Activist for divorced dads throws hat in ring- NH

Activist for divorced dads throws hat in ring

Excerpts:

Republican Marc Snider of Merrimack accused incumbent Sen. Sheila Roberge, a Bedford Republican, of leading the charge to kill legislation (HB 529) to give fathers equal rights as parents in custody cases in the absence of evidence they should be treated differently.

Snider founded nhcustody.org, which has fought to reform divorce laws to give fathers a better chance at getting equal and joint custody. He has videotaped hearings of House and Senate committees to expand public awareness of how the Legislature has dealt with the issue.

Child-support plan prompts outcry - NH

Child-support plan prompts outcry

Excerpts:

The bill would give divorced parents who pay child support credit for the time they spend with their children, reducing their payments to the primary parents. Rep. David Bickford, the bill's lone sponsor, said the state's existing child-support guidelines are a relic from the days when divorces often resulted in one parent gaining full custody of the children. The system can penalize divorced parents who have partial custody, said Bickford, a New Durham Republican.

Bickford's plan would pro-rate child support so that a parent who makes payments would owe only for the days the other parent cares for the children.

Opponents said the bill could provide the wrong motivation for divorcing parents when negotiating time with their children.

Lawmakers who oppose Bickford agree that the system is imperfect, but they say that the Parental Rights and Responsibilities Act needs time to be observed before more changes are made.

"I think we need to not be so impatient," said Rep. Carolyn Gargasz, a Hollis Republican who opposed Bickford's bill on the House floor.

Bickford said his ultimate goal is to reform the New Hampshire child-support formula so that it's based on the cost of raising a child, not the income of divorced parents. Hiring the economist is the first step in that direction, he said.

Paternity fraud rampant in U.S.

Paternity fraud rampant in U.S.

Excerpts:

More than three years ago, a Maine district court judge ruled that Geoffrey Fisher no longer had to pay child support for a child that wasn't his.

But that didn't stop the state from revoking Fisher's driver's license and coming after him for thousands of dollars it says he owes in back payments.

Last year, Maine sent Fisher, 35, a letter seeking $11,450 in child support, even though officials know that DNA tests proved he isn't the father of the child in question.

Fisher had a brief relationship with a woman eight years ago and when she got pregnant and told him he was the father, he believed her. He began paying child support but eventually fell behind.

In the summer of 2001, the Maine Department of Health and Human Services took him to court because of delinquent payments. The court ordered him to pay up, and the state had his license suspended under the "deadbeat dad" law.

That fall the girl, then 3, was placed in foster care. When Fisher pushed for custody, the state ordered a paternity test, which proved he wasn't the father.

At that point, one branch of the human services department told him he could no longer see the girl because he wasn't the father, while another said he owed $10,000 and couldn't have a driver's license because he was the father.

As the nation experiences an unprecedented increase in unwed motherhood, more men are finding themselves named as "fathers," for purposes of child support, simply because of their ability to pay, say several recent studies.

It's called "paternity fraud," and one state that examined the problem found as many as 30 percent of those paying child support were, indeed, not the biological fathers of the children being supported.

The most recent comprehensive study took place in New Hampshire under the auspices of the Commission on the Status of Men.

The commission found that even men who later were able to prove they were paying support for the children of other men were sometimes still forced by courts and state agencies to continue.

Like New Hampshire, California has also established a commission to explore the problem, based on reports that 14 percent are being misnamed as fathers. A report is expected later this year.

Florida is about to pass a new law that would end child support if a man proves he's not the father. Like most states, Florida currently requires that child support – once legally established – continue until the child's 18th birthday, regardless of who the real biological father is. Eleven states have changed similar laws since 1994.

A new state law took effect in Colorado this year that permits men, for the first time, to challenge his paternity of alleged offspring – at least during the proceedings of a divorce, separation or child-support action. However, once a final order is entered, the new law says, the man is barred from presenting evidence of non-paternity.

Commission aims to make courts more user friendly - NH

Commission aims to make courts more user friendly

Excerpts:

A commission charged with making the state court system more affordable and easier to use may recommend that the state develop classes, how-to kits, and a Web site that would help people represent themselves in court without a lawyer.

