H. Con. Res. 241

Coming shortly on the heels of the unanimous passing of House Bill 474, "Recognizing the immeasurable contributions of fathers in the healthy development of children...." (yes, we are checking now to see if Hell has, indeed, frozen over), comes the following bill.

H. Con. Res. 241: Expressing the support for the enacting of joint custody laws for fit parents, so that more...
Bill Status
Introduced: Oct 25, 2007
Sponsor: Rep. Roscoe Bartlett [R-MD]
Status: Introduced
Go to Bill Status Page

You are viewing the following version of this bill:

Introduced in House: This is the original text of the bill as it was written by its sponsor and submitted to the House for consideration.

Text of Legislation
HCON 241 IH


110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. CON. RES. 241
Expressing the support for the enacting of joint custody laws for fit parents, so that more children are raised with the benefits of having a father and a mother in their lives.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES


October 25, 2007

Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland (for himself and Mr. ABERCROMBIE) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Expressing the support for the enacting of joint custody laws for fit parents, so that more children are raised with the benefits of having a father and a mother in their lives.

Whereas, in approximately 84 percent of the cases where a parent is absent, that parent is the father;

Whereas if current trends continue, half of all children born today will live apart from one of their parents, usually their father, at some point before they turn 18 years old;

Whereas when families (whether intact or with a parent absent) are living in poverty, a significant factor is the father's lack of job skills;

Whereas committed and responsible fathering during infancy and early childhood contributes to the development of emotional security, curiosity, and math and verbal skills;

Whereas an estimated 19,400,000 children (27 percent) live apart from their biological fathers;

Whereas 40 percent of the children under age 18 not living with their biological fathers had not seen their fathers even once in the past 12 months, according to national survey data;

Whereas single parents are to be commended for the tremendous job that they do with their children;

Whereas the United States needs to encourage responsible parenting, by both fathers and mothers whenever possible;

Whereas the United States needs to encourage both parents (and extended families) to be actively involved in children's lives;

Whereas a way to do that is to encourage joint custody so that parents share children;

Whereas the American Bar Association found in 1997 that 19 States plus the District of Columbia had some form of presumption for joint custody, either legal, physical, or both, and since then, 13 additional States have added some form of presumption, bringing the current total to 32 States plus the District of Columbia;

Whereas Census Bureau data shows a correlation between joint custody and a higher payment of financial child support;

Whereas social science literature shows that children are generally well adjusted in an intact family with 2 parents in the home, and research also shows that for children of divorced, separated, and never-married parents, joint custody is strongly associated with positive outcomes for children on important measures of adjustment and well-being;

Whereas research by the Department of Health and Human Services shows that the States with the highest amount of joint custody subsequently had the lowest divorce rate; and

Whereas parents with joint custody pay 50 percent more in child support than parents with visitation only or no contact with the child: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That Congress expresses support of the States passing joint custody laws for fit parents, so that more children are raised with the benefit of having a father and a mother in their lives, careful to protect victims of domestic violence, abuse, neglect, children from potential kidnapping by a parent.

Wow. While this bill has yet to be passed and is currently stuck in committee, it's very encouraging to see other bills being passed that recognize the invaluable and irreplaceable contribution of fathers and bills being submitted that recommend actual action being taken to promote and protect the role of fathers.

Lukeskywalker on Antimisandry.com has done some admirable activist work and has an online petition in favor of passing this legislation.

Here's the link to the petition

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/urge-the-us-house-of-representatives-to-pass-h-con-res241-expressing-the-support-for-the-enacting-of


Please, please take the time to add your signature and, if possible, to forward this on to everyone you know. If we can't eradicate divorce and the instances of children being raised in broken homes, at least we can do our part to try and insure that children have the benefit of their fathers in their lives.

Did you read this part?

Whereas 40 percent of the children under age 18 not living with their
biological fathers had not seen their fathers even once in the past 12 months,
according to national survey data;

In instances where the mother has custody, nearly half of all children haven't seen their fathers in a year.....what a sad, disturbing statistic.

Here's the link to Luke's antimisandry.com post. He's also included some great samply e-mails that can be used to send to our representatives voicing support for this bill.

http://antimisandry.com/important_email_petiton_campaign_urge_us_house_pass_joint_custody_resolution-t11265.html

Memorial Day

When I was a child we would always travel a couple hours distance to visit cemetaries where many of our ancestors were buried. I remember quite clearly one particular Memorial Day, seeing amongst the bouquets and flowers, the neglected and untended grave of a soldier.

