|

Parents
Organize Fight Over Custody Laws
By Joe Mandak
Associated Press
Oct. 8, 2004
PITTSBURGH - John Cihon
lost custody of 6-year-old Andrew when he and his wife divorced.
Now, father and son spend two weekends a month together and try to
talk on the phone nearly every day. Cihon, of Pittsburgh, contends
some 25 million parents in the United States - 22 million fathers
and 3 million mothers - are just like him, not allowed to live with
their children because of unfair custody laws.
Last week, Cihon became
part of a nationwide effort to reform those statues when he signed
on as lead plaintiff in a federal lawsuit against the state of
Pennsylvania.
Led by the Indiana Civil
Rights Council, like-minded groups such as the American Coalition
for Fathers and Children plan to sue all 50 states and U.S.
territories. At least 40 suits have already been filed, according to
the council.
The lawsuits use a wide
range of constitutional grounds to argue that a child's natural
parents both have an equal right to custody, but that right for one
parent is too often trumped by a swell-
sounding but ill-defined
legal standard known as "the best interest of the child."
Generally, children's
advocates and family lawyers say, courts find it is in the child's
best interest to give physical custody to the primary caregiver.
Living with one parent minimizes shuttling a child - especially a
younger one - between homes. The "noncustodial" parent is ordinarily
the breadwinner, still frequently the man, who spends more time away
from the child.
"As children progress (in
maturity) they're better able to handle those types of situations,"
said Chris Zawisza, director of the Child Advocacy Clinic at the
University of Memphis Law School.
The lawsuits seek $1
million in damages for any plaintiffs who may sign on to each class
action, meaning the potential damages run into the trillions
nationwide. But what the groups really want are changes in the laws,
such as a bill being proposed for Pennsylvania by state Rep. Thomas
Stevenson.
Stevenson's bill would set
a "presumptive standard" that physical custody should be split 50-50
unless one parent can prove that there's a good reason for a
different arrangement. Legal custody, which gives both parents a say
in issues such as religion, health and education, can be shared
equally even when physical custody is not.
But many of the experts say
legislating a 50-50 standard is a bad idea.
"This is one more attempt
to say that every case that goes into court should start with the
assumption that it's 50-50 time - even if they haven't been putting
in 50-50 time before that," said Lynne Gold-Bikin, a family law
attorney and past chair of the American Bar Association's family law
section. "And why do they want 50-50 (custody)? Some people want it
because they know they can reduce the support they pay to their
wives" as a result.
That may be, but advocates
say it's discriminatory not to equally protect both parents' full
rights until and unless the facts show that one parent has forfeited
them.
And they say the deck is
stacked because the time a wage-earner spends making money to feed,
clothe and shelter children isn't given equal weight to time spent
with the child, even though it's just as necessary as nurturing.
"The many are suffering
because of the reputation of a few - the deadbeat dads and deadbeat
moms," said Torm Howse, president of the Indiana Civil Rights
Council. "Each parent has certain rights and the states have been
taking away the rights of one parent."
[Index
to Articles]
|