Divorce Attorney Senator Creem (D) is Anti Shared Parenting (dump her in November)

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=5004 ^ | 9/1/10 | Glenn Sacks

[AbolishCSEU]

Fathers and Families Board Chairman Ned Holstein, MD, MS debated Massachusetts Senator Cynthia Creem (pictured at right), co-chair of the Joint Committee on The Judiciary, on the subject of family court reform and HB 1400, Fathers and Families' shared parenting bill. We want you to join in the debate--please post a comment to Creem's article by clicking here.

Creem is currently in the middle of a hotly contested electoral battle to save her state Senate seat. The Creem-Holstein debate began last week with Dr. Holstein's column Senator Creem and Mr. Rudnick, Help our children (Newton Tab, 8/24/10). Yesterday Senator Creem fired back at Holstein with her column Acting in the best interests of children of divorce

[AbolishCSEU]

Not suprisingly a DEMONRAT has both hands in the cookie jar as a Divorce Attorney and State Senator against shared parenting. Just give custody to the mothers in 90% of the case, have said mother alienate the dad out of the children's life, yet keep his wallet via "Child" Support and Alimony. So much for "best interests of the children."

[Psalm 144]

My own state has a poor track record on this issue.

Barring an unfit parent, and I mean REALLY unfit, joint custody is the best solution for a bad - but sometimes inevitable - situation.

[FormerACLUmember]

It is unimaginable that someone as evil and corrupt as Cynthia Creem holds any public office.

[AbolishCSEU]

I live in NYS and it’s just as bad here. Women get custody, men get to pay through their nose (”child” support) and in return, women alienate the children from their fathers.

My “hubby” has a vindictive ex who happens to be a “Child Protective” worker and who has alienated all three under 14 years old. Courts couldn’t care less; all they care about is those “child” support dollars rolling in. Dad is just a wallet; meanwhile kids are all on ADHD meds and going feral, failing school, etc. without a father’s direction. She is perhaps the most unfit parent I know about, yet I see this scenario playing over and over again.

[Psalm 144]

After a certain age, some states will give weight to the desires of the child as to which parent the child will live with. It is something to work with, at least.

Sorry about your husband’s plight. I would go mad with grief and anger if my child was being twisted away from me. My wife and I have our issues, but we have never used the kid as a pawn, or tried to shut off any source of affection for the child. From that fact, we have been able to keep things together.

[Grams A]

It not just one parent or other in many states who is shut out but it’s worse for a grandparent, particularly if one parent dies and the remaining parent remarries. In many states grandmothers some limited rights if they bring a lawsuit and are lucky enough to find a friendly judge whereas the grandfather has no rights. Many areas do not have a family court so you may end up with a judge who has little knowledge or experience in family matters.

[sauropod]

ping

[momtothree]

I’m all for removing the presence of a parent (both a mom or dad) if there is a history of abuse/neglect/drug addiction etc... but a child needs both parents in order to grow up to be productive humans. I would never in a billion years not allow my kids to see their father if we ever separated/divorced. Any woman who could do that to HER KIDS is mean, cruel, and selfish. Just a thought

[AbolishCSEU]

Neither did I. You and I are in the EXTREME minority. Most women today (especially the twenty and thirty something crowd) routinely withhold visitation and gradually “phase out” dad by poisoning the children against him (and this is ramped up when the father decides to “move on” with a new relationship).