First, attend the International Conference on Shared Parenting 2017 (ICSP 2017) on May 29-31, 2017 at the Westin Copley Place Hotel in Boston.
Then attend AFCC 2017 at the Sheraton Boston Hotel immediately after the close of ICSP 2017 on May 31, 2017, a five minute walk from the Westin.
NPO-ICSP 2017 preliminary program available now! #NPO-ICSP2017 npo-icsp2017.org/program/
Registration & Housing for NPO-ICSP 2017 available now. Make sure to register by April 15 for our reduced early bird fees! npo-icsp2017.org/registrationhousing/
Questions can be directed to Parents@NationalParents
February 20, 2017 by Robert Franklin, Esq, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization
The “protective parents” movement is at it again. Here’s the latest article channeling their mostly bogus claims. It’s by Laurie Udesky and, to anyone not versed in the matter of parental alienation and allegations of child abuse made in family courts for the purpose of gaining the upper hand in custody battles, the piece would certainly appear authoritative. Udesky presents three heart-rending cases in which an apparently abusive parent managed to get custody over the objections of the other parent who may well have been trying to protect the child. Such cases make for painful reading and no one dismisses them lightly.
I can’t comment on Udesky. She’s a long-time journalist with some awards to her credit. But if her linked-to piece is any indication, she’s no journalist, she’s an advocate and a highly unscrupulous one at that. She’s a zealot.
February 19, 2017 by Robert Franklin, Esq, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization
Finally, John Bolch delivers himself of this gem.
And the final myth is one that all of this fatherhood talk brought to mind. It is this: that for separated fathers courts and lawyers are the enemy, preventing them from retaining a relationship with their children. I find this particularly ironic, given that every day courts and lawyers do entirely the opposite, working hard to ensure that father/child relationships are maintained. If a father is denied contact with his child by the mother, where does he go? To the court. And the court will do everything it can to ensure that contact does take place, unless it is one of those relatively rare cases when it is not in the interests of the child. As for the lawyers, those acting for the father will do all they can on his behalf, as I did many times myself, and even those lawyers acting for recalcitrant mothers recognise they have a duty to consider the child’s welfare at all times. In short, courts and lawyers are the friend of fatherhood, not the enemy.
February 17, 2017 by Robert Franklin, Esq, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization
Smugly wrong. That about describes John Bolch. He writes piece after piece at the site for the Marilyn Stowe blog and all but invariably simply substitutes the most outrageous and inaccurate claims for known reality. Weirdly, it never seems to occur to Bolch that providing some sort of factual support for his opinions might make them more acceptable to his readers. That’s doubly weird given that the man used to practice law. My experience with law practice was that judges and the law itself always demand evidence in support of legal claims and, if a lawyer doesn’t provide any, that lawyer loses the case. I’ll take a wild guess that it’s the same in the U.K. Of course, now that I think about it, maybe that’s why Bolch no longer practices; the whole “producing evidence” thing is clearly beyond him now and maybe it was then too.
In his most recent embarrassment, Bolch both comes out in favor of fatherless kids and informs readers that, really, British courts would never, never discriminate against a father. His first thesis, as I described yesterday, is that divorce is good for everyone, Mom, Dad and the kids. As I said, his reasoning is straight out of the 1960s when we were told that getting out of a bad marriage would make the adults happier and, with happier adults would come happier children.
February 16, 2017 by Robert Franklin, Esq, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization
John Bolch is at it again. Actually, on first reading, I was sure this piece was written in 1968 (Marilyn Stowe Blog, 2/13/17). But no, a glance at the date indicated it was posted just this past Sunday. So I can’t figure out why he’s recycling arguments in favor of no-fault divorce that could have been lifted directly from the late 60s or early 70s. Has the man learned nothing in the ensuing decades? Oh, silly me, I forgot, it’s Bolch. Of course he’s learned nothing. That’s sort of his specialty. As usual, he’s tossed off a piece that’s long on vague assertions backed up by no empirical facts and contradicted by much that’s both obvious and well-known (at least by others). Bolch wants certain things to be true and therefore, according to him, they are.
His reason for once again fouling the page at the Marilyn Stowe Blog is a pair of articles on fathers and fatherlessness in The Observer last Sunday.