With nearly 70 percent of Granite Staters already representing themselves in divorce or child-custody cases, providing more aid to those who try to avoid hiring a lawyer promises to be one of the largest challenges for the New Hampshire Citizens Commission on the State Courts.

Time to get serious about child visitation

Time to get serious about child visitation
by KATHLEEN PARKER

Excerpts:

Bitter parents who try to block their formerly beloved's access to the couple's child(ren) following divorce might think twice in New Hampshire, where a proposed bill aims to make life difficult for uncooperative custodial parents.

How difficult? By inviting the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to investigate the offending parent for child abuse and neglect.

The idea behind such legislation is that children of divorce should continue to have access to both parents, assuming there's no reason to protect a child from one of his parents. While child visitation orders are taken seriously in theory, the legal process of enforcement is usually time-consuming, laborious and expensive. In practice, the failure to take them seriously leads to an ever-widening, and predictable, trajectory of distance between the child and visiting parent.

Bickford's bill (HB 1585) would make it easier for parents denied visitation to seek remedy, while promising grief for parents who don't cooperate.

First, the non-custodial parent would get an expedited court hearing rather than take a docket number and possibly wait three to four months. Next, if the judge determines that the custodial parent is blocking access for no legitimate reason, then the Department of Health and Human Services would be notified of a possible case of child abuse and neglect.

Common sense tells us what we seem to need studies to demonstrate — that children need two parents and manage divorce best when they have equal access to both.

While family courts are increasingly trying to ensure that children have that access by awarding joint or shared custody, emotionally distraught humans don't always follow directions.

Meanwhile, courts and the state historically have been more effective in enforcing child support than visitation such that we have entire bureaucracies built around support collection tied to federal incentives. For every dollar that states put up to collect child support monies, for example, the federal government matches with two dollars. Other incentive funds are also available to reward collections.

But the proposed bill is not without critics. As with any law related to personal relationships, this one could be tricky to enforce. Imagine a HHS social worker knocking on your door to ask why you didn't let Johnny see his daddy last weekend.

Such well-intentioned laws also could backfire. As one close observer put it in an e-mail exchange, "Getting (HHS) involved is usually the worst thing to do. They usually side with the 'Mom who is concerned about letting the kids go to their father' and, they (investigators) may decide that neither parent is fit. And take custody of the kid(s)."

Compromise reached on child custody bill - NH

Compromise reached on child custody bill
House agreement is nod to father groups

Excerpts:

Judges would be required to explain in writing what evidence they used in making child custody decisions under a compromise bill recommended by a House panel.

Report: Men need some help - NH

Concord Monitor

Report: Men need some help
Trouble areas: health, schools, legal system

Excerpts:

In the group's first report, New Hampshire's Commission on the Status of Men recommends that the state devote more resources to correcting the gender biases men face in divorce and domestic violence cases, as well as promoting the role of fathers in families.

The commission, the first of its kind in the country, was established in 2002 as a counterpart to the state-funded women's commission. Most of its seven members have some background in social welfare, mental health or family law.

Much of the report is concerned with what commission members describe as the biases leveled against men in divorces, child support arrangements and custody disputes. In research and in meetings held over the last year, the commission found that many fathers feel they are treated unfairly in family court disputes. Many complained of judges who automatically side with mothers, child support guidelines that leave the father with little income, and a general lack of understanding of the benefits of a father-child relationship.

Citing numerous studies that show children who spend time with their fathers are better-adjusted, the report recommends that the state provide funding to the men's commission so it can launch a public awareness campaign to support bringing fathers and children together. The commission does not receive any public money.

The report also discusses domestic violence. Men told the commission that some women accuse men of assault so that the judge will award the woman custody of the couple's children. Judges tend to take the woman's side, the report states, which can make it difficult for the man to dispute the charges later.

The commission also studied the traditional assumption that all domestic violence is caused by men, and it found studies suggesting that women assault men just as often. Domestic violence education and advocate training programs tend to compound the bias by referring to perpetrators of violence in male terms.

"Efforts to get relief from the domestic violence problem have been unduly influenced by special interests who have successfully sold the problem as solely a responsibility of males over the years," the report states. "The whole truth on this emotionally charged dichotomy isn't being fully revealed."

