making judgments.

As for all those women who think they're ready to become parents and don't need a man, I stick to my original verdict: American Tragedy.

The column in question is worth rehashing, given this woman's letter. Even well educated people apparently are clueless when it comes to what children need.

Focus, now, and breathe deeply: Children want daddies.

What I wrote wasn't precisely about Jodie Foster. She was merely a convenient vehicle for illustrating a larger point. In fact, as I said before, I like and admire Jodie Foster. What I don't like or admire is our tendency to worship anything a celebrity does, even when the action is not a great idea for the teeming masses.

The impetus behind the column was a People magazine cover featuring a beaming, pregnant Foster and the headline: ``And Baby Makes Two,'' which produced in me symptoms resembling morning sickness and this thought: Why, when fatherlessness is a national crisis, are we celebrating single motherhood?

Not single motherhood as results from divorce or death, but single motherhood that results from a voluntary decision to get pregnant, give birth and rear a child without a father. It can be done, but should it? Dr. Mad indirectly answered the question with one of her own:

``As a single, successful, 34 year old woman, I am faced with the difficult question as to whether my desire to be a parent is stronger than my aversion to being a single parent. I was once married, and my husband cheated on me. Because I chose not to tolerate that behavior and left him, should I now be precluded from having children?''

The word that leaps off the page, of course, is ``desire.'' That's the operative motivation behind most things these days, including bringing fatherless babies into the world.

I desire, therefore I will.

What Dr. Mad and other aspiring single mothers don't realize is that wanting a child isn't enough. Yes, a single woman can certainly be a good mother. But a single mother can never be a good father.

Kathleen Parker's column is distributed by Tribune Media Services. You can meet Kathleen Parker in person at the convention this September. She will be one of our guest speakers. Ms. Parker welcomes your views and suggestions. Mail to:

The Orlando Sentinel,

 

 

MP 6, P.O.
Box 2833,
Orlando, Fla. 32802-2833.

WE NEED YOU!

We need volunteers to help specifically in the following areas:

Please call Kevin at 854-4799 to volunteer your services or if you have any questions about any of the above positions.

Please Renew Your Membership

NCFC membership is good for one year. Single membership is $85 and family membership is $95. Renewal of membership to NCFC is $50 for single members and $70 for family membership. Your membership dues are tax deductible because NCFC is a non-profit, 501(c)(3) educational organization. Most of our expenses are paid for with your membership and renewal of membership money.

Please take time and renew your membership. If you already have renewed your membership, NCFC thanks you.

A Special Thanks

The following people deserve a special thanks Cookie Seskey, Matt and Katie Wyant and Lee Skinkis for helping with the last newsletter mailing.

MONTGOMERY & DUDDING, M.S.T.

1138 Brownsville Road

Pittsburgh, PA 15210

(412) 882-8002 fax # (412) 885-4725

Serving businesses and individuals in taxation issues, audits, business evaluations, and personal estates. Call for a free quotation of services. Mention that you are a member of NCFC and Mark Dudding will donate $20 to our organization.

Lecture at Indiana University of Pennsylvania

NCFC board members Joanne Scheafnocker and Kevin Sheahen were the guest lecturers at Indiana University of Pennsylvania on March 22, 1999. The class was a sociology class and the topic was the role of fathers in families. The discussions by Kevin and Joanne gave a brief history about the changing roles of fathers and mothers and about the present court systems and the adverse effects of absent fathers on children’s lives. This was the fifth consecutive year that NCFC has been invited to speak to the students of this class.

Co-operative Parenting for Divided Families

A new facet of the Greater Pittsburgh Chapter of National Congress for Fathers and Children is forming. This new part of NCFC is called Co-operative Parenting for Divided Families. The Coalition for Fathering Families, ACES, and Citizen’s for Family Unity are working with Co-operative Parenting for Divided Families. Joanne Scheafnocker is the director of this new organization. The purpose of this new service is to offer families an opportunity to become educated about co-parenting after a break-up of a relationship when children are involved.

