Glenn Sacks Updates

This is all verbatim from an email

SB 1482 Update

In the face of over 3,500 calls, letters and faxes opposing SB 1482, the hearing on the bill has been postponed from today to Tuesday, May 9. Thanks to all of your for your participation.

As I noted in my action alert NEW CAMPAIGN: Move-Away Bill Will Harm Children of Divorce (April 18, 2006):

"Under SB 1482...a parent seeking to block a move is specifically prohibited from citing most of the evidence that could provide a basis for restraining the move. Nonmoving parents are prevented from citing the move's impact on their children's relationships with them or the effects of the children losing their schools and friends. This directly abrogates current California case law which says that the children's relationship with their nonmoving parent must be considered when deciding a relocation case.

"The Alliance for Children Concerned About Move-Aways, which we originally formed to defeat SB 730, is working with the California Alliance for Families and Children to defeat SB 1482."

New York Shared Parenting Bill Held

In a disappointing though not surprising vote, the New York Assembly Committee on Children & Families voted today to hold over A330, the New York Shared Parenting Bill. Four committee members voted in favor of the bill (see below), and the rest voted to hold, citing concerns about alleged technical issues or flaws in the bill.

This bill has been locked up in committee for 12 years. Jim Hays, president of Coalition of Fathers and Families New York, who sponsored the bill, told me that with the four "yes" votes and all the media attention, this is the closest they've ever come to getting it out of committee. He has asked me to tell you that it was the 8,000 calls, letters and faxes you generated which helped bring it this close, and to thank you.

The Assemblymemebers voting in favor of the bill were Ruben Diaz Jr., Karim Camara, Michael Benjamin and Vincent Ignizio.

Custody rights bill for fathers dead in Assembly -NY

Custody rights bill for fathers dead in Assembly
Supporters say bill would balance system they say favors mothers

I don't know what to say.

Excerpts:

ALBANY -- An Assembly panel Tuesday killed for the year a proposal to give fathers greater custody rights in divorce proceedings.

By a 12-4 vote, the Assembly Children and Families Committee scuttled a contentious plan that would have made courts presume that shared parenting of children is the best arrangement for divorcing couples and their children, if there was no accusation that it would harm the children.

The bill's supporters say that courts now award custody to the mother in most cases, with fathers limited to occasional visits. They said 13 other states have adopted similar legislation to level the playing field for fathers.

But the majority of committee members were swayed by arguments that the bill would put the needs of the parents ahead of those of the children.

The committee vote means the measure won't advance to the floor to be considered by the full Assembly, effectively killing it for the year. The Senate wasn't expected to act on it until the Assembly made its decision.

More Glen Sacks and A330

This is all verbatim from an email:

Assembly Committee Stalls Vote on Shared Parenting Bill

Despite media coverage and over 5,000 calls and letters, powerful members of the New York Assembly Committee on Children & Families are trying to stall voting on A330, the New York Shared Parenting Bill.

We recently suspended the thousands of faxes being sent to the Committee members through our campaign page because the committee members told us they were unable to get any work done. James Hays of the Coalition of Fathers and Families New York, which is sponsoring the New York Shared Parenting Bill, has now asked us to go back to emails to deliver the message. To email now, click here.

The vote on the bill was set for March 28 but has been postponed twice. New York is a battleground state for shared parenting and fatherhood, and we want a vote on this bill. Again, to support the bill, click here.

Shared Parenting Bill Would Help New York's Children of Divorce

Shared Parenting Bill Would Help New York's Children of Divorce

More Glenn Sacks...

Excerpts:

According to a meta-analysis conducted by psychologist Robert Bauserman and published in the American Psychological Association‘s Journal of Family Psychology, children in joint custody settings had fewer behavior and emotional problems, higher self-esteem, better family relations, and better school performance than children in sole custody arrangements.

A Harvard University study of 517 families conducted across a four-and-a-half year period measured depression, deviance, school effort, and school grades in children ranging in age from 10 to 18. The researchers found that the children in joint custody settings fared better in these areas than those in sole custody.

A study by psychologist Joan Kelly published in the Family and Conciliation Courts Review found that children of divorce “express higher levels of satisfaction with joint physical custody than with sole custody arrangements,” and cite the “benefit of remaining close to both parents” as an important factor.