Dads making strides in child custody battles - NH

Portsmouth Herald

Excerpts:

PORTSMOUTH - Family law experts say they are seeing a change from the presumption that a children are always better off with their mothers in cases of divorce.

"In 2005, I see the courts looking very carefully at both parents, at their roles in the home, to see who is the parent providing the nurturing," said Pilkington-Casey. "Courts want to know what is the father’s role, and more and more fathers have become noticeably involved with their children, through coaching, attending school events and taking the child to the doctor’s and dentist’s. Those were traditionally considered the mother roles."

"I would say there definitely is a trend toward courts considering the interest of fathers in custody matters," said Nossiff. "That’s particularly true in Maine - less in New Hampshire, and far less in Massachusetts."

Nossiff said the passage of HB640, which involves both parents planning for their children’s future, is designed to further even the field.

But fathers’ rights groups such as NHcustody.org, are advocating for passage of HB529. The bill allows the court to begin proceeding under the premise that both parents have equal rights.

HB529 has been deferred until the 2006 session.

Michael Geanoulis is the president of the New Hampshire chapter of the National Congress for Fathers and Children. He said that 35 to 40 percent of children in this country go to bed at night without a father in the home.

Divorce: Equal custody wanted - NH

Portsmouth Herald

Excerpts:

PORTSMOUTH - A bill that encourages equal custody rights for parents in divorce cases stalled in the Legislature earlier this year.
Now both fathers and mothers have launched a statewide e-mail and letter-writing campaign to get it passed in the form originally intended.

House Bill 529 contained a provision that encouraged judges to push for shared custody if possible. That provision was stripped from the almost identical HB 640, which was signed into law.

The only real difference between the two bills, said state Rep. David Bickford, R-Durham, is that HB 640 omitted wording that would have courts begin custody cases with the presumption that both parents share custody equally.

"There is already a presumption that both parents know what is in the best interest of the child, but we never came out to say it’s 50/50," said Bickford. "HB 529 starts both parents off equally, then adjusts from there.

Bickford said custody cases often pit one parent against the other. The court has set the blueprint, he said.

Bickford said passing HB 529, a bill he sponsored, does not mean that custody will be shared automatically. The judge has the leeway to make changes based on evidence of child abuse and other factors.

If the court finds that shared custody is not in the child’s best interest, the judge can rule otherwise.

The Parental Rights and Responsibility Act (RSA 461-A) - NH

Relative to the previous post, I thought I would add some more info about RSA 461-A.

From the New Hampshire Bar Assoc site:

Effective October 1, New Hampshire divorce and custody law will undergo substantial change with the enactment of new statutory chapter, the "Parental Rights and Responsibility" act (RSA 461-A). This chapter includes a purpose clause that states: "Children do best when both parents have a stable and meaningful involvement in their lives." It says that the policy of the state is "to support frequent and continuing contact between each child and both parents" and to "encourage parents to share in the rights and responsibilities of raising their children."

The Task Force on Family Law’s two-year study led to the conclusion that "custody," "physical custody," "legal custody," and similar terms were divisive and encouraged litigation. RSA 461-A replaces the traditional terms with "parental rights and responsibilities," "residential responsibility," and "decision-making responsibility." The goal is to promote co-parenting with both parents actively involved in their child’s life.

Keep the kids out of the middle - NH

The Telegraph Online

Excerpts:

We should all take a lesson from New Hampshire RSA 461-A.

As of Oct. 1, RSA 461-A rids the state of the archaic and destructive notion of child custody.

Divorcing parents are instructed instead to work within the court system to determine their respective schedules of parenting “rights and responsibilities.”

RSA 461-A moves us closer to what we healthy parents know to be true: Parenting is a privilege and a responsibility. No matter the status of the legal or emotional bond between co-parents, parenting can never be about which parent gets more.

Healthy parenting is all about cooperating to see that the child’s needs are met.

Keep the child out of the middle isn’t as difficult as it may seem. No matter if you and your co-parent are living together or apart, married, separated or divorced, the rules are the same.