Today, when a couple separates today, their usual first information or education step is either a lawyer or the family court. Both the family court and lawyers understand their own industry and system, however, most couples do not understand and are at the mercy of these two organizations. In addition, the mental, emotional and financial capacity of this couple is strained to their limits, resulting in stress on the children and the parents. In fact, next to a death in the family, divorce and separation are the most stressful events for people.

Co-operative Parenting for Divided Families’ goal is education for these couples on a team approach. The couples meet with team members from Co-operative Parenting for Divided Families, one male team member and one female team member. These two team members and the couple meet about three or four times for about one hour each time to discuss each other’s concerns and to learn about the family court system. These couples can then better understand what lies in ahead of them in terms of litigation, probable results, examples of parenting plans, probable support levels, and time line of events.

Thus far, each couple that has gone through this program has resolved all of their issues and concerns outside of court. This program is available to everyone an presently, there is not any fees for either party. NCFC is soliciting grant funding to expand this successful program at the present time.

If you would like more information about Co-operative Parenting for Divided Families, please contact Joanne at 412-732-0425.

AMICUS BRIEF TO BE FILED AGAINST "CONSTITUTIONALITY"
OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT

"A national challenge for individual fathers, father groups and organizations, paternal family members, and others concerned about the devastation and excessive federal intervention into the American Family, to join and work together in a single united cause.”

United Fathers of America, a nonprofit tax deductible father oriented family policy research organization based in Washington, D.C. and California, working with the American Fathers Alliance, today announced a national effort to file an Amicus Brief on the issue against the constitutionality of the Violence Against Women Act. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals declared the law unconstitutional in a legally historic 7-4 decision announced on March 5th, 1999. The Women's movement filed several Amicus brief's on behalf of the Who's Who of the Domestic Violence and Sexual Abuse Industry. It is fully expected the case will be filed, and accepted, at the United States Supreme Court. Another case has already been filed from New York. This case has just days ago been denied review by the U.S. Supreme Court. It is fully expected that the issues raised in the VAWA action of March 5th, 1999 will be accepted for review by the U.S. Supreme Court.

UNITED FATHERS NEEDS FUNDING FOR THIS PROJECT - $20,000

United Fathers is working to raise $20,000 in the next 6 to 8 weeks to do the necessary work of legal research, copying and analysis of other Amicus briefs on related cases, copying of research articles and related documents, distribution to various people involved in the drafting process of the UFA Amicus Brief, hiring an attorney as the attorney of record on the brief in order to file it, amongst other clerical and procedural items. Additionally, once the brief is filed, spokespersons from United Fathers will travel the country (8 to 10 states) holding press conferences and informational meetings to keep this issue before the public, as well as present our views on false\fabricated allegations of abuse directed at state legislatures.

United Fathers is requesting minimum DONATIONS \ INVESTMENTS of $20.00 or more from at least 1,000 fathers, family members, second wives, and friends to get this process started. All donors of $50.00 or more will receive a copy of the brief and official press release once it has been filed. These False Allegations issues and incidents negatively impact all fathers and family members, including children, by being one-sided and biased. This leads to biased and unnecessary use of Temporary Restraining Orders based on false and/or fabricated allegations of abuse.

The sooner we receive this initial $20,000 of funding, the sooner UFA can begin serious work. This is a national campaign on behalf of all fathers\family members children and it begins in March of 1999. Remember, winning this case would be a Godsend to fathers and second families all over America. It is past time for at least one unified, nationwide Father's Movement project to be undertaken.

United Fathers needs the names of attorneys or other people interested in working on the Amicus Brief. Secondly, we need people in various states to coordinate with UFA for stateside meetings once the Amicus Brief has been filed. We need individuals or organizations who can organize meetings or press conferences in strategic locations. Please develop your meeting or press conference proposal in writing and mail it to our national UFA office in Washington, D.C.

