From: John Murtari, Coordinator (jmurtari@AKidsRight.Org)
Date: Sat May 03 2014 - 13:26:07 EDT
View this email in your browser (http://us7.campaign-archive1.com/?u=7570bc56b2e8a5d7c1d034bf3&id=6c3bf4b25e&e=df8e9c626e) Good People & People of Faith, In this message: 1) Final prep for May 9th "I LOVE YOU" event - make an impact! 2) Equal Parenting Party - gaining traction in New York. 3) Your FEEDBACK - Rebuttable Presumption or Fundamental Right? NOTE: We've had problems with SPAM filters trapping mail. Later today you should receive another message in plain text. Hopefully you receive them both -- just a one time event. 1) Final prep for May 9th "I LOVE YOU" event - make an impact! The Friday before Mother's Day, we are trying to influence two US Senators that Family Rights are important. We have some parents who are willing to risk arrest by writing "I LOVE YOU" with kid's chalk on the ground outside the Hanley Federal Building in Syracuse. The more people we have there to witness and to visit the Senators offices -- the less risk involved. http://us7.campaign-archive2.com/?u=7570bc56b2e8a5d7c1d034bf3&id=4f6c7b3973&e=b63b6ad9d4 Hope to see you Friday afternoon. About a dozen people so far plan on making the trip. News releases will go out early next week & we think local News Media will show up for the story and talk to people. We are making final arrangements now, please call me on my cell: 315-430-2702 or email: jmurtari@AKidsRight.Org if you are attending. We'd like to have a lunch get together before we go to the Federal Building at 1 PM. Contact me for details. 2) Equal Parenting Party - gaining traction in New York. Greg Fischer, a long proponent of Family Law Reform and very experienced with politics, has made great progress in getting an Equal Parenting Party established in New York -- and hopefully nationwide. https://www.facebook.com/groups/EqualParentingParty/ He can use some help, contact via Facebook, or also email at: perfect100@hotmail.com One important item as we consider Family Rights -- is it a rebuttable presumption or a Civil Right? (See FEEDBACK below) 3) Your FEEDBACK - Rebuttable Presumption or Fundamental Right? Get yourself a drink and take a few minutes to follow the conversation below. You are welcome to send in your thoughts and we'll also share those with the group. It's an important item for making reform a reality. From: Glenn Cheriton http://www.canadianepc.org/ President, CEPC Canadian Equal Parenting Council 631 Tubman Cr Ottawa ON K1V8L5 613-260-2659 > I note your dig at the proposed Canadian legislation (which we > at the Canadian Equal parenting Council are co-sponsoring) which > aims to reform the federal Divorce Act so that parents do not > lose their children in divorce unless a certain level of proof > is attained. > That, in legal language is a presumption that both parents and > fit and should get equal time and responsibility unless that is > rebutted by being shown that the child's best interest would be > “substantially enhanced” by another custody sharing (presumably > sole custody). > If properly interpreted by judges, this is the equivalent of > “innocent until proved guilty”. That is the intent of our > legislation. > I don't presume to know the state of your knowledge and wisdom > on Canadian family law, but we have extensively consulted on > this wording and it is our considered decision that this is as > far as we can reasonably expect to push things at this stage. > We are a federation of parents organizations across Canada which > engages in political action to reform law and practice. > Your comment suggesting that people should not be satisfied with > this is, in my opinion, an unwise and insulting dig at a > volunteer group of parents who are working to make real change. > I don't make comments out to the public asking “ well, if you > are satisfied with writing in chalk on the sidewalk…” > There are all sorts of efforts at reforms and the movement > should be working together rather than trying to minimize, > insult or diminish the efforts of others. > We have initiatives at international, provincial and federal > levels, which go beyond this initial legislation. A success in > this legislation can lead to further initiatives. We are not > stopping with this. > If those in the family rights movement want us to fail for > reasons that I am convinced at the heart of it are unhealthy, > then your comment will encourage that type of attitude and > non-co-operation with other groups. You don't need to build up > your support by tearing down others and their approaches. > I have long admired your long and principled fight for justice > and reforms. This is the first time that I view that you have > stepped outside of your good track record. > I am still your admirer, if on this one point, disappointed. From: John Murtari Good to hear from you and my apologies for the delay. I know you've been at this for a while as have many others. In the last several years I've been surprised by the lack of public activity. I appreciate what you are saying, and in part, I have to agree with you. Something is better than nothing and "this is as far as we can reasonably expect to push things at this stage." Many people here express similar feelings -- but I also feel if we want to make real progress the goal has to be big enough and worth the sacrifice to achieve it. I'm not sure about the 'big tent' approach to reform? I sincerely feel being presumed a fit & equal parent deserves the same level of protection given to a common criminal. http://www.akidsright.org/family_rights/family-rights-poster.pdf In the U.S. that means a unanimous verdict from a jury of your peers and proof beyond a reasonable doubt that you acted with serious mal-intent toward your kids. It's not at all about being a superior, average, or poor parent. I feel we diminish ourselves by supporting such wording, "a presumption that both parents and fit and should get equal time and responsibility unless that is rebutted by being shown that the child's best interest would be “substantially enhanced” by another custody sharing (presumably sole custody)." Others may find it correct. I think of my divorce case, I think of many others and parents also involved with the social workers from "Child Protective Services" -- and such wording doesn't help? I think we would actually benefit ourselves by clearer goals and ideas.http://www.akidsright.org/civil_rights_essay.htm I feel this is a fundamental right, others see the need for government to manage the relationship. Perhaps we haven't progressed enough in our thinking on the issue? All the 'great' Civil Rights were defined and earned by people willing to sacrifice for what they believed in. I don't think we will be any different as families. When we word goals as 'Civil Rights', people understand the level of effort needed. When a goal is a "rebuttable presumption" -- that is a different level of effort? This may be why our groups don't coalesce as they should? Glenn, I would appreciate your thoughts. I'd like to get your reply and share it in a dedicated message for the group. From: Glenn Cheriton > I understand that you are sincere, and I respect that. > There are also dozens of similarly sincere parents in Canada who > feel that a “no-compromises” approach is what it takes, so they > figure that by sabotaging what our group is trying to do will > somehow make magic happen. Such people seem to me to each have a > different expression of what no compromise means, of exactly > what principle should be used. > In the real world of politics, I have chosen to make changes > step by step, and work with people with political skills, or > those who can work with others and can learn politics. > I have no problem with those who choose another path. Evidence > to me is clear: you can make any analogies you want, but I don't > see the kind of support for our issues from the civil rights > groups. On the contrary, they oppose parent equality as strongly > as those on the extreme right. > “Rights” dialogue may work in the US, but we have not been able > to make traction with it in Canada. We have a good working group > with our strategy. Working together is critical for any > political advocacy group. Others can try other strategy, but it > is certainly a major annoyance if we get those who should be > working with us, to make claims (that I privately think are > unreasonable) that make our work more difficult. > I hope that we can meet and chat more some time. > Glenn ============================================================ Copyright © 2014 AKidsRight.Org, All rights reserved. Previous member of earlier group list. Our mailing address is: AKidsRight.Org 34 Franklin Street Lyons, NY 14489 USA ** unsubscribe from this list (http://Org.us7.list-manage2.com/unsubscribe?u=7570bc56b2e8a5d7c1d034bf3&id=f9b5442be1&e=df8e9c626e&c=6c3bf4b25e) ** update subscription preferences (http://Org.us7.list-manage.com/profile?u=7570bc56b2e8a5d7c1d034bf3&id=f9b5442be1&e=df8e9c626e)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue May 15 2018 - 03:12:02 EDT