historical background of the father

8/6/2019 Historical Background of the Father

1/13

Historical Background of the Father's Rights Movement

During the height of the women's movement, a laudable movement began bymen sympathetic to the plight of feminism to educate their peers about howwomen weren't the only victims of archaic social roles. Men, they argued,

were robbed of precious time with their families, their health, and the veryability to feel by social conditioning which told him a man's role in society wasthat of a breadwinner. Medical practitioners acknowledged the link betweenstress and heart disease.

The rise of pop "self-help" psychology furthered the men's movement,educating its' constituency through myth and legend in stories such as "IronJohn" and "Gods in Every Man." Sweat Lodges (the male version of anencounter group) grew in popularity as men learned to network amongstthemselves, bond, and discuss the formerly forbidden realm of the emotions.

Men started entering the delivery room with their wives when their childrenwere born and cradled their newborn progeny with pride as the physiciansevered the umbilical cord from the mother's womb. As women began to workoutside of the home, however, some men responded to their newfound role asnurturer with ambiguity.

Not all men were thrilled with the women's movement. Traditional man-as-breadwinner roles afforded less enlightened males a dominant position in theirfamilies. Feminism, with all of its trappings, seriously undermined a man'sability to dominate his family and control his spouse as women demanded

equal opportunities in education, the workforce, and in the home. Women, nolonger trapped in their dependent, subservient roles as housewives andmothers, began to infiltrate the upper echelons of power in politics andcorporate America. Many women chose to postpone marriage and childrearing until after completing their education and gaining a certain amount ofsuccess in their careers. Successful, educated women avoided men whodesired to place them in a subservient role. Others chose slower-paced"mommy-track" jobs until their children were older, but demanded equality inthe home.

"Men are very confused, angry, and frustrated as they try to figure out what itmeans today to be a man," says Dr. William Pollack, director of the Center forMen at McLean Hospital in Belmont (Massachusetts).

"There aren't a lot of structures in society that help men get a hold of it."(Menwith Promises to Keep, Mary Leonard, the Boston Globe, September 21, 1997).


2/13

Men who failed to respond to a woman's changing role as equals foundthemselves out in the street as frustrated women gave up on unfulfillingmarriages and filed for divorce. Most men learned from their failures and wenton to form successful relationships with new partners, but others were tooentrenched in their archaic social roles to adapt to the needs of modern

society.

The groups which call themselves "Father's Right's" groupsare notmembers of the legitimate men's movement. These groups havenothing to do with associations (ranging from little league to anti-childexploitation) consisting of fathers who have banded together to protectchildren or encourage others to take an active part in their lives. Rather,"Father's Right's" groups are a dangerous movement which arose as abacklash against women's demands to be free from domestic violence andunreasonable male domination in their daily lives. The key word in discerningwhich groups are pursuing illegitimate objectives is the use of the word"rights." They are an extremely vocal minority which claims to represent theinterests of fathers, but in reality they are attempting to turn back the clock onwomen's rights and regain their dominant role in society and the family.

Overwhelmingly, men join these groups after a former intimate or spouseleaves them to escape physical abuse or files for divorce. These groups, inreality "batterer's right's groups", very quickly learned that an educated publichad no tolerance for their archaic views of a man's right to dominate hisspouse through domestic violence. Like a cancerous organism, these groupsnetworked through the internet and adapted by publicly identifying themselveswith conservative Republicans and latching onto the coattails of the legitimatemen's movement. Already accustomed to networking through the "ol' boy"network in business, they began lobbying the statehouse and pullingelaborate publicity stunts to get media attention.

Concealing the truth about their extensive history of violent behavior towardstheir intimate partners and children, numerous restraining order violations, andpending criminal charges for beating, stalking, and harassing their victims,these men found the best way to both control their ex-spouses and dupe thepublic into helping their cause was to use their children as pawns and promotea false image of concerned fatherhood. Using men who had, in reality,experienced unfairness during the judicial process as "poster children" andpawns to arouse sympathy for their own illegitimate cause with the populaceand by aligning themselves with conservative political factions, these menhave attempted to stamp their extremist activities with the imprimatur oflegitimacy, nor are they the average, good fathers which have built society.


3/13

The Quest for Dominance and Control

"Abusive men typically have deeply entrenched notions about "traditional"male roles, with concomitant support for male dominance."

-- Lee H. Bowker, Beating the Wife Beating, p. 7-9 (1983)

"Victims [of domestic violence] are more likely... to have less traditionalattitudes regarding women's roles in the family."

-- Lenore Walker, The Battered Woman Syndrome, p. 8, (1984)

The batterer's quest for control of the woman lies at the heart of an abusiverelationship. "The men want to direct and determine how their partnerbehaves, and the way to do this is through violence... the men use violence todominate, control, and force the woman to do what they want."(Jan E.Stets, Domestic Violence and Control, p. 110, (1988). Battering is about domination.

Violence is a way of "doing power" in a relationship, an effort by the batterer tocontrol the woman who is the recipient of the violence. "At the moment ofseparation or attempted separation -- for many women the first encounter withthe authority of law -- the batterer's quest for control often becomes mostacutely violent and potentially lethal." (Desmond Ellis, Post-Separation Woman Abuse:The Contribution of Lawyers as "Barracudas," "Advocates," and "Counsellors," 10 Intl. J.L. &

Psychiatry 403, 408 (1987). Lenore Walker, a leading forensic psychologist in thefield of battered women, has emphasized the batterer's control of thewoman. "A battered woman is a woman who is repeatedly subjected to anyforceful physical or psychological behavior by a man in order to coerce her to

do something he wants her to do without any concern for her rights."(LenoreWalker, The Battered Woman Syndrome (1984)). Walker found that as her clients inpsychotherapy became more assertive, they encountered more physical andpsychological abuse.