We knew it was a soldier because a small, lonely flag stood next to the grave. I don't remember the man's name, but I do remember he'd died very young, the dates indicated it was quite likely during war.

My brother and I weren't very old but we started crying at the thought of this lonely headstone of an unknown stranger, seemingly forgotten with nobody left in the world who remembered or cared enough to visit his grave.

We were inconsolable, so, at a loss for what else to do, my mom went to the graves of our ancestors and removed a flower or two from each arrangement and allowed us to place them on the barren grave of the soldier.

After that, every Memorial Day she would bring extra flowers for me and my brother to place on the forgotten graves.

I would challenge everyone this Memorial Day to remember those who have fought and died for their country and maybe, if you're at a cemetary and you see a grave of a soldier who's sacrifice the world seems to have forgotten, to take the time to lay a flower there.

Freedom Is Not Free

I watched the flag pass by one day.
It fluttered in the breeze.
A young Marine saluted it,
And then he stood at ease.
I looked at him in uniform
So young, so tall, so proud,
He'd stand out in a crowd.
I thought how many men like him
had fallen through the years.
How many had died on foreign soil?
How many mothers' tears?
How many pilots' planes shot down?
How many died at sea?
How many foxholes were soldiers' graves?
No, freedom is not free.


I heard the sound of Taps one night,
when everything was still
I listened to the bugler play
And felt a sudden chill.
I wondered just how many times
That Taps had meant "Amen"
When a flag had draped a coffin
Of brother or a friend.
I thought of all the children,
Of mothers and the wives,
Of fathers, sons and husbands
with interrupted lives.

I thought about a graveyard
At the bottom of the sea
Of unmarked graves in Arlington...
No, freedom is not free.

Author Unknown

Just One Person

It seems to me that the world is doomed, largely because the majority of 6.6 billion people believe that they can't make a difference. They believe that this is just how things are....what can one person do. The fact aside that just one person can, and often time has, changed the world. 6.6 billion people individually working to improve even just that little portion of the world they live in, would change everything.

Some of you are aware of the story of my brother, for those of you who aren't, here's the link

http://equalbutdifferent.blogspot.com/2007/09/my-brother.html

My mom had a visit a couple of weeks ago from a man who had gone to school with and known my brother as a boy. This man had moved away many years ago and was back visting some family. Although he hadn't talked to my mom since the time of my brother's funeral, some 20 years prior, he called and asked if he could come by and visit her. He stopped by to tell her how much his life changed because of the example of my brother.

Every year at my brother's birthday there are flowers left by unknown people. We know they're not left by family members or close friends....we don't know who leaves them, but every year for the last 22 years, people who knew my brother have left flowers on his grave.

He touched people, he changed lives and made a difference....and he was only 13. Imagine what each of us can do if we stand up for what we believe in, if we speak out against what's wrong and if we choose to make a difference in the world around.

I'm Lucky

I got into an arguement on a forum a while back with a woman who said if she had to choose between saving her dog and a human life...any human life....she'd save her dog. Mind you she was married and had children and made it quite clear that she would leave them to their own devices and save her dog. She also mentioned that once while enroute to the vets because her dog was sick, she happened upon an accident that had just occurred. She didn't stop. She figured nobody had ever bothered going out of their way to help her, so why should she bother going out of her way.

As much as I love my dogs....I would save a human, any human, and would just hope and pray that my dogs were able to take care of themselves. I expressed this to her, along with a few other thoughts I had concerning the value of human life. Her response was that I, obviously, had led a charmed life. Clearly, nothing bad had ever happened to me so it was easy for me to maintain a moral high ground....I was just lucky.

I hear that a lot from women; that I'm lucky. Mind you, I do consider myself incredibly lucky. Lucky that I have never had to go hungry or homeless, lucky to be healthy, lucky to have a wonderful husband and three beautiful children. What bothers me is that apparently everything in my life that I deeply value; my marriage, my children, my character and integrity....these are all simply the result of random luck.

Apparently, if you have a successful marriage it's not because you worked very hard to be kind, understanding, loving and selfless.....nope, you were just lucky. If you are a decent human being it has nothing to do with years of introspection and constantly striving to better yourself.....you're just lucky.

I find this yet another way to avoid any semblance of accountability. It's not your fault if you are a despicable human being with no redeeming qualities.....you were just unlucky. You're not responsible for the failure of your marriage....you were unlucky in the husband department.

A good friend of mine told me a story recently of an incident that happened while she was at work. She works two nights a week and there are quite a few divorced women at her work. My friend is kind and friendly, attractive and thin AND she's been happily married for 14 years and has 3 kids. The women she works with were all talking about how hard their lives are, how much it sucks to be single moms, how there aren't any decent men......when one of them commented, "Unlike (insert my friend's name here)". All the women kind of smirked and joined in with, "Yeah, unlike ______". My friend asked them what they were talking about and they sarcastically replied with, "It must be hard being skinny and pretty and happily married....you've REALLY got it rough".

My friend was a little upset by this. It was painfully obvious that the women deeply resented her. It was also quite obvious that, in their minds, the only difference between them and her was that she was lucky and they weren't. She had somehow gotten off easy while they'd gotten the short end of the stick.

The thing is, she hasn't gotten off easy. I know a lot about her life and it hasn't been easy at all. Her childhood was horrible. Her and her husband have had enormous trials and struggles throughout their marriage. She, like myself, wasn't lucky; she was determined that she would be a good person, a wonderful wife and a great mom.....regardless of what life threw at her. She didn't cave in and she didn't make excuses for herself. She faced up to her responsibilities, realizing that she alone was accountable for her decisions and actions and for the kind of person she turned out to be and nothing could take the place of personal values and integrity......not even luck.

It makes me wonder how many women are going to spend their lives, not attempting to take a long, hard look at themselves, bettering themselves or learning from their mistakes, but simply waiting for their luck to change.....I'm guessing they've got a long wait.

Once Again, Women Are Victims

Browsing the internet I happened upon a site entitled 'We The Women'. I'm not going to link to it but the web address is 'wethewomen.org'.

There was a lot I could address on the site but I found the following article particularly ridiculous and offensive. I'll post it paragraph by paragraph with my comments added in between.

Women and War: Gendered Politics

In the so called developed world, the position of women in public sphere remains static and insipid with any issue relating to them considered innocuous. Time and again women are looked upon as mandated individuals ordained only with duties pertaining to the defined territories of their houses and are predominantly seen as stupefied objects of pleasure, use and abuse.

Unbelievable. The position of women in the public sphere is static? Perhaps the author is unaware that women are quickly replacing men in our universities, in our hospitals and in our offices. Of course, static would be an improvement over the situaiton of men, vast numbers of which are simply disappearing from the public sphere, disappearing from our schools and institutions....static would be preferrable indeed.

The next part is even worse....issues relating to women are considered innocuous? You just have to wonder where the people who write these things live (a world that only exists within their own minds, if you ask me). To suggest that issues affecting women are of little import or concern is ludicrous. The only issues that seem to be of any concern are those that affect women. The guaranteed way to get funding or awareness for an issue is to let it be known that it's adversely affecting women.

Of course the assertion that modern women are being chained to the kitchen and bedroom is as big of a fallacy as I've ever heard. Women have as much and more work opportunities as men and if they're staying at home instead of joining the work force, it's a near guarantee that they do so because they've chosen to, not as a result of subjugation or oppression by the hands of men.

Sexual violence, vulnerability, fear and parochial outlook is what women all over the world are experiencing, whether in their households or at workplace.

Now, keep in mind that the author is referring to the 'developed world'. How many of us living in the 'developed world' see women experiencing 'sexual violence', 'vulnerability' and 'fear' in the home and the workplace? Women aren't likely to be met with a good natured pat on the back in the workplace for fear of a sexual harassment suit. While we all know that domestic violence exists (on both sides of the gender divide) the notion that vast numbers of women are in their homes, subjugated and trembling in fear is ridiculous.

The situation worsens when a woman leaves her nationality for serving in an insurgency and war afflicted area like Iraq. This situation seems reminiscent of the US women who serve in the Iraq war either as contractors or soldiers in the army. Abuses relating to women are either shoved away, negated and are usually jettisoned. And women raising voice especially against sexual abuse find themselves helpless in face of the obdurate administration of men of the higher authorities.