When Arizona State University psychology professor William Fabricius conducted a study of college students who had experienced their parents’ divorces while they were children, he found that over two-thirds believed that “living equal amounts of time with each parent is the best arrangement for children."

Research demonstrates that joint custody also leads to high rates of child support compliance. This is no surprise--parents who are permitted little role in their children’s lives have less motivation to make sacrifices for their children. Also, under the current system noncustodial parents are often forced to wage expensive court battles in order to protect their time and relationships with their children. These parents end up supporting lawyers instead of kids.

According to a study in the Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, over time joint custody serves to help reduce conflict between divorced spouses. When Texas Woman's University conducted a study of the effects of post-divorce discord on children aged 8 to 12, they found that joint custody does not expose children to greater parental conflict. Bauserman’s research found that divorced couples with joint custody report less conflict than those in sole-custody settings.

Glenn Sacks and A330

This is all from the latest Glenn Sacks newsletter. You can subscribe by clicking here.

Excerpts:

James Hays of the Coalition of Fathers and Families New York, which is sponsoring the New York Shared Parenting Bill, informed me yesterday that your faxes have completely shut down the fax machines of the 16 members of the Assembly's Children & Families Committee. The committee members have asked us to stop, and we complied immediately.

Five thousand of you have faxed or emailed the committee members in support of A330, the shared parenting bill. FaFNY wants to deliver your letters personally to the committee members this week, and has asked that you continue filling out the letters form. To write to the committee members with your support for this bill, click here.

This bill has been locked up in committee for 12 years! The vote on the bill was set for March 28 but has been postponed until April 4. This may be a maneuver designed to allow the bills' opponents--which include the New York Chapter of the National Organization for Women--to make their impact felt. New York is a battleground state for shared parenting and fatherhood. Again, to support the bill, click here.

New York NOW Defends Mothers' Veto over Fathers' Fatherhood

Pappas wrote a revealing letter to a shared parenting activist explaining her opposition to A330.

In opposition to A330 Pappas writes:

"Many women who are victims of domestic violence and women who have had to endure watching their children be abused, would disagree with [the bill]. Many women have said, 'forced joint custody sent my children right into the arms of their abusive father.' We believe that joint custody should be agreed upon by both parties and if one party disagrees, then there is usually a good reason. A woman who is victim of violence should not have to be victimized again by the courts. This is what forced joint custody does" (emphasis in original).

The old domestic violence bugaboo. A330 only applies to fit parents--abused women would get sole custody.

Pappas' views amount to this--if mom wants a dad to remain a dad, fine, but if not, too bad. Feminist family law proponents essentially seek to give mothers veto power over fathers' fatherhood.

Your Tax Dollars at Work

The New York State Coalition Against Domestic Violence's opposition to A330 is a fine example of your tax dollars at work--the coalition receives government funding, probably from the Violence Against Women Act.

One of the things about VAWA which I find the most objectionable is the fact it results in state-funded radical feminist lobbying. Whenever our movement tries to bring fathers and children together, these groups are always among our most vocal and influential opponents.

In California, for example, they opposed AB 1307, the California Shared Parenting Bill, and were instrumental in defeating it last Spring. These groups were also among the leading opponents of Gary LaMusga, a heroic father who fought an eight-year battle all the way up to the California Supreme Court to prevent his two boys from being moved out of state. To learn more about the LaMusga case, click here.

Are You a High Earner Paying Child Support?

Family law reform activist Josh Gonze is looking for high-earners who are paying child support. He says his state has no ceiling on child support and that he is "searching for published legal precedent where a court placed a limit on child support on the grounds that the statute produces excessively high child support." Those interested can respond to Gonze at reformfamilylaw@hotmail.com.

Societal Shift in Role of Fathers

Societal Shift in Role of Fathers

This is the latest article from Wendy McElroy.

Excerpts:

On March 28, the New York State Assembly's Children & Families Committee is scheduled to hear Bill A330 on shared parenting. The bill seeks to establish "the presumption in matrimonial proceedings for awarding shared parenting of minor children in the absence of an allegation that shared parenting would be detrimental to the best interests of the child."

In short, a parent seeking sole custody (most commonly the mother) would assume the legal burden of proving why a shared arrangement would harm the child.

Father's rights advocates view New York as "a battleground state" not only because of the influence its policies exert but also because New York is one of the few states to resist a national trend toward statutes favoring joint custody.

