our-blog-icon-top
NPO publishes blog articles to inform and to stimulate conversation about issues of importance to NPO's mission.  All blog articles express the opinions of the authors as individuals and do not necessarily reflect the views of National Parents Organization, its Board of Directors, or its executives.  

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
November 24, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization 

Two days after the fact, I thought I’d take time to mention a few of the things for which we have to be thankful.  By “we” of course I mean the movement for family court reform.  ‘Tis the season, after all, and, since we have so much for which to be thankful, it would seem to be inappropriate to let it go by without a low bow and a sweeping doff of our plumed hats.

First can only be the fact that so many people have gotten our message.  That children need both parents throughout their childhoods and even after is such an obvious truth that so many people know, if not consciously at least intuitively, has finally gained critical mass.  Does anyone even argue otherwise?  If they do, I certainly don’t see it.  Yes, there are a few organizations fighting a rearguard action against equal parenting, but they invariably need to disguise the fact.  So the DV establishment opposes shared parenting in the guise of opposing domestic violence and radical feminists do so in the guise of an imaginary “war on women.”  Family lawyers claim that the system works just fine.  More threadbare and patently untrue claims would be hard to imagine.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
All of us at National Parents Organization wish you and your family a joyous Thanksgiving holiday!

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
Linda Valdez is on to something (Arizona Republic, 11/19/18).  Arizona’s child protective agency, the Department of Child Safety seems to be hoping no one will notice a particular bit of information.  More specifically, it hopes We the People won’t notice that an important bit of information is missing from the reams of data DCS routinely maintains.

The state’s legislature requires that DCS go to court and get a judge’s order before it removes a child from its parents.  That of course is standard procedure throughout the country.  What’s also standard procedure is that states give their CPS authorities an out.  If the child is in imminent danger, then the state can request an emergency hearing based on “exigent circumstances.”

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
November 19, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

This continues my response to the National Review article on adoption that I began yesterday (National Review, 11/17/18).  November is National Adoption Month, hence the NR piece.

As I said yesterday, all 14 contributors to the article enthusiastically promote adoption and for the best of reasons.  Many, many children worldwide don’t have parents or close relatives to care for them.  They desperately need good, loving homes and only adoption can provide them.  Adoptive parents are usually motivated to meet that desperate need.  Good for them.

But, however well-intentioned the writers of the NR piece are, there’s a lot they don’t know about the laws on adoption and its practice.  They see the bright side of adoption, but not the dark.  And it’s that dark side that tends strongly to thwart their own good intentions and the good that adoption can do.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
November 18, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

The National Review has this article on adoption (National Review, 11/17/18).  Actually, it’s less of an article than a compendium of short pieces by people with various connections to and thoughts on adoption, foster care, etc.  Adoptive parents and adults who were adopted as kids chime in with religious leaders, law professors and the like.  It’s often moving, partly because kids needing adoption are in such precarious positions and those who adopt often do so out of such a strong sense of love and generosity.

And yet, out of the 14 people who contributed to the article, not one knows the dark underbelly of the adoption system in this country.  Each person enthusiastically endorses adoption for all the obvious reasons.  Their statements should be read and internalized.  These are human beings who want to do good for children in need.  Many of them already have and their stories are important.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
November 16, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

The U.K. finds itself in the same pickle as we do in the U.S (The Independent, 11/9/18).

That pickle is the one in which authorities charged with protecting children have far too little money with which to do the job.  There are too many cases and too few caseworkers to handle them.  And the number of cases is increasing, pointing to a potential crisis in the years to come.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
November 15, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

The fight for shared parenting in Michigan will be heating up again  in the coming months and this article by NPO’s Linda Wright reprinted in a blog is the opening salvo (KiddieMom, 11/13/18).  Actually, that may have come on Tuesday, November 6, i.e. Election Day, when Jim Runestad won his bid for a state senate seat.  Runestad of course was the force responsible for SB 4691 that would establish a presumption of equal parenting following divorce or separation.

Needless to say, Wright’s piece is, shall we say, right on.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
November 14, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

It’s hard to know how to feel about this CNN piece on fathers and the family court system (CNN, 11/7/18).  On one hand, the writer seems to be sincere about advising men, so he consults family court experts – a lawyer, a judge and a mental health expert – for their tips.  On the other hand, it’s a piece that could have been written 40 years ago, entirely lacking in the long-established realities fathers face.  It’s like writer Thom Patterson is a latter-day Rip Van Winkle, newly awakened from a long, long sleep.

So he seems to want us to believe that fathers haven’t been complaining about their treatment in family courts for those four decades.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
November 12, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

Usually, advice columnist Carolyn Hax is the very soul of good sense.  She rarely misinforms, misleads or misadvises a letter writer.  This, however, is an exception (Seattle Times, 11/7/18).  Hax’s inquirer signs herself “Wannabe Mom, Not Wannabe Wife,” a label that, strangely enough, is only tangentially related to her, her situation and her question.