UFA has contacted a prominent national attorney, a member of the US Supreme Court bar, and he is interested in associating with our brief. However, first things first. We need the funding to organize the research and writing effort. A minimum donation of $20.00 or more from 1,000 individuals is not too much to ask. Remember, last month the federal government distributed $230,000,000 in Domestic Violence federal grants to women's organizations.

Our work is clear, let's join together and work for a unified FATHER'S Amicus Brief.

This is an urgent matter and we look forward to your response.

BILL HARRINGTON, UFA President

 

 

UNITED FATHERS of AMERICA, INC.
NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS
2 MASSACHUSETTS AVE. NE
SUITE 75972
WASHINGTON DC, 20013

e-mail: bill@tafa.org

United Way Check Off Code Number for NCFC

It is that time of year again when the United Way will make donation drives at your place of employment. The Greater Pittsburgh Chapter of National Congress for Fathers and Children’s Donation Code Number is 9614. Remember this number when your company is seeking United Way donations or send your contribution directly to the United way of Allegheny County and use the 9614 donation code. Thank you for your generosity.

Harry F. Smail, Jr.

Attorney at Law

A complete general practice. Divorce, support and custody matters (a true Father’s Rights Advocate).
Also, wills/estates/trusts, criminal matters, contracts, business planning, incorporations, real estate.

(724-836-2040)        Fax (724-836-2041)

SERVICE FOR MEMBERS

We offer our members a service to help them understand custody issues. If you are in the Generations program, call the office prior to your 2-hour mediation session. We will meet with you and walk you through the custody issues that will be raised in the mediation. This service, like all others is available to all members, male or female. Call the office (854-4799) for an appointment.

ADVOCACY GOALS

The National Congress for Fathers and Children is a coalition of organizations and individuals who support fathers’ rights, men's rights, and divorce reform in North America. We seek to advocate and with one voice to encourage:

‘JOINT CUSTODY, NOW THAT’S CHILD SUPPORT’

Bumper stickers that say ‘JOINT CUSTODY, NOW THAT’S CHILD SUPPORT’ are available if we can gather enough donations for them. Don Hank, a fellow fathers’ rights comrade in Lancaster County, has printed these bumper stickers before. However, he needs financial assistance before he can print up another batch. Please send us a donation for these bumper stickers and we will forward your donation to Don and mail you two to put on your car. Call Kevin at 854-4799 for more information.

WHY BEING A PART OF A NATIONAL ORGANIZATION
FOR FATHERS RIGHTS IS IMPORTANT

The following communication are two letters between our national NCFC President Larry Hellmann and the President of Parents and Children for Equality from Columbus, Ohio, Don Hubin. The two presidents outline with the examples, the political clout national organizations such as the NAACP and NOW can bring to politics. That power is diluted with the large numbers of smaller, independent organizations of fathers rights groups.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Larry,

Okay, I had to come back to the office tonight to get some work done and I felt so bad about not having a link to NCFC on the site that I did it tonight instead of waiting till tomorrow.

Our local organization, Parents and Children for Equality, which has chapters in Columbus, Cincinnati, Dayton and Northern Kentucky is associated with the Children's Rights Council and an Ohio umbrella organization, Children's And Parents' Rights Association (CAPRA). CAPRA is looking into organizations with a national profile with an eye toward an affiliation of some sort. Of course, NCFC is one that we are examining.

