🚀 go-pugleaf

Maureen McKitterick wrote:

> "Bob Hirschfeld, JD" wrote:
>
> > A month and a half until some unprepared
> > noncustodial parents may have Christmas experiences like
> > the one George told about last year:
>
> And a month and a half until some uprepared custodial parent may get to explain
> why the ncp really didn't show up, really didn't send gifts, and really doesn't
> care.  I know there are ncp's that get a totally raw deal, I know there are
> children lied to straight across the board *all* year, not just the holidays,
> but the problem doesn't completely exist in father's who are denied visitation.
>
> > <snip>
> > > In this coming political year, and with the issues of the Cuban boy, one
> > has
> > > to wonder why is there so much concern with child support, and so little
> > > with court-ordered-parenting-time.  Commercials are run telling fathers to
> > > spend more time with their children, but no advice on how millions of
> > > nonresidential fathers can do it.  Maybe the one question that should be
> > > asked of those who want to lead this great country is, "When will children
> > > have the right to not only a father's money, but also to a father's love?"
>
> I agree entirely....my children deserve their father's love...so where is he?
> Where is the advice for those parent's want nothing more than to have a
> co-parent and the other refuses?  Those children who had a parent keeping them
> from the other parent at least have the opportunity to grow up, seek out the
> other parent and finally hear the truth.  What about the children that were
> truly abandoned by the other parent?  I'd have more respect for what you seem to
> be trying to accomplish if it addressed the rights of the children more
> completely than just in how it is related to the father who is denied.  That
> right to have two participatory parent's exists regardless of why one parent is
> not in the picture.
>
> Maureen

Bingo Maureen.

It is CHILDREN'S RIGHTS not FATHERS (or MOTHERS) rights.  Get it straight.

Pat