• You must actively support your child’s relationship with his other caregivers. To expose your child intentionally or accidentally to your negative feelings about your co-parent is a selfish and immature act of abuse.

• You must find a way to communicate constructively with your co-parent.

• You must work toward consistency of care. Children can and will adapt to each caregiver’s unique expectations and rules and consequences, but at what cost?

When you and your co-parent are consistent, the child’s world becomes that much more secure and predictable. There are fewer opportunities for splitting (“But Mommy lets me!”) and the child will have more emotional energy for growing and exploring and learning.

• Fight fair. When your kids must be exposed to your differences, let them see that anger needn’t be destructive. How you and your co-parent cope with anger is the model your children will emulate.

• Beware that asking the children to choose between caregivers can be painful and even traumatic. Separated and divorced co-parents sometimes think they’re being generous by allowing the child to choose in which home to live, where to spend the weekend and even who they’d like to attend the school play.

Child abuse: Is governor missing the big picture? - NH

Fosters

Excerpts:

"First of all, decades of study have shown that the children of single-parent, maternal-headed families are the most frequent victims of neglect, violence and sexual abuse. Common sense would seem to suggest that reducing the number of single-parent families would be a good place to start to reduce the number of sex crimes against children. But our feminist-indoctrinated governor refuses to endorse measures designed to support stable two-parent families. He continues to support a feminist agenda which aims at destroying the traditional family.

Lynch, since taking office, has steadfastly refused to discuss family values with local parenting groups, and refuses to endorse the concept of shared physical custody following a divorce. Clearly, he places politics over the welfare of children.

Secondly, Lynch should have made himself aware that sex offenders frequently come from fatherless homes. In promoting stable, two-parent families, we would not only be providing the immediate protection of a live-in, natural, concerned father for the children, but a role model for relational development.

The studies which demonstrate that fatherless girls are more prone to precocious, and promiscuous sexual activity are abundant. Other studies show that fatherless boys are more likely to develop inappropriate sex drives as well."

A new way to treat children of divorce - NH

The Telegraph Online

Excerpts:

Divorcing couples with children will find a change of procedure in New Hampshire’s court system starting Oct. 1.

A new law aimed at making divorce less hostile allows judges to refer parents to mediation when they are unable to agree on how much time their children will spend with either mom or dad as part of broader custody issues.

The law, however, would not apply to cases where domestic violence has been an issue.

Lawyers who deal in divorces and other family issues hope the law will encourage parents to settle custody disputes themselves by setting up a plan for shared child-rearing responsibilities rather than having a judge impose a top-down solution.
It could be a less costly and quicker resolution of custody issues and a happier outcome for children who are the unhappy bystanders in a marital breakup.

The law, approved by the Legislature as part of a bill called the Parental Rights and Responsibilities Act, is the product of a task force that studied ways to reform divorce and other aspects of family law in the state.

Under the law, lawyers and others familiar with divorce proceedings hope parents, through mediation, will work cooperatively to set up visiting schedules, holiday participation, school attendance and living arrangements that best meet their kids’ needs rather than their own.

Bill puts kids first in divorces -New Hampshire

Portsmouth Herald Local News: Bill puts kids first in divorces

Excerpts:

A bill designed to mitigate some of the most unfair aspects of current divorce law was passed in both houses of the Legislature this month.

HB 640 aims to remind the estranged spouses that their children come first. To do that, it requires the parents go through pre-court mediation unless there’s a restraining order in place. The bill also assumes that children need to have both parents active in their lives and asks each parent to create an in-depth parenting plan.

Rep. Chris Serlin, D-Portsmouth, said the current process is destructive to children, and many believe the system favors mothers.

"It’s so hard for the kids to understand why their parents would want to dissolve their bond," said Serlin. "The children will deal with it for the rest of their lives. We have to keep the process from scarring them, if that’s possible."

Serlin agreed that the courts probably favor women.

"A presumption of equality is a good place to start," Serlin said. "Anything that levels the playing field is good."

"Not many people win a divorce," he said. "But the research shows it doesn’t have to derail the kids if the kinds of things in this bill are actually done. Mediation is especially useful when the two people sincerely want to work things out for the kids. But there’s so much hurt to set aside. Nobody goes into a marriage thinking it will fall apart."