There is a problem with our affiliating with (or simply becoming a chapter of) a specifically *fathers'* rights organization. The Columbus chapter of PACE was just formed from the combination of *Fathers* and Children for Equality (FACE) with Moms without Custody. We have several women in our group who are noncustodial moms. My own belief is that there is, of course, a lot of gender bias in the practices of domestic relations courts, but, because most non-custodial parents are fathers, this gender bias is typically expressed as "non-custodial parent bias". Once a woman, for whatever reason, gets into that track, she gets screwed by the system, too. Given that, it seems to me to be helpful politically to include not only women who are sympathetic to the plight of men and their children (mothers, second wives, etc.), but women who have somehow wound up in the role traditionally held by men non-custodial parent. They help us politically convey the message that this isn't, as the paranoid fantasies of N.O.W. would have us believe, an issue of patriarchal dominance and control over children and women. It is an issue of maintaining a precious relationship between children and both their parents when the parents are loving, competent parents.

NCFC's mission statement is very agreeable to me personally and, I think, would be to most of our members. I notice that the mission statement itself is gender neutral. The name of the organization, of course, is not. I certainly understand the reasons for this. But I'm not sure that our moms would think.

These are just personal ruminations, and we are in the very early stages of talking about this. But if you have any thoughts on these issues, please let me know.

                                                                                                                          Don Hubin

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _  _

Don:

Thank you for adding us to your links.

I do not know after that recent blowout of all the Big Ten teams, I should admit my alma mater being Indiana University and the rivalry with Ohio State, but fatherhood makes for strange bed-fellows.

Seriously, we would welcome you as chapter or as an affiliate. You are right about the name. It is sort of like the NAACP, or NOW. Recently, when I was on a panel discussion here in Los Angeles radio re: bio-dads and rights to their children, the real supporter was NOW because I was advocating one of our fathers who wanted to take on the "obligations" of fatherhood, such as paying child support, a word in the upbringing, etc. How could they oppose it?

We do have some women in the organization and one on the board, much too little to suit me. I still believe we all came from a combination of the two sexes and are still part of the same humanity. I do not see us changing our name, as would not NAACP or NOW; however, we do espouse the needs of the opposite sex, custodial or otherwise. We believe that men do have the ability to raise children. We also believe in responsible parenthood.

I suppose that says it all. We are the oldest fathers' rights organization with an elected board in the United States today. I believe we have made our place and that place does include women. Women fighting alongside men in the trenches for the rights of the custodial position only enhances their own desires for that same position of parent. Just as many of us men worked with our sisters in their fight for equality, it enhanced our position as responsible men. I believe there is a great position for women in our organization and also for their own rights and position. However, we are still NCFC.

I think our new national convention speaks to this issue. For the first time, we have several women as speakers and hopefully there will be more. We want to encourage a dialogue with groups like ACES and other groups seeming anomalous to us. They are not. We are all in the same boat, the boat holds fathers, custodial (as I am) and non-custodial, mothers, custodial and non-custodial, bio-dads and legal dads, etc.

Have you seen our agenda for the convention in Pittsburgh? Let me know. Hopefully you can make it, Pittsburgh is just over the hill from Columbus.

                                                                                                               Sincerely,

                                                                                              Larry Hellmann, President NCFC

THE POLITICS OF FATHERHOOD

Stephen Baskerville

The following paper was presented at the plenary session of the conference on The Politics of Fatherhood, Howard University, Washington, D.C., March 23, 1999.

When we first conceived the idea for a conference on The Politics of Fatherhood not everyone was sure precisely what it meant. And perhaps we were not sure ourselves. We knew the fatherhood crisis had been addressed by several disciplines and that political science was not one of them. As a student of political thought, I knew that most major political theorists have had something to say about the place of fatherhood in civil society and the role of father as preparative for that of citizen. We also knew that any social movement inevitably involves politics, both internally among the various strands and externally in connection to the wider society and the public state.

