News Features
John Marra
John Marra is WSAZ's gardening expert.
Recipes
See what's cooking in the WSAZ kitchen.
E-Reporter
Submit your pictures or video to WSAZ.
Charleston's Most Wanted
Check out Kanawha Valley's fugitives.
News Story Dubs
Want a copy of a news story? Go here for info.
Where Are They Now?
See what former WSAZers are doing now.
Dashcam Diaries
Outrageous police chases caught on tape.
Become an e-Reporter
Send us your News and Weather pictures & videos. Click on the pictures to submit
Possible Change in Parenting Laws Save Email Print
Posted: 11:03 PM Jan 30, 2008
 Last Updated: 11:03 PM Jan 30, 2008
 Reporter: WSAZ NewsChannel 3
Email Address: news@wsaz.com
89 comments
A | A | A

West Virginia's Parenting and Family Law could be in for a major overhaul. Whether that's good or bad news depends on who you talk to.

State legislators, parenting experts and advocates met to discuss the proposed changes Wednesday. Fathers' rights groups and equal parenting advocates say the new laws benefit children by having kids spend more time with both parents, but some family groups say the new laws don't fit every situation and could make matters worse for victims of domestic violence.

"We know now what works best we used to not know we used to think mom with children when they were young we now know children brought up without with equal time with mom and dad do better," Equal Parenting Author Warren Farrell said.

"I think we have to be very careful what to do if we open the laws and start all over they going to open up children will fall through cracks and families will suffer," West Virginia Women’s Commission’s Kathy Pauley said.

You can check out these controversial new bills for yourself and let your representatives know what you think. Just click over to our Featured Links.

More Stories
Virtual Tour of Marshall’s Campus

Bars Breaking Smoking Ban Law in Attempt to Boom Business

Going Green and Saving Big on New Appliances

Chickens Lay Colored Eggs

 Broadband Speeding its way through Braxton County

The Importance of Smoke Detectors

Fatal Accident in Kentucky Tuesday Afternoon

Playmates Child Care Olympics
Post Your Comments
First Name:
Location:
Enter Comments: characters left
Email (optional):
Email will not be displayed on site. For station contact purpose only.
Read Comments
Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
Posted by: david on Jun 3, 2008 at 10:10 AM
i believe this law to be in the best interest of the child. i am in a situation where the mother is a drug abuser and used the child support to fund her habit. she never took him to the Dr., and lied to me for 2 years--until he had to go to daycare and had to have 10 shots.she has denied me access on many occasions and has not taked court ordered drug tests on 5 occassions, only to get a slap on the wrist from the judge because she is a "mom". i am reading the posts here and there is a "anti-father" vibe here. Please be aware that there are just as many bad mothers out here as well, and the only way to be fair is to promote this law--hopefully it will make its way national. and the way to check this system is when the other parent is not doing right--call CPS
Posted by: the other parent on Apr 23, 2008 at 01:58 PM
I am all for the 50/50. I think it is competely needed for a child to spend equal time with the mother and father. It is more balanced for the child. Unstead only knowing that they get to see there fathers on the weekend or if their mother is angry at there dad or step mother, they wont be allowed to see them. As for CS I feel that if the father doesn't want anything to do with the child, then yes they should pay child support. If the father wants to be active in the childs life, then why should the father have to support the child in two different homes? The 50/50 law would be a wonderful thing in the end. Every child deserves to spend as much equal time with both parents and both sides of there family. Especailly when they have a mother that makes others believe the childs father is worthless and sometimes doesn't allow the child to see or spend time or even talk to the other parent because she is mad. So I pry to GOD that the 50/50 goes through, for the childrens well being!!!
Posted by: Joyce Griffith on Mar 25, 2008 at 08:40 PM
I think that it should be up to the children no matter what age if they want to be with their Dads. And If a Dad Can't keep up with what he agreed to pay for in the court hearing or child support they should not get to see there children till they can do what they are suppose too and if they are unstable like my ex son in law they should be supervised because most of your dads are dead beats and expect the welfare to take care of them . I think the child should be able to make a decision on if they want to go or not. My son in law cause my daughter and 3 kid to lose there house and now they are very upset with there dad because they lost there home and had to change schools and now they stay upset all the time because of there dad And they go to Church and when he gets them on his weekend he cause them to miss there Sunday school class There dad quit a job making$18 dollars to a job making less than $9.00 he drinks and drugs and he sleep in same room with his daughter when he has them
Posted by: Lora on Mar 25, 2008 at 08:13 PM
DEPENDS ON THE SITUATON, BUT IN MY CASE 50/50 WOULD NOT WORK, MY EX-HUSBAND IS A NUT CASE WHEN WE GOT OUR DIVORCE HE THREATENED SUICIDE WITH A GUN, HAD A 2 HOUR STANDOFF WITH THE POLICE AND WAS SHOT WITH A TAZER DART THEN TAKEN TO BARH FOR 10 DAYS. I AM NOT SAYING IT WOULD NOT WORK FOR SOME BUT IT WILL NOT WORK FOR MY SITUATION AT ALL. SOME FATHERS CAN BE DEPENDABLE BUT THESE DEADBEAT DADS THAT WON'T WORK, PAY CHILD SUPPORT AND KEEP UP WITH ALL THEIR COURT OBLIGATIONS SHOULD BE RESTRICTED ON THEIR PARENTAL RIGHTS, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY ARE MENTALLY UNSTABLE TO THE POINT THEY LET 5 YR OLDS WRECK ON BIKES WITH NO HELMETS OR TRAINING WHEELS, THEN THEY ARE TOO STUPID TO TAKE THE KID TO THE HOSPITAL TO HAVE THE KNOT ON HIS HEAD CHECKED TO SEE IF HE IS OK OR NOT. TO SUM IT UP IT REALLY DEPENDS ON THE SITUATION SOME PARENTS CAN AGREE BUT MY EX-HUSBAND AND I CANNOT AGREE ON ANYHTING AT ALL. HE WON'T EVEN CALL HIS KIDS HE HAS HIS MOMMY DO IT FOR HIM BECAUSE HE IS A TOO UNSTABLE TO TALK TO ME.
Posted by: Brenda on Feb 17, 2008 at 11:41 PM
50/50 is not good for anyone. Kids don't feel they have a home. My kids have to get up at 4:30 in the morning when with Dad he quit a his job went to work for $6 less. I pay everything, even braces and Nibert wouldn't let the kids stay with me at night and Dad every weekend until school was out. She said every child get's F's. He is with a jackson cnty teacher's aid and has had sex in front of them, over New Years he took them out of state to her Dad's where they were given alcohol. I knew nothing about it until the school called me to come get my son who reported this to them I had to miss another day of work to take them to CPS. The I was told this was not child abuse, a parent can give their child alcohol. He called my son a liar. I don't know all cases in Jackson but Judge Nibert has given the father the benefit in 10 that I know and ignored the letter from the guardian stating they should be with me. Oh and I pay him child support. Jackson not for the best interest of the children
Posted by: Dawn on Feb 15, 2008 at 09:09 AM
I think we as a state we need the passage of this bill.Because alot of children do suffer at the the hands of Both parents . They are parents that don't want the children to be with the other parent even if they have a court order. The children will benift from the 50/50 it will allow access with both side of the family also children will grow up knowing how much the families do love and and care for them.When entering wv the sign say's welcome to wv wild and wonderful.It should say welcome to wv the family friendly and fun state.So who will benfit more from this bill the children or the state if not passed.
Posted by: Grandmother on Feb 15, 2008 at 07:34 AM
Money to Gain Children too Lose, Why shoud children suffer by any parents hands They are mothers and fathers who wants to be apart of their kid life also what about the Grandparents cousin aunts and uncle who would want tobe apart of these kid's life.Now ask your self when you see children hurt when daddy or mommy is refused the right to see them who is hurting the most the kids don't you say.Now what about the mental issue that is being put on the child.Oh I forgot that is not a lasting problem for a child. I see where 50/50 would be Great I hope that it passes here in the Great state of W.V Instead of the welcome sign saying wild and wonderful it should say welcome to Wv the friendly,family and fun state open to all
Posted by: DEBORAH on Feb 12, 2008 at 10:48 PM
THE LAWS NOW DO THE SAME THING, GENERALIZE ALL CASES THEY ARE NOT THE SAME, MY HUSBAND IS IN JAIL RIGHT NOW, EVEN THOUGH HE HAD A JOB AND SUPPORT WAS BEING TAKEN OUT. NOW HE HAS LOST THAT JOB AND THEY WANT HIM TO GO TO WORK RELEASE TO FIND A JOB AND PAY SUPPORT. TELL ME THE LOGIC IN THAT. I THOUGH JAIL WAS A LAST RESORT AND ONLY FOR TO SHOW THOSE WHO DIDN'T WANT TO WORK WHAT COULD HAPPEN, NOT FOR THE ONES WILLING TO WORK AND PAY SUPPORT. THE CHILD SUPPORT LAWS SUCK, THOUGH I ADMIT IT IS NEEDED, THERE HAS TO BE A BETTER WAY THEN TO INTENTIONALLY MAKE SOMEONE LOSE THEY JOB. THAT'S INSANE. AND IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME HE LOST A JOB BECAUSE INSTEAD OF GIVING HIM A DATE TO COME BACK TO COURT THEY LOCKED HIM UP KNOWING HE HAD A JOB. WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT THAT. IS THERE ANYTHING I CAN DO TO PREVENT IT FROM HAPPENING AGAIN???????????? I LIVE IN PENNSYLVANIA MAYBE IT BEING A COMMONWEALTH MAKES IT OKAY TO JUST LOCK THEM UP.
Posted by: Marcy Ganz on Feb 3, 2008 at 03:26 AM
Children will benefit from 50-50 equal shared parenting. Studies prove that child that are in 50-50 parent homes do better in school, stay away from drugs, don't join gangs, don't get pregnant, and on and on. Go look up the stats yourself and see what is really good for children 50-50 shared parenting. Many of the European countries practice this equal shared parenting. Get out of the 50's girl! Women and men are equal stop having some corrupt judge that wants women barefoot and pregnant keep you from 50-50 equal parenting. The state is the only place not wanting this because they get money from title IV-D that is designed to break up families. Do wants right for your children and vote for equal shared 50-50 parenting. http://crispe.org
Posted by: MOmmy on Feb 2, 2008 at 09:39 PM
Oh how sad!!! This is the saddest thing....as if a divorce is not bad enough on a child....take away their Mommy and their home....OH this is so sad!
Posted by: innocent by stander on Feb 2, 2008 at 05:13 PM
MG, Just so everyone knows, I have no dog in this fight, but I find it pretty appalling how MG talks about Nique having family values when she /he is on here making judgement on someone that he/she doesn't even know.That's the pot calling the kettle black huh? If you, my friend, were taught values like you want everyone else to be teaching, you wouldn't stoop to that level. HAve you walked in that mother's shoes? I doubt it because you wouldn't be writing things like that.
Posted by: Mommy of 1 on Feb 2, 2008 at 03:46 PM
Passing this law would be the worse thing for most children My daughters father is in her life but only b/c his mom makes her and when he does actually have her she comes home after his three days and she stinks so bad her teeth are crusty yellow and she will tell me that she hasn't had a bath or brushed her teeth since my house. This law would do nothing but hurt the kids in 99% of cases I don't think its fair for the kids its like they are legalizing child abuse and neglect. This law is not thinking about the kids at all, it would be helping deadbeat parents get something for nothing, and its not fair. Yes the child does need the father and mother both but also the child needs to be where they are taken care and raised the right way. Kids dont need the parent to be a friend they need guidenc
Posted by: Nique on Feb 2, 2008 at 03:12 PM
To MG, I'm really sorry to see that you are such a narrow minded person that would write something like that to a mother that has support 3 children on 500.00 per month for 12 years. I'm not the one that left me with 2 children ages 2 and 4 for the girl next door. That's 1 daddy and counting!!! And for the second daddy, we'll let's just say he had a thing for the babysitter!!! That's 2 daddies and counting. Hmmmm, well that's all of them smart butt..Oh, and by the way, I got smart and stayed single to this day..12 years...Like I said previously, my second husband is a great father, just a not so great husband...I would tell you just how many times he's been married but I wouldn't allow you to be narrowed minded again. I hope when you get to meet Jesus on judgement day, he reminds you of this. But for now remember this- Be who you are and say how you feel because those who matter don't mind and those who mind...DONT MATTER!!! You sweetie, DON'T MATTER!!!!
Posted by: Chase on Feb 2, 2008 at 11:18 AM
Amy - I'm sure there are many in your shoes too. Personally I made sure that when I got pregnant if anything happened between me and my husband or to my husband I could take care of me and our daughter. I guess I should say I did everything possible and didn't accidently get pregnant which I know happens and could have happened to me to (so don't take that wrong). I have the insurance and I am the breadwinner in my family but it could easily have been the other way around. And it really shouldn't matter because both parents should do whatever they have to for the child but that would be a perfect world huh? I guess I just base my opinions on what I've seen happen to my youngest brother. He pays support then pays for her gas so the child can be in extracurricular activities etc and the mom won't work and has been on and off of drugs then she told lies and we didn't even see the child for 8 months. It's been a nightmare so I just would like to see good fathers have more rights.
Posted by: been on the other parents side on Feb 2, 2008 at 07:43 AM
as a person who lost there step son in 2005..i know what its like to see your husband hurting and to see the smile on that childs face. I know for a fact everything they are saying is true when we finally got to see my step son we found out he was doing poorly in class...we asked for his skool records, we went and got tutoring books and whatever else we could think of......His mother tried everything she could to stop us from seeing him...but thank god judge hagerman read right through her..but now that is all gone..if any mother is reading this and doing these exact same things think about your child instead of your ego...that child needs its father...my husband is a good man, paid his child support (over it actually) and bought trevor clothes , he did not deserve the pain brought upon him. Please for the children , the mothers needs to help on their side, CS isnt everything. thats all you hear is i want a raise in CS.Get over it. get a job. your child is hurting....be a real woman
Posted by: haley on Feb 2, 2008 at 04:51 AM
they need to make a law that kids arent allowed to be so fat ! im serious it should be child abuse for a parent to allow these fat kids to eat like that. no wonder there kids get made fun of. just today i saw a child struggling to get out of the car he was so huge. my child so light and beautiful bounced out and bounced into the school gracefully and everyone was saying how gorgeous she is, shes gonna be a real looker when shes older while these poor fat kids are to be made fun of cause there parents dont care. something needs to be done. i care, we all should. even my small daughter said" mommy why are some so very fat like a piggie" i almost cryed and explained to her that there parents just dont care and that because i do she will be a attractive lady someday . im just saying no wonder the more attractive make fun, they dont understand it
Posted by: bringin it back on Feb 2, 2008 at 04:37 AM
people get you a paddle and bring the paddle back. you know that song, im bringin sexy back, yeah! well im singin "im bringin my paddle back, yeah, them bratty kids dont know how to act" yeah
Posted by: karla on Feb 2, 2008 at 04:08 AM
let these low life dads help out for a change. they dont do anything but send a little money.
Posted by: TARA on Feb 2, 2008 at 03:29 AM
PEOPLE NEED TO START BUSTING THERE KIDS TAILS WHEN THEY ARE MEAN. IM SO SICK OF ALL THE BRATS I SEE, GO TO WALMART AND SEE ALL THESE FAT WELFARE MOMMIES TRYING TO CONTROL THERE FAT MINI- ME 'S . DO THEY REALIZE HOW STUPID THEY LOOK? PEOPLE ARE MAKING FUN OF YOU IDIOTS.
Posted by: Kenya on Feb 2, 2008 at 02:58 AM
50/50 custody should be automatic. The problem is that child support is calculated based on the parents earnings and the time children spend with their parents. Also, the states receive Federal money depending on how much the Child Support Enforcement Agents collect. The more support is collected, the more Federal (tax) money the states get. Do you get the connection? The parent who gets less time with the child(ren) pays more support. The more support that parent pays, the more Federal money the state receives. Custody is not about "the children best interests" It is about MONEY!
Posted by: alan on Feb 1, 2008 at 08:41 PM
I am in this situation as we speak. My exwife and I are both very young to have a 5 year old. I work 40 hours a week and she works on and off. I pay her almost 100 bucks a week and I keep him on Wen. nights and get him every Friday and return him on Sunday. Everyone I know says shes taking advantage of me and I shouldnt let her do it. But I just want to have him as much as possible and just try to forget about having to pay her every week when I have him more. I would love to see a 50/50 law
Posted by: Anonymous on Feb 1, 2008 at 08:39 PM
I had to drive 250 miles every weekend and then some,but every time I could pick my son up I did.I done that for 16 years.I was lucky got along with ex,even her husbands family liked me and my new family enough they watched my kids,and we all exchanged gifts and were welcome in each others homes.We raised a great child and I truly feel blessed.
Posted by: Michael on Feb 1, 2008 at 07:35 PM
I believe this law is great. Under the US Constitution each of us are supposed to be given equal rights. However for decades in family courts everywhere fathers are being discriminated against just because they're male. I'm a proud father of a precious 4 yr old boy and I'd give my life for him and all the money I'll ever make. They're great fathers out there that are not being given a chance. The real problem is that the States are being given kick backs from the Federal gov't for collecting cs. So fathers for every $3 that is take from you, $1 is given to your state to collect it. What incentive is there to treat men equally. 50/50 should be the standard. Children are better for society as adults if they have both raise them. Mothers out there that have a dead beat dad well I agree there are exceptions just like there are "dead beat mothers"; and if you case a party that fits this criteria then they should not get 50/50 but come on people stop thinking about money, think about kids!
Posted by: Don on Feb 1, 2008 at 06:00 PM
Does anyone think it unusual that in the vast majority of divorces, one parent is awarded custody of the children, regardless if both parents are equally fit? Also, does anyone find it a little odd that one parent is ordered to pay child support, regardless if both parents earn an equitable amount? Now, consider the fact that most cases of divorce are filed by women. And despite the large amount of false allegations of abuse, most of these women seek to destroy their marriages because, "I'm just not in love anymore." Maybe, just maybe, if these women knew they were not going to receive the primary relationship with the child and child support they might think twice before filing for divorce. That is why it is so expedient to set the presumption of custody at 50/50 instead of 86/14. If both parents are ordered custody half the time and neither is ordered to pay child support the incentive to divorce would be eliminated. Children would be better off with equal access to both parents.
Posted by: Jesse on Feb 1, 2008 at 05:01 PM
Maybe a fair share of custody between the couple can stop the kids from being used as a pawn to get more support money.
Posted by: Larry on Feb 1, 2008 at 03:01 PM
The children today are being used as pawns in the divorce industry to gain control, power and greed. This must stop and equal parenting will take the incentives out of it, reducing parent alienation and child abuse that is now going on because of the current laws. Presumption of Equal parenting is a must to save our children from the greedy attorneys who do not care about our children and only care about there pocket book.
Posted by: a concerned mom on Feb 1, 2008 at 02:34 PM
What if the mother is breast-feeding an infant?
Posted by: MG on Feb 1, 2008 at 01:48 PM
To Nique, just how many baby daddy's do you have? Are you going to continue until you find the right man/child combo? This is what is wrong with children today.....NO FAMILY VALUES.
Posted by: Andrew on Feb 1, 2008 at 01:15 PM
Family courts are a business that deals and manipulates raw emotions and brings out the worst in us. Children are basically held hostage and there is no such thing as what is good. It is a winner take all situation, one parent loses, deliberately marginalized. As for money the legislatures for states,should not be including fiscal models for child support and including it in the budget. Neither should they retain undistributed funds which should be returned to the payee or the court ordered majority parent. I would like to see undistributed money used on kids only, if it cannot be returned, not roads or the governors pet projects just because they can, it is a disgusting system, devised by business people that produces nothing but misery. 14% a month is not enough to establish a good relationship with kids, sure we have our bad parents, but kids need to know both the good and the bad in themselves, that is who they are. There is Noequity in turning children into money, ever !
Posted by: MOM OF 2 on Feb 1, 2008 at 12:37 PM
If you mandate 50/50 law, the kids get so confused. It is hard to keep up with which house they go to after school. Anyway most fathers will go for this just to keep from paying child support for the children. BETTER THINK ABOUT THIS LAW. THINK ABOUT THE KIDS!!!!!!
Posted by: A Loving Father on Feb 1, 2008 at 10:06 AM
Let me start by saying that many comments on here are wildly inaccurate about the purpose and effect of the proposed changes to State code. It is sad that so many narrow minded people can’t see past their own personal situation to get perspective on a very troubling and unfair practice in WV’s family court system. Just because your former mate is a bad parent doesn’t mean that all people of that gender are bad parents. It is troubling to see how easily all of you gleefully discriminate against a gender. It wasn’t so long ago that women were constantly discriminated against because of their gender in the workplace. One would think that most women could understand why it is so morally wrong to do the same thing at home.
Posted by: A Loving Father on Feb 1, 2008 at 10:04 AM
(continued) I also say shame on you to everyone who has called into question a father’s worthiness as a parent based on the frequency and size of their payment of child support. I challenge everyone who has complained about their child support to post their credit scores and tell us how you never have any problems meeting your financial obligations. But most importantly, this law isn’t about what mothers or fathers want when it comes to parenting time, it is about what is best for the children. And it is well documented by the medical community that having both parents equally present in a child’s life is the ideal situation. Moreover, this law does not grant fathers any more rights than mothers - it only codifies that the starting point for parenting time planning should be equal time for both the mother and father and that they have equal rights. Equal rights under the law – that’s a phrase we’ve all heard before. What could be fairer?
Posted by: Mommyof2 on Feb 1, 2008 at 09:37 AM
I think this is very very sad. Our children should not have to suffer and be torn between two homes....just because their parents created a mess. I am one hundred percent NOT for this change in laws. It would be bad for the kids and good for them only if they have a good daddy. It will lower child support and make it harder for the Mom to raise the child properly, but I bet the Daddies will lOVE having their support lowered!! It is sad and I am NOT for this!!!! My parents divorced when I was a child.....I would have committed suicide if I had to live with my Dad and his girlfriend and the delinquent "stepbrother." They never married thankfully!!!!!
Posted by: Anonymous on Feb 1, 2008 at 09:18 AM
I believe that Kathy Pauley of the West Virginia Woman's Commission is either violating or skirting the edge of federal law in lobbying against this legislation, and Commission publications indicate that this is just the most recent example. The citizens of West Virginia who support changing a law should not have to argue with an opponent that they pay through their federal taxes. That's why the federal government created US Code TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 93 > § 1913. Lobbying with appropriated moneys Yet, Pauley flouts these saying "I think we have to be very careful what to do if we open the laws and start all over they going to open up children will fall through cracks and families will suffer" She is plainly opposing this law. "This time, we were able to take an active role in several pieces of legislation" The Advocate West Virginia Women's Commission Spring / Summer 2006 Pauley should stop lobbying on the taxpayers' dime.
Posted by: Daryl on Feb 1, 2008 at 08:38 AM
To Anon. Paying child support was never an issue, he was not asked to be brought into this world and I did not want my child to become a pawn but just letting me be a dad would have been PRICELESS.
Posted by: Amy on Feb 1, 2008 at 08:23 AM
To Chase: I personally don't see anything wrong w/ providing receipts to reflect how the CS $ is spent on the child. It would certainly indicate that CS doesn't even come close to what the custodial parent actually pays for the child. For instance, I get $128 per month--well, let me correct myself, my ex is court ordered to pay that amount, but my son doesn't get it, and I spend $194 per month for my son's health insurance, so would someone please tell me how fair that is. If they do decide on the 50/50, which I am against, then does this mean that the now-non custodial parent will have to pay 50% of the $ spent on their children? I bet then alot of non custodial parents wouldn't support the new possible changes. Of course, lots of non custodial parents are getting a bad deal, and they would love to see their children more.
Posted by: Robert Gartner on Feb 1, 2008 at 07:50 AM
I am excited that West Virginia has considered equal parenting legislation. Perhaps it will diminish such the perpetration of such insidious forms of abuse as systematic parental alienation, a thing that prolonged court process helps to instill.
Posted by: Joyce on Feb 1, 2008 at 07:47 AM
I think they can make all the laws they want but when it comes right down to it, it is whoever has the most money to pay the judge off is who will win. The judge doesn't (judge Nibert) doesn't consider what is in the best interest of the child. Prime example: My daughters father was a child abuser but yet judge nibert (Ripley WV) gave him custody of our daughter. After 3 years I still have not received a court order signed by her, nor have I been able to see or speak to my daughter since. And she lets him get by with it. If I had the money to pay her off it wouldn't be an issue. But since I don't have the money I got to set back and wait til my daughter gets old enough to explain to her about everything. If the case wasn't crooked then why have I not recieved a court order after over 3 yrs us going to court.
Posted by: Mason County Also on Feb 1, 2008 at 07:42 AM
Hey Mason County I agree with you to the fullest. I was drug through the mud for almost 3 years before I got overnight visitation. After all the accusations they didnt find nothing on me It was all made up by the mother, If it wasnt for the psychologist telling the court It was the mother making my child like this then I wouldnt have got but 4 overnights a month. It does get old being drug back to court for every little thing that isnt worth going to court for. I know I almost lost my job for having to go to court so much then the judge would have loved that huh cause If I would have lost my job then oh no no money for the mother to spend on everything else but my child. I pay my child support every time on time Im not behind but then she says well I need more money for this or that for the child and Im sorry but I pay what the court says. I know that sounds bad but Im not supporting the mother to pay her bills because she cant thats her problem not mine. Vote out the family law judge!!
Posted by: Anonymous on Feb 1, 2008 at 07:35 AM
I am glad to hear someone finally caring about the rights of fathers. My husband pays out the nose in child support (owes NO arrears) & the mother is *routinely* caught perjurying herself in court to get more money. She *never* has any punishment for this *proven* perjury, & gets to keep raking in the big checks, all while doing *nothing* for the children, & telling them (and anyone else that will listen) that she can't "because daddy doesn't love them enough to pay his child support". All while she cashes the big checks every 2 weeks that leave my family & my children little to live off of in our home. And she gets almost all my husband's money - AND the money of the man she committed adultery with "because he had more money" (her exact words). Our courts should make these women SHOW where the money goes, should punish perjury, and should not financially reward people for adultery & tearing families apart for no good reason other than money.
Posted by: Nique on Feb 1, 2008 at 12:21 AM
I have been on both sides of the fence,I have an ex who seen his kids every other weekend and nothing more. Paid his little bit of child support and nothing more. Verbally and mentally abused our children when he wouldn't get his way or I took him back to court which was only 2 times in 18 years.Then I have an ex who is the greatest father I have known.Gets his daughter every time he can get his hands on her,she loves her daddy very much. Gives her extra money other than child support when she ask for it.He remarried and had to go thru Mason Co. court to be able to see his little girl when he divorced again (I witnessed how Judge Nibert is first hand)It's ashame!! The differences in the way my childrens dads handled fatherhood made an amazing difference in our kids. The abuser dad (his kids has emotional problems and hates going to see him, even at 18) But the good dad(she is 14 & does well in school and has a great outlook on life) Good dads can make a difference, given a chance.
Posted by: just a mom on Jan 31, 2008 at 11:57 PM
I am just a Christian Mommy......who wants the Lord to be wih My Daugter and myself. He always talks bad about others....he does not know the real way into Heaven. I asked him one time, as he is a father of divorce...."would you want your kids half of the time.?" He said,"if they would lower my child support." I rest my sweet case!!!!' I made this mistake....please don;t make my daughter pay. DO not trust your EX!! AMEN!
Posted by: Laura on Jan 31, 2008 at 09:32 PM
I have been told that there is a distance claus, it isn't on either bill. I have been told that both parents have to reside in the same town in order for this bill to apply, that is not written either. I have also been told there is a military claus, can't find that in there. Please read this bill very carefully. NO parent has the right to CONTROL the other parent getting another job even if it is in another location. Also, what happens to the children who have insurance while living with the custodial parent? If the child doesn't live there more then 50% of the time in order to have the insurance is the state and tax dollars going to pay for medical cards for these children? This bill is poorly written and it goes for what is best for the NON custodial parent NOT the children. Each case is different and each CHILD is different and custody cases need to be decided individually. ALso do most of you that are for this have the money to CONSTANTLY be in court or mediation?
Posted by: George on Jan 31, 2008 at 08:57 PM
I wish that every state law mandates 50/50 parenting time. This would keep from one parent from using the kid(s) as a tool agaist the other parent. Most of the time it's all for money!
Posted by: Chase on Jan 31, 2008 at 07:56 PM
It makes me sick that so many people think of fathers as dead beats. All a lot of women want is the child support and they spend it on whatever they want. How about them showing receipts for what they spend it on. And fathers are parents too and most want to be. I'm sure there are just as many horrible mothers as there are fathers. My husband is a terrific father and if we ever divorced i would want our daughter to spend time with him every day and I know we would both do whatever it took to make that happen. Both of my brothers married women who are pitiful mothers. If you have children you need to do whats best for them and having a relationship with both parents is whats best. There are always exceptions but those should be taken care of separately.
Posted by: What about changing Child support laws on Jan 31, 2008 at 07:41 PM
Ok, I am apalled that this bill is even being considered when the legislatures can't even get kids the child support they are owed! There is over $150 million in back support owed and when you write to legislators about it they say there is not a problem with the laws. I am here to tell you that after 4 1/2 years of once per month court hearings I have still gotten nothing! He has been in contempt for 4 1/2 years spent 3 months in jail and when he came out he refused to pay again! During our last hearing he refused to show up, a warrant was issued and when he called the judge to explain, the judge cancelled the warrant and gave him another chance to show up! That is a disgrace, and all the while he still refuses to pay! Let's start simple first like changing the laws for child support. Its not just men I know plenty of women who refuse to pay as well!
Posted by: Anonymous on Jan 31, 2008 at 07:31 PM
A child has no rights what so ever when they are under the age of 12-14 as to who they want to stay with. I see my granddaughter get very upset when she has to go stay with her dad. So are we helping this child or are we creating a situation. She only goes every other weekend but you can differently see her change when she has to go with him. It is time the courts says lets do what the child wants instead of saying well the dad or the mother needs to be in their lives. Maybe that is not true for everyone. Each case is a different one. Just like each child, regardless of age, should be able to make some discisions themself. Things are bad enough now, don't try to make it worse. The child won't know what bed they are going to sleep in from night to night.
Posted by: Bud on Jan 31, 2008 at 04:40 PM
Here is a simple software applet for XP or Vista that predicts the possibility of Parental Alienation. http://www.frips.com/predictpa.exe It is designed to help judges and courts monitor and "early detect" psychological child abuse on children. Since some of these kids live in fear and negative talk all the time, some end up believing the "targeting parent/abuser" more than the targeted parent. As someone who was born in West Virvinia, I am very proud of my birth state taking a deeper look at "Shared and Equal Parenting." May God bless all of you involved in crafting better laws and systems of protection for these kids. And, may God continue to bless the innovative people of the United States of America.
Posted by: RoaneCo. on Jan 31, 2008 at 04:38 PM
Isn't the root cause of this issue divorce? Maybe the reasons for the divorces should be looked at too. Maybe if some of the issues that bring on divorces in the first place were addressed and the divorce rate decreased that may help this problem to some degree.
Posted by: Jackson Parent on Jan 31, 2008 at 04:29 PM
Support SHARED parenting and NOT the proposed presumed 50/50 custody by going to:http://safefamilies.wordpress.com/
Posted by: Ray on Jan 31, 2008 at 04:28 PM
I would just like to say that every father is not a "DEAD BEAT DAD", I would gladly give 10 years off of my life to be able to spend more time with my son. I pay my cs like I am suppose to, although I do get tired of being taken back to court every time I get a raise. But as long as it takes care of my son its fine. If I could get custody of my son I wouldnt even ask for cs, and I would give my ex the same visitation as I have. It would be worth it just to be able to wake him up, and get him ready for school every morning, and to be there when he comes home from school. I also see some of the womens point. My wife has 2 girls from another marriage and their dad wont call them for their B-days or any thing. And he also owes about $50,000 in back cs and wont pay. But those of us who do right should be entitled to the same rights as our ex's. Dont punish those of us who do try and do want more time with our children. Just because love between us end doesnt mean we love our children less.
Posted by: Robert on Jan 31, 2008 at 03:56 PM
The common in every comment here is child support. In WV not only does the child not get quality time with his father but does'nt get time with his fathers family.. cousins, grandparents and such. I'm very thankful that my son shares his son's everyother week visitations with me. My grandson and I share a bond, one that I hope he can reflect upon when he is older and I have pasted on. My son also mades sure he sees my parents as well. Heritage.
Posted by: heart broken mom on Jan 31, 2008 at 03:21 PM
MAson County: Maybe if your ex-wife moves out of mason co and you stay you'll have a chance. those kids are money for the county if they are school age. I dont know who Fisher is but if he gets her out I like him already just for running against her.
Posted by: Anonymous on Jan 31, 2008 at 03:09 PM
I am the anonymous person who stated that fathers want more time with their kids so they don't have to pay as much. And I am not hateful or spiteful. My ex and I actually get along quite well, as long as I don't mention money. And he is welcome to see OUR child any time he wants (of course, its always after he's finished hunting, fishing, running, or anything else he wants to do) I'm just being realistic and your're right it is quite disgusting. But its also real life and I choose not to go through life with my eyes shut. Unless you know someone's true identity and circumstances you should not pass judgement. I didn't indicate that your ex-husband didn't want to pay, but I know several divorced couples where the father claims he wants more time with the kids, but come Saturday night, the kids are with grandma cause daddy's "going out." My child is very secure in her relationship with BOTH her parents. My point was that each case should be determined on an individual basis.
Posted by: Daryl on Jan 31, 2008 at 02:28 PM
To Anonymous: Back in the 70s' the judges were pro female and the final ruling was all ways in the womens favor and I tried to see him but under that court order she had the final say. He is a grown man now. AND THAT IS THE WHOLE STORY!
Posted by: anon on Jan 31, 2008 at 02:10 PM
If this law gets passed and this is mandatory, I will take my child to another state to live. Her father would not be good for her to be around fifty percent of the time. It would diminish the security and quality of life that I have built. The reason I divorced was because of the environment my child had to live in while with her father. I made a choice for her to leave. Our kids should not have to pay for poor choices on our parts. When an attempt to better their lives is negated by laws, it is truly the children who pay. There is obviously a clueless lawmaker who has either A) never gone through this or B)will benefit from such a law. Many men will LOVE this though as it would decrease their child support. I would forfeit mine for the exhusband to GO AWAY! He is only around once a month or so...his choice. My daughter is secure and happy. This would be a bad law for most children, if not all children.
Posted by: mother on Jan 31, 2008 at 02:04 PM
This obviously was not the choice of someone who has either been a child of divorce...or a mother of a child who has gone through divorce. I personally know people who have joint custody and equal visitation rights. In all of the cases I know of, the children are terribly insecure. They do not get routines or have stability because it changes all the time. For instance, with Mom we have manners....bedtimes, bedtime stories. Our Daddy gets sitters the whole time, no rules, no bedtimes...we eat junk food all the time. This makes Mom the bad person. The kids resent her, even though they love the boundaries, it is difficult to understand. The poor kids don't know if they go home with Dad today from school, stay for after school care, walk home, or get on the bus. It is not the job of these poor kids to learn schedules. It is our job as adults and parents to make them for them and keep it consistent and stable. The kids should not suffer for the mess of the parents.
Posted by: MASON CO on Jan 31, 2008 at 01:41 PM
THIS WOULD BE GOOD FOR FATHERS IN MASON COUNTY BECAUSE THE FAMILY LAW JUDGE DOES NOT DO WHATS BEST FOR THE CHILDREN HERE SHE JUST SIDES WITH THE MOTHERS. SHE IS A MAN EATER. FISHER FOR FAMILY LAW MASTER.
Posted by: Stepmom on Jan 31, 2008 at 01:27 PM
Try having a mother that don't want the kids!! She called hubby and told him to come get them in Tx. We had them Putnam Co Court gave him custody. He loves his children and we raised them for 4 yrs. Great students in school and in church. Hubby took her to court to get child support raised mind you she was paying 100. month for 2 kids. She came to court and said she wanted her kids back.. Well she got them. They have moved 5 times in 2 yrs. they are failing school. She is a truck driver and has no time for them. They are now 16 and 17. She has pulled them out of school and enrolled them in a Internet school. Hubby's hands are tied.. She moved them to Oregon and hubby dont get to see them and he pays 975.00 a month child support plus Health and eye Insurance. That is what you get with the Putman Co Family Court. And the children are the ones who had to pay. By the hands of the court and their so called mother
Posted by: Amy on Jan 31, 2008 at 01:16 PM
To: mom with dead beat dad: Wow! I am right there w/ ya. The court system is a JOKE. NOt only is my ex not paying CS or medical bills, but he was/still is responsibilty for a 4-wheeler. Needless to say, the 4-wheeler got repossessed, and since my name was also on the loan, I have a repossession on my name, sonething that he was court-ordered to pay. Yes, the lender was aware of the situation and yes they have a copy of the court order. There is nothing that can be done. The ex was supposed to have refinanced the 4-wheeler so my name wouldn't be on it anymore, but did he do that, either??? NO
Posted by: dooda on Jan 31, 2008 at 01:08 PM
This will not fly, I know there are real good dads out there who are dads like they should be. If passed there will be problems. Going thru my divorce, I knew how my kids thought their dad (or father I should say, since it takes a special person to be a dad, any man can father a child)was a light in their eyes and I did not want them to hurt anymore than they already had when he walked out on us, so in court I offered the every other weekend plus more, and he set right there and basically said no he didn't want that and only chose 1 evening a week. well that didn't go either, he went thru periods of upto 7 months at a time not seeing, nor speaking to his kids.My son always said he doesnt't know if I'm even alive.Now how do you explain that.I even agreed to split on claiming one of the children on taxes, he didn't even file his taxes-he owed back support is why. They better back up, and look at a bigger picture.Its not pretty roses everywhere.
Posted by: lucky one on Jan 31, 2008 at 12:25 PM
I guess I am one of the lucky ones. My ex is allowed open visitation with our children. He is always available for them and actually wants to spend time with them. No court can mandate that. I do think men need to be a bigger part of the parenting plan, but don't force them if they don't want to be.
Posted by: Anonymous on Jan 31, 2008 at 12:14 PM
Daryl, why did you not take her to court? And why is the kid so angry? When they grow up kids usually see thru brain washing, you might wish to look at your own faults in the situation cause I'm sure you're not telling the whole story.
Posted by: ADULT on Jan 31, 2008 at 11:59 AM
GROW UP!!! JUST DO WHAT IS BEST FOR THE CHILDREN! THEY ARE THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS.
Posted by: mom with dead beat dad on Jan 31, 2008 at 11:41 AM
Why doesn't the legislature first focus on establishing and enforcing EQUAL COSTS of clothing, sheltering, feeding and insuring these children? Although I have a court Order for child support and health insurance, I have, for many years, had to foot the bill for everything alone because I cannot get the WV Family Court system to enforce my Order. Additionally, the small amount of child support in question here does not even come close to half of what it costs to raise a child. It appears that my Order is not worth the paper it is printed on.
Posted by: On both sides of the fence on Jan 31, 2008 at 11:29 AM
Well I completely agree that joint custody can be a GREAT situation but every situation is different. I do not think that a law should be passed mandating this but should be on a case by case situation. My husband and I both have joint custody from our previous marriage and it benifits everyone in our situation. The kids get to see both parents all the time, we get to spend quality time together, every other weekend but I believe it depends upon the past situations which surrounded the case. How both parents are and if both parents are responsible enough to have a child 50% of the time. In some situations there is only one parent that actually does the parenting while the other gets the 50% but does nothing at all and makes it hard on the parent that does it all. Because then this parent is still taking care of both households!!
Posted by: m on Jan 31, 2008 at 11:16 AM
I think that when they make these new laws they need to look at from every angle. Iam a single mothe and My ex was orderd to pay child suport and pay medical bills but do you think he does that? NO instead of placeing new laws try inforceing the ones you have in place now.But for the dads that pay their half and help[ out with extra things their child wants to do then good for them give them some extra evenings but dont take them 2 counties away to spend a week or two it is two hard on them .
Posted by: Amy on Jan 31, 2008 at 11:11 AM
damaging it is on your child when he asks you how come his dad doesn't love him, or come and get him when he's supposed to. This has gone on since Jan. 05, it has come to the point that I don't want my son around his father; it just gets his hopes up, then he is depressed for the next few days. I would have loved to his father to be the father he was during the 1st 2 years of our son's birth, but w/ mental illnesses that the EX has, (not making excuses) but he just wants nothing to do w/ him. I completely believe that fathers who are continually involved with the child's life, not just 1 or 2 times a year have an oportunity to have more time; on the other hand, it needs to be decided by all parentals involved, and ask the child their opinion. This needs to be on a case by case basis.
Posted by: Amy on Jan 31, 2008 at 11:07 AM
To: StepParent, you seem like you're a wonderfukl parent to your stepchildren, and it does seem that your husband WANTS to be a part of his children's lives, and LIVES UP TO BEING involved in their lives. Unfortunatley, your family is not in the norm around here. I completely agree w/ Brian, ad my ex-husband is one of those only-wants-to-see-his-son-when-it's-convenient type-of-father. Literally, he lives 5 min. away from me and his son, has only 1 times ever called to talk to his son, stopped by out-of-blue 1 time to see his son, even though the agreed-upon visitation was every other Wednesday til Thurdday morning. I asked him what about on the weekends, and he told me that he didn't have time for his son because that's when he goes hunting, fishing, 4-wheeling. I'm owed close to 2k in CS/med. expenses, yet he always has $ for beer, and his hobbies--5 days before a contempt hearing on CS, he was layed off, even though no one else was. I don't think people realize how cont.
