Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Monday, July 23, 2007
Phyllis Schlafly :: Townhall.com Columnist
Children's Rights
by Phyllis Schlafly
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will Sarah Palin make a run at the GOP Nomination in 2012?


Debates about same-sex marriage and gay adoptions always include the argument that a child has the right to both a father and a mother. If that is true, why is a child usually deprived of that right when heterosexual couples divorce?

It would seem that maintaining the father's love and authority would be crucial when a child's life is turned upside down by divorce. Yet, family courts routinely deprive children of one parent, usually the father, restricting his time with his child to about six days a month.

The courts pompously assert they are invoking "the best interest of the child," but how can it be in the best interest of children to make them forfeit one parent?

We hear many pious comments about the need for fathers to be involved in the upbringing of their children. This need should be even more important in times of emotional stress, such as divorce, than the need for fathers to play ball with their kids in an intact family.

Some states are considering legislation that establishes a presumption of shared parenting whereby divorced parents divide equally both time and authority over the children. This enables children to maintain strong ties to both parents.

When primary or sole custody is given to the mother, the father becomes merely a visitor in the child's life (that's why it's called "visitation"), whose only value is to mail a paycheck and be an occasional baby sitter. The father loses his parental authority and fades out of his own child's life.

An argument is sometimes made that shuttling back and forth between two homes might be upsetting or a nuisance, but there is no more shuttling with equal custody (where parents, for example, get alternating weeks) than with the typical mother-custody/father-visitation schedule (where the father gets two weekends a month plus some Wednesday evenings). Do the math; both plans have about the same number of shuttles between homes.

An argument is also made that giving custody primarily to the mother promotes stability, but the need for stability is really a reason for shared custody. The stability of parental relationships is a great deal more important than contact with material things.

Americans have always assumed that parents share decision-making authority because only parents can determine what is in the best interest of their own children. As recently as 2000, the Supreme Court in Troxel v. Granville reaffirmed this principle and rejected the argument that a judge could supersede a fit parent's judgment about his child's "best interest." Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Phyllis Schlafly is a national leader of the pro-family movement, a nationally syndicated columnist and author of Feminist Fantasies.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Phyllis Schlafly‘s column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.

Doesnt Take a Village to Raise a Child!
It does take a father and a mother to raise a child. I can speak with certainty on this subject because since the first grade along with my siblings we were tossed around from one place to another.

There was a lot of uncertainty about the world then and sometimes a lack of self confidence. While growing up, my brothers including myself had all kinds of surrogate fathers and mothers and actually were lucky because both of our grandmothers were strong and had the good since to instill a sort of character into all of us. On the other hand, our grandfather was more like a father and set the example which we would follow years later in finding our manhood. They both had easy going manners and belonged to the Optimist Club which I think was really cool. They were also active in the church.

There is another dimension to this age old problem? Also, my brothers and I were raised to a certain extent by our neighborhood. We always stayed over at friends and even went on trips together. Even the older folks in the community kind of adopted us along the way and always took such great delight in us as we were growing up. If we fell and hurt ourselves there was always a mom in the neighborhood who would pick us up and tend to our tears if our grandmother or grandfather was not around.

So, I guess you could say we had an immediate family and then an extended family of sorts. As we got older our extended family included teachers who understood everything somehow and our church where we would find other sources of I guess you would call them mentors. During my High School years there were circles of friends which had to be tended to like a garden. In other words, you had to pull the weeds out every once in awhile in order to survive if you didnt want to get into trouble...these were the bad influences.

The problem for me and my brothers was that our biological parents had not really grown up themselves. Our dad was a playboy who liked to chase skirts more than be tied down by kids and our mother was so young she didnt know what to do with so many children. Ms Schlafly is right though because it is better to be with both parents than to lose one half of your childhood which could mean the loss of extended families such as cousins and aunts and uncles too.

As for myself, I had it a little harder when I went over to visit my dad. I always got the belt buckle instead of the belt and was immediately put to extensive work either cleaning or doing yardwork because my dad resented the fact that his mother in law...i.e. my grandmother favored me out of all of her grandchildren. So, he took it out on me and still does to this day...but despite the fearfulness at times about being around my dad..I would still recommend it. I really think it made me a lot stronger. The only thing I did resent in later years was being put to work when I got home from high school and on the weekends and not being allowed to do my homework or just play with our school friends because my dad said I needed to quit wasting time and get to work.

Years later when my dad got custody of me and my brothers I sometimes had to sneak around just to get my homework done because I continued to look after his rental properties and cut all the grasses, clean gutters, hang sheet rock and paint.Then just when we thought we could see the light at the end of the tunnel he married our step-mother and kicked each one of us out of the house when we turned 17 seventeen. At the time, it seemed like the whole world was falling apart...but now that I look back on it...I must say, life continued to get easy after all that. Even when I went into the military...that was a piece of cake now that I think about it. When I graduated high school I had perfect attendance for all of the five years I was there because I preferred to go to school and be in school rather than be at home when my dad was there because I knew that once I went home all hell was gonna break lose again. Its hard to believe it but my dad never drank, smoked or even did drugs. If he had I would probably not be writing this today. LOL

I am totally opposed to Gay Marriage and for gays to be allowed to adopt kids because I think that part of growing up is discovering ones manhood and womanhood and in order to do this one needs role models in order to understand what makes a woman a woman and what makes a man a man. If you want to call it socialization then ok.

Understanding that a womans world in turned inward toward the child or toward her work as opposed to a mans world being turned outward towards the hunter or the creator or protector as E. Merril Root would say it what its all about in discovering ones destiny or fulfilling ones destiny.

Lastly, there are Gay men and women who are mostly conservative and who understand everything I have written and why. These are the ones who accept the reality and purpose of the nuclear family which is primarily to insure that our species continues to reproduce after our own kind and populate to earth. They realize that if they are granted special rights then other groups will come along too and demand special rights which will threaten the natural order of Nature which God has left in place in order that humanity will not become extinct. You probably will not hear them voicing these opinions on talk shows like Oprah Winfrey or Jay Leno...but they are there and they respect the Nuclear Family and the reasons Conservatives give for not wanting to allow them Special Right under the Law.


Objections
Those opposing a presumption of shared parenting based on disagreement between divorcing/separating parents use a faulty premise. These defenders of the status quo would have us believe that because the parents disagree on the post separation parenting plan, government should step in and impose their vision of what is best for a particular family.

This implies that the government doesn't already have a preconceived custody presumption. This is utterly ridiculous and flies in the face of the realities for children. The overwhelming majority of family court judges default to maternal custody. These people do next to nothing to explore the parenting skills of either parent. Their knee jerk and predictable reaction is to award Mothers custody and deny children a Father.

A shared parenting presumption works because it forces judges to start with shared parenting as the default, but judges can still deviate if there is evidence proving a parent is unfit. Since lawyers and our judiciary is suited to weighing evidence, and our ill suited to determing the best family arrangement, this is also a huge advantage to a shared parenting presumption.

Finally, for those seeking to strenghten marriage, I give you my personal guarantee that divorce will decline when custody is no longer automatically granted to Mothers (along with years worth of unearned income). Mothers currently initiate over 70% of all divorces, and contrary to the feminists excusers, most women do not cite abuse or infidelity as the reason they want to divorce.

Ms. Schafly was right about feminism in the 70's, and she is right once again on the issue of children and their need for two parents.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.