We knew as well that one very politically-charged issue was central to this, as to every problem of American society may be the one to be so direct): race. While the fatherhood crisis has long been felt most acutely in minority communities, it can no longer be dismissed by the majority. As Cornel West and Sylvia Ann Hewlett write, when it comes to dads, the African-American experience prefigures the contemporary mainstream experience and the results are devastating. Indeed, given the gravity of the fatherhood crisis, perhaps what we are seeing here is an unexpected validation of the prophecy of Frederick Douglass, who said that the Negro and the nation are to rise or fall, be saved or lost, together. If this prophecy is indeed still valid, it means that the stakes are high for all of us. It means that in addressing the destruction of fatherhood in the minority community we are simultaneously addressing it for the majority and throughout society. It may also mean that the experiences of the minority in recent decades are applicable here. Among the lessons of the civil rights movement that might be profitable for those of us to see our task as creating empowerment for fathers is that no people can be empowered by others; by definition the only way to be empowered is to empower oneself. And power means politics.

This has not been the central approach thus far in the fatherhood movement. Yet sooner or later it is one we must confront. If for no other reason than the rather startling fact that, with the exception of convicted criminals, no group in our society today has fewer rights than fathers. Not just unwed fathers, not divorced fathers, all fathers are affected. Even accused criminals have the right to due process, to know the charges against them, to a lawyer, and to a trial. A father can be deprived of his children, his home and life savings, and his freedom with none of these constitutional protections.

It will come as no surprise to some here that the line between fathers and criminals is now becoming thin. This is sometimes owing to what fathers themselves have done. More often it is the result of what our social, political, and legal system has done. Nowhere is the criminalization of fatherhood more evident than in the politics of the judiciary. It is the courts which, from the days of the civil rights movement, we have looked to as the guardians of the constitutional rights of individuals and minorities. Yet for fathers and families generally, the judiciary has not only failed to protect constitutional rights; it has become their principal violator.

The arm of the state that undeniably reaches deepest into the private lives of individuals and families today is the family court. Malcolm X once described a family court as modern slavery, and more recently West and Hewlett have written that the entire process seems to bypass most constitutional protections. The very notion of a family court now backed up by a vast army of family police should alert us to danger. Yet far from scrutinizing these bodies, we give them virtually unchecked power. Shrouded in secrecy and leaving no record of their proceedings, they are accountable to virtually no one. Robert W. Page, Presiding Judge of the Family Part of the Superior Court of New Jersey, writes that the power of family court judges is almost unlimited.

Predictably with unlimited power, the family courts of this country are now out of control. They are not tribunals for redressing injustice; they are more of a racket for plundering fathers and funneling money into the pockets of lawyers. Though their lips are dripping with the words ‘best interest of the child’, they are in fact using our children as weapons and as commodities for the increase of their own power and profit.

We have in our history seen the consequences of treating an entire class of citizens as if the Bill of Rights did not apply to them. We have tried to live in a house divided in a political system that operates half slave and half free. And we have found, as Lincoln warned, that sooner or later it must be all one or all the other.

As a society we are always in danger of forgetting what we have learned, and I think it is the appropriate role of this University, with its role in the history of civil rights, to remind us. For it is the responsibility of scholars, perhaps more than others, to point out and criticize the abuse of power. The neutral scholar is an ignoble man, wrote Frederick Douglass. The future public opinion of the land must redound to the honor of the scholars or cover them with shame. What we are now seeing, to paraphrase Douglass, is the authoritarian power of the courts advancing, poisoning, corrupting, and perverting the institutions of the country. In fact, what we are witnessing today what may be the most massive institutionalized witch-hunt in this country’s history.

Never before have we seen, on such scale, mass incarcerations without trial, without charge, and without counsel while the media and civil libertarians look the other way. Never before have we seen the spectacle of the highest officials in our land including the President of the United States, the Attorney General and major cabinet secretaries, and leading members of Congress from both parties using their office as a platform to publicly vilify private citizens who have been convicted of nothing and who have no opportunity to reply. Never before have we seen government officials walk so freely into the homes of private citizens who are accused of nothing and help themselves to whatever they want, including their children, their life savings, their private papers and effects, and eventually their persons. Not since the days of Communist Eastern Europe and Nazi Germany have we seen the regular use of children as informers against their parents. Never before have we seen the stealing of children systematized to a bureaucratic routine. To find the forced separation of children from their parents on such a scale we must go back before the days of Communism and Nazism. Though both these regimes routinely took children from their parents, they did so on a scale that was minuscule compared to what is now practiced in the United States. Indeed, we must return to the days of American slavery to find a time when state power was used to forcibly break up families on a scale comparable to what is taking place today.