Because A330 is vehemently opposed by mainstream feminist organizations like the New York Chapter of the National Organization for Women, the bill's hearing may become raucous. But, given that almost three dozen State Assembly members have endorsed the bill as sponsors or co-sponsors, A330 stands a good chance of passing.

Shared Parenting Showdown

Read the latest Glenn Sacks newsletter (including updates on New York Shared Parenting Bill A330) by clicking here.

Bills in New York would require courts to treat mom, dad equally

'Shared parenting' seen as custody solution
Bills in New York would require courts to treat mom, dad equally

Excerpts:

A.330 in the New York State Assembly would guarantee "statutory presumption of joint custody" in divorce cases "so that both parents can continue to share in the responsibilities and duties of the children's upbringing."

The bill, sponsored by Democratic Assemblyman Harvey Weisenberg, states that continuing contact with both parents through "shared parenting" is in the best interests of minor children – as well as their parents.

Under the legislation, courts would be required to award joint custody unless something were brought to light to prove such an arrangement would be detrimental to the children. That fact would have to be proved by the party seeking sole custody.

"Shared parenting," the bill states, means "both parents would remain legally responsible and in control of their children so that both parents share in the care and upbringing of their children."

States the legislation: "Currently, there is no preference for shared parenting in New York. The court may award joint custody, but in practice rarely does so."

Weisenberg's bill has been endorsed by the New York City Council and fathers' rights organization Coalition of Fathers and Families NY, Inc. A companion bill in the Senate is S.291.

Another similar bill pending in the Assembly is A.6670 by Assemblyman Brian Kolb. One of its provisions is to change state statutory language so the term "visitation" for non-prime custodial parents is substituted with "parenting time."

Quicker, Cheaper 'No-Fault' Divorces Proposed - New York

Quicker, Cheaper 'No-Fault' Divorces Proposed

ALBANY - New Yorkers would no longer have to prove a spouse cheated or was abusive to get a quick, less costly divorce under a new "no-fault" proposal. New York is the only state lacking some version of a no-fault divorce law. Efforts to make divorce easier in New York have failed, even though supporters argue contested cases extend bad marriages, encourage dishonest court testimony and can be traumatic for spouses and their children.

A state Senator, John DeFrancisco, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he is supporting a proposal that would allow a divorce to go through in 30 days if a couple has resolved all of its economic and custody issues.

"It's not a straight no-fault, but it goes a long way to eliminate court proceedings that are brought just so people don't have to wait a year," the Onondaga County Republican said.

The head of the Assembly's Judiciary Committee, Assemblywoman Helene Weinstein, said she would consider no-fault divorce only if other provisions were put in place to protect victims of domestic violence and the economic interests of non-working spouses.

People's Law School To Convene In Albany - NY

North County Gazette

Excerpts:

ALBANY--The People's Law School, a new initiative presented by the New York State Bar Association, will operate on consecutive Tuesday afternoons from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. beginning on Nov. 15 and running through Dec. 13 in the Great Hall of the Association's Albany headquarters at One Elk Street.

Each People's Law School lecture will last approximately two hours and will feature respected legal experts who will use real-life examples and anecdotes to demonstrate how the law really works in easy-to-understand, interesting and informative sessions.

People's Law School attendees will receive an updated version of the bar association's popular handbook, "Understanding the Law - a Practical Guide for New York State Residents." Each presentation also will be recorded and made available on audiotape, videotape, DVD, and online.

The program is free for those who pre-register. A $5 fee will be charged for those who register at the door. No prior legal education or knowledge is required. To register, please contact the New York State Bar Association Department of Continuing Legal Education at 518-463-3200.

TOPIC: Matrimonial Law including grounds for divorce; models for representation; child custody; an overview of financial issues, such as child support, maintenance and equitable distribution DATE: Tuesday, 11/15/05 SPEAKER(S): Florence M. Fass, Esq., Fass & Greenberg, LLP, Garden City; and Charles P. Inclima, Esq., Biernbaum Inclima & Meyer, LLP, Rochester

TOPIC: You and Your Lawyer will address some of the myths and misconceptions about the legal profession; how to find a lawyer; what to expect in terms of financial arrangements with your attorney; the Client's Bill of Rights DATE: Tuesday, 12/6/05 SPEAKER(S):A. Vincent Buzard, Esq., Harris Beach PLLC, Rochester; and Steven C. Krane, Esq., Proskauer Rose LLP, NYC

An unusual decision in custody case - New York

Newsday.com: An unusual decision in custody case

Even though this mother has previously demonstrated that she could not be expected to fully comply with her custody arrangement and that the parents have joint custody - this judge decided she could move the child out of the country provided she put up a bond guaranteeing monthly visitation.

