Teri, this is not apples and oranges. You are helping men who have RO's on them (sometimes multiple RO's from many different women) and men who stalk women simply because they supplied one cell that resulted in a pregnancy. Children are nurtured by mothers in ALL species including the human species and mothers should never be removed from a child's life. Children do not NEED fathers, they need to be cared for which requires financial assistance and they need nurturing and love. Abraham Lincoln said it best when he said the best gift a man can give his children is to respect and love their mother. Beating her within an inch of her life or raping her is NOT respect or love.
Stop Family Violence and Liz Library ARE based on TRUE facts and TRUE stories. Women who are featured on SFV have evidence and documentation to support the facts that they or their children were abused and the courts gave the children to the abuser. Stitches and broken bones and black eyes and ripped hymens and STD's do NOT lie Teri.
Children are not protected in Shared Parenting states. I am in contact with many women (some who supply me with information for this blog) and they have either lost their children to the abuser, or the abuser has UNSUPERVISED contact with the children resulting in more abuse. There is one woman in Florida who was abused by her husband. She left and that man proceeded to gain "shared parental responsibility" and then called the state on this woman and several of her supporters. The most recent call involved an elementary aged female child and the removal of all of her clothes due to a sexual abuse claim by this man. This child was humiliated and for what? The child had a heat rash which was verified by the doctor. This father simply wanted to make mom's life a living hell because - how DARE she leave him?
Now here are the links to relevant statutes in Florida concerning DV and child custody.
This section discusses PC's (those famous court whores) and whether they can be appointed. The woman and children in the paragraph above have been threatened with a PC due to the many unresolved issues surrounding custody. The ONLY reason one has not been appointed is because the abusive father has stated he cannot afford it. NOT because the mother was a victim of DV.
Shared Parental Responsibility
This section discusses whether Shared custody should be granted and states that only a conviction of DV is used. Again the woman above TRIED to get her abuser prosecuted. The State Attorney of Florida where she lives REFUSED to do so, even after they were contacted by a police officer regarding this case. That police officer went on to do everything he could in order to give this woman the proof the SA office so desired but was also unable to get enough proof.
Child Support and DV
This statute discusses the Registry for CS cases and what should be done if there are family violence indicators. The woman listed above has requested anonymity and has been refused until just recently. This is because she now has a caseworker who realizes that she and her children are the client and this caseworker works for her.
We don't need to get into this one as there are many blogs out there that cover those infamous court whores. But, Florida grants full and complete immunity to them like many other states.
Other cases filed between parties
This involves court paperwork requirements and tells how other cases between the parties must be reported to the courts hearing custody/dissolution cases.
More paperwork requirements
More of the same as above.
The woman listed above has tried getting her case moved because she is not being afforded protection in her current court. She has been told that since her abuser was violent once before (YES ONLY ONCE) and no other violent acts occurred until after the birth of the children, that she knew he was violent and now she has to deal with it.
This has one tiny section about DV which states that a parenting course does not have to be taken by both parents at the same time if DV is present. The woman above was forced to take the class with her abuser while an active RO was in place. She simply disregarded the order and presented paperwork for a completed, certified parenting course when the order was made and was dismissed from this requirement.
Court-ordered electronic communication between a parent and a child.
First it says that each parent's DV history is to be included in whether a determination about communication with the child is made. The woman above had an active RO against the abuser AND the abuser had a history of previous RO's with other intimates and no such determination was given to the children. The abuser was allowed free and ready access to the children.
Parental Relocation with a child
This discusses the rules and laws about relocation. Again, the woman above lived within a few miles of her abuser and was experiencing break-ins, stalking, harassment, and many other such issues. She moved 32 miles away from the father to a more highly populated area and the abuser took her back to court. He knew where the mother lived as he had resumed his stalking behavior yet again but perjured himself to the courts which was proven in court. Nothing was done to the abuser (no punishment for perjury) and thankfully the mother only got a lecture.
This woman asked for and received an injunction but the cases (dissolution and injunction) were combined against her wishes. This allowed the abuser to take the focus off the real issue of family violence and focus it on the non-issue of divorce. Dissolution and injunction/RO cases should NEVER be combined. EVER!
Again this states that domestic violence is to be considered when creating a parenting plan, yet we can see from the many examples above that no such consideration was afforded this woman.
Now what do you suppose was the reason for all these 'blunders?' Well if you guessed that this woman was a SAHM and had not worked in many years and was only able to get a minimum wage job and relied on legal aid for a lawyer, you would have guessed right.
But enough of that - we should move on here. This is not about her this is about you, Teri, and just how deluded you can be.
You also state here that 80% of abuse claims are false? Other times you say 50%, other times it has been 90%. Which is it Teri? Can't you get your statistics straight?