It is not lightly that I invoke the slave system. It is to illustrate our experience that any system of domestic dictatorship no matter how apparently private and apolitical poses a serious threat to a democratic society. Nowhere is this more destructively seen than in the impact on our children themselves. Politically, the decisive argument against slavery was not so much its physical cruelty as the corruption it wrought in the political system and in the minds and souls of what should have been free citizens. It fostered tyranny in the slave holder, servility in the slave, and moral degradation in both. Such habits of mind were said to be incompatible with the kind of republican virtue required for a free society.

The abolitionist Charles Sumner warned of the impact on the development of white children growing up in slave societies. Their hearts, while yet tender with childhood, are necessarily hardened by this conduct, and their subsequent lives bear enduring testimony to this legalized uncharitableness, he wrote. Their characters are debased, and they become less fit for the magnanimous duties of a good citizen. Something similar is at work with the children who are now growing up under a state that forcibly destroys their families and their fathers. No people can remain free who harbor within themselves a system of dictatorship or raise their children according to its principles.

This too is the politics of fatherhood.

NEW NORTH HILLS FATHERS SUPPORT NETWORK

Members or fathers interested in joining a newly proposed support and social group can contact Victor Celo at (412) 767-2345 during the day or 767-4182 at night. This group is designed to help us fathers adjust to ‘single’ parenting issues and to help organize single fathers and non-custodial father parenting time. It is hoped that by combining resources both ours and our children’s growth activities can be improved and varied in a positive way.

It is also intended to allow people with the same issues to help each other cope with divorce related problems and anger. These include, but are not limited to, dealing with PFA’s, separation anger and a variety of other issues. It can also provide a simple venting avenue when needed and a phone relief network.

By sharing similar problems and concerns, it is hoped that a group or network setting can help achieve a better vitality for its members. The group’s format will be guided by its membership needs and directional guidance.

Please call for information and to give your input on this proposal.

BOARD MEMBERSHIP POSITIONS

In addition, our NCFC chapter’s board of directors election will be at this November’s educational meeting at the Bethel Park Municipality Building from 10:00 a.m. until noon. If you are a current member of NCFC and would like to be considered for a position on our board of directors for a two year term, please call Kevin at 854-4799. The board meets every month for a two hour meeting. The chapter officers are elected from the board members at the November board meeting. If you are interested in affecting change and helping others, please consider running for a seat on our board of directors.

WEST VIRGINIA JOINT CUSTODY EDITORIAL AND REPLY

The following is a copy of a reply to a West Virginia newspaper editorial about some pending presumptive joint custody legislation. The reply was written by Larry Hellmann, NCFC’s President. The information was brought to us from Albert Whale, through the PAPI information list.

Reply-to: papi@access.hky.com

To: papi@access.hky.com

On Fri, 12 Mar 1999 00:00:56 0600, proadvocate@earthlink.net wrote:

Hey folks.............Larry wrote a dynamite, logical response to the article, lets back him up and make sure we all copy this and get it sent PRONTO to the Charleston West Virginia Gazette Newspaper.........do it now before you forget to do it.

proadvocate in St. Paul, MN.

To the Editor of the Charleston Gazette,

I want you to know that the "official position" of the DOMESTIC RIGHTS COALITION is exactly the same as stated so nicely and logically by Mr. Larry Hellman, President of the NCFC below. The DRC is about 400 members strong, and I am going to make sure all DRC members get this message, as well as sending it out on the 'internet' to be seen by THOUSANDS of other men and dads. I would encourage them, and other interested persons of both sexes, to also reply to your article making their views known to you also!