Such cases are frequent in Iraq war where US women are frequently becoming victims of war, facing explicit sexual exploitation and abuse. KBR Company, formerly known as Kellogg, Brown and Root, which provided logistical support to the US armed forces, has turned a deaf ear to these cases and the women employees are increasingly facing violence such as rapes and assaults. But the firm does not intend to formulate any laws and preventive actions against these crimes which have become a regular feature. Raising these issues entail a threat to the employment and bearing them becomes a crisis in turn for these women.

The main criticism signals to the Bush administrative policies in these areas which have amounted to a serious neglect of issues concerning safety and protection for women employed in Iraq. What seemed to be progressive developed nation has failed to protect its women from the clutches of exploitation and violence, and where testifying for the crimes inflicted has also become a sheer impossibility.

I just lumped the last couple of paragraphs together because they are all telling us basically the same thing. What? I'll let the sole commentator to this post sum it up for you,

Natasa Feb 20 2008
Women are the worst victims of war followed by children. This is a fact. I know.

That's right folks. Women are the worst victims of war. Apparently dying, which is what the men do in wars, is neither here nor there compared to what women experience. Oh and the children, you know, the innocent victims who are unable to fend for themselves...well, they also come in second...because the greatest suffering only happens when it happens to women.

Granted, this isn't new...it isn't ground breaking. All around the world travesties are only brought to light when they begin to affect women. It seems like we only start to hear about horrific atrocities when the women start to suffer...never mind the corpses of thousands and thousands of men may lie decaying in unmarked mass graves.

What always comes to my mind when I read these pieces of mythology is why they continue to write them...why, in the western world, where women are the opposite of oppressed, do they strive so hard to continue furthering the fallacy. My best answer.....I suppose it's nicer to believe oneself a victim and a martyr then selfish, spoiled and unappreciative.

The Way Men Sacrifice

Today I was at the grocery store and on the way out got caught in a torrent of rain and hail (don't even get me started about the fact that it's hailing in May). Anyhow....I'm dashing through the downpour with my shopping cart, I arrive at my car, pop the trunk, start my mad rush to unload the groceries when a man comes over and says, "hurry and jump in the car, I'll unload these for you". I, of course mortified at the thought of this poor guy stuck out in the downpour, unloading my groceries while I'm nice and cozy in my car, told him, "oh no, thank you so much, but I can't let you do that". He said that he was at least going to help and proceeded to quickly empty out my cart and then insisted on returning it for me.

Now, granted I'm not really fond of the concept of chivalry due to the fact that it ignores character and concentrates solely on gender. However, that aside, I think time should be taken to recognize the manner in which men sacrifice. I am not a stranger to sacrifice. During the early years of marriage when finances were tight, my husband had to force me to spend money on myself. Initially, knowing I'd never take the incentive if left to my own devices, he'd take me shopping when he realized I needed something, but he soon realized I would only find a way to keep from buying anything. Then he tried gift certificates, but found I'd only use them for him or the kids, so he resorted to just going out and buying me the things I needed as I refused to spend the money on myself. For me, it was always just easier to go without then to see the ones I love do so.

I dedicate large amounts of my time and energies to charity work; I make whatever sacrifices are necessary for the best interest and betterment of my family.....however, these kind of sacrifices, while good and admirable, are easier. They may involve material possessions that are, while nice, not entirely necessary, or they require a little time or personal effort. The way that men sacrifice goes beyond this. Whether it be soldiers going to war, fathers defending their families, firefighters braving flames to save the lives of others.....or even a man enduring the cold, rain and hail to aid a stranger....when men sacrifice, they truly sacrifice themselves.

Men have always sacrificed themselves and they've rarely been given the appreciation they deserve for their actions. The real insult, the slap in the face, came when feminism decided not only to ignore their great sacrifices and kindness, but to villify them. Men going off to war denoted their violent natures and their apathy for the plight of the women and children they were leaving at home. Men working hard to provide for their families, allowing their wives the ability to stay home and take care of children and family was an act of patriarchal oppression, shackling their poor wives to the kitchen.

Instead of hearing 'look at the way our men have sacrificed, giving their very lives', we heard, 'look at these poor women, made to sacrfice by being stuck at home'. How did the opportunity to care for and be with the ones we love become a sacrifice? And what was the alternative...the great thing they were being forced to miss out on? A forty hour work week? Their children being raised in daycare by strangers......truly, their husbands were cruel.