I know of many cases where the NON-CUSTODIAL mother has sought assistance from a fatherhood program for visitation and child support in order to reduce the child support so she may be able to afford to live and NOT be HOMELESS and the result was being dumped to other agencies and then being turned away. These mothers are still homeless.
I only have one thing to say to this.
HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of cases where the father killed the children and there are so many this blogger has not time to list every single one. And often the stories do not make the news. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.....
Ah so we should have parents spying and stripping their children in order to keep an eye out for marks? We saw what happened to the woman and young female child above with shared parenting and abuser dad keeping an eye out for marks. Which by the way, the abuser also would get heat rashes due to his weight, just like the child does. Should a complaint of abuse or neglect be called in on abuser's new wife? Maybe on himself since he has a rash?
As far as your argument that mothers commit more abuse, we should factor in time spent with children. If it is as you say and women get custody 90% of the time and fathers only 10% of the time, we should play with the numbers some. Let's say there are 1,000 custody cases (there are more but this is just for example). So 900 children with moms, 100 children with dads. So if moms commit twice the abuse of dads, that must mean that mom abuser is 66% and dad abuse is 33% (again simplified because there is stranger abuse as well). How many children are abused? Let's say 100, unless you can give me a percentage of abused children compared to the whole population of children. So if you have 2/3 of 100 children abused by mom that would mean 66 children by mom and 33 children by dad. Now lets compare that to the entire group (not just the abuse victims). Sixty-children out of 900 works out to 7.3% of mothers abuse and 33% of the fathers abuse. There is no other way to work the numbers Teri, MEN do abuse more often than women - the numbers are completely skewed if you look at only part of the picture.
And if my small explanation is not helpful to you, you can simply go HERE and see what the NIS-3 (the most complete study which lists gender and marital status of abusers - the NIS-4 does not separate like the NIS-3 - hmmmm Fatherhood groups at work here?).
Now we move on to placating and condescending behavior. What you are known for best. Next you will block and talk about behind their backs. Watch out ladies, myself and several others are on her little block list. She even has some from the father's movement on her little list as well, isn't that right Ray? And do not deny Teri is right out there in the open for everyone to see. Well most everyone :-)
You also help alleged abusers, why else would you be searching for a ride for a well-known father's rights activist who was supposed to be in court in OHIO yet was stranded in ILLINOIS, which just so happened to be where his alleged victims live?
Ahh here we go.... Why don't you name some of these alleged victims you have helped? Name one man who is known to have been a victim in your circle of friends. I imagine between myself and others we could dig up his history and show a history of abuse and self indulgent behavior (traffic tickets, civil lawsuits, etc). Are you talking about Mark Godbey? Hmmmm that one was recently in court for violations. Have any more you want to share? I am up for tearing any claim you have completely apart, Teri.
This is so not even worth the time to discuss - NEXXXXXXXTTTTT!
There are no lies about you Teri. Did you forget you condoned child sexual abuse on your single parents email group? Did you forget your run that group like a little Gestapo and those who disagree are moderated or kicked off? Do we need to remind you of your sexist website - Jugs For Justice? No link back - not giving THAT filth any kudos.
Oh and we all know WHY you write about fathers more than mothers. Isn't it because your son and his ex-girlfriend went through a custody battle back in 2002 or 2003? And you were angry at HER mother because she hired a lawyer for her daughter and grandaughter? You sure complained about it often enough on not only the group you now own (which you did NOT own back then) and several other single parent/mom groups. You go so angry with one group that you quit that group. Like I said, know thine enemy Teri and I know you rather well.
Oh here we go. Teri says we are done so we are done. Well guess what Teri? You cannot control Facebook like you do your little Gestapo single parents group. So again put THAT in your little pipe.
Oh boo hoo hoo, poor widdle Teri has someone picking on her. Actually it looks like to me that teri is having fact and logic thrown at her and she has no clue how to respond. She is very much like some of the alleged abusers she helps. When the victim does not back down Teri resorts to the "oh woe is me routine". Pretty sad....
NOW THAT IS A SCARY THOUGHT!
Murray Straus? That explains the skewed reports. He does not know anything about intimate partner violence. If a woman yells at her partner to stop beating her she is just as violent as he is - even if he is shooting at her with a gun or trying to stab her. Yeah go on with yo bad self Teri.
Names Teri, Names. And again because you cannot take it like you dish it out and you cannot silence these two women, you are done. WHATEVER!!!!
NEXTTTTTTTTT!! (This is getting really old btw Teri - when will you just go away?)......
Oh and here we go with the self promotion. You keep right up with that Teri. See how far it gets you.