The judge said, "Visitation with a parent is not the privilege of the parent but the right of the child. Both [the father and the boy] must have this right preserved by maximizing defendant's opportunity to maintain a positive and nurturing father-son relationship.” Which can apparently be accomplished through a monthly visit. Right.

Why not leave the child in New York and provide the mother with as liberal of a visitation schedule as she desires. Then she doesn’t have to come up with huge upfront costs, can elect to pay for her own travel expenses and the child does not have to be removed from his father and community simply since Mom’s new husband works in Canada…

Move away cases drive me crazy – if one parent wants to move there is certainly no compelling reason to keep them from doing so. However, their elective choice should not be an excuse to disrupt the parent/child relationship with their ex. If you want to move – go for it – but don’t expect to be able to take your child. Part of having children is sacrifice – you may have to sacrifice your desire to go wherever in order to support your child in the most loving and stable manner possible. Eventually the child will be old enough and out of the house where you can move wherever your little heart desires. In the meantime, deal with the fact that you have already handicapped your child by divorcing their other parent and try to do the best thing for them considering.

These remarriage move away cases are the epitome of selfish.

Excerpts:

Jodi Ann Fischtein wanted her 11-year-old son to move to Canada with her.

But she and her ex-husband had joint custody of the boy, and the father wanted him to stay in New York.

After a 28-day trial in Central Islip, State Supreme Court Justice John Bivona made a rather novel decision.

The boy could go with his mother and new stepfather, who had been commuting to New York from Toronto. But Fischtein had to put up a $60,000 bond ensuring the father's visitation at least once a month, and pay his travel and hotel expenses.

"Visitation with a parent is not the privilege of the parent but the right of the child. Both [the father and the boy] must have this right preserved by maximizing defendant's opportunity to maintain a positive and nurturing father-son relationship," Bivona wrote in the recent decision.

However, he added the mother's "past conduct does raise concern as to whether she will cooperate and abide by the order of this court." Bivona directed that Fischtein post a $60,000 bond in the escrow account of the lawyer for her ex-husband, John Andrade, until her son becomes 18.

"This is very unusual," said Friedman. "I think the judge was concerned that the relocation he was allowing was out of the country and out of U.S. jurisdiction ... and there could be problems for the father jurisdictionally if there is a proceeding for enforcement."

In requiring the bond, Bivona cited instances in which Fischtein had interfered with Andrade's access to his son since the couple's divorce last year.

"Based on past history, plaintiff has dictated terms of visitation according to her whim," the judge wrote. Despite a separation agreement and both having joint custody, "plaintiff acts unilaterally."

New York - Opinion Articles on No Fault Divorce

New York has been considering a bill to turn it into a no fault divorce state. Below are excerpts from opinion articles both for and against. Link to see the entire article.

Time for no fault divorce? NO : Proponents also argue that New York needs no-fault because we are almost the only state without unilateral no-fault. That means that one party, with no grounds - legal reasons - for divorce, can walk out, abandon the family and then claim that abandonment as a ground - legal reason - for divorce.

By not encouraging Separation Agreements, more cases will be sent into court. The failure to negotiate drives the issues of child custody, child and spousal support and property division into court, where women continue to face gender bias, a fact admitted by the court administration itself.

Do we need divorce reform? Yes! We have a whole list of reforms needed in New York. Among them are:
1. A bill that requires judges to award attorney fees and expert fees during the divorce action to the spouse without access to the marital money to "level the playing field."
2. Better medical coverage from the spouse who has the coverage to the noncovered spouse after divorce, such as in Massachusetts.
3. Custody awards that provide stability to children after divorce by having the children live with the parent who did most of the care-giving during the marriage.
We would like to see these and some other reforms to current law before we consider no-fault divorce.

Christ, I copied almost the entire article. Just so we all know - while my position on fault/no fault divorce has not quite yet been cemented- I find this article atrocious. I might eventually decide I fall on the side of preferring fault divorce - but never for any of these reasons. In fact, having read this all of the sudden find no fault much more appealing that I have previously.

We all need to know that the NO editorial was authored by: Kozak and Jacobs, are co-chairs of National Organization for Women's Domestic Relations Law TaskForce in New York. So that explains the "reforms."

My take on these "reforms" is that one parent wants to be able to access the money of the other parent for purposes of litigation - but that same parent does not want to "share" parenting responsibilities - that they were likely able to be the primary caregiver of as the other party was out making an income with which to support that arrangement. So what NOW is saying - share the money, not the kids. What a wonderful message for liberated women to be espousing.

Anyway, I digress, on to the Yes editorial:

Time for no-fault divorce? YES : Individuals here must prove cruelty, which is the infliction of emotional or physical pain, adultery or spousal desertion (or, no sex) for at least one year.

Because of New York's divorce law, some couples agree for one to be at "fault." But there is no purpose served by using fault-based divorce rules in ways that lead to disrespect for the law.

Some have argued that we shouldn't make it easier to get divorced because this will lead to unnecessary breakups of more couples. But experience with no-fault systems in other states shows this is unfounded and divorce rates 10 years later were no higher than before the change.

Litigants should not feel compelled to lie about "fault" to end their marriages. It is time for New York to join the 48 states that have already adopted no-fault divorce.

Standard is president of the New York State Bar Association

New York - Get Married (to your child's Mother) and We'll Forgive Your Support Debt

From KLTV TV

Pataki is pushing a proposal that would reward deadbeat fathers by forgiving their child-support debts to the state -- if they marry the mothers of their children. He says the idea is to get those fathers involved with their children's lives and encourage them to support their families.

The governor also wants to create a tax credit for young, unmarried fathers who keep up with their child support payments.

A show of support for new dads - Troy, NY

Full article at timesunion.com

A show of support for new dads
Fathers Inc. aims to teach young men to become better parents

By Rick Karlin

Kenneth Braswell is starting Fathers Inc., a nonprofit group aimed at teaching young men with children how to stay involved with their offspring and be better fathers.

"What I'm interested in is where is the father in the family equation, and how do we build the capacity of the father to become involved in the growth of the child?" said Braswell.

While plenty of support systems -- such as in-school programs and Women Infant and Children nutrition services -- exist for young moms, there is a void when it comes to helping those who become fathers, he said.

"What I found was that nobody was providing services, particularly to fathers," he said.
An estimated one-third of the nation's youth are growing up without their biological fathers present, according to Milton Scott of the National Fatherhood Initiative, a Gaithersburg, Md.-based group created 10 years ago to confront the problem of absent fathers.

Braswell said he plans to affiliate with the group. He noted that more people are paying attention to the importance fathers play in the lives of their kids. The 43-year-old Troy resident has seen a growing interest in fatherhood also.

Braswell stressed that he doesn't see his group as a "fathers rights" organization that goes to bat for men in child support and custody cases. Rather, he sees Fathers Inc. as an educational resource. His ideas include offering courses on personal finance to help fathers keep up child support payments and efforts to keep young fathers in school.

"The training component is going to be the biggest component of what we do," he said.

For more information, contact Kenneth Braswell at 221-5184 or braswell@fathersinc.org. The Web site is http://fathersinc.org

Judge dismisses challenge to state child support laws

This is reference to the case I discussed here.

Judge dismisses challenge to state child support laws

12/29/2004, 3:07 p.m. ET
By MICHAEL VIRTANEN The Associated Press

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — A judge has dismissed a Hudson Valley father's constitutional challenge to New York's child support laws, ruling federal court lacks jurisdiction to determine whether the state's income-based support guidelines violate parents' rights.

Harold Rosenberger sued Ulster Family Court and the state Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance in April. The Highland man claimed New York's Family Court Act and Domestic Relations Law infringe on a parent's right to determine "how much money a parent spends on the care and maintenance of his or her child."

U.S. District Judge Gary Sharpe dismissed the suit last week, concluding any challenges to the Family Court order affecting Rosenberger belong in state appellate courts. Rosenberger promptly filed for reconsideration, claiming the judge's reasoning is wrong, and that his suit intends to overturn the laws themselves on behalf of all New Yorkers.

Rosenberger was divorced June 17, 1999, from Cynthia Cashman, who filed Family Court petitions for child support and sole custody of their three children, according to court papers.

