A billboard in Chicago’s Gold Coast neighborhood sponsored by the divorce law firm Fetman, Garland, and Associates, Ltd depicts two scantly clad adults and reads “Life is short. Get a divorce.”

source: Fox News

Watch the WFLD Report

A bill that would require divorcing couples observe a waiting period and attend mediation received approval from the House Children and Family Affairs Committee according to Timesnews.net. This bill, sponsored by State Rep J. Thomas DuBois and billed as a money saver for divorcing couples, appears to be nothing more than a Trojan horse meant to deter couples from divorcing. I’m not entirely sure how DuBois figures making couples wait 30 days or 90 days (if children are involved) is going to save them money, especially considering a divorce last an average of 1 year (Divorcemag.com). When exactly did the people begin electing Matchmakers and divorce therapists?

Bill requiring mediation, waiting period for divorce advanced by House panel

Published 05/02/2007 By HANK HAYES

Legislation requiring a waiting period and mediation in Tennessee divorce proceedings won approval Wednesday from the House Children and Family Affairs Committee.

The bill, sponsored by state Rep. J. Thomas DuBois, R-Columbia, calls for a 60-day waiting period if married couples have no children and a 90-day period if they have kids under 18 years old. The waiting periods would apply to divorces sought on any grounds and begin after the divorce court papers are filed.

“The whole idea is you would save people, hopefully, court costs and grief and a long-drawn-out hard-fought proceeding, but you would require them to sit down at a table and work things out first,” said state Rep. Brian Kelsey, R-Germantown, a bill co-sponsor presenting the legislation to the committee on DuBois’ behalf.

“Are you trying to deter people from getting divorces with this?” state Rep. Johnny Shaw, D-Bolivar, asked Kelsey.

Fathers of Tennessee, feel free to send Rep. Thomas DuBois an email asking him to work on getting divorced fathers equal access to their children if he’s so concerned about maintaining family bonds. And, feel free to send me your story to have it published in the Your Voice section.

This post has been removed. See my public apology to Alec Baldwin for posting the audio to his daughter in the first place.

Information on Parental Alienation Syndrome:

• Wikipedia: Parental Alienation
• Fathers Are Capable Too
• ParentalAlienationAwareness.com
• Parental Alienation Syndrome by Richard Gardner

I came across a wealth of Fathers’ Rights case law information on MySpace yesterday. Thanks so much to this person for taking the time to put this together, whoever you are. I’m not entirely sure how helpful these would be to a father preparing for divorce; however, this is important information to know. Here are a just a few of the case law excerpts listed:

• “When a judge acts intentionally and knowingly to deprive a person of his constitutional rights, he exercises no discretion or individual judgement; he acts no longer as a judge, but as a “minister” of his own prejudice.” Pierson v. Ray. 386 U.S. 547 at 567 (1967)
• “No bond is more precious and none should be more zealously protected by the law as the bond between parent and child.” Carsen v. Elrod, 411 F.Supp. 645, 649 (U.S. District Court Eastern Dist. Virginia 1976)
• A parent’s right to the custody of his or her children is an element of “liberty” guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Matter of Gentry, 369 N.W.2d. 889, Mich. Appellate Div. (1983) Legislative classifications which distributes benefits and burdens on the basis of gender carry the inherent risk of reinforcing stereotypes about the proper place of women and their need for special protection; thus, even statutes purportedly designed to compensate for and ameliorate the effects of past discrimination against women must be carefully tailored. The state cannot be permitted to classify on the basis of sex. Orr v. Orr, 99 S.Ct. 1102, 440 U.S. 268 (1979
• Right of parents to the care, custody and to nurture their children is of such character that it cannot be denied without violating those fundamental principals of liberty and justice which lie at the base of all our civil and political institutions, AND SUCH RIGHT IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT PROTECTED BY THIS AMENDMENT AND AMENDMENTS 5, 9, and 14. DOE V. IRWIN, 441 f. SUPP. 1247, U.S. DISTRICT COURT OF MICHIGAN (1977)

Speaking of never using  children as a pawn, here are some great ideas and guidelines for parents going through a divorce that I found on DivorceNet. I’ve been meaning to post this for quite some time. I would also add that this list doesn’t necessarily require both parents be on the same page. It certainly makes it easier, but it’s not necessary.

I’ve been able to apply a lot of these on my own, with or without the cooperation of my ex-wife. And, at the end of the day, I can only be responsible for what I’ve done.

Looking around for information on prenuptial agreements and if there is such a thing to protect against a malicious ex, I came across a great article from Nolo.com that provides great information on what you can and can’t do with a prenuptial agreement. The excerpt on custody reads:

There are some things you just can’t — or shouldn’t — do with a prenup. State laws differ as to what matters are considered off-limits. However, as a general rule, any agreement to do something that is illegal or against state-defined public policy will be considered unenforceable — and may even jeopardize other valid aspects of the premarital agreement. Here are some things that you can’t do, at least in some states:

Restrict child support, custody, or visitation rights. No state will honor agreements limiting or giving up future child support. The same holds true of agreements limiting future custody and visitation rights. This is because state lawmakers consider the welfare of children to be a matter of public policy and do not enforce any private agreements that would impair a child’s right to be supported or to have a relationship with a parent in the future.

I completely understand the argument here. My kid is not my property. They are a little different than say a Tool Box. Much more fun to snuggle with or take bike riding. However, I do believe that there should be some method for couples to prepare for the worst, you know, before they get angry and resentful toward one another. If I’m not mistaken, I do believe that you can include methods for handling disputes in a prenuptial agreement, which provides somewhat of a safety net. But, when you throw in the extreme bias of the Family Court System it doesn’t seem all that helpful.

Oh well, chalk one up in the “Con” category for getting married again.