Powers said the children want to know they’ll still have a mother and father in the end.

Sen. Martha Fuller Clark, D-Portsmouth, said the bill sets up some clear criteria for making decisions about support and custody. That, along with mediation, should make the legal battle less costly and more amicable, she said.

"It will make sure the parties talk about the needs of their children early on," said Fuller Clark. "That’s a step in the right direction."

Rep. David Bickford, R-New Durham, the bill’s prime sponsor, said he drafted the legislation to require mediation in every divorce case, but an amendment passed by the Senate exempted cases involving domestic violence.

In an exhaustive report issued in 2004, New Hampshire’s Family Law Task Force, chaired by Nina Gardner, recommended the passage of legislation like HB 640 along with a broad expansion of the family court system. Gardner said the bill helps parents keep their children out of the fire of the divorce.

"We know the children absolutely, positively benefit from having two parents in their lives," said Gardner. "That’s a profound change the report and the bill address. There’s no gender bias in our report. That doesn’t mean a 50-50, cookie-cutter arrangement is best in every case. It means the kids are not property."

More about child support, custody - New Hampshire

More about child support, custody - Fosters

This is written by State Representative David A. Bickford. I am reprinting the entire article...

A recent Associated Press article about child support and custody which appeared May 2 mischaracterized some issues. As vice chair of the commission to study child support and related child custody issues, I feel compelled to fill in some of the blanks.

The commission did not recommend cutting child support to the bone. The commission does need to have information about costs of raising children and basic costs is a starting place for government to study what that should include. But it won’t be bare-bones. What luxuries should be added is up for debate.

Paying “only” half the costs as the reporter put it would actually be an increase for some people to pay. The commission also recommended a sharing of child-care costs by both parents which is not done in the present system. That wasn’t reported.

The commission did recommend judges presume custody will be shared unless credible evidence shows a different arrangement is in the best interest of the child and felt it was an appropriate starting point. Constitutionally and statutorily both parents are considered in the best interest of their children with equal custody of their children, so why arbitrarily assume otherwise.

The present system assumes divorcing parents are low-income and would consume 25 percent of their income to support a child and 33 percent of their income for two children, 40 percent for three children and 45 four for four children. The present system also assumes one of the parents is absent 100% of the time and has no child related expenses at all.

New Hampshire thought it had adopted an income-shares model, but the commission discovered it had inadvertently adopted a “percent of obligor” model instead, meaning child support only applies to one parent regardless of the income of the other parent.

New Hampshire has no underlying study to support the present system. The studies thought to support it show there should be a decrease in the percentage to be awarded as income increases. New Hampshire adopted an incomplete plan. Also, most states cap the amount of income to be considered for calculating child support known as a presumptive floor. They recognize the costs of raising children have limits. New Hampshire never incorporated the limits. The commission learned there is no way of assuring money over and above the cost of raising a child is spent on the child. The commission felt it needed more information from an economic study to determine what that limit should be rather than just copy another state.

For states to get matching federal funds the federal government requires states to review, and if appropriate revise, child support guidelines at least every four years, and when reviewing the guidelines a state must consider economic data on the cost of raising children. The data the commission had was outdated, and the economists that developed it would not stand behind it to be used as a presumption in law as the federal government also requires states to do.

Some quotes by commission members appear to be misapplied in the story. No model was recommended that would leave children in one household having just “broth and bread” as a quote from attorney Tom Cooper implies.

A quote by commission member attorney Catherine Feeney states, “The mothers were not represented” is misleading. The commission had two very capable mothers representing custodial parents, however there was only one non-custodial parent represented on the commission. The commission held four public hearings in various locations around the state. The commission had no funding to advertise but did put out public notices in newspapers and in child support offices throughout the entire state. Everyone that came was heard.

The NH Women's Lobby followed the commission's work very closely and attended meetings as well as the New Hampshire Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence. The Commission on the Status of Women was well aware of the commission’s work. These organizations have a very successful history of getting the word out to women. More parents sending child support did show up at the public hearings. However, the commission did not allow emotions or "disgruntled dads" to skew or inspire its recommendations.

