|
Contact Us
| |
The Family Rights Act of 1999 - rev
b (9/29/99), changes in red
(see comments submitted, view previous revision)
AN ACT:
to recognize:
that the current patchwork of Family Law in the
United States has become a tragedy in which both parents and children are victims,
that one of the most basic rights of any person is to
associate with their children,
that the vast, vast majority of mothers and fathers
are good people and good parents trying to do the best they can,
that most practioners in the present
"system" mean well but are operating in a difficult environment where there is
great administrative power,
that the "best interests of the child" are
served by recognition of these rights and regular and frequent contact with both parents
(barring a Jury finding the person is unfit to parent).
to enforce some of our most basic Civil Rights:
the constitutional right of both parents to associate
with their children and participate in their lives free of
government interference,
the constitutional right of family members to be
secure in their homes,
the constitutional right of parents to change
employment or careers throughout their lives,
to encourage:
the American people to realize the birth and raising
of a child is an important decision that is not to be taken lightly and which will place
them (whether they like it or not) in proximity to the other parent for many years.
the States to institute programs in parenting and
marriage for young people, and to require attendance in pre-marriage classes before a
Marrial License is granted.
to provide:
that the provisions of this Act become the
"default" agreement between individuals before they form a family,
that the States and/or individuals are free to
institute other agreements to replace this Act, but the acceptance of those provisions
must require free will acceptance by the part of any individual to be affected,
for the involuntary termination of the preceding
rights only when the family member is found unfit to parent -- with the same
standard of jury protection and speedy trial,
to confer jurisdiction upon the district courts of
the United States to provide injunctive relief,
to authorize the attorney General to institute suits
to protect such rights
and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may
be cited as the "Family Rights Act of 1999".
I. DEFINITIONS:
The term "parent" applies to both the
biological father and mother of a child. If the biological parent is deceased or has taken
action to leave the child for adoption --it then means the adopted parent(s).
The term "family member" means either a
child or parent. The term applies to parents who are unmarried, married, or
divorced.
The term "home" means a living area which
is either owned or rented by the individual.
The term "unfit to parent" means to be
found guilty of Criminal Misconduct against a child. This is a serious accusation, and a
person accused has the protection of a Jury.
The term "attempting to escape support"
means a willful attempt by a parent to reduce their Child Support obligation by reducing
their income primarily for the purpose of reducing the payment. This is a serious
accusation, and a person accused has the protection of a Jury.
The term "speedy trial"
means that if a parent is charged with misconduct which could result in a
"temporary" order either limiting access to their home or to their children --
they have the right to be brought to trial on the charges within 60 days (even if they are
not imprisoned as is the usual rule in Criminal cases).
II. BACKGROUND:
This Act is drawn in the light of the following sections of the U.S.
Constitution:
Seventh Amendment - "In suits at common law, where the value in
controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved . .
. "
Ninth Amendment - "The enumeration in the Constitution, of
certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people
… "
While the framers of the Constitution did not include "matrimonial" issues
specifically within these amendments, divorces were not then considered matters within the
"common" law, but rather church law - we consider the present day frequency and
ease of Divorce proceedings (and their devastating effect on families). This
"evolution" have would have caused the "founding fathers" some
concern. Especially when considered with those words from our:
Declaration of Independence: "We hold
these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by
their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the
pursuit of Happiness."
Americans have always held to the tradition that "Liberty" and "Life"
rights deserve our greatest protections. What of "Happiness?" And what greater
and purer "Happiness" can there be in life than the relation between parent and
child?
Who among us, when faced with a Court proceeding in which we felt a Judge
or Government offical was about to unjustly limit contact with our children - would
not want the safety valve of a jury?
Who among us would not want a presumption we be allowed equal contact
with our children?
The right to the company of one's children/parent is a right preserved to the
people.
III. IMPLEMENTATION
The following scenarios are examples reflecting adherence to the
goals of this Act. Unless a parent is found unfit -- the relationship with the
children continues unbroken.
COMMENTS:
|