WMNWW’s question – whether she should, without a partner, adopt a child - could be right out of the 1990s.  That was a time when the “Single Mothers by Choice” movement was in flower.  The women of that movement were intentionally giving birth to or adopting children without the involvement of a man.  It was all portrayed as terribly “courageous” on their part and few people raised their voices to challenge them.  One of course was Vice President Dan Quayle who famously questioned whether TV character Murphy Brown (Candace Bergen) should have been depicted as having a child without a father.  Quayle pointed out that doing so shouldn’t be considered “just another lifestyle choice.”

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
November 11, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

Houston Juvenile Court Judge Michael Schneider has once again unsheathed his judicial sword (Houston Chronicle, 11/9/18).  And once again, Child Protective Services must yield. 

I’ve written before about Schneider.  He shows every indication of being a judge who’s bent on educating CPS caseworkers and their supervisors about how to do their jobs within the confines of statutory and constitutional law.  Several years ago, when caseworkers demanded an emergency hearing because, according to them, a child was in such danger that regular notice couldn’t be given to its parents, Schneider acquiesced.  But, on learning that no such emergency had occurred, he took the unusual step of ordering the pair to write essays demonstrating that they understood parents’ constitutional rights.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
November 9, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

In my post yesterday, I dealt with yet another strange and badly researched article that seeks to cast aspersions on the Family Bridges program.  Family Bridges is a four-day workshop that attempts to reverse the process of parental alienation, usually in kids with the most severe form of alienation.  It’s been around for 20 years and logged an astonishing record of success.  That success is both anecdotal, as I’ve reported before, and scientific.  Dr. Richard Warshak has conducted two studies of its efficacy and found the program highly successful at reintegrating children with their targeted parents.  No such program could hope to be 100% successful and Family Bridges doesn’t hit that mark, but, all things considered, it seems to work well.  That’s why countless judges, custody evaluators and others have referred/recommended alienated children and their targeted parents to the program over the years.

But that success doesn’t keep incurious, mendacious and virulently anti-dad “journalists” from attacking FB anyway.  Such a piece was the NBC Bay Area one I discussed yesterday.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
November 7, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

In Colorado, and seemingly under the threat of a state Court of Appeals decision, state child welfare agencies are starting to try to locate fathers when mothers are charged with child abuse or neglect (Colorado Sun, 11/5/18).  That of course is a good thing, but the new development fairly screams “Why’d it take so long?”

As I’ve written before, back in 2006, the Urban Institute did a study that found that, in over half of cases in which the father’s identity was known, CPS agencies made no effort to locate him.  They preferred foster care to father care despite the fact that the former costs the state significant sums of money and the latter little or nothing.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
November 8, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

As hit pieces that target the Family Bridges program go, this is one of the most benign and professional (NBC Bay Area, 11/2/18).  Don’t get me wrong, its anti-FB biases are abundantly clear and it’s scandalously badly researched (if it’s researched at all), but even so it’s better than the others.  For example, it quotes Linda Gottlieb who’s that rarest of birds in articles of this type, an expert who actually knows what she’s talking about.  That alone puts it a cut above the other nonsense we read.

The NBC Bay Area piece takes a strange tack in its assault on Family Bridges.  The writers (yes, there are five of them) first located three kids who were deemed alienated by the judges in their parents’ custody cases, went through the FB workshop and are willing to say negative and in some cases untrue things about it.  Much of the piece then consists of quotations from the three who are all now young adults.  For example,

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
November 5, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

Hi everyone.  It’s your intrepid correspondent again, this time breathlessly bringing you the latest on the most important event of the past two years - the Brad Pitt/Angelina Jolie divorce and custody case (New Idea, 11/1/18).  Yes, wars are being fought, hurricanes are laying waste to entire communities and the Four Horsemen prowl the countryside, but a couple of celebrities are divorcing, so all must drop what they’re doing and take heed.

It seems that Brad has, at least for now, taken the lead in the custody sweepstakes.  The judge appointed a custody evaluator, one Dr. Stan Katz, who has, in due course, interviewed all and sundry – the parents, the kids, relatives and others.  And it turns out the kids prefer his Bradness to living with Angie.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
November 4, 2018 by Rober Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

I suppose this is a case of “anything the U.S. can do, Australia can do … too.”

Three men have been arrested in New South Wales and a woman is sought for arrest in connection with a long-term conspiracy to kidnap and hide children who the conspirators believe have been wrongly taken from their mothers or who are the subjects of joint custody orders.  The group appears to be an extension of the “protective mother” movement.  Put simply, when a mother claims a father who’s gotten some form of custody is abusive, the group stands ready to abduct and hide the child.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
November 2, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

In the case of In Re the Adoption of L.G.K., both the trial and appellate courts reached a just decision.  I wish I thought it was the correct legal decision and that the case won’t be overturned by the Indiana Supreme Court. 

The child’s father, G.C. and her mother, J.K. were never married, but had a sexual relationship for about 10 months, from December, 2013 to October, 2014.  In December, 2014, J.K. told G.C. that she was pregnant.  G.C. took little part in her pregnancy or childbirth, but both his parents did.  Once L.G.K. was born though, G.C. moved in with J.K. and took an active part in her care.  She soon was calling him “Dad” and his parents “Granny” and “Poppy.”  He and J.K. separated, but he continued caring for his daughter, paid support to J.K. and had sole care of the child at certain times.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
November 1, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

As of mid-October, we have the latest analysis of the Family Bridges workshop that seeks to repair the relationships between severely alienated children and their targeted parents.  Previous studies of Family Bridges strongly suggested positive results of the program along with positive attitudes of its participants.  The latest study is larger and a more comprehensive examination of both.

It must be noted that the study was conducted by Prof. Richard Warshak who originated the concepts put into practice by Family Bridges.  That said, Warshak has had no professional, legal or financial connection either to Family Bridges itself or to the professionals who conduct its workshops.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
October 31, 2018 by Don Hubin, Ph.D., Chair, Ohio Affiliate and Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

National Parents Organization’s groundbreaking study of Ohio’s domestic relations courts’ standard parenting time guidelines has provoked a response for the Ohio Association of Domestic Relations Judges (OADRJ).

Normally, it would be appropriate to thank the judges for reviewing the NPO Ohio Parenting Time Report, judiciously weighing the points made in the report, and thoughtfully responding. Unfortunately, there is little evidence that the judges actually read, or at least read carefully, the NPO report. Indeed, there is clear evidence that they didn’t read, or at least didn’t understand, the report.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
October 28, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

The case of Teagan Batstone may come to a close soon.  Teagan was the little Canadian girl who was killed by her mother, Lisa Batstone, back in December, 2014.  Lisa Batstone was apprehended when she backed her car into a ditch and Teagan’s body was found in its trunk.  The child was eight years old.

Just why it’s taken almost four years to bring Lisa to trial is anyone’s guess.  Mental health professionals said she was fit to stand trial shortly after her arrest, but so far no trial has taken place.  The latest proceeding is a one in which the judge must determine whether Lisa’s statements to various people at the scene and at the hospital later are admissible in her trial for Teagan’s death (Abbotsford News, 10/16/18).

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
October 26, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

#BelieveTheWoman took another body blow recently (Minneapolis Star Tribune, 10/17/18).  As many recall, U.S. Representative Keith Ellison, D – MN, was accused back in August by his former girlfriend, Karen Monahan, of physical and emotional abuse against her.  He denies her allegations, but they spurred the Star Tribune and Alpha Media to seek records from his divorce from his wife Kim in 2012.  Presumably, both media outlets sought information to the effect that Ellison is an abuser.

Both Ellison and his ex-wife opposed unsealing the divorce file (why was it sealed in the first place?) citing privacy concerns.  But a judge ordered its contents made public.  What they revealed is that it wasn’t Ellison, but his ex who was the abuser.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
October 25, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

Yesterday’s piece ended by asking why opponents of the shared parenting bill currently before Italy’s Parliament seek its defeat. In that piece I detailed the usual tired claims by opponents that were faithfully reiterated by Washington Post writer Anna Momigliano (Washington Post, 9/18/18). As usual, none of those arguments withstands even casual scrutiny and Momigliano mentioned not a single reason to support shared parenting. Her piece was 100% negative.

But of course she gave plenty of space for opponents to make their claims. The question though becomes, why do they oppose shared parenting. The answer, it turns out, is both entirely predictable and utterly quixotic, at odds with even the interests they pretend to promote.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
October 24, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

Is it possible that, with all that’s been written and said about shared parenting in so many parts of the world, that it will be Italy that leads the way?  It is.  Indeed, it appears likely.

Now, this Washington Post article about the bill that’s pending before the Italian Parliament is little different from the usual claptrap published by those who oppose children maintaining meaningful relationships with both parents when the adults split up (Washington Post, 9/18/18).  That of course means that it’s simply wrong on several fronts and misleading on the others.  Plus, writer Anna Momigliano tosses in a rich disregard for Italian mothers in her zeal to mischaracterize the bill, its probable effects and its supporters.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
October 22, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

It’s like reading the history of a defeated army retreating but fighting rear-guard actions along the way (Psychology Today, 10/10/18).  I refer of course to Professor Edward Kruk’s description of the tactics used by anti-shared parenting advocates over the years as, one by one, their justifications for their opposition fell before the advance of science and sound reasoning.  And now, they’ve come up against the impassable river, the unscalable mountain.  They’re stuck, hemmed in on every side by the onslaught of scientific achievement.

According to Kruk, there’ve been three waves of justifications advanced by opposition forces against shared parenting.  The first wave consisted of three smaller ones.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn
October 21, 2018 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

Here’s a case that’s sadly not uncommon (U.S. News, 10/9/18).  So why write about it?  Two reasons that I’ll get to later.

A case manager for the Iowa Department of Human Services has been found to have lied under oath and otherwise fabricated evidence in order to strip a mother and father of their parental rights to their four children.

Share this post

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn