Marriage is becoming such a drag for men. I'm beginning to think Amy and Gregg have it knocked: simply loving each other, with no marriage and no kids to use as weapons against each other.

I've lived now for about a decade apart from my kids, except for the "typical deal" given to men, dinner on Wednesdays, every other weekend.

I wish I had died about a decade ago. It's a life of emptiness, loneliness, and terrible hurt.

I think anytime in a divorce proceeding when an allegation of abuse is made, the children should be immediately removed from the home and placed with a neutral party and a guardian ad litum appointed to ascertain if there is any truth to the allegations. I hate to say it but I have met too many woman and men who are either mentally ill or have personality disorders who will literally say and do anything to get their way in any dispute. Some of these people are so messed up that they might even pass a lie detector test. There have been a few cases of actual abuse that have been stopped or prevented by the current system but we as a society have paid a terrible price in what it has done to decent men, a large percentage of which no longer either want to get married or have children. Who can blame them? The current divorce laws have done as much to ruin marriage as the Great Society program did to our work ethic. Isabel

If he was in prison for 2+ weeks, she'd done more than file claims, she must have pressed charges w/ the police.

This tactic has apparently become very common. A guy I know who lives is Mass had gone through something similar recently. His wife wanted a divorce and fabricated evidence of abuse against him by injuring herself - basically she gave herself an indian burn. The police recognized what she'd done, and so did the judge, but he still was booked, and slapped with a restraining order. His attorney told him that 60% of the men she represents face the same thing. It's just part of the process.

What's weird is that there are no repercussions for filing false charges, either in the criminal or family court. If I were to knowingly make false accusations of bank robbery against someone, I'd be charged with a crime. But falsely claiming that someone attempted murder and committed assaults to gain the upper hand in a divorce is apparently OK.

I suspect that there's a convergence of biases that allows this. On one hand there's the expectation that women are going to behave irrationally, and suffer from a sort of diminished capacity when it comes to moral conduct. On the other there's institutional feminism which promotes and enforces a worldview in which women's claims of victimization are sacrosanct, and even if proven false can't be punished because this will somehow dissuade true victims from seeking protection.

If the guy killed her and went up for murder, he'd have a pretty good case for self defense.

Be hard to find him guilty of maliciously killing someone who was trying to get him put in jail on trumped up charges.

If you read his blog, he's dealing with a situation where his wife has abandoned the home and moved their child in with her lesbian lover. She's had him arrested for sending her an email and for entering their property, though she wasn't residing there. So she's being very aggressive about trying to get him locked up.

Granted, there are two sides to every story, but the tone of his writing doesn't suggest that he's attempting to threaten her.

Her lover may be instigating this behavior as well. I've seen this happen more than a few times. A woman hits middle age, decides that she's a lesbian and then her and her girlfriend go about trying to destroy the ex. This is one of the reasons that I don't get involved with bisexual women. Many of them become full blown lesbians once they've had children. They lose interest in men.

"...anytime in a divorce proceeding when an allegation of abuse is made, the children should be immediately removed from the home and placed with a neutral party..."

Excellent suggestion!

> children should be immediately removed
> from the home and placed with a
> neutral party...

Oh. A neutral party.

Additionally, workers in the health care, education and legal sectors should have their earnings aggressively taxed such that aging bachelor video editors can each be provided with a late-model Ferrari, including maintenance and insurance costs...

...I mean, like, daydreams come easy. Who's the Salomonic genius you're going to hire to walk into these homes and confiscate children, and to whose lovingly "neutral" arms will they be delivered?

Quote me: Family law sux.

You wanna quick fix? Mandatory minimum sentence for filing a false claim of abuse against a current or former spouse of 15 years.

That would of course require judges who actually give a shit about the lives of those on the receiving end of such lies.

Brian: You wanna quick fix? Mandatory minimum sentence for filing a false claim of abuse against a current or former spouse of 15 years.

While I agree that those who file false claims should be punished, what happens if someone files a legitimate claim against someone, but her case is weak and somehow the partner gets acquitted. The fear of things like this would prevent those with legitimate cases to not file.

Patrick, that is precisely the argument that people use that prevents the prosecution of those who file trumped up charges in the first place.

That people with legitimate claims will hesitate to make them, fearing that they will be punished if they lose.

But there is such thing as prosecutorial discretion, if a prosecutor loses a case, they do not necessarily have to behave as if the accuation were false and immediately turn around and file charges against someone they do not believe to be guilty.

And frankly there has been enough systemic abuse of the system that the harm done by discouraging legitimate complaints, pales in comparison to the wasted resources and abuse of courts by false accusations.

When it is "part of the process" to be accused of domestic violence with 0 evidence, jailed even when the people arresting you can see that the charge is obviously false, and the presumption of innocence is given only to the false accuser...its time to put some teeth to the courts to go after the criminal who files false accusations.

Its ridiculous.

--------------------------------------

I heard a story once, took place in ancient china. At a given time there was an administrator who believed that even the smallest crimes should carry the death penalty, so as to deter more serious crimes, well it happened that there was a group of citizens on the way to a levy assembly to put into the army, and they were waylaid by a storm.

As it ended and they were able to make there way again, one of the soldiers to be said to the others, "Comrads, what is the penalty for rebellion?"
"Death." They answered.
"What is the penalty for being late to the levy?"
"Death." They answered.
"Well I've got news for you brothers...we're late."
So a rebellion began that toppled the old dynasty.

We now are in a circumstance where increasing numbers of men know that they will be jailed and presumed to be guilty as abusers and or sex offenders with no evidence at all, that they will be reviled in the press and face discrimination, abuse, and be labeled for life, even if they've done nothing wrong at all.

A false allegation, baseless to its core, is all it takes for a man to lose his property, his home, all rights to his children, be thrown in jail...the list goes on.

Something HAS to change, and the most reasonable thing to change is to prosecute those who waste tax payer dollars and make false criminal accusations.

I've resisted commenting on this story because I don't know the people involved enough to know what the truth is. What always surprises me is the ease that this woman was supposedly able to have this man arrested. The police need proof when they respond to a scene of something happening. Going to court for a restraining order is not sufficient proof.
I say this from experience and it is my experience that makes me wonder what's missing from this story. My ex-husband was abusive to not only me, but my children. Getting the police to file report was like pulling teeth and to be honest, they only took one report and that was because the officer on duty knew my brother. If he hadn't been there, there would have been no report. When I went to court with details of what had been happening and CPS reports called in by two independent parties who had spoken to all three children separately, the judge was not going to issue an order. When he finally agreed, he was issuing an order that would allow my ex visitation with the kids but to stay away if it was not his visitation. I refused to leave the courtroom and asked the judge what that would possibly do if the abuse was occuring during visitations. My children were interviewed by CPS workers, Law Guardians, and therapists and consistently gave the same account independent of one another.
I went through this more than once and in our most recent court case I found myself in the position of having to explain to a Law Clerk and Law Guardian why I didn't think my ex husband should be breaking into my home. Again, any time any abuse was alleged, my kids were interviewed without me present and independent of one another. Even getting CPS to take a report is a nightmare so I just don't understand where these people live and how they are able to get people arrested so easily or take their kids away. It has been my experience that its a very hard thing to make happen. To this day, my ex has had minimal consequences for his behavior. In fact, he seems to get rewarded for it. He has gotten away with everything he has done and my children are more tired of it than me. They ask why they have to go to court since all of these people who are there to help them never do.

"The police need proof."

In theory, you're right. But tell that to the Duke lacross team.

Tell that to those 5 college students who were picked up because the woman they had group sex with accused them of rape when she grew concerned that she might get a reputation as a slut.

The list continues.

Proof...I wish.

Frankly I wonder what state you live in, where someone can break into your home any time without going to jail just for at least a few years because they had a relationship with you at some point in the past.

But then, I have to ask what you would define as "abuse".

That word has been thrown around quite a bit over the last few years.

That woman who shot her husband awhile back and got 6 months for it alleged he abused her because he wanted her to wear high heels during sex.

I'm consistently suspicious these days anytime someone uses a loaded but very...flexible, word like "abuse".

Honestly, I don't think I buy this particular story, mostly for all the reasons Kristen gave, and partly because something about the way the guy tells his story doesn't ring true.

It seems to be a state-by-state thing.

In Mass, apparently you can spend 15 years in prison on completely made-up charges, and then after the bogus charges are overturned you stay on the sex offender registry.

In CT, if there's a domestic disturbance call, at least one party MUST be arrested.

And in several states "feminist" groups run clinics on how to frame your soon-to-be ex with spousal abuse to guarantee sole custody of the children without visitation.

Brian, could you cite the sources regarding said clinics?

I'd like to look into that one.

Robert: But there is such thing as prosecutorial discretion, if a prosecutor loses a case, they do not necessarily have to behave as if the accuation were false and immediately turn around and file charges against someone they do not believe to be guilty.

But there's nothing in place that requires them, or even encourages them, to exercise prosecutorial discretion, either.

I've been hesitant to comment on this, but... my father was quite the manipulative, psychologically-abusive narcissist, and something about this guy's letter is pushing my warning buttons. Frankly, he is doing all the things in this letter that my father did in order to try to turn my mother's friends and family against her when she finally divorced him, after 28 years of abuse. Specifically, he characterized his efforts to undermine my and my brother's relationship with our mother as "trying to create joy in the midst of pain." Hmmm.

So, no, I don't believe this guy that the situation is a cut-and-dried case of dads in the system getting an automatic shaft.

Robert, I live in NY and it was not the first time I was astounded in court by what he got away with. I've seen it in cases of child neglect and abuse from both parents not just fathers. The system is seriously messed up and I have often wondered what exactly you have to do in NY to lose contact with your children.
As far as the man in this article, I have one other concern. If he were arrested on false charges and issued a restraining order, it just seems to me that the first thing he did was write a letter to his child and mail it from jail despite a restraining order. A man who took child psychology classes should be educated enough to know that a judge would look on that as flagrantly defying an order from the court, not a man who is desperate to contact his child. Something is missing for me in this story and again I don't know the people involved to say its truth or a lie, but much of it does not sit right with me after my experiences with the courts and police.

Prosecution for false charges, false reporting, or malicious prosecution requires evidence. Someone can't be convicted of these simply because their claims can't be verified. There'd need to be evidence that they knowingly made false claims.

As for this guy, If you read between the lines, on his blog, it seems like he's had a drug problem ( pharmaceuticals ) and has also behaved erratically w/ the police and in court. At this point he's deliberately violating the court's orders and they throw him in jail each time he does. He's also unemployed and homeless. But there's nothing I'd seen to indicate that he's violent.

It seems like the abuse charges set the ball rolling but he's made the situation worse for himself by behaving in a way that creates suspicion.

I keep thinking of Charlie Sheen. Apparently over the holidays he and his wife got into a huge argument where she told him that he needed to tow the line or she would divorce him and take their kids away so that he would never seen them again. At that point he allegedly threatened her with a pocket knife. She called the cops and he spent the next while in jail and still has a restraining order in place while she spends his money going in for spa treatments and private jets.

If someone threatened to take a woman's kids away and she snapped, it is considered justified. Why isn't it considered justified for a man?

-Julie

If someone threatened to take a woman's kids away and she snapped, it is considered justified. Why isn't it considered justified for a man?

Because men are supposed to be tough. We're supposed to be able to handle these things.

This happened to me in Santa Clara County, Ca. Apparently a restraining order does not infringe on my rights (even if it bars me from my home), which is why they are granted without question here. I (unwisely and full of self-rightousness) sent an email (non-threatening of course)and ended up in jail(playing right into her hands). My advice is for any man finding himself unfairly in this situation -Shut up, take it, learn to forgive. You are not alone, You are not the first, talk about it, get help, you are strong and will live through it to laugh about it some day.
It is hardly an uncommon occurance

That's still no reason to threaten your wife with a knife.

Although, at first hearing, it sounds like passions got out of hand and both of them said or did things they shouldn't have, I can't help but wonder if she was trying to provoke him so she could have him sent to jail and show him that who's really in charge.

Also, a small nit to pick: it's "toe" the line.

Because men are supposed to be tough. We're supposed to be able to handle these things.

We all know that is bullshit. The idea that men are unfeeling really should have gone the way of the girdle...if you want to be that way, fine, but as a societal norm it is restrictive and false advertising.

That's still no reason to threaten your wife with a knife.

I agree. The reports I've heard indicate that they got into an argument, she called the cops, and the police found a folding knife in 'his possession', which led to his arrest, as he was claiming that he never touched her. Most men that I know have a pocket knife that they carry with them at all times, and I have one in my purse as well, so having the knife doesn't mean that he threatened her with it, but that is how the reports have 'morphed' over the weeks. I also noticed that the 'folding knife' is now being reported as a 'switch blade'.

I can't help but wonder if she was trying to provoke him so she could have him sent to jail and show him that who's really in charge.

That was my thought as well. I also considered that she was laying the groundwork for a good settlement along with custody in the divorce. Pulling a 'K-Fed' so to speak.

Also, a small nit to pick: it's "toe" the line.

I would expect nothing less from a person who identifies himself as a 'grammarian'. :-) Although it is not an excuse for being sloppy, I'm currently battling seasonal head pain that is either cluster headaches or trigeminal neuralgia...I see the neurologist tomorrow. I'm more than a bit foggy.

-Julie

I have been accused several times of adult abuse by my ex, and once for suspected child abuse. Not one of them was ever followed up on. It is such a joke that when she hit me with the mandatory abuse claim when we seperated, my attorney said "go down and file one as well, the judge will throw them both out." So, I did, and he did.

The child abuse was a complete fabrication. I got a phone call from DFS, who told me there had been an "anonymous" complaint of me abusing my child!!!! After a few minutes on the phone with this guy he realized there was nothing to it, so the case was dropped. Of course, several days after that I received the notice of modification of the divorce decree, which in my state can ONLY happen if there is a a change of circumstance (read: child abuse)...I never heard about the "child abuse" again. If it were me and I thought my ex was abusing my child, they would have to pry the kid out of my grasp to let him go back to her.

Finally, interesting story on how stupid it is to go to court without an attorney: Unfortunately I got remarried (to a ball-busting third wave feminazi no less) who decided she did not want to work anymore and wanted to stay home all day doing nothing...anyway, we ended up seperating and she filed the requisite abuse/restraining order. She came to the judge sans attorney, thinking she was oh so smart, and i brought my awesome attorney. My attorney asked if I ever touched her physically to harm her, and she had to answer "no", but my ex said "But he has great potential to."

I was sitting there thinking WHAT DID SHE JUST SAY?????

The judge dismissed the ex-parte order.

Sorry just venting over this. I ended up with custody of my 8-year-old anyway.

BTW, looks like Glenn Sacks no longer takes comments on his blog. Too bad, he did so much to bring alot of these issues to light.

BTW, looks like Glenn Sacks no longer takes comments on his blog. Too bad, he did so much to bring a lot of these issues to light.

Posted by: mike at February 8, 2010 12:04 PM

_____________________

True. He said as much on Feb. 6th. Pity. But at least more of his fans will be moved to act instead of yak. That will be interesting. Especially since, as I've pointed out time and again, the average men's rights movement fan does NOT put his money where his mouth is when it comes to, say, better male birth control! They pound their chests over how the patriarchy will be restored when all men use MBC and have complete control over their bodies and their wallets, but they ignore the fact that for most men, the idea of paying for MBC - and USING it - is too much like being asked to bell the cat.

And, BTW, MRAs (as opposed to the above-described fans) very often refuse to talk about MBC at all. Examples of that are the macho hotheads Marc Rudov and Bernard Chapin. They've made it clear they're not interested. Maybe they're in condom-only relationships and care little about men who aren't - or they just don't want to say that men should take that much social responsibility.

End of GS's notice:

"However, we still want to provide our thoughtful readers with a platform for their views, and have thus created a new Letters to the Editor section. This section will provide readers the opportunity to publish letters as blog posts or as parts of blog posts on the site."

But all the old comment threads have apparently been wiped out! Why?

I can understand Melissa's and Kristen's doubts, but it's worthwhile noting that it's almiost impossible under current laws and social policies for them to ever be in the situatuion this guy is describing.

This is like those who doubt that there is much of a problem with false reporting of rapes, even in a country with a history of mob lynchings based on false rape accusations and now these days more and more exconerations based on DNA.

This is probably just a case of not seeing something that doesn't happen to loom over you personally.

I forgot to add
Life is not fair.
The systems not perfect, but deals well, considering the complexity of the problem.
Who's gonna stick up for aledged abusers anyway?
Eventually the truth came out. People figure it out. My ex paid for her actions (social and communal ramifications). I don't think she'd do it again

This is probably just a case of not seeing something that doesn't happen to loom over you personally.

Gee Jim, can I use this one the next time we discuss abortion/birth control rights of women?

-Julie

I'm currently battling seasonal head pain that is either cluster headaches or trigeminal neuralgia...I see the neurologist tomorrow. I'm more than a bit foggy.

Good luck. Hope everything turns out for the best.

"I can't help but wonder if she was trying to provoke him so she could have him sent to jail and show him that who's really in charge.Beside"


First off, I've had arguments with a spouse and there is nothing that anyone could have said to provoke me into getting physical with them, physical enough that apparently there were choke marks on her neck, but nice job blaming her for that. Secondly, I don't think that Charlie Sheen would be the best example to use as far as a man who gets a raw deal. He has a long history of being accused threatening or physically assaulting the women in his life. Let us not forget that one of his girlfriends ended up with an accidental gun shot wound. If that's the case you may as well bring out OJ as a defense and figure out how his ex wife and her friend provoked him into his murderous rage.

And Jim, I'm speaking from experience not just with abuse issues, but with seeing children, whom I have taken into my home, who have parents who are on drugs or alcohol to the point that the kids are wandering streets. Schools were involved, government agencies were involved and these people were not losing their kids. Not only that, but one kid asked me to go home with him to pick up a few things and there was a note on the door from the police telling him that his mother was just carted off to the drunk ward and wouldn't be home for a few days. There was no follow up to see if this minor was alright or to see where he would be staying. So when I hear stories about people being barred from their children I always wonder what more there really is. Its not a matter of it not being possible that it could happen to me. Its a matter of what I've seen with my own two eyes.

...there is nothing that anyone could have said to provoke me into getting physical with them....

Yes there is. You just haven't heard it yet.

...but nice job blaming her for that.

One can speculate about the incident without "blaming" her.

She was legally drunk (.13 BAC) when the police arrived and he was not (.04 BAC). Angry drunk people have been know to go too far in trying to provoke a reaction from the target of their anger.

Both of them have a history of drug and alcohol problems and probably should not have been drinking.

Before her marriage to Sheen, Mueller had been arrested for DUI and for cocaine possession. In addition, she had been in rehab for crack addiction.

According to RadarOnline, "She would leave rehab and go buy crack. There were times when she would disappear for a couple days and come back with bruises and a hospital bracelet on her wrist. She had a serious problem."

After Sheen's arrest, Mueller recanted her story and refused a follow-up interview with the Aspen police. And later reportedly checked into a drug and alcohol rehab facility in North Carolina.

Hence, the speculation.

To be fair, it should be pointed out that Sheen has been in rehab for alcohol and drug addictions in the past.

And Colorado child protection agencies investigated Mueller after the incident and left the couple's children in her care.

...I don't think that Charlie Sheen would be the best example to use as far as a man who gets a raw deal.

Very true.

Still...if they get divorced, there are potentially millions of dollars in alimony and child support at stake.

Their marriage was strained. They were arguing frequently.

Sheen is a pig with a long history of domestic violence complaints against him. One girlfriend ended up shot, another ended up unconscious.

That's not a good record to have if you want to complain that you're being set up. But it's a great record for your future ex-spouse to have if you decide you want to set him up to fall hard in a divorce.

I agree with you Conan that Sheen would be a great future ex-spouse if you want to set him up. I just don't agree that he really needed that much help. Granted she is nothing to write home about either and certainly I don't really believe this was a love match or that either one of them is an angel. And while yes, she was drunk, her bruises were around her neck, not on her arms from being pushed away or restrained from hurting herself or someone else.
That is a situation where I only feel sorry for the children involved. Maybe I'm wrong, but I do believe that she married him for the cash and had the kids to increase whatever payout she would eventually get. The kids are the ones that get my sympathy in this case. They have parents that are garbage.

"Gee Jim, can I use this one the next time we discuss abortion/birth control rights of women?"

No, because it doesn't apply, does it? Those are our children too. Aren't they. At least y'all seem to think so when it's convenient.

If it were only about your bodies, than maybe you could. I don't give a shit about your bodies - and frankly, why would I, anymore than women care about men's bodies, no harm no foul - but it would apply only to that narrow and tangentially related aspect of the debate.

Kristen, you just refuted yourself:

"Schools were involved, government agencies were involved and these people were not losing their kids."

when you went on to say:

"Not only that, but one kid asked me to go home with him to pick up a few things and there was a note on the door from the police telling him that his mother was just carted off to the drunk ward and wouldn't be home for a few days. There was no follow up to see if this minor was alright or to see where he would be staying. "

...."his mother". That is the difference. Mothers can do no wrong by their kids as far as the legal system is involved. They can cook and deal meth out of the house and the state doesn't take them, they can crack whore in the house and the state doesn't take them, 'cause that's they moms and shit.

The abuse of DV and child molestation accusations in divorce cases is pretty well-documented on sites like Glenn Sacks and others. It's a research project and you may not have tiome to read through all of it, so I won't bother you with links, but trust, me it happens.

Jim, this kid's father was in no danger of losing him either. He was in the hospital due to a heart attack from drug use and faces possible long term rehab. He had been in the kid's life as well and didn't face losing his child. His wife, the mother of this kid just happened to be able to abuse substances for a longer period than the father and didn't end up on the detox ward as soon as he did.

Also in another case, where again, my son brought home a friend who came to live with us, that mother was out of the picture for years, living on the street somewhere in an alcohol induced stupor. She left him with the father who was shooting up heroin in the house and brought home a crack whore prostitute to live with them. I was in contact with the school and that knew social workers were visiting the house as well as CPS. This father did not lose the son or the daughter. These kids had been riding bikes or walking to the next town over to get money from family members for food and essentials. It sickened me when I found out the conditions these kids were living in that not only were government agencies aware, but family members as well.

So Jim, I will say it again. I don't know what people have to do to lose their children. Both cases had both parents involved and both parents seriously endangering and neglecting their kids. To this day which is a few years in one case and one year in the other, not one of the parents has been brought up on any charges or lost their kids. And in both cases, all were aware that these kids came to live with me. And in fact, the parents' rights in all cases are being protected. They are all insisting on maintaining contact with the kids and the right to make parental decisions despite what the kids want. So far the parents have maintained control and rights of kids they have no right to be parents to. Its not just the mothers but the fathers too.

And seriously, Jim, it shouldn't be a contest over which sex screws up more and gets away with it. The system is hurting the kids who in turn will grow up and in too many cases repeat the bad behavior of their parents.

"Gee Jim, can I use this one the next time we discuss abortion/birth control rights of women?"

No, because it doesn't apply, does it? Those are our children too. Aren't they. At least y'all seem to think so when it's convenient.

But this was your point:

This is probably just a case of not seeing something that doesn't happen to loom over you personally.

You will never have to worry about being pregnant and abandoned, or have to tell your family that you became pregnant and the father took off. In many ways it is exactly the same thing.

It is entirely possible for a man to lay false claims at the feet of a woman to attempt to get custody of the kids. Perhaps calling a woman a stalker (which comes with a restraining order) or saying that she has men coming in and out of the house at all hours, etc. I watched it with my sister's divorce. She was slandered in an attempt to get the kids, and therefore avoid child support. (The end result was that her ex-husband signed off all of his parental rights, and he was therefore not liable for any child support).

There are two sides to every coin, and there are jerks of both sexes that will take advantage and become opportunistic when convenient. But to say that women cannot have an opinion about abuse charges during divorce because they aren't men is the same as saying that men cannot have an opinion about abortion and birth control issues because they aren't women. It only holds water if you don't think about it. Both issues effect us all.

-Julie

@Kristen - From the description of your experience with abused and neglected children, it sounds like you are in or near an area in a lower economic bracket. It is, unfortunately, not unusual for the type of behavior from courts and police to be as you described in such areas. I do not know the reasons for certain, but a lot of it could very well be a feeling that intervening is a waste of time and effort. I know that's a horrible way for people to think, but I have seen it before.

The stories like the one presented here are much more commonly found in middle-class to upper-middle-class neighborhoods, where stories like yours are more likely to wind up on the evening news. One of my friends was accused of abuse for knocking his wife's glasses askew with a stuffed cat toy. He found this out when the divorce papers were served to him in the hospital (for an unrelated illness).

For child abuse accusations, my wife and I have been accused of child abuse by my mother-in-law, with no actual evidence except a couple of bruises our oldest got playing. The public attorney advised us to not contest it, but to accept a plea bargain, which he said was a standard practice. We hired an attorney and fought it, but wound up having to pledge not to use physical discipline on our children, which has resulted in a total lack of respect from them, since we were unable to find anything that they considered enough of a punishment that they would modify their behavior.

"And seriously, Jim, it shouldn't be a contest over which sex screws up more and gets away with it. The system is hurting the kids who in turn will grow up and in too many cases repeat the bad behavior of their parents."

this is the bottom line, and frankly, the sysytem has not come close to a decent solution to the problems these kids face. And it's not good enough to quote soem storeies about kids who came through just foinr, and it's not good enough to say they can just suck it up; we end up living wihte wreckage of all this, so it's outr problem too.

"There are two sides to every coin, and there are jerks of both sexes that will take advantage and become opportunistic when convenient.'

Julie, the more of these stories I hear the more it seems to me that the men and the women - narcissists or Borderlines, whatever. The real issue is that we don't have good ways of identifying and labeling these people in time. They start to show their symptoms well before they get inot relationships, however good they are at hoodwinking most people. They can fool most of us, but that is mostly due to our inability to communicate to each other what we see in these people.

"Both issues effect us all."
I declare peace between us. I agree with you here.

Wayne B, actually I love in a very affluent area of Nassau County on the water. I moved back to this town from a less affluent area after my divorce and was amazed at what I found here. The kids that I am speaking of come from money too. The one grandmother who knew her grandchildren were wandering streets living with a crack whore lives in a beautiful house on the water with a Merceded convertible in her driveway. She also has a home in Boca. The other kid is not as wealthy but his parents were very well off.

If it were my neices, nephews, or (one day) grandchildren, living on the street because my son or daughter were worthless...they'd be living on the street not one hour longer than it took to hear about it and track them down.

But then again...I'm not surprised that grandmother didn't act for her grandchildren's sake.

After all, is it ANY surprise that a piece of shit parent came from someone that is a piece of shit grandparent?

People who make poor parents, tend to also be poor grandparents. Big shock.

Some people are a waste of flesh.

We agree, Robert. I couldn't imagine ignoring a kid living in the conditions these kids were living in, but as you said, a shitty grandmother was most likely a shitty mother, hence the shitty son who would rather shoot up with his crack whore than know where his kids are or feed them.

The real issue is that we don't have good ways of identifying and labeling these people in time. They start to show their symptoms well before they get inot relationships, however good they are at hoodwinking most people.

I agree. I believe that the first thing we need to do is get rid of the idea of unconditional love. Of course love should be conditional for romantic partners! I cannot speak to what men are fed as children, but young girls are fed this idea that romantic love is a fairy tale mixed with a romance novel, and it is more like a corporate merger. Relationships take work, but it should average out to equal work. We should have standards and people should have to earn our respect, love, and companionship. I think that if we could disseminate that information, that would at least go a measure toward ending some of the 'hoodwinking'.

Back to the topic...I still maintain that any accusation of abuse should result in the accuser leaving the family home with offspring and supervised visits with said kids for the accused. I believe that part of the problem is that there is very little cost associated with making an accusation, which increases the likelihood that people will use it for nefarious purposes. If we were to create a cost associated with it while still taking the accusations seriously, that would likely reduce the false accusations while still protecting people in abusive relationships.

-Julie

Julie, If I had to leave my home with my children after accusing my ex of abuse, where would I go? Why should I have to suffer a financial burder as well as more of an emotional one because of his bad actions? My children were suffering enough. Why pull them from their homes? As I stated earlier, getting CPS to take reports is not as easy as you may think. Reports coming back founded is also not as easy.

My ex had many allegations against him by two separate mandatory reporters. I was not aware of some of the allegations because the children had been threated by their father not to tell me. When they finally broke down and told the therapists involved, some of the things were no longer proveable though very true. Abuse is not always caught right at the moment it happens. And sometimes victims don't come forward or file a report until after a long history of abuse. Part of this does go towards what you spo9ke about with people believing in unconditional love though it does go deeper than that obviously.

My ex had about 20 allegations made and investigated. This was the second time CPS was involved and the second time I had I had to go to court because of the involvement of CPS. The first time, a judge thought he'd learned his lesson and would behave. The second time, 4 our of the 20 incidents came back founded, and the 4 were serious charges. He was still not charged with a crime, and he was still allowed legal visitation with his children. It was more of a nightmare for me and the kids than I could ever put into words.

My ex is a sociopath. If you met him, you'd probably love him and feel sorry when he told you all of his tales of false allegations at the hands of his bitch ex-wife. We just finished another round in court again after the intervention of CPS called in by another independent authority. Nothing sticks though not one person involved outside of my ex believes that any allegation is false.

If we went by your proposal, I would have been forced to leave my home, investigated more than I've already been, probably charged, and maybe even faced a financial punishment on top of the financial costs I've suffered because of this. My hope was for him to just go away and leave us alone. I'd prefer that to ending up in court constantly, but unfortunately he gets his kicks by harrassing me so I have to deal with his behavior until it is something chargeable which by some stroke of luck for him, never seems to stick.

If we went by your proposal, I would have been forced to leave my home, investigated more than I've already been, probably charged, and maybe even faced a financial punishment on top of the financial costs I've suffered because of this.

What about my proposal would cause you to be arrested? All that I proposed was that we attempt to treat people accused of abuse as if they are innocent until proven guilty. If you are going to make an accusation you need to be willing seclude yourself to protect your safety and the safety of your offspring. If you are unwilling to remove yourself, I question how concerned you are about the behavior. This is a litmus test to determine how serious you are about the complaint and how concerned you are about the behavior you are complaining about.

The fact that any person can make an accusation and force a person out of their home and completely away from their children not only treats the good men in our society horribly but also it waters down the complaints of true victims and survivors. Willingness to extricate yourself adds validity to your case but also distinguishes your very real case from the bullshit false cases done by women very much like your ex-husband.

Not that this excuses his behavior, but haven't you said in the past that your ex is a cop? The Blue Shield can be very heinous.

-Julie

Yes, Julie, my ex is a cop. While that was a factor in getting a police report, it shouldn't be a factor in a judge's decision when CPS reports come back founded. And as far as me leaving for a secluded place for my safety, for how long? Forever? Uprooting my children and being displaced so he behaves or to add credibility to any allegation is only inconveniencing my children and me and doing nothing to him. The courts are overwhelmed with cases. Where do you propose all of these people go when they leave their homes and who will pick up the cost? Should I be expected to pay my rent and rent on another place? Should I be forced to live in a shelter? Is someone providing a place for me that allows my children to attend their school and be around their friends? These are all things you need to consider when you propose that the victims leave. Yes, I don't want to see anyone subjected to false allegations, but I don't see how your proposal helps anyone.

I don't want to see anyone subjected to false allegations, but I don't see how your proposal helps anyone.

What would you suggest?

-Julie

I am honestly at a loss myself as to what would work, Julie. I just know that your proposals are punitive to victims. Across the board, the system doesn't always work and there is nothing to prevent innocent people being accused whether its an abuse issue, a rape allegation, or murder.

I still maintain that I question the story Amy blogged about based on my experience. My comments were meant to show why I question it, not as proof that I have all of the answers or solutions, because I will be the first one to say that I certainly do not. Based on my experience with my ex and other situations I've been personally involved with I have seen how hard it is to make anything stick let alone stick with some form of consequence to the perpetrator.

but I don't see how your proposal helps anyone.

As to how this proposal helps anyone:

*The victim and the children would be protected from the abuser by not being readily available in the home and in the usual haunts. They've also made a pledge through their actions showing that they honestly fear for their well being.

*The accused is treated as someone who is innocent until proven guilty. The person is allowed supervised visits with children, but is not as easily able to track down everyone for further abuse or harassment.

In addition, I would propose that current possession of the home not be a determining factor in who retains the home in divorce proceedings.

And as far as me leaving for a secluded place for my safety, for how long? Forever?

How long are you at risk? If you are at risk you should be willing to stay in seclusion in order to ensure your safety.

Uprooting my children and being displaced so he behaves or to add credibility to any allegation is only inconveniencing my children and me and doing nothing to him.

But until he has been convicted, nothing should be done to him. You cannot (or should not be able to) punish someone (Take property, isolate from children) who has not been convicted of a crime.

Where do you propose all of these people go when they leave their homes and who will pick up the cost?

Who would pick up the cost if your house burned to the ground? Where would you go in that situation?

-Julie

I just know that your proposals are punitive to victims.

How is it punitive to expect people to take action to ensure their own safety? You arrest the accused and while he/she is being processed, the accuser is provided with police escort (to ensure safety and as a witness) to gather personal belongings and leave the family home.

I don't understand why if someone comes to your home (or lives in your home) and hurts you (and possibly your children) you think that staying in the same place where they can easily exact retribution once they get out has any hope for ensuring your safety.

-Julie

Julie, if my house burned down, I have insurance coverage for that. My childhood house burned down about 20 years ago. We were put up in a hotel until trailers were put on the property while we rebuilt. Making someone leave their home as a condition for filing a report to protect someone's presumption of innocence is not an answer. Of course I want to stay safe and I want that for my children. The system takes a long time and again, that would mean for the past 9 years and several court cases, my children and I would be displaced and our lives disrupted until something was done about my ex. And with the jails overcrowded how long of a sentence do you think he'd face before getting out. Then what? We have to leave our home again?

If someone broke into my home and robbed me, I wouldn't be expected to leave my home to file a complaint. Why should I be expected to leave because my husband was abusive? Don't punish the victim to protect a presumption of innocence. Not only is that backwards, its wrong. You put the burden on the victim. Would you ask a woman who was raped why she chose to wear what she was wearing? Would you ask a mugging victim why he or she chose to walk someplace? You are assigning guilt to the victim just for being the victim by what you propose.

If someone broke into my home and robbed me, I wouldn't be expected to leave my home to file a complaint.

No, but you wouldn't be allowed to take the robber's home while s/he was on trial either, and that is the issue here.

Why should I be expected to leave because my husband was abusive?

Because you should want to preserve your own safety. No one else can do it for you.

Don't punish the victim to protect a presumption of innocence. Not only is that backwards, its wrong.

More wrong than making the accused homeless? Than making that person, who hasn't been convicted, completely separate from his/her children? How is the accused supposed to live? Where should that person stay? They haven't been proven guilty yet...he/she shouldn't be receiving punishment.

Would you ask a woman who was raped why she chose to wear what she was wearing? Would you ask a mugging victim why he or she chose to walk someplace?

No, but if I spoke with a woman who was raped in her own home, I would ask if she had someplace to stay tonight. I would ask the person who was robbed the same thing...because you have someone who has been victimized and the person who hurt them knows where they live. Going on about your day when someone can very easily track you down is dumb. Police cannot be everywhere, you have to work to ensure your own safety.

You are assigning guilt to the victim just for being the victim by what you propose.

I am not assigning any guilt to the victim. I am assigning responsibility for one's own welfare to all of us. If I get mugged walking down the street at night, and I continue on as if nothing happened it is like I learned nothing from the experience, and I would likely get mugged again. Should I have to change my life to ensure my own security? It doesn't seem fair to hand the world over to the aggressors in the world. However, not learning from an experience is stupid. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity.

How about this:

The victim is not required to leave his/her home, but neither is the accused. If you don't want to leave your house, fine...stay put. But know that the person who you accused of hurting you will also be there. It isn't right that with a mere accusation someone can have their home and children taken away. That fact is feeding this trend of false accusations.

-Julie

Julie I don't think either one of us has the answer. I questioned how easy it is to get results with false accusations based on my experience of nothing happening with real accusations. Hopefully its not something you have ever lived through or will ever live through. I know for me, it would be unfair to expect me to pick up and leave because of his actions. And it certainly has not hurt his rights as a father or any other rights. He was found guilty by CPS and still has suffered no consequence. If I were to pick up and move away and keep his kids from him, I'd certainly be held in contempt of court for violating his visitation rights. So I stay where I am and fight in court when I need to knowing it really is pointless. I won't compound it by going into further financial despair or disrupt my children's lives and leave our home for a case that never seems to get settled. It is not a reflection of my responsibility for my welfare or the welfare of my kids. It is the reality that is faced on a regular basis in real instances of abuse. It in no way means I am sympathetic to anyone making a false allegeation. It just means your solutions don't work for me in any way and I don't think you will ever understand why.

My suggestion. Drug the children so they are incapable of lying or reacting to their fears and emotions while questioning them.

Also infuse all alchohol sold within the united states with birth control

It just means your solutions don't work for me in any way and I don't think you will ever understand why.

I understand (and have experienced) more that you might realize...but I also understand that despite the sometimes massive failings of our judicial system, being innocent until proven guilty is the foundation of a system where you cannot be convicted of something just because everyone 'thinks' you did it. Punishing people before they are convicted violates that foundation in the most severe way. It is obvious that your personal experiences are clouding your judgment; it happens to the best of us. But if we don't speak up when this happens to other people, eventually it will happen to you or someone you love. Defending the rights of others doesn't negate the validity of your own experiences, it helps to make the system we live under better and moves it closer to justice.