                                                                                                               Sincerely,
                                                                                               George T. Gilliland Sr.

 

 

                                                                                               Executive Director'
                                                                                               Domestic Rights Coalition
                                                                                               St. Paul, MN.

Enclosed is the letter to the editor I wrote in response to this problem. It would be appropriate that more are sent. Please write letters to the editor.

gazette@wvgazette.com,

or Charleston Gazette, 1001 Virginia Street E., Charleston WV 25301

the editorial follows the letter.

To the Editor:

I was quite interested to read your editorial on the state of the child custody bill presently in the state Legislature. You call it the "Chafin bill" although, as you mention, he is not named on the bill but supports it. Just because the bill has the support of Sen. Truman Chafin, D-Mingo, does not make it a "Chafin bill." But I understand your thinking. Find someone you do not like and attach something you do not like to him so you can damn the bill by association.

I do not personally know the good Senator, but enough of his constituents did to elect him. I know, now we can all talk about those elected officials we did not vote for and do not support to take the focus off the reality.

West Virginia has the intestinal fortitude to take a good hard look at the child custody problem in the State, contrary to the case in many States that refuse to tackle the problem of child custody bills that do not work, that serve to take one parent or the other from the child willy-nilly, on some "best interests of the child(ren)" guidelines that work only to continue what has not worked in the past.

You say: "Divorce laws in this state undoubtedly need revision. The family law master system is flawed." But you do not say how, nor do you suggest a solution. You say that Sen. Chafin believes "that the primary caretaker rule discriminates against men" because women give birth. Yet you do not source any testimony to that. It is to damn Sen. Chafin so you can thereby damn a bill you do not like.

Interestingly, your attitudes against joint custody and father involvement in the family post-divorce run contrary to even government studies, the census bureau, the FBI files, and current studies about the need for father involvement with the children. Men are just as capable as women to raise their children, and are necessary to the proper development of the children as fit members of society.

You quote former state Supreme Court Justice Richard Neely in saying: "C." Of course he is going to say that and racists are going to say the other racists will trade everything . . . and so will old Nazis . . . and so will present prejudices of any kind to justify their old prejudices that have wreaked horror on the children and generations to follow.

Would it surprise you that some men are willing to trade everything for the custody of their children, and yet sacrifice their desires and needs to preserve the family? Would it surprise you that many men would swap positions with the woman in raising their children but no one has asked them? Would you be surprised that many men do not know they even have the right to child custody? The courts and the mediation systems work to deny the man his children because he was out working to support the family and was not home. They are crushed. And mother knows that her source of income is often from not allowing the father to have time with his children.

Yes, divorce is a problem, especially at the 50% rate. Fatherlessness is a problem, in view of the 30% to 40% out-of-wedlock birthrate in this country, depending on what State you are from. For the State to decide that the courts and the State are not in the father stripping business and allow joint custody as the presumption and see where the chips fall is a beginning to attempting to keep fathers involved and as such needs to be praised.

If Senator Chafin backs the bill and has a personal interest in the bill, maybe he knows how valuable the children are to his life and reason for being. God bless him. Your argument that because he has first hand knowledge of the travails of divorce and custody problems make him a bad judge of the need for a custody change in laws you say do not work is the same as saying that someone who backs a cancer research bill because he has first hand knowledge of the problem is an unreliable source. It is like telling a black man that because he has been the victim of racism that his attempt to vote or have his children go to school is just the violent reaction to his own problem. Like telling the Jew that his hatred of Hitler is spurred on only because he gave orders for extermination of almost 12 million people.

Senator Chafin, and other divorced fathers in the Legislature are the very ones that need to be speaking out to let people know what it is like, what happens when a person is stripped of his children. I do not see him saying to strip women of their children. I see this as only asking for a fair starting point. If a woman, or a man, for that matter, interferes with the access of the opposite party to their children, that person is announcing that he/she is incapable of properly caring for the children and their needs and that is child abuse that will visit its ills on generations to follow.

