Fathers Rights Means Demanding Constitutional Rights Currently Denied to Fathers

Many of you may think dads groups are asking for new privileges when 'fathers rights' are mentioned. They're not! They're just demanding the constitutional privileges guaranteed to all, but declined to them under existing divorce or paternal actions. This article explains what's declined to them and why it's unconstitutional.

Under divorce and paternal suits where lawful proper proper the kid is at issue, close relatives assess most judges assign child lawful health care. This assignment is supposedly based on 'the best interests of the child'. There are two types of lawful health care - lawful and actual. Both can be allocated jointly to both mom and dad or only to one.

Having lawful legal health care indicates you can figure out your kid's religion, educational choices, and medical choices. Physical lawful health care allows you to figure out the day-to-day ordinary living situations and, most importantly, the kid life with you. You discuss the constant companionship of your kid and are perceive by him or her as the mom or dad in management of them.

Not having actual lawful health care indicates the kid life with you - typically for 2 days over every two 7 days interval. Your kid 'visits' you. You have very little - or no management - over your kid's daily choices. Kids realize that quickly.

If you don't have actual lawful proper proper your kid, the assess purchases you to pay 'child support' to the actual custodian (i.e. the mother) of your kid. This can be from 25 to 33% of your earnings - and more if the assess chooses to attribute more earnings to you than you actually earn. If you don't pay it all, the assess will send you to prison.

What's unconstitutional about these assess purchases is that the assess straight denies your constitutional privileges without the necessary 'constitutional due process' required. He simply pronounces that for the best attention of your kid, he's doubting you lawful proper proper your kid and ordering you to pay the mom specific (and usually high) your kids expenses or go to prison. And the your kids expenses don't have to be used for the kid at all - by law!

Yes, you do have a constitutional right to mom or dad your own kid - and that includes the direct proper proper him under both lawful and actual lawful health care. Additionally, you have the right to figure out your own working earnings and can't be punished for not earning enough - as happens if you can't pay all allocated your kids. And, lastly, you have the right to enjoy all other fundamental privileges as anyone else in society.

Constitutional privileges are inalienable privileges that government was formed (in the U.S.) to protected - if you remember the Declaration of Independence. The constitution made it difficult to take away constitutional privileges from a person. The lawful courts must use 'constitutional due process' when constitutional privileges are at stake - unlike what close relatives lawful courts do. Which indicates you can't be declined your constitutional right to mom or dad unless you are found unsuitable as a mom or dad by clear and convincing evidence - generally by a jury - in a civil assess. And to be unsuitable, you must existing a serious danger - i.e. deadly - to your kid. The 'best attention of the child' is not an adequate reason for doubting a fit mom or dad his parental privileges. Actually In Parham v. J.R. et al 442 U.S. 584 (1979), the Supreme Trial declared the 'best attention of the child' resides in the fit mom or dad - not in the state. The 'best attention of the child' excuse can only be used when there's no fit mom or dad.

Recognizing equal privileges between mom and dad should mean that both mom and dad would discuss both custodies or alternate between them at 50% time. Of course, mom and dad can believe the truth on any other arrangement if they - and only they - believe the truth.

Fathers Rights Denied So today, fit dads - never having done anything incorrect - are routinely declined their constitutional privileges in close relatives assess - their right to straight proper take proper their kids and are subjected to extort by the lawful courts to pay the mom cash for whatever purpose she wants to use it for.

And beyond the scenario of 2 day visit per two 7 days interval and high extortion expenses under the threat of prison, many moms alienate your kids from the dad - or just move away with the kids. Family lawful courts do little or nothing to assuage this 'motherly' behavior.

The assess doesn't protected - as it should - the dads privileges. Actually he's enslaved for cash - a lot of cash. All is controlled by these close relatives lawful courts most judges and moms. They have all the energy. And, as always, energy corrupts and absolute energy corrupts absolutely. I've written elsewhere on how the cash and energy is an enormous influence on keeping this unconstitutional close relatives lawful courts in operation against dads.

To refuse dads privileges is to refuse constitutional privileges to someone who's done nothing incorrect - not to mention doubting children their real dad.