Last week in
Urbana, the American Coalition for
Fathers and Children began a campaign
aimed at Champaign County Judge Arnold
Blockman on how he handles custody
of children in divorce cases. Generally
speaking, in almost all cases Judge
Blockman will award custody to only
one parent and give two weekend visits
to the other parent. Most of the time
(but not always), it is the mother
that gets total custody - thus cutting
the father out of the child's life
in a significant way.
Every reputable study on the subject
indicates that children do best when
both biological parents have a relationship
with their children. Yet the courts,
particularly in Champaign County,
do not recognize this. In fact, when
a parent expresses that they'd like
shared custody, Judge Blockman makes
the assumption they don't really want
to parent the child and terminates
their custody. This is not the behavior
of a judge; it is the behavior or
a bureaucrat who decides not on the
merits but on some list of rules.
If bureaucracy was sufficient to handle
such matters, then divorce could be
handled by the county clerk's office.
It's true that some parents need to
have their custodial rights terminated.
But, most parents want to have a positive
role in their children's lives. Preventing
them from building a relationship
with their children without just cause
is fundamentally wrong. This is particularly
true of fathers who more often than
not get told the only contribution
they should be making after divorce
is child support payments. While this
attitude has tempered somewhat over
the years, it is still present.
Radical feminism is, in part, to blame.
For years, radical feminists told
women that they don't need men. In
this line of thinking, filing for
divorce is liberating because she
doesn't need a man. And apparently,
neither does her children. In reality,
women need men, men need women and
children need their parents. Both
of them.
Men - fathers in particular - have
taken a beating in the media as a
result of radical feminism. Gone are
the images of wholesome and honest
fathers on TV to be replaced by babbling,
whining baboons that act more like
children than fathers. Many hold up
the image of the hard-working single
mother (and rightfully so), but where
are the images of the hard-working
father celebrated?
Illinois law is largely silent on
the issue of parental custody leaving
the issue to be adjudicated by a judge.
All the evidence points to the fact
that shared parenting would be a far
superior arrangement except in the
cases of abuse or other significant
defects; yet this doesn't translate
into how things are done in Champaign.
One person going through the custody
process now questions whether the
American Bar Association takes into
account the fact that $15 billion
in legal fees would be lost if shared
parenting were the rule. Perhaps this
is why when Rep. Richard P. Myers,
R-94th., introduced a bill to emphasize
shared parenting as the rule last
year, it was the lawyer lobby that
helped kill the bill.
The other camp of opposition to making
shared parenting the rule and not
the exception was the domestic violence
lobby. Once again, this shows the
difference between how liberals and
conservatives look at things. Conservatives
see the case of domestic abuse as
an exception that should be handled
when it happens. Liberals see the
potential of domestic abuse in all
men, and thus all men must be treated
as if they are already guilty of it
and have their parental rights terminated.
Children need a mother and a father.
Divorce is an unfortunate reality
in this culture which need not translate
into ripping one parent out of the
life of their children arbitrarily.
What's best for children, and not
lawyers, is what custody decisions
should be based on. It would be ideal
if men and women were given the tools
and support in this society to remain
married for their whole lives, but
that's a topic for another column.
John Bambenek is a graduate student
and a University employee. His column
appears every Friday. He can be reached
at
opinions@dailyillini.com