Desperate dad in rooftop protest

hmmm maybe this is why he doesn't have visitation rights? Sounds like someone has boundary issues.

We have so many systems in the United States that make no sense and only serve to provide hardship and frustration to the public those systems are supposed to help....its great to see that the father in this situation and fathers across the country and world do want to have a place in the lives of their children and to make a positive difference to and for them.....

Go him.

More power to the dads that aren't deadbeats! In a lot of cases the fathers only rights are to pay child support or go to jail. If the mother wants to mislead the state to get even with the dad for her own reasons unrelated to abuse, he loses visitation. Bad dads have left a tough act for good ones to follow.

If a man has a child and wants to see their child, as long as he is not an abusive man, they should be allowed to see their child. As the social services says, they think of the welfare of the child, well a child needs both parents, not only one and if the father wants to play a role in that childs life, don't take that away from the parent or the kid.

part 2 of 2

The children equal 100%

Mom is W and Dad is E or Vis-à-vis
The state has 1/3, mom has 1/3, dad has 1/3
The state manufactures,creates conflict in order to
eliminate a parent,of their choosing.The parent of choice to eliminate,aka the states target parent is the one they feel most likely who will stand up,defend against them and the removal of the child(ren) and who will most likely be indebted to pay dearly to remain in the life of their child(ren).
The state moves forward thru and by their state agencies aka DSS/DCF/CPS to manufacture what they need for the elimination of their target parent.Thus when complete, the state then usurps the 1/3% of that parent ,adds it to their 1/3% Now the state has 2/3% of power and control, which allows them to enact/ become and have triggered state parens patriae interests.
The state then With 2/3% of the child(ren) the state thru the family court and DSS/DCF/CPS then dictates to the other parent who has only 1/3% as to what they can/cannot do,how,where,why,when and tolerates the other parent they have eliminated and uses that parent(regardless of gender) as a money factor which they use to maintain the states incentives paid to them under Title IV funds.
The state DSS/DCF/CPS then at it's own whim can enact any or all foster care,adoptions etc. and the children become a creature of the state[[ a legal adoption by a non-biological parent is a creature of the state. Lofton v. Secretary of the Dep't of Children and Family Serv., 358 F.3d 804 (11th Cir.), aff’d 377 F.3d 1275 (11th Cir. 2004)(en banc).]]
Yielding more incentive funds to them all under Title IV.
Diamond

N
State
/l\
/ l \
/ l \
/ l \
/ l \
M \---l-----/ D
\ l /
\ l /
\ l /
\l /
children
S

part 1 of 2
IMO,look at in a diamond shape,N,E,S,W

The state on the top N declares a vested interest in the child(ren).via Incentives they receive ,located at the opposite end of N is S, the children .

The judge ,family court is Influenced by the state Agengy,DSS,DCF,CPS thus the judge has a vested interest in the children
via Incentives they receive ref: www.nccpr.org
THE PRICE OF PANIC/11
Any judge
knows that if he listens to the parent, sends
the child back home and then something
goes wrong, his entire career may be in
jeopardy. If, on the other hand, he listens to
the lawyer from DCF and keeps the child in
foster care, the child may suffer all sorts of
harm, but the judge is safe.
The deck remains stacked throughout
the process. In a criminal proceeding, the
defendant must be proven guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt. But the standard DCF
must meet to take away a child and put him
or her in foster care is “preponderance of the
evidence,” the lowest standard in American
jurisprudence – the same standard used to
determine which insurance company pays
for a fender bender.

The incentives for panic that apply to
caseworkers and judges go all the way to the
top.

The federal government lavishes billions
of dollars each year on foster care.

Much of it can’t be used for anything else.
And the foster care money comes as an
open-ended entitlement. For every eligible
child, the federal government reimburses 50
to 83 cents of every dollar spent to keep that
child in foster care. In Florida this adds up
to an estimated $140 million per year.30
The federal government offers far,
far less for safe, proven alternatives to foster
care - -and that funding is not an entitlement.

As a result, the feds wind up spending
at least nine times as much on foster care
as on alternatives.31 And the system creates
a perverse incentive: Though alternatives
cost less in total dollars, it may sometimes
cost a state less to throw a child into foster
care.

National Coalition for
Child Protection Reform
53 Skyhill Road (Suite 202)
Alexandria VA 22314
(703) 212-2006
info@nccpr.org
www.nccpr.org

I think that each case is different and each relationship needs to be evaluated before making any sort of decision. We have no idea if this guy was a fit parent or not; we have no idea if this guy had made threats, treated his ex poorly, or if he was father of the year.
In the US there are systems in place to help the courts make these tough decisions. I've been through the system for the custody of my daughter, and her father made some serious accusations that I had to spend a lot of money to prove false. Even after that I demanded that he have plenty of quality time with her, even going against what our evaluator recommended. Not every father is left out in the cold, but if there's no money to be spent, then the evaluation will be a lot less fair overall. It isn't the fault of the courts, who have to work in a "one size fits all" world to be fair. If you get married and have kids, the most important things are loving your family and doing what's best for your children.

a high percentage of these fathers have been abusive towards their spouses/partners and their children.

it sucks that a lot more good men have to suffer, but then...the onus is on ALL fathers to take responsibility for the abuse.

Most of the time its not the courts that are the problem, most of the time its one of the parents that refuse to follow a court order that allows one of the parents to see a child. Unless a parent can prove that the other parent is a danger to their child, the courts should force the parent to allow visitation or remove the child from that parents custody.

Agreed,there are No Options left.
Family court needs to shape up and make Equal custody the norm or ship out,get out of the lives of families.
Our children are our posterity,Not the family courts property.