Meanwhile, Over at the... Keeping kids first 2014 page the debate and conversation continues. The following questions to me by Melinda Weerts and my response are not about a particular issue. It dives into my own story a bit. It took some time to write my response so I thought I would share, for those interested. ***Thomas, Im curious how much time was spent on the divorce trial in your case and how much time the appeal took. Im also curious whether you are aware that North Dakota case law has had a presumption of parental fitness for decades. Melinda, 1.) never went to trial, it was delayed over and over and over. But plenty time was spent during the three years it dragged out in which my children were robbed a Father. Enough time to not only rob my children of a father in their best interests, but rob them of their college funds and future education as well to be paid to an attorney to keep their father from their lives. Thankfully, the custody part is over. An agreement was reached after the children became so vocal only recently about their desire for a return if their father to their lives. We still have the final court date coming unless we reach am agreement on the financials soon which looks likely. I will be one of those statistics that you and others who oppose shared parenting throw around and say they didnt have to go to court, they reached an agreement. Agreements are made within the framework in which you are making choices. Just because someone has a gun to your head and you agree to give them your wallet, doesnt mean you mutually agreed to a compromise that is fair. 2.) The appeal was in concern to allegations of DV where I was found to be a repeat pattern abuser. Of course these findings were under a preponderanceand where my constitutional rights to Due Process were violated. An interesting note here is that the same allegations that resulted in a mandatory arrest, cost me my employment and left me to rot in jail, were later addressed by a judge in criminal court who apologized to me with sincerity at the situation. Explaining to me how current legislation in these matters require an arrest, etc etc. He filled me with hope, that the same would be seen in the family court room. It wasnt. I was told the same level of evidence was not required and I was found guilty. I was ordered to supervised visits with my children, when combined with the very limited time I was now allowed with my children, putt an extreme stress on our previous strong bonds and relationship. I was ordered to psychological evaluations, drug tests and treatment, batters intervention classes, and many other stressful rulings against me that just about completely broke my will to continue to fight to be a part of their lives. All without evidence beyond her allegations. The allegations were the evidence. I came very close to becoming your typical deadbeat that society is so quick to cast judgement upon. But, as we all know the old saying dont judge without walking in the shoes of that person first. Unless you have personally experienced the pain, desperation, hopelessness and humiliation that I did in my fight to remain a part of my children lives, you havent a clue and it pray you never will, what it can do this person. Many walk from the fight simply for survival. To remove themselves from the pain and emotions that completely overwhelm them at the loss of their children. Others who have not experienced this will never fully understand, no matter how much imagination, empathy or understanding they have within them. For those that understand... No words are necessary. For those that do not... No words can explain. Anyways, I digress. The appeal to a year. After which even the Supreme Court agreed my due process had been violated. It ended the supervised visits. But did little else. I was told even though they ripped my childrens father from their life on allegations of DV without a second thought, the the children were now settled into a new routine. Doing well in school, etc. and to reintroduce me into their life beyond 4 days a month would now be to disruptive and not in their best interest. It was back to the delay tactics, while my children continued to grow up without a father. 3.) I was not aware that ND has a presumption of parental fitness. I would be interested in reading it. Perhaps you can point me to the state statue that spells that out. But honestly, it matters not. If this is true, it is VERY disturbing. Disturbing that a system and people as yourself are wiling to remove fit parents from the lives of children in the childrens best interest. That is absolutely mind blowing to me. Especially when their is no legal definition to best interest. Not one single state has a legal definition to this. All states have factors to determine it. But not one can define it. If you ask 10 judges you will get 10 different answers. That is the core issue I have with this current best interest system. Judges overly broad and over reaching discretion in each case. Because each case is different. A judge is not a god. They are human. They put their pants on in the morning one leg at a time. Just like the rest of us. They make decisions based upon their own life experiences, their own core values, beliefs, and biases. Those beliefs, values, and biases are what drive their rulings and determining what is in the childs best interest. The factors are nothing more then items to use in justifying their decision of best interest. Those factors can be used in anyway they desire. How I may use those factors to determine what is into childs best interest is irrelevant. All that matters is what someone else tells me is in my best childs best interest. I have seen a judge rule against a father telling him that because the mother is the primary care giver she is going to get primary custody. I have seen the same judge rule in another case where the father was the primary care giver that the mother would be getting primary custody because she was able to better financially provide for the child. I have seen another judge say that it wasnt in the childrens best interest to be in the fathers how because he moved in immediately with another woman and it sent the wrong message. Turning around in another case and telling a father that the mother would be able to provide a family atmosphere for the children that he was unable to provide because she moved in immediately with another man. The discretion these judges have is over reaching to say the least. Earlier this year, a mother who had primary custody died. It was found that it was in the best interest of the child that the step father get primary custody instead if the biological father. The biological father was allowed to continue his 4 days a month visitation. All in the childs best interest. So not only are we willing to take children and remove them from the lives of one parent in their best interest, we are no as a society ready to remove them from both biological parents in their best interest. Whats next? We going to remove children from both biological parents who are still married and considered fit, all in their best interest? Just because some judge who is playing god says so? The right to parent is a fundamental right. Absent abuse or legitimate danger to the child we have no right to remove children from parents in that childs best interest. A child deserves two parents in their life. We do not have the right to remove parents that love their children and are considered fit under some premise that it is in their best interest determined by some judge whose values and beliefs of best interest may be very different from that of the parents. Respectfully, Thomas Fidler
Posted on: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 02:41:44 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015