Children need.
. . THIS?
NCFC DISPUTE WITH ACFCReceived: from navajo.gate.net (liz@navajo.gate.net [199.227.0.15]) by osage.gate.net (8.8.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA140790 for <liz@gate.net>; Sun, 4 Oct 1998 23:27:12 -0400 Path: news.gate.net!news.corpcomm.net!newsin.pe.net!news.pe.net!cyclone.news.idirect.com!islan d.idirect.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!not-for-mail From: "Bob
Hirschfeld, JD " <nolawyer@nolawyer.com> (602)
265 4692 Lines: 127 FOR
INFO ON NCFC'S OCT 16-18 CONVENTION IN DETROIT, SEE http://www.ncfc.net/ncfc liz
<liz@gate.net> wrote in article As usual, Liz, your facts are a bit off. Both Stuart Miller and David Usher were indeed on the NCFC board of directors. They tried not only to seize control, but also did some things which hurt certain members, and which threw the organization into disarray. They took NCFC's membership database for their own use. Therefore both were removed from NCFC's board, after which they formed "ACFC". Please do not confuse NCFC, which has existed since 1991, with the ersatz ACFC formed by a few dissident former NCFC directors. Stu Miller is not authorized to lobby for NCFC. NCFC has no connection (after ejection of the dissident directors) with Miller's "AFC". John Knight and the "Patriarchists" are at direct odds with NCFC's continuing dedication to Joint Custody and equal responsibility for both parents. NCFC is not a religious-right arch-foe of feminism. >
From usher@mo.net Empirical evidence. But do not take my observations on what women believe and what's "typical" garnered from representing fathers in over 700 domestic relations cases over a decade, to be representative of what others have observed. I still seek a presumption of joint custody, or even better, an abolition of the legal concept of "custody." I still assert that children need nurturance by both parents. Half of these are female, half of them are male. I do still stand up to those women and their attorneys who seek to vest all care, and power, in the female half of the parental class. I have been particularly effective in taking children away from mothers whose attitude toward the role of fathers exhibits itself in a way that seriously harms children. I am sure Knight, Usher , Miller, etc., would be glad to attack me as not adhering to a "patriarchy" model. NCFC has been a centrist organization since its 1981 founding. Former NOW president Karen DeCrow was one of its early supporters. NCFC's board has historically included women who believe in equality. The initial 1981 platform of NCM (NCFC) actively supported passage of the ill-fated Equal Rights Amendment, in the belief that equality would benefit both genders. The persons you named above were not in the mainstream of NCFC's approach. They tried to drag it to their Patriarchy viewpoint, and failed. Your results may vary. --Bob Hirschfeld, JD Legal Educator Phoenix AZ
LIZ'S RESPONSENewsgroups: alt.lawyers.sue.sue.sue,alt.mens-rights,alt.support.divorce,misc.legal,soc.men,us.legal On 4 Oct 1998, Bob Hirschfeld,
JD wrote: This is very interesting. This couldn't have happened all that long ago, since ACFC is relatively new. Why is there so much infighting among all these FR (father's rights) groups? Could it possibly be that these men represent a segment of the population that are controlling and pugilistic, and utterly unable to get along with others? They cannot even manage to get along in their OWN best interests. How the heck can they possibly be motivated by what is in children's best interests (let alone know what that is.) Could it be that perhaps these men's ex-wives actually have a reason for wanting these men to get lost? Could it possibly be that these men are themselves the reason they have the problems they do?! >
John Knight and the "Patriarchists" are at direct odds with Be that as it may (and I'm very glad you've shared this), joint custody is not in children's best interests. It is in men's interests. And individuals such as Warren Farrell, and Karen DeCrow, who speak from the ignorance of never even having their own children, let alone having any expertise in child psychology, or divorce, are unimpressive as sources. Warren Farrell seems willing to speak to and participate in any groups that will further his agenda of selling his books. >
Empirical evidence. But do not take my observations on what women In other words, you are pleased to go after sole or primary custody when it's men who are looking for it based on their allegations that the mother is not acting in the child's best interests. However, when it's a mother, who happens to be the primary parent, who knows that joint custody is not in the children's interests, that doesn't please your politics. This really is all about what's good for men, not children. >