Rep. David A. Bickford, a state representative from New Durham, is vice chair of a commission studying child support and custody issues in the state.

Divorce should not shortchange children - New Hampshire

Full article at Foster's Online

Excerpts below:

HB 640, passed by the House and currently before the state Senate Judiciary Committee, aims to change this mercenary practice. If successful, the bill would redefine parental rights and responsibilities based on the needs of the children, not how much a custodial parent is paid.

Currently, child-custody and support guidelines assign a value to each child. It is not based on need or real-world costs, but rather mathematics. For example, for one youngster that amount is 25 percent of a non-custodial parent’s income. For four children, it is 45 percent.

The result, as recognized by the Commission to Study Child Support and Related Custody Issues established under former Gov. Craig Benson, is a custody fight based on how much money the custodial parent can be awarded by the court, not a child’s needs.

HB 640 would require both parents to develop a written parenting plan, describing each parent’s rights and responsibilities.

In cases where either parent is not forthcoming, the court would be authorized to develop the parenting plan.

The bill stresses the need to keep both parents involved. It encourages parents to “share” in raising their children after being separated or divorced, rather than fighting for sole custody.

Child support commission: Split custody, costs - New Hampshire

The Union Leader and New Hampshire Sunday News - 02-May-05 - Child support commission: Split custody, costs

Excerpts:

They're getting help from a legislative commission that wants to cut court-ordered child support to the bone, making each parent responsible for only half the actual cost of their children's "basic needs" — food, shelter, clothing and medical care — regardless of each parent's income.

The commission also wants judges to presume custody will be shared, and that if it is, no money will change hands.

Under state child support guidelines, most non-custodial parents pay a flat percentage of their income in child support to parents with primary custody — 25 percent for one child, 33 percent for two children, 40 percent for three and 45 percent for four — although judges can make exceptions for hardship or special circumstances.

That leads to unfair results in some cases and promotes litigation, David Amico told a state Senate committee last week.

"We need to remove this prize of child support. If it were more equitable and fair, there would be more incentive for the parents to work together in the best interests of the children," he said.

"We need to do a major overhaul to our system," Bickford said.

Paying for anything more than half of a child's basic needs should be optional for divorced parents, just as it is for married ones, he said. Otherwise, deciding what extras must be covered becomes a "slippery slope."

However, a minority on the commission, which issued its recommendations late last year, supported a so-called "standard of living adjustment" based on parents' incomes. The minority also said judges should start with no presumptions about custody except what's in the children's best interests.

Everyone on the panel agreed the child support formula can be disastrous for low-income parents and unfair to high-income ones. They also agreed the Legislature should devise child support guidelines for cases of shared physical custody.

House Bill 529 would require judges to start with a presumption of shared physical custody, but it has been shelved in favor of House Bill 640, which requires judges to make the best interests of the children paramount.

Both would change the term "custody" to "parental rights and responsibilities," require parents to come up with parenting plans addressing their children's needs and allow courts to order parents into mediation.

Shared child custody legislation aired in the N.H. House

Shared child custody legislation aired in the N.H. House - Fosters

Excerpts below:

Under the bill heard by the House Children and Family Law Committee, New Hampshire would join Alaska, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma and Wisconsin in adopting shared custody of children.

Mark Snider of Nashua said he is recovering from his contested divorce by spending the last 10 weeks lobbying for the bill, including on his Web site, www.nhcustody.org.

Lawyers, child advocates and anti-domestic violence administrators have a conflict of interest in trying to kill the bill, he charged.

“The entrenched divorce industry has a vested interest in making sure the expensive destruction of nuclear families continues,” he said.

Health and Human Services Commissioner John Stephen supported the bill through an aide, John Williams.

“Shared parenting goes toward eliminating the perception that one parent is preferred over another due to her gender,” Williams said.

Rep. Claudia Chase, D-Francestown, backed the bill, saying she has seen both sides of divorce court, first as the mother who got primary custody.

“In the seven years we were divorced, he never visited his children. That’s the choice he made,” she said. But more recently, Chase said, she has been the wife of a second husband who vainly has fought for equal treatment stemming from his divorce. “This is a bill to find wholeness in the wake of brokenness,” she said.

