"Divorce Corp. [DC] is a film which exposes family court corruption and dysfunction, which almost everyone agrees with.
However, their hidden agenda is the promotion of Forced Equal Parenting [FEP] (otherwise known as presumptive joint custody). They are asserting that FEP is the solution to the corruption. The problem is that simply is not true. FEP will not end the corruption but it will harm children by forcing them to live in dangerous and abusive situations. [See: The Truth About Equal Parenting]
They are also disseminating other misinformation to the public including that false allegations of abuse are supposedly common and judges are falling for them. This is also not true. It is a camouflaged way of saying what fathers' rights groups have been alleging for decades--that parents (usually mothers) are fabricating abuse because they want to "alienate" the children (usually from fathers). Hence the Parental Alienation Theory that has been so widely supported by fathers' rights groups which has caused hundreds of thousands of children to be given to abusers. [See: The Truth About False Allegations]
DC is asserting that they are "gender neutral", but it is obvious from the fact that their misinformation matches fathers' rights groups propaganda, and the fact that Glenn Sacks, a leader of the fathers' rights movement is featured in it, that this movie is simply the latest strategy in the fathers' rights campaign. The age-old Trojan Horse war strategy is being used to sneak biased messages to the public which are harmful to women and children. There was no effort to cover women's and children's side of the story. To promote it as gender neutral is disingenuous at best."
However, their hidden agenda is the promotion of Forced Equal Parenting [FEP] (otherwise known as presumptive joint custody). They are asserting that FEP is the solution to the corruption. The problem is that simply is not true. FEP will not end the corruption but it will harm children by forcing them to live in dangerous and abusive situations. [See: The Truth About Equal Parenting]
They are also disseminating other misinformation to the public including that false allegations of abuse are supposedly common and judges are falling for them. This is also not true. It is a camouflaged way of saying what fathers' rights groups have been alleging for decades--that parents (usually mothers) are fabricating abuse because they want to "alienate" the children (usually from fathers). Hence the Parental Alienation Theory that has been so widely supported by fathers' rights groups which has caused hundreds of thousands of children to be given to abusers. [See: The Truth About False Allegations]
DC is asserting that they are "gender neutral", but it is obvious from the fact that their misinformation matches fathers' rights groups propaganda, and the fact that Glenn Sacks, a leader of the fathers' rights movement is featured in it, that this movie is simply the latest strategy in the fathers' rights campaign. The age-old Trojan Horse war strategy is being used to sneak biased messages to the public which are harmful to women and children. There was no effort to cover women's and children's side of the story. To promote it as gender neutral is disingenuous at best."
http://boycottdivorcecorp.com/
Go online and watch the movie on YouTube or see it at your local theater. What is your opinion? I'd be interested in hearing your views in the comment section below!
I strongly disagree with the statements on the boycott website that all lawyers tell women NOT to make claims of abuse for fear of losing custody. That may happen in a lot of cases but it has been my experience that the opposite happens more often.
ReplyDeleteCase in point. I have a friend in NYS who had a bad divorce. Her lawyer advised her that the best way to get sole custody is to call the police and claim abuse and have her husband removed from the home. She is a decent person so she did not do it.
In another case, a man spent 8 months in jail under a false rape charge made by his ex to take the children from him. Had he not found evidence showing he was nowhere near at the time, he probably would still be in jail. The prosecuting attorney refused to file charges of perjury and false report against the mother.
I can go on and on with many examples of the opposite occurring.
I have no proof but I believe abusers get sole custody a lot because they are as unethical as the divorce industry and are capable of using it to their advantage.
I really wish all this gender baiting would end because the only people who win are those in the divorce industry.
With respect to shared parenting, the gal in my case had the audacity to say well my ex should get decision making for the kids because she made most of those decisions before the divorce. I told my gal 2 things.
1. That she was allowed to make those decisions because she could make everyone's life miserable if she did not get her way (that's not healthy) and many of those decisions ended badly for the children. I can provide examples if anyone questions the veracity of this statement.
2. If we are going to base the post divorce arrangement on the pre divorce conditions, then I should get the children 5 out 7 days a week because I worked from home and took care of them 5 days a week.
The gal never brought up the argument of pre-divorce arrangements again after she heard #2 cause she knows my ex would never go for it
I hear the argument a lot from men that women will allow them to take care of the kids before the divorce but once they file for divorce, the men are no longer good enough to take care of the children. We feel it is a control thing, not a real argument.
PLEASE END THIS GENDER BAITING, they are both good and bad parents in both genders.
As the commenter said above, FEP is not a permanent solution, but it at least prevent the abuser from getting full custody. In my case the false claims of abuse by the other party were enough for her to be given temporary custody during our almost 2 year long full custody court case. Whenever I ask why or how the court ruled a certain way, I am told by the Judge that he doesn't know what happened on that day but that they don't just remove children from homes based on unsubstantiated claims in open court... sure.
ReplyDeleteEven if they're not doing well in their new environment the fact is that they've been there for 2 years and I believe the 'what if' the allegations were true is enough that the gal, family relations and multiple judges have recommended the 'status quo'.
At least in FEP both parents would have a chance to parent on there own. Then the court could truly weigh in which environment the child excelled or not.