The misperception that men cannot control their anger still permeates society.Abusive men will often use the threat of violence, whether actual or implied, tocontrol his victim. "Men are violent and abusive towards women because thisbehavior allows them to establish and to maintain control within therelationship ... and because no one has ever required them to stop."(Lisa G.

Lerman, The Decontextualization ofDomestic Violence, 83 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 217, 236(1992)). Abusive behavior can range from implied threats ("any other man wouldhave beaten you to a pulp") to overt acts against property (breaking apart thefurniture, punching a hole in the wall) to direct physical assault (shoving,grabbing, battery). The abuser constantly finds fault with the victim, forcing thevictim to remain constantly on the defensive, walking on eggshells lest she


4/13

"cause" her abuser to lose control and incur another incident of violentbehavior.

Studies indicate that, contrary to the assertions of the abuser that he just "lostit," batterers are quite aware of what they are doing. "Loss of control is

substantially contradicted by the batterers' own testimony. While the menclaim that their violence is beyond rational control, they simultaneouslyacknowledge that the violence is deliberate and warranted." (James Ptacek, Whydo Men BatterTheir Wives, p. 153 (1985). Strongly indicative of this pattern ofpremeditation are the facts that abusers often limit their beatings to placesthat will not show (like the stomach), violent episodes occur almost exclusivelyin the home where they can get away with it, and despite the abusers

justifications of "I just lost control," most batterers have limits beyond whichthey will not go (most stop short of killing their partners). (Lenore E. Walker, TheBattered Woman Syndrome, (1984)). Abusers are extremely manipulative and areoften described as having a Jekyll and Hyde Personality. Ellen Pence andMichael Paymar's training manual for batterer's, Power and Control: Tactics ofMen Who Batter, treat violence as a form of control and explicitly rejecttheories that focus on some flaw in the abuser, the victim, or therelationship. (Ellen Pence & Michael Paymar, Power and Control: Tactics of Men Who Batter, p.64, (1986). Abusers view theirrightto dominate and control every aspect of theirpartner's and children's lives, theirrightto resort to physical violence, as aconstitutionally protected rightsanctioned by the founding fathers and thebible, not aberrant behavior.

When the intimate partner of a domineering male demands an end tocontrolling or abusive behavior or attempts to sever the relationship, hisabnormal behavior will often escalate into violence. Separation assault is theattack on the woman's body and volition in which her partner seeks to preventher from leaving, retaliate for the separation, or force her to return. It aims atoverbearing her will as to where and with whom she will live, and coercing herin order to enforce connection in a relationship. It is an attempt to gain, retain,or regain power in a relationship, or to punish the woman for ending therelationship. It often takes place over time.(Martha R. Mahoney, Legal Images ofBattered Women: Redifining the Issue of Separation, 90 Mich. L. Rev. 1, p. 65-66, (1991))

.

Despite the obvious physical and psychological harm caused by battering, theabuser is able to continue battering his partner because he does not fear legalor social consequences. A batterer often believes he has the rightto controlhis partner through the use of force. Reinforcement of learned behavior mayencourage this obsessive, dependent personality. Impulsive and easilyfrustrated, a batterer resorts to physical violence. The batterer will deny his


5/13

violence to himself and others. A batterer is not violent in other relationships.In fact, with people outside the family, he can be seen as the pillar of thecommunity. (Lisa N. Birmingham, Closing the Loophole: Vermont's Legislative Response toStalking, 18 Vt. L. Rev. 477, 484-485 (1994)). This hinders the victim's attempts to seekhelp or emotional support from friends and even her own family because

batterers tend to wear a false persona to the outside world. The victim'sclaims that her partner is out of control tend to be met with disbelief andoutright hostility from the outside world.

Mom, Country, and Apple Pie -- Why People Help Them

"There's a sucker born every minute..."--W.C. Fields

Our society was built upon the foundation of the family. It is the backbone of

our culture and the root of our identity. Our founding fathers granted extensivefundamental rights to protect family integrity, and it is a right our courtsrigorously protect. It is these noble characteristics which the Father's Rightsmovement has learned to manipulate in their elaborate scheme to regaincontrol of their victims and turn the clock back on women's rights.

If you look at literature for the Father's Rights movement, you will often see apicture of a father and child doing something together. This image tugs at theheartstrings of all of us.

Emotional agitation is a favorite technique of the propagandist because "anyemotion may be 'drained off' into any activity by skillful manipulation."(AaronDelwiche, Propaganda Analysis, (1995)). If we were lucky enough to grow up withgood fathers in our lives, it brings back fond memories of our own fathers. Ifwe had absent, dysfunctional, or emotionally unavailable fathers, it inspirespowerful emotions about what we wish our own fathers had beenlike. "Transfer is a device by which the propagandist carries over the authority,sanction, and prestige of something we respect and revere to something hewould have us accept. Thus, we may accept something we otherwise mightreject."(Institute for Propaganda Analysis, 1938). The reality of the Father's Rights

advocates criminal history of spousal abuse or child abuse is nevermentioned, nor is the fact that he may have voluntarily terminated visitationwith his own children in a ploy to evade paying child support.

The pairing of the Father's Rights movements distasteful agenda with positiveimages of fatherhood causes us to transfer paternalistic associations intowhatever the Father's Rights group is saying and stamps it with the imprimatur


6/13

of credibility. As Americans, we believe in fatherhood. Whether it is an imageof our own fathers, the founding fathers of our country, or God the Father, theFather's Rights movement seeks to create a false connection betweentraditional notions of fatherhood and legitimizing spousal abuse or failure topay child