Larry Hellmann, President

 

 
 
 
 
 

National Congress for Fathers and Children
9454 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 207
Beverly Hills, CA 90212

        March 7, 1999

'Chafin Bill'; Senator meddles with divorce

WOULD a bill changing state divorce and child custody laws get as much consideration as it is receiving in the state Legislature if not for the self-interest of a powerful senator who wants custody of his daughter?

This bill, which passed the Senate last week, is called the "Chafin Bill," after Sen. Truman Chafin, DMingo. Though Chafin is not a sponsor, he has done his part to push it.

Chafin's high-profile divorce has spilled over into the Legislature before. He wanted a court order to force his ex-wife, former Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Gretchen Lewis, to put his child support payments in a trust fund and provide an accounting of how the money was spent. When he couldn't get it, he proposed a bill to force all custodial parents receiving more than $1,500 a month in support to put the money in trust funds and account for how it is spent.

Chafin was also rumored to have pushed bills critical of DHHR out of spite.

His latest bill would gut the "primary caretaker rule," which assumes that the person -mother or father -who spends the most time caring for the child should be awarded custody. Instead, the presumption by the court would be to award joint custody except in special situations.

That is unwise, and certainly not in the best interest of children.

If two people cannot cooperate enough and find enough common ground to remain married, how on earth can they be expected to overcome their anger to cooperate well enough to raise their children together?

Certainly, joint custody works sometimes. But such cases are a rare exception, not the rule.

Chafin believes that the primary caretaker rule discriminates against men, since women, who give birth and breast-feed, have a natural advantage. "A lot of women are clever," Chafin said.

Yes, mighty clever of them to have been born with wombs and breasts.

But while the primary caretaker is most often the mother, plenty of fathers have been awarded custody under this rule.

Divorce laws in this state undoubtedly need revision. The family law master system is flawed.

But the primary caretaker rule is a good one. It means less disruption in the lives of children, and it makes it harder for one parent to manufacture custody arguments as a ruse to bargain down child support payments.

As former state Supreme Court Justice Richard Neely, who wrote the 20-year-old opinions that established the primary caretaker rule, said: "Some women are willing to trade everything for the custody of their children."

Chafin's motives in pushing this bill are transparent. His continued bitterness (he recently filed a conspiracy suit against Justice Margaret Workman) demonstrates quite well why forcing joint custody on parents is a very bad idea.

Membership Application

Current Volunteer Officers of NCFC/Greater Pittsburgh Chapter

President                     Kevin Sheahen (412)854-4799

Vice President             Joanne Scheafnocker

Treasurer                    Doug Jones

Secretary                   (Position vacant)

Asst.Secretary            Tom Tully

Current Board of Directors of NCFC

Jim Carmine Ph.D.            John Gorman

Brad Fish                          Dave Scott, CPA

Doug Jones                       Kevin Sheahen, PE

Michael Nieland, MD        Harry Smail, Esq.

Marc Peters                      Joanne Scheafnocker

Altoona Division               (814) 944-5879

Butler Division                  (724) 368-9155

Volunteer Staff

Press Information             Kevin Sheahen

Telephone Answering      Alberta Mattingley, Marilyn Porta, Dan Maloney and Tom Tully

Newsletter Editor            Kevin Sheahen

NCFC Legal Advisor      Tom G. Eddy, Esq.

MEMBERSHIP INFO:

Please call 412-854-4799 or use the application on this page or call 1-800-SEE-DADS.

A 140 page national manual and sections of Pennsylvania’s custody statutes is included in a membership package. You also become another voice for equality in family courts. Membership is tax-deductible.

THE BEST PARENT IS BOTH PARENTS!

Greater Pittsburgh Chapter

National Congress for Fathers & Children

37 Seneca Road

Pittsburgh, PA 15241