I am sure Knight, Usher , Miller, etc., would be glad to attack me as I am not aware of any basis upon which Karen DeCrow could claim to know squat about parenting, family law, or what's in children's interests. Karen DeCrow and partnership marriage theory feminists also advocate that equality begins DURING a marriage. But the overwhelming most of parents who come before a court at the time of divorce are NOT equal, have not put in equivalent efforts or time toward parenting, are not equally suited to have custody of the children, and are not equally motivated or knowledgeable. A disproportionate percentage of men who fight for custody do so because they are controllers or abusers, and their foremost motivations have nothing whatever to do with interest in hands-on caring for children or household, but have to do with anger at the spouse and monetary concerns. > NCFC's board has historically included women who believe in equality. Many FR groups claim this. Most of the women in question are second wives/girlsfriends of complaining men who would like nothing better than to pretend that the ex-wife wasn't there first, and do whatever it takes to LESSEN contact between their husbands and their husbands' ex-wives. This is called being jealous, not "equality." The joint custody fantasy is the fantasy of the elimination of the need to consult and cooperate or to function together with the other parent in mutually caring for children. It is the fantasy of operating an autonomous household which has the authority to do as it wishes without consulting. Joint Custody: >
initial 1981 platform of NCM (NCFC) actively supported passage of Equality before the law means that similarly situated persons can expect equal treatment; NOT that the law attempts to create equal gender outcomes when DISsimilarly situated individuals are before it, without regard to circumstances. Nor does this equality position of yours explain why your conference touts anti-feminist anti-mother speakers such as Farrell (who has been quoted in a national publication as stating that genital caressing of children is part of normal family love, or Richard Gardner, who thinks we all have a little pedophilia in each of us. liz ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Path: news.gate.net!news.corpcomm.net!newsin.pe.net!news.pe.net!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!newsfe
ed.cwix.com!152.163.199.19!portc03.blue.aol.com!audrey03.news.aol.com!not-for-mail >From:
liz <liz@gate.net> > > Both Stuart Miller and David Usher were indeed on the NCFC board of directors. They tried not only to seize control, but also did some things which hurt certain members, and which threw the organization into disarray. >This is very interesting. This couldn't have happened all that long ago, since ACFC is relatively new. Why is there so much infighting among all these FR (father's rights) groups? Please remember Liz, that with Hirschfeld's comments you are reading ONE person's interpretation of events. As to the inyternecene warfare within the movement. Usually Mr. Hirschfeld is the one found standing at ground zero! >Could it be that perhaps these men's ex-wives actually have a reason for wanting these men to get lost? Could it possibly be that these men are themselves the reason they have the problems they do?! Sadly Liz, you have a point. As we have seen in the antics of Mr. Moore harassing a great many people, men and women, we can see that women who divorce men are NOT always wrong! Unlike feminists, Liz, some of us men CAN admit that not every male is an innocent victim. Feminists can't do that, they have to see ALL issues with gender colorization. But you raise a VERY valid point. One that has troubled me for 20 years. And you can find a lunctic fringe within the men's movement. The violent militia types, and men who just are abusive. We could find out WHY they are.... But that beggs the REAL issue. Again WE (men) don't need to make excuses or rationalize bad behavior. Bad behavior stands on its own, from male or female. As to Hirschfeld, well like I said, when you see conflict within the movement, Bobby is usually standing where all the smoke is generating from. Interesting that the REASONABLE heads, even from NCFC are in the midst of forming an Inernational cooperative. Guess WHO wants to toss a monkey-wrench into it? |
SITE INDEX
| LIZNOTES
MAIN PAGE | COLLECTIONS
| WOMENS
HISTORY LIBRARY | RESEARCH ROOMS
| THE READING ROOM
FATHERLESS CHILDREN STORIES
| THERAPEUTIC JURISPRUDENCE
| WOMAN SUFFRAGE
TIMELINE | THE LIZ LIBRARY
ENTRANCE
Except
as otherwise noted, all contents in this collection are copyright 1996-2009
the liz library. All rights
reserved.
This site is hosted and maintained by argate.net.
Send queries to: sarah-at-thelizlibrary.org.