How much progress has the Fathers’ Rights Movement made?

Why can't I see my kid?

How much progress has the Fathers’ Rights Movement made?

Let’s first make a few supported mixed assumptions and facts:

      • Dad’s 100% + Mom’s 100% = 100% because a child is created by sperm and an egg. Dads and Moms both have 100% legal rights to the child(ren) until a judge (or the law) says otherwise.
      • Judges originally took away most Moms’ 100% legal rights to their child(ren), leaving Dads with 100%. In rare cases, Dads gave up their 100% leaving the Moms with 100% legal rights to the child(ren).  For example, Joseph seemed like he was going to give up his legal rights of Jesus, leaving only Mary with 100% earthly legal rights to Jesus.
      • Judges started taking away some Dads’ 100% legal rights to their child(ren) during the Industrial Revolution when Dads were leaving the home, while Moms stayed home as the primary caregivers. Divorces were still very rare.
      • Judges then again started taking away some Moms’ 100% legal rights to their child(ren) after World War II when Moms started leaving the home, started going to college, started ending up on welfare, started denying visitation to Dads whose legal rights had been taken away, started making false allegations of domestic violence, started becoming the main financial providers, etc.  There are a lot of other reasons.

    Where are we now??? Federal, state, local and private organizations poured money into the Fathers’ RIghts Movement trying to pass laws ordering judges to take away 50% of Mom’s legal rights and 50% of Dad’s legal rights to their child(ren), so that the parents would leave court with so called 50/50 shared parenting.  These laws would cause more UGI (unwarranted governmental interference) in families than ever before in the history of the United States of America. UGI is common in other countries, but our government was founded on the fundamental proposition that Americans should remain free from UGI. Jury trials are a big reason why Americans remain free from UGI. Jury trial rights (whether or not an American is forced to use one) are a big reason why we prosper as a country. 

    The Fathers’ Rights Movement failed to focus on the one four letter word that would stop judges from reducing ANY of Dads’ 100% legal rights to their own child(ren) and promote settlement, “Jury” trial rights. Instead, the Fathers’ Rights Movement relied on the advice of family law attorneys who simply sought to level the playing field so that both sides would continue to sustain the fighting. 

    In California, a Dad’s fate still rests solely in the hands of a judge (or the law) so nothing has changed there since the beginning of time. The only thing that has changed is that “expert witnesses” now come to court and advocate against Moms. The exact same “expert” witnesses who used to advocate for Moms.  

    Who are these very well paid “expert” witnesses? Almost all of them are members of the AFCC net. org. The AFCC is the private organization that has a lock on a $50 billion a year industry that family court brings in (again each YEAR). These AFCC members are judges, attorneys, custody evaluators, GALs or guardians ad litems (more attorneys), therapists, social workers, forensic accountants, etc.  Basically, “professionals” who have never met either parent before, but decide which parent to testify against.  The AFCC has a very profitable racket going on in our family and juvenile dependency courts because of the Fathers’ Rights Movement huge amount of funding. This money created a win win solution for the AFCC but created a worse lose lose result for both parents and children. Who do you think is a big reason for the federal funding for the Fathers’ Rights Movement in the first place? The primary recipients. The AFCCnet has a very profitable racket going on in the family and juvenile court systems.  

    Texas got it right by granting parents jury trial rights in family and juvenile dependency courts. We are hoping that parents use this right as the ultimate layer of defense, so that both parents will leave court with 100% legal rights to their own child(ren) and no court ordered visitation. Texas crime rates fall well below California’s and so does their homeless rates. Texas attorneys advocate for keeping their jury trial rights in their family and juvenile dependency courts. doesn’t have even one family law attorney in all of the State of California supporting it, in any manner, whatsoever, unless that family law attorney also operates in the juvenile dependency (CPS) court system. How do judges justify using AFCC “witnesses” against parents? In the word of Sir Francis Bacon (when he was a judge) “I usually take money from both sides so that tainted money can never influence my decision”, until he got caught, indicted and jailed for it because he was also lying about that too.