Posted by: Cindy on Jan 31, 2008 at 11:06 AM
Shared parenting is only more confusion for the child(ren) unless the parents live next door to each other. Child(ren) need consistency not a move each week. As far as Domestic Violence, I personally believe if the mother makes a allegation against the father or stepfather/boyfriend and then returns to the person then CPS needs to remove the child(ren) if the woman decides to live with abuse that is her option however the child(ren) have no choice. The children are forced to live in the abusive home because their mothers are not able to care for them therefore CPS needs to remove the children or have the mother leave the abuser. Trust me people, most mothers would let the children go to keep their abuser. Sick HUH?
Posted by: Anonymous on Jan 31, 2008 at 11:04 AM
I read a comment from anonymous stating that fathers are wanting new laws so they do not have to pay as much child support, not because they are wanting to actually spend more time with their children. That my friends is the most disgusting thing I have ever heard of. Of course some parents are like that, father AND mother. I am sure anonymous is one of those mothers who acts in a hateful and spiteful manner just to annoy her ex-husband. I think looking into and changing the laws to better include the fathers is a fantastic idea. I let my ex-husband know that he could see OUR children anytime he wanted. Even though he was set up on scheduled visitation by the family court. He was late on a few child support payments, but I new the circumstances and did not give him any crap over it. He was not the best husband to me, but he is a heck of a father to OUR children. That is what is important. It will come back on the mothers when the kids are older and know who the bad guy really was.
Posted by: Jeannie on Jan 31, 2008 at 10:53 AM
I believe this is a good law. Not all fathers are abusers, actually, most are not abusers. Fathers are expected to pay child support, but jealous mothers who use children as pawns do not want to allow fathers adequate time with THEIR children. I worked in child support for more than three years. I was continually fascinated by the number of vindictive women who hated the children's father and used their kids as objects to argue over. This is also child abuse. Brainwashing children against their father is also child abuse. Sadly, many, many mothers do this. Fathers ought not to have to fight to see their children; this should be an automatic right. Mothers are not put under the same scrutiny as fathers. As long as the fathers are not domestic violence perpetrators, there should be no limits on time with their child. ...And fathers should be presumed innocent till proven guilty of abuse.
Posted by: concerned for the kids on Jan 31, 2008 at 10:29 AM
Because every case is different, a law mandating 50-50 is inappropriate. Not every man is out to get out of child support. not every man wants to help raise their kids because they are too immature. A "one size fits all" approach is only going to hurt the kids in the long run. What about the school and extracurricular activities that kids are involved in? What- one parent gets them for the practices and the other gets them for the games? One gets them for school work and one gets them for fun? Parenting is more than where a kid sleeps at night. Who takes the kids to the doc? stability is not being bounced back and forth all the time, being torn from friends. There are so many other issues that need to be fixed. I applaud their effort in wanting to fix the system, but this is not the way to do it. Things need to be looked at on a case by case situation.
Posted by: Daryl on Jan 31, 2008 at 10:21 AM
In the 18 years that I paid all the health insurance, dental, eye exams' and other realted expenses and child support, do you think that the ex. would let me see him, heck no! And the boy hates me till this day, thanks to the all the mothers' who brain wash the children with all of these lies! The law needs to have a different two parent relationship for these children.
Posted by: Brian on Jan 31, 2008 at 10:18 AM
Mandating a cut & dried rule on custody will not work. Every & I mean every case daling with children is different. Every side of the case should be looked at. Both the father & the mother. A child advocate should be available that looks for the child's best interest, NOT a parent trying to hurt a former spouse. And yes, I am involved with this. Mt wife has 2 great kids with a biological father who is only around when it suits him. It's uncanny how when he doesn't have the kids he's off work but when it's his "court-appointed" time with them he has to work. I'm a dad when I can to them while he's noting but a father. He gave me that title by not being one himself. I want what's est for them. If he would treat them better I would not care what he thought of my wife (his ex-wife). Kids have a hard time enough with 2 homes without being forced to spend time with someone, male OR female, who are only doing it to hurt a former spouse.
Posted by: STEPMOTHER on Jan 31, 2008 at 09:53 AM
I think that the dads that want to be part of their children's lives should be allowed the same amount of time as the mother. My husbands wants to spend as much time as possible with his children but the courts will not allow it. His ex has had him back to court at least 43 times in the last year. She keeps bringing false charges against him and each time those charges gets thrown out because there are no grounds for them. The last time that they went to court he lost a day with the children but the judge told his ex that he now knows that she is doing everything that she can to keep him from seeing his kids. I can't understand how a judge can take away time with a father but on the other state that he knows that the ex-wife is doing trying to keep him from seeing his children. He pays his child support on time and everything. We need to fix the laws so that the parents that really do want to be with their children should be allowed to do so
Posted by: heartbroken on Jan 31, 2008 at 09:37 AM
You gals that have custody of your kids should count your blessings. I'm going through the divorce of a 10 year marriage not a physically abusive marriage, but one of submission. My husband recently gained custody of our 2 children. I'm not a drug addict, alcholic or abusive, I have a job and have always worked and anytime that I wasn't working the children were in my care but when the father wasn't working he was out running around.but Mason Co Judge Nibert thought that the children should be in his custody even thought she had to rule that he not have any alcohol on the premises while the children were in his custody. The reason he wanted custody? I was married to the man long enough to know why he wanted custody- No 800.00 a month child support. I understand that a mother would like a break every now and then but girls just think if you were in my position. I dont know what to do without them and a mothers love is something no man can give.
Posted by: StepParent on Jan 31, 2008 at 09:31 AM
My stepkids don't miss any activities because they are with us. It shouldn't make a difference and it hurts all fathers when some don't make sure their kids go to their extra curriculars, b-day parties, etc. Kids activities should continue regardless of which parent they are with. I with that was something addressed during the divorce because I have heard that far too much. It's always baffled me because it was never a question with us.
Posted by: concerned parent on Jan 31, 2008 at 09:08 AM
I too, think that they need to step back and really think how this is gonna benefit the child. why do we even have a justice system if the laws allow those who break them to get chance after chance and a slap on the wrist. i have been a victim of domestic abuse and m