-Julie

My experience isn't clouding my judgment, Julie. As I said earlier, its because of my experience that I questioned the story Amy blogged about. And again, because I do not agree with your solutions does not mean my judgment is impaired. It means I don't see your solutions as workable solutions. Yes, there is a presumption of innocence and I do respect that. But domestic violence is a different thing than a house burning down or being mugged. It usually is cyclical and in cases such as mine where it has gone on for years and things have been proven, what you suggest only makes life difficult for the victim.

I also gave examples of situations with kids that I knew were being neglected by parents where neither parent faced any penalty. My reason again was to show that in my experience these things go on for very long periods of time and I have seen kids living in situations that were dangerous with nothing being done when it was a mother or a father involved. It was the reason I questioned the story. It was not to rob anyone of their rights. It was to illustrate that I have seen and experienced just the opposite of what the man in this story is claiming. And again, I stated I do not know the parties involved to know who is being truthful, just based on my experiences, I think there is a lot more to the story.

My experience isn't clouding my judgment, Julie. As I said earlier, its because of my experience that I questioned the story Amy blogged about.

I'm not suggesting that your experience has clouded your judgment because you question this particular case. I agree that in this case we don't have enough information to take a clear side.

I suggest that your judgment is clouded because you completely refuse to look at this from the other direction. What if someone you love was falsely accused of domestic assault (either to the kids or to the spouse) during a divorce. That person is rendered homeless because he/she is forceably removed for his/her home. That person looses contact with the children because now there is a restraining order in place. That person might also loose jobs, familial/friend relationships, community respect. The person looses all of these things without a conviction.

Do you realize that I could right now make marks around my own neck, tear up my clothes a bit, start crying and make a police report against my husband, and he would be kicked out of the house and have a restraining order by sundown? That is horrible.

No matter how awful it is, the burden of proof should always be with the victim. The victim has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the crimes. It is the basis of our justice system.

I know what it is like to be constantly tormented by an abuser (father and ex-boyfriend) and I know how hard it is to escape. I also know what it is like when the court system doesn't provide justice but that doesn't mean that we should start taking rights away from the accused in order to attempt to load the dice. Someday you or I might be accused, and if that takes place, any effort toward ensuring justice for everyone will serve us.

For the record, I'm not attempting to justify what your ex-husband did (and continues to do) to you.

-Julie

Gentlemen, read this thread carefully. Women, who have more than 50% of the votes are incapable of understanding any man anywhere is being falsely accused of something,though attorneys admit the false charge is virtually automatic in divorce in most of the US.

No matter how badly men are being treated, all women can do is pick out the small percentage of men who are bad and repeat it over and over.

Let me shout it out. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DISCUSS OUR STATUS WITH WOMEN.

The US is not the entire world. Stop taking this abuse, and GET THE HELL OUT.

If you stay, you deserve everything that happens to you.

The most ignorant and uneducated slaves knew if they could get to Canada, they would be free. Canada is as bad for men as the US, but the idea is the same. So, if ignorant slaves didn't know to leave what is your problem?

I write from Mexico where I can kiss little girls on the forehead when I walk downtown, without being arrested. Nor will I be charged with a felony for talking to a kid in plain sight of his mother, or for looking at him. (NH).

And, if I am sitting in the park and a kid comes, his parents do not call the cops.

Julie, again, its not that I refuse to look at this from another perspective or that I don't believe there are people falsely accused of abuse. I just don't happen to agree with your proposals. Unfortunately there are people who are accused of crimes that they did not commit. There have been people who have served time or even been sentenced to the death penalty only to discover later on that they were innocent. I wouldn't say those are the majority of the cases, but its happened and happened too often.

It is an unfortunate fact of life that when accused of a crime, while you have a right to a presumption of innocence, your life is still in limbo unto the resolution of any criminal case. That is the situation regardless of what crime you may be accused of. In situations of domestic violence, especially when there is a known history, your proposals do nothing but enable the abuser to continue a campaign of abuse and intimidation.

There is no easy answer as to their rights because yes, you are correct, they are facing hardship before a conviction, but if I were accused, I know I'd do anything to separate myself from the situation until cleared, and that includes moving out.

And I do not feel that you are in any way justifying what my ex has been guilty of. I simply disagree with you on what you consider solutions. It doesn't mean you're wrong and I'm right. It just means that we disagree. There is no offense taken and I certainly mean none to you. It is a discussion that obviously does not have easy answers.

Let me shout it out. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DISCUSS OUR STATUS WITH WOMEN.

irlandes, that isn't even fair or accurate. I've been advocating for a change that would reduce the number of false accusations and attempting to explain that this is an issue for EVERYONE. Just like rape is an issue for EVERYONE. This issue was brought up on a blog run by a WOMAN!

I realize this is a severe and horrible issue, but alienating people who are actually on your side doesn't assist you in making any significant positive change in society.

-Julie

The collateral damage of all this intentional systemic injustice is not just conjecture on blogs on the internet, it ACTUALLY is a lot of angry young men that, frankly, will be the violent "thugs" that many paranoid women think that most men are now, even though they are not.

We have a young man living with us that was taken to jail for "domestic violence" for yelling at his brother's girlfriend. This same "girl" made a huge gash on his face (which is still a large scar) a month ago by hitting him in the face with an ashtray. She just moved in, and he was kicked out of his house, where he lived all his life. This is JUSTICE?!?

If you want a glimpse what the future will look like with all these beaten down young men, look at the plane crashing into the IRS building.