Most of us know what it's like to feel unappreciated, but I imagine few women can appreciate how it must feel to spend your life sacrificing, giving your very all for those you love and then not only are you not appreciated for it, but you're told that what you've done, this sacrifice of yours, it's oppression. This act of love....it's misogyny...hate.

Once a month in my church we have what we call Fast and Testimony Meeting. During this meeting, members of the congregation have the opportunity to stand before the rest of the members and bear their testimony. Without fail, every single testimony meeting, at least one woman stands up and, through a lot of tears, says how thankful she is for her husband, how thankful she is that through his hard work and sacrifice she has been allowed to stay home and raise their children.....but this, according to the feminists, this is oppression.

Now, just to clarify, I'm not saying that women don't ever sacrifice, I'm not even saying that there haven't been occassions when women sacrificed themselves for the benefit of others. I'm saying that it is only within the realm of men that this kind of great and noble sacrifice isn't rare. What is, however, a rarity, is men ever being recognized or appreciated for their magnanimity.

A Child's Best Interests

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1917291/Good-fathers-'powerless-against-vengeful-mothers'.html


Fathers 'powerless against vengeful mothers'

By Tom Peterkin
Last Updated: 11:33PM BST 01/05/2008

Decent fathers are left powerless to see their estranged children if vengeful mothers are determined to prevent access, a senior judge has admitted.

Lord Justice Ward attacked child access law after presiding over a case that saw a “vicious” mother falsely accuse her ex-husband of sexually abusing their child.

He spoke out after telling the father that there was nothing he could do to help him re-establish contact with his daughter after his ex-wife turned her against him.

The man’s 14-year-old daughter, who cannot been identified, had been influenced by a “drip, drip, drip of venom” from his ex-wife, who wanted to deny him his paternal rights.

Lord Justice Ward said the case was bordering on the scandalous but the court was compelled to act in the interests of the child.

Because of her mother’s “viciously corrupting” influence, it would cause the teenager too much distress if she spent time with her father, he said.

In London’s Civil Appeal Court, Lord Justice Ward said: “The father complains bitterly, passionately, and with every justification, that the law is sterile, impotent and utterly useless.
”But the question is 'what can this court do?’ The answer is nothing.”

The parents were briefly married in the 1990s and their daughter was a baby when they parted.

Lord Justice Ward said it was “impossible” that the girl could remember being abused and it was obvious it was something she had been told and believed.

In 1997 a judge ruled that allegations of sexual abuse were “wholly unfounded”.

The malignant influence of the mother, who lives in the Lincoln area, came to a head when the girl wrote to her father when she was nine.

The letter read: “This is what I really think about you. I hate you and you frighten me. You made my life miserable and stressful. I wish you would die. Leave me alone.”

In 2004 the father went to Lincoln County Court in an attempt to gain access. He was allowed to see her, but only under the supervision of a priest.

The contact was an unhappy experience for the daughter and the arrangement ceased. At a later court hearing, the father virtually admitted that further meetings would distress her.

At the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Ward refused the father permission to appeal his decision. The father is considering taking a case to the European Court of Human Rights.

Now, I like to consider myself a reasonably intelligent person....but I can only suggest that SURELY I must be missing something, because the slightest amount of common sense suggests that this is ridiculous.

The judge has acknowledged that the mother has falsely accused the father; he's described her influence in the life of their child as "vicious", "scandalous", "corrupting".....BUT, he's upholding the mother's custody because the court is compelled to act in the best interest of the child.

Again I ask you...what am I missing? Surely it's a flaw in my skills of comprehension because TO ME, mere logic would dictate that the "best interest of the child" would be removal from this "vicious", "corrupting", "venomous" environment.

This is how ridiculous the court system has become. It was bad enough when they relegated fathers to a secondary position that considered them little more than a paycheck. It was bad enough when they said that a mother was more important than a father. Now, apparently, keeping a child in a toxic environment with a bad mother while denying a good father access is in the child's best interest.

The court system should clarify for us all what exactly their definition of "best interest" is. I was always under the impression that the best interest of the child was the most stable environment possible and the benefit of the positive influence of both a mother and father....apparently the term has undergone a vast revision.