Your View 10/22: Involve dads

I just finished reading "Fathers Targeted by Upcoming Conference" in the Oct. 8 Standard Democrat.

It would seem to me that the best way to "help" divorced fathers to better "father" is to actually allow them to do so by implementing a presumption of shared parenting (joint physical custody), providing that both parents are fit." The current system that so many states continue to use - which allows the non-custodial parent (many times, dad) four or so days a month of visitation - is reprehensible.

Separating a child from a parent, with no just cause, and against the wills of those involved, is a complete violation of civil, human, and constitutional rights. And, it is horrible for children and society as well. We certainly cannot claim ignorance to the fact that fatherless children are at great risk for a whole host of problems, including teen pregnancy, suicide, drug and alcohol abuse, criminality, and behavioral and emotional problems, to name a few.

Unfortunately, my young niece and nephew (New York residents) continue to suffer under the child custody determination that was forced on them. They beg to see their dad more, but are not allowed to. My niece (age 4) clings to her father, sobbing, "No! Me stay with Daddy! Pleeeease!" when her mother takes her away. My nephew (age 8) begs to be able to tell the judge what he wants: his father. Seeing their faces when they realize that their "visitation time" with their father is over and that they won't be allowed to see him for days is an experience I'll never forget. I'll never forget the tears streaming down their small faces, nor will I forget the continuing look of despair in the eyes of both of these innocent children - as well as in the eyes of my brother, who's devastated over the "loss" of his children.

I'm mortified at how these fathers (or mothers, should they be deemed "non-custodial") are treated. For, should his spouse decide to divorce, he must stand by helplessly as he loses his children, his home, his financial stability, his peace of mind, and, should he fall behind on child support, even for an "innocent" reason such as because it's simply too high and doesn't take into account his own "reasonable" living expenses, or because he loses his job or has become disabled, etc., he could be jailed and lose his freedom as well.

And the inequities in this "winner-takes-all" system don't stop there: not only does the "winner" get the children and, most likely, the marital residence, but they can also, many times, count on receiving all or most of the tax benefits as well. Then, there is the fact that they are not held accountable as to how the child support money is spent. Add to that that they are able to exert "control" over their ex-spouse for many, many years. Add to all of this that, most likely, they can even withhold visitation, and receive no penalty (while, as stated above, if the non-custodial parent is to fall behind on child support, they can receive serious repercussions). As a matter of fact, the custodial parent may even be able to move the children to a different state (or even another country), thereby, for all intents and purposes, cutting off completely the "non-custodial" parent's contact with the children. But, at the same time, they are entitled to continue receiving the child support checks from that non-custodial parent.

The 14th Amendment guarantees due process and equal protection to all: Yet, in New York and in many other states, there are millions of fathers (and sometimes mothers) who are being denied seeing their children grow up. And, there are millions of children being denied one of the most important relationships that they'll ever have: a relationship with their father or their mother. I do not see the 14th Amendment within this system at all, for there is absolutely nothing "equal" about it. And, in no way, shape, or form does it even come close to protecting a child's "best interest."

Joint legal custody (what my brother has) gives him say in major decisions (theoretically), but still relegates him to the role of "visitor." What he needs is both joint legal and joint physical custody. Joint physical custody (shared parenting) would allow him to actually parent, in the true sense of the word. It protects a child's right to equal (or near equal) access to both parents, so that they can benefit fully from the love and nurturing of both. It assures that both parents will have continued and meaningful contact with their children, providing that both are "fit." There are currently four pieces of shared parenting legislation sitting within New York's Legislature. The passage of this type of legislation would benefit children immensely. It is inexcusable that this legislation has been languishing within committee for so long.

My nephew recently stated that he cries himself to sleep every night because he misses his father so much. And, he is not the only one; he is one of the many children who, tonight when they put their heads on their pillows to go to sleep, will be falling asleep in a pool of their own tears.

Our children deserve so much more than THIS.

P.S. For an eye-opening look at "child custody," please read "Why is Daddy in Jail," by Stephen Baskerville, Ph.D. -- it can be found at: http://www.dvmen.org/dv-40.htm

Deborah Colerick Charlotte, N.C.