New Hampshire -New Bills Introduced

Concord Monitor Online

Excerpts below:

Two bills working their way through the Legislature would encourage parents to work together to formulate a plan for raising their children after a divorce. It's hoped that the measures also make the experience more civil.

The Presumption of Shared Parental Rights and Responsibilities Act would create a legal presumption that parents should share equally in raising their children, both in decision-making and physical custody.

"In determining parental rights and responsibilities, the court shall be guided by the presumption that equally shared parent rights and responsibilities are in the child's best interest," the bill reads.

Both bills also separate laws relating to parents and children from laws relating to marriage and divorce so as to avoid confusing the issues, and both bills replace the terms "custody" and "child support" with "parental rights and responsibilities."

The most important difference between the two bills is that while the second encourages parents to share the rights and responsibilities of raising their children, the first calls for the sharing to be equal.

"I felt that we needed to go one more step," said Rep. David Bickford, a New Durham Republican. Although he is chief sponsor of both measures, he prefers the first.

Bickford said state courts seem inclined to try to perpetuate whatever family structure existed before the divorce, giving primary custody to whichever parent was the primary caregiver during the marriage.

Bickford argues divorce should be viewed as restructuring families, not trying to preserve old arrangements.

"Right now the whole thing is based on looking for who the better parent is or who the primary caretaker was," Bickford said.

New Hampshire Bar Association spokesman Dan Wise said that while everyone agrees parents should try to cooperate more, the presumption of shared custody is a controversial idea.

"There are a lot of lawyers who do divorce work who are very skeptical about the idea," he said. "They think that's sort of a parents' rights view of the situation," rather than being focused on what's best for children.

Bickford said state courts seem inclined to try to perpetuate whatever family structure existed before the divorce, giving primary custody to whichever parent was the primary caregiver during the marriage.

Bickford argues divorce should be viewed as restructuring families, not trying to preserve old arrangements.

"Right now the whole thing is based on looking for who the better parent is or who the primary caretaker was," Bickford said.

New Hampshire Bar Association spokesman Dan Wise said that while everyone agrees parents should try to cooperate more, the presumption of shared custody is a controversial idea.

"There are a lot of lawyers who do divorce work who are very skeptical about the idea," he said. "They think that's sort of a parents' rights view of the situation," rather than being focused on what's best for children.

Bickford said state courts seem inclined to try to perpetuate whatever family structure existed before the divorce, giving primary custody to whichever parent was the primary caregiver during the marriage.

Bickford argues divorce should be viewed as restructuring families, not trying to preserve old arrangements.

"Right now the whole thing is based on looking for who the better parent is or who the primary caretaker was," Bickford said.

New Hampshire Bar Association spokesman Dan Wise said that while everyone agrees parents should try to cooperate more, the presumption of shared custody is a controversial idea.

"There are a lot of lawyers who do divorce work who are very skeptical about the idea," he said. "They think that's sort of a parents' rights view of the situation," rather than being focused on what's best for children.

Bickford said state courts seem inclined to try to perpetuate whatever family structure existed before the divorce, giving primary custody to whichever parent was the primary caregiver during the marriage.

Bickford argues divorce should be viewed as restructuring families, not trying to preserve old arrangements.

"Right now the whole thing is based on looking for who the better parent is or who the primary caretaker was," Bickford said.

New Hampshire Bar Association spokesman Dan Wise said that while everyone agrees parents should try to cooperate more, the presumption of shared custody is a controversial idea.

"There are a lot of lawyers who do divorce work who are very skeptical about the idea," he said. "They think that's sort of a parents' rights view of the situation," rather than being focused on what's best for children.

Bickford said state courts seem inclined to try to perpetuate whatever family structure existed before the divorce, giving primary custody to whichever parent was the primary caregiver during the marriage.

Bickford argues divorce should be viewed as restructuring families, not trying to preserve old arrangements.

"Right now the whole thing is based on looking for who the better parent is or who the primary caretaker was," Bickford said.

New Hampshire Bar Association spokesman Dan Wise said that while everyone agrees parents should try to cooperate more, the presumption of shared custody is a controversial idea.

