Tuesday, July 13, 2004

Latest Glenn Sacks

I am copying this verbatim from an email I received this morning. I have previously discussed both the LaMusga case and John Burton and information on both can be accessed other places on this site:

As many of you know, during last night's broadcast I announced a new His Side listener campaign. It is the first since our consumer boycott campaign against the 'Boys are Stupid' Products, a coordinated action which achieved its
primary objectives and made newspapers all over the world.

As you know, California family law has a huge influence on other
states, and parents all over the United States have a large stake in what happens here. I have written many newspaper columns and devoted several His Side shows to the issue of post-divorce move-aways and the LaMusga move-away case in particular.

In LaMusga, a vindictive and alienating custodial mother sought to move her two young boys 2,400 miles away from their loving father. Since the 1996 Burgess decision, California custodial mothers have had the almost unlimited right to move their children hundreds or thousands of miles away from their
noncustodial fathers, who, like Gary LaMusga, are often chained in their current locale by stiff child support obligations.

I hear every day from devastated men who have lost their children in the aftermath of this misguided decision. In May the California Supreme Court finally acted to rein in these damaging and destructive move-aways, deciding In re Marriage of LaMusga (2004) in favor of the father. You may recall that I co-authored a column on it, Is a Pool More Important than a Dad? (San Francisco Chronicle, 5/4/04).

Almost immediately Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco) and his feminist allies began plotting to gut LaMusga. The result is a bill which would be far more devastating than Burgess. The bill would amend California Family Code 7501 to "abrogate [LaMusga] in its entirety" and establish that "The custodial parent has a presumptive right to change the residence of the child and does not need a court order allowing him or her to do so." The bill also states that the move-away's inevitable disruption or destruction of the
relationship between the noncustodial parent and his or her children cannot be used to restrain the move or get a change of custody.

In other words, mom can move wherever she wants whenever she wants and does not even need the formality of a court order to do so. This bill would be a devastating blow to children and to the rights of fathers in California and, by extension, fathers and children in many other states. It must be stopped.

Burton, who will be termed out this fall, is reportedly planning to slip the anti-LaMusga legislation through the Legislature attached to a bill which has already gone through committee. While we do not yet have a bill number, feminist groups have already rallied support for the bill, and the bill's introduction is imminent.

The Alliance for Children Concerned About Move-Aways(www.ACCAMA.org) has been formed to fight to defend LaMusga. The website has a lot of information about the LaMusga situation, and I ask ALL of you to take part in this campaign.
TO TAKE ACTION, click here.

Best Wishes,
Glenn Sacks
Listen to His Side with Glenn Sacks

Labels: ,


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Listed on Blogwise Blogarama - The Blog Directory Blog Directory