C.P.S. legal abuse, under color-or-LAW.

part 2 cont.

In 1965, a national organization of lawyers announced a new 'Project' - to draft a 'model' divorce law for state legislatures to enact.

The result of their Project, which would change the face of public policy, would become known as 'no-fault divorce.'

California was seen as the test case when In 1969, Governor Reagan signed no-fault divorce into law. But the national 'Project' would deliver the product to the rest of the country.

Informal interviews reveal that no-fault divorce is not very well understood. Most people will say, "It means it's nobody's fault."

The purpose of this web site is to reveal more of the story about no-fault divorce - through a closer look inside the Project. The story is told 'in their own words,' using documents preserved from 40 years ago.

More than 3,000 pages of documents from archives around the country have been located. Each bullet point in the list is linked to a document from the Project. As more of these documents are processed, they will be posted... please check back.

Most of the links are to files in 'pdf' format which may download slowly on some computers. Please be patient. Many of the links are also offered in 'jpg' format which may download faster. Most of the links only go to one or two pages of a longer document. The focus is on a specific statement(s) in the document. Full-length versions of the complete documents will become as time permits.

If you would like faster access for research purposes, please contact us.

Please help us tell the rest of this story by making a tax-deductible donation...

part 2 cont.
The top ten secrets of ‘no-fault’ divorce:

1. It is still a ‘lawsuit’ – one party is suing the other – even though they changed the name of the legal action to ‘petition.’The plaintiff was re-named the ‘petitioner’ and the defendant became the ‘respondent’ but a ‘hearing’ is still required – which is a sham.

2. There’s no ‘cause of action’ – in other words, it’s a lawsuit without any real ‘grounds’ (this is unconstitutional) . The sole legal ground, ‘irretrievable breakdown,’ is merely symbolic.

3. There are no ‘defenses’ which means the defendant always loses (again, unconstitutional – we are guaranteed the right to a defense in a lawsuit).

4. Without the two essential elements of a lawsuit – a ‘cause’ and a ‘defense’ – there’s no ‘case in controversy’. This means the court process exists only for the sake of appearances – and, simply put, is a ‘fraud.’

5. The judge’s role is ‘ministerial’ (the same as that of a ‘clerk’) – there’s no ‘judicial discretion’ because the ‘judgment’ is an ‘automatic outcome’. The judge’s involvement (once again) is for appearance’s sake – and for enforcement of ‘state authority’ (ensuring the ‘automatic outcome’ of the law’).

6. The fundamental precept of ‘unclean hands’ is set aside. According to this precept, if the party filing the lawsuit caused the problem they are not entitled to a ‘remedy’ in the courts.

7. At the outset, the law was deceptively sold as a ‘mutual agreement’ process – and most people still believe this is how it works: that both people sign an ‘agreement’.

8. The State is not neutral – it always takes the side of the one filing the divorce lawsuit (the ‘petitioner’).

9. No-fault divorce works like the ‘takings’ doctrine – the ‘benefits’ of marriage, such as health insurance, etc., are ‘taken’ with the granting of divorce. Same-sex couples are now clamoring for these very same ‘benefits’ because no-fault divorce laws removed ‘traditional’ marriage protections and opened the door to a multitude of new interpretations of marriage.

10. The State’s police powers can be deployed to ensure the divorce takes place and to enforce the resulting court orders (child support, custody, etc). A spouse that tries to preserve the marriage can be sanctioned with fines or jail for ‘dragging their feet’.

How many of these things did you know? PLEASE READ ON...
------------ ------

Greed of the Greedy of Eyes Beady;
vs
Needs of the Needy and prospective Needy.

The slippery slithering slope,
From seductive allure,
Of ready pay,
Via hate,
Discrimination,
And invigoration,
Of ill-will.

Yet,
It should never pay,
To hate,
Discriminate,
Or invigorate,
Ill-will.

This is your State(s) on Dough.
Any questions?