On Jan. 24, 2002, Rosenberger was ordered by Ulster Family Court to pay child support of $325.69 per week and 73 percent of all unreimbursed health expenses. On March 21, 2002, the OTDA arranged to have the money taken from his paycheck.

In federal court, he claimed the state laws infringed on his right to privacy and due process.
Sharpe ruled that while the U.S. Supreme Court may review state court judgments, the lower federal courts cannot. And while Rosenberger argued he is challenging the constitutionality of the state laws, not his own Family Court order, Sharpe found them "inextricably intertwined."

"Finally, this court would be outside the bounds of its jurisdiction in addressing subjects of domestic relations which clearly `belong to the laws of the States,'" Sharpe wrote, citing a 1990 decision from the U.S. District Court in Brooklyn.

Rosenberger, a computer programmer representing himself in court, said Wednesday he has petitioned Sharpe for reconsideration and that state laws must align with federal law. If that fails, he plans to appeal to the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, where he has a separate case pending over New York's custody laws.

"The Supreme Court has said you can raise your children as you see fit," Rosenberger said. "People don't think of it as a constitutional right, which it really is."

Group raises kid-custody issues

Family Law Reform Now is attempting to get New York to adopt a custody law allowing for joint custody. Every Friday, at least for the rest of this month, they will be collecting signatures from 11 am to 1 pm on the steps of Queens Family Court in Jamaica.

New York Daily News

Mother Who Tried to Bribe Judge Pays Price....

Esther Weitzner, one of the parents who paid money to a mediator in order to swing her custody case, subsequently lost custody of her three children. This was from the case in New York concerning mediator Nissim Elmann and Judge Gerald Garson. Charges were also filed against clerk Paul Sarnell and court officer Louis Salerno. Salerno and Sarnell are now on trial while Garson awaits trial.

In my opinion this is a pretty crappy article - the author pretty much provides this woman a soap box to whine about how she was wronged. From the article:

"Weitzner said she regrets breaking the law but acted out of desperation and not disrespect for the law.

"The bribe was wrong, and I would not encourage anyone to do it," she said. "Out of desperation you do stupid things.

"I feel that just because I tried to protect my children and gave money to this mediator to help me win custody, the judge is getting back at me. He belongs to the 'black robe club.' All judges are friends with each other."

"Elmann approached my father and said the only way to win the court case is by bribing," Weitzner said."

However, only briefly mentioned in the article is the fact that Mrs. Weitzner had also at time denied her ex-husband his court ordered visitation with the children. - But don't hold your breath, this author makes no comment on this.

And for a final thought - (and this is speculative) but I understand why even a good father might attempt to bribe a judge (not that I think they should, or that they should not be harshly punished if they do...). However, I have to think for a mother to consider using a bribe, she is probably a pretty lousy mother if she is really afraid she will lose the case. So all in all, it seems that the kids were meant to be with dad... Just don't expect this reporter to say anything AT ALL about that...

New York Daily News

Mediation

This is an article discussing the benefits and costs involved with mediation versus a court battle. Specific resources for parents in New York. timesunion.com

New York Bill A1123

I discussed this bill previously and I must admit I am a little behind in getting the update available. As you can probably imagine, had the bill passed, the news would have been more forthcoming.

On May 11th, 2004 the committee agreed to "hold" the bill making it a non-issue for the remainder of this legislative session. Chairman Roger Green was integral in getting the bill held (this is not good). However, here is where it gets interesting - Roger Green resigned his position on June 1, 2004 after pleading guilty to receiving free rides from contractors that he then turned around and billed the state for. Article at NYNewsday.com

The author of the bill is David Sidikman and he can be contacted here:
New York State Assembly
146A Manetto Hill Road
Plainview, NY 11803
516-822-5590
FAX-822-5597

As well as all members of the New York State Assembly can be contacted through the state website: New York State Assembly

A good summary article is available through familylawreformnow.com.

I encourage everyone to read the article at family law reform and then to contact all the appropriate state legislatures to express your feelings on the handling of this bill and to contact David Sidikman in support of his bill and encourage him to keep fighting.

NY Joint Custody Measure

New York bill A1123 will go in front of the State Assembly's Children and Families Committee tomorrow. This bill will (I believe - the reference article is quite brief) will help to create a presumption of joint custody. Mensnewsdaily.com