"There are a lot of lawyers who do divorce work who are very skeptical about the idea," he said. "They think that's sort of a parents' rights view of the situation," rather than being focused on what's best for children.

The Family Law Task Force does not endorse Bickford's favored version or the idea of presuming anything about where and with whom children should live, Gardner said.

"We do not believe in the strict legal presumption of joint custody,"she said. "We believe each family is unique and you have to look at the needs of the children in each family. It's not always appropriate. It's not always in the best interests of the children."

Child Support Changes in Mass and NH?

I am copying this verbatim from an email list I am on:

The child support showdown is under way in Massachusetts.

Under federal law, Massachusetts must review and possibly revise its Child Support Guidelines this year. (As you probably know, the Guidelines are a formula that is used to compute your child support order. It is based on the number of children, his income, her income, and a few other factors.)

In Massachusetts, the responsibility for the Guidelines falls to the Chief Justice for Administration and Management, Robert A. Mulligan. Fathers & Families has begun its campaign for child support reform by writing Chief Justice Mulligan and requesting a meeting.

As some of you remember, Fathers & Families single-handedly won substantial reductions in the Guidelines in 2002. Whether we are able to win additional child-friendly changes will depend entirely on YOU: how many new members you recruit, how energetic you are in supporting this cause, and your financial support. There are powerful forces that would like to raise the Guidelines even higher than they have been in the past. Fathers & Families is the only force standing between them and success.

Meanwhile, there are revolutionary changes next door in New Hampshire. Due in part to the incessant efforts of Representative David Bickford, the New Hampshire Legislature created a commission to study child support. It issued its report on December 1, 2004, and it is quite amazing.

The New Hampshire Commission found "the current New Hampshire Child Support Guidelines to be unfair and inappropriate in many circumstances and in dire need of reform and revision."

New Hampshire, like Massachusetts, declares that the objective of its Guidelines is to maintain the same standard of living in the custodial parent's household that would have existed had the marriage remained intact. The Commission took particular aim at this principle. A majority of the Commission concluded that the objective of child support payments is to assure that a child's basic needs are met. The Commission quoted a 1986 Minnesota case, Moylan v. Moylan as follows, "The government's interest in family expenditures on children is limited to ensuring that the children's basic needs are met. Not extravagances, not luxuries, but needs. Once that occurs, government intrusion must cease." The report went on to say that the Commission "agrees 'standard of living' should not be a concern of government and government should not be collecting money on behalf of a 'lifestyle' that government has no interest in measuring or actually enforcing." Along the same lines, the Commission wrote, "The economic reality of maintaining multiple households may be inconsistent with maintaining the 'standard of living' of the children in the initial family."

The Commission also recognized that, "Child support is often in excess of the cost of raising children, which encourages litigation."

The Commission also recognized that it is not good for children to base a child support order on the income from overtime work or a second job (unless necessary to meet the child's basic needs), because the order will then be so high that the non-custodial parent will be forced to work endless hours, and will thus be unable to be a parent to his child.

The Commission also recognized that, like Massachusetts, the New Hampshire Guidelines almost guarantee that the second family of a non-custodial parent will be worse off than his first family.

The Commission also recognized that in New Hampshire, like Massachusetts, an increase in earnings by the recipient of child support has almost no effect on the child support award. They stated, "This result is contrary to professional studies on child costs. . ."

The New Hampshire Commission's central recommendation is quite revolutionary. It calls on the state to scrape efforts to base child support awards on something as elusive as the "standard of living" and instead to provide "basic costs" of raising a child. After reviewing four sources of data on the actual costs of raising a child, the Commission concluded that the basic cost in New Hampshire is somewhere on the order of $400 to $600 a month, probably excluding healthcare costs.

The New Hampshire Commission report is one of the first to take a cold hard look at the realities of child support. It discards the pieties, platitudes and slogans that form the basis of Child Support Guidelines in most states and substitutes critical analysis. It remains to be seen whether New Hampshire will implement the recommendations of its Commission.

You can contact Fathers & Families or Rep Bickford through the highlighted links above.

UPDATE: Here is a link to the actual NH Child Support Report. It is a PDF so make sure you have Adobe Reader