Greed of the Greedy of Eyes Beady,
Supplanting Needs of the Needy and prospective Needy;
As We the People, of the People for the people,
Passively or actively acquiesce,
To co-dependent rapports,
With Contractors, for contractor by contractors,
Who endlessly endeavor,
To evermore of their,
Euphoric fixes from the mores.

Dare (them) to just say NO to the Dough.

IV-mainliners need be brought to light;
Not further rewarded, enabled or incentivized.

Embezzlement,
Racketeering,
And Extortion,
Should never be couched upon endearing children;
Nor against the dignity of any Child of the Almighty.

part 2.
More Links located to the left
http://www.uniformdivorce.com/

The 'Uniform Divorce' Project
- the inside story of 'no-fault' divorce in the U.S.

>The top ten secrets of ‘no-fault’ divorce:

http://www.uniformd ivorce.com/

***New Study shows 'Unilateral Divorce' positively impacts violent crime rate,including murder rate.***

De-coding No-Fault Divorce –
Ten Things They Don't Want You to Know

What is no-fault divorce anyway?

Try asking anyone what it is – or better yet – ask how it works. Why don’t you even try asking a legislator, a judge, or a lawyer. Most will say it’s a ‘mutual’ process and that it preserves privacy. Or they say, “It means it’s nobody’s fault,” or, “It prevents needless conflict.” Will anyone say, “It’s a one-sided process”?

In truth, very few couples end their marriage ‘by agreement’ and then work out the details to do so. In his research, Frank Furstenberg found that “four out of five marriages ended unilaterally.” (see page 22 in his book, Divided Families)

So, what happens during the no-fault divorce process to these four out of five couples when it’s not a ‘mutual’ process – when one spouse wants to preserve the family unit or get help for the marriage relationship? Is family preservation supported? Does anyone consider the kids?

An even more revealing question is: Were certain things purposely concealed about ‘no-fault’ divorce when it was being promoted in 1970?

State agencies,funded by the feds have been running A muck long before GWB, It started back in 1965,The Project, , in 2 parts

part 1.
ref:
1965,The Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act (UMDA) Project,would become known as 'no-fault divorce. And 'No-Fault' = No Kids 2007 article

In 1965,
The Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act (UMDA) Project

The Project....

http://www.uniformdivorce.com/InTheirWords.html

In 1965, a national organization of lawyers announced a new 'Project' The Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act (UMDA) Project- to draft a 'model' divorce law for state legislatures to enact.

The result of their Project, which would change the face of public policy, would become known as 'no-fault divorce.'

Background:
The Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act (UMDA) Project

In 1965, a little-known organization called the Uniform Law Commission announced a new project to draft a 'uniform' marriage and divorce law that would be a 'model' for the states to enact.

The 'Commission' is a spin off of the American Bar Association and serves as their 'drafting arm' to write 'model' laws for state legislatures to enact.

Made up of lawyers from each state who are appointed by their governors, the Commission meets every summer to draft model laws and that meeting is called the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL).

The Project....

(Click on underlined items below to link to documents from the Project.)
http://www.uniformdivorce.com/InTheirWords.html

• was the idea of those with influence over state legislators
• was organized by a group described as a 'shadow super-legislature'
• was overseen by lawyers that saw themselves as a 'governmental' organization
• would need 'approval' from the American Bar Association
• meant the protection of family unity was in the hands of lawyers

Florida case

Deploying the State's Police Power to Sever Marital Ties

No one who has not sat in prison knows what the State is like. – Leo Tolstoy

Could you be jailed in Florida for trying to preserve your marriage? A case study that has been unfolding over the past three years in Palm Beach County reveals this is entirely possible.

==

Child Protection Services needs a severe overhaul.
Yet another organization infested with egos run amok due to the GWB administration's involvement.
With narrow-minded zeal, they leap to conclusions and manipulate the truth to suit their needs in misguided moral superiority.
I suspect that Laurie Lee's avoidance of cameras and interviews has to do with her not wanting to be directly associated with the "CPS" as a face that people would remember. This would insure continued anonymity of her questionable practices, as well as her associate's.
It's time to "clean house".

All in the name of federal funds. This is paid for by our own SS taxes that I always thought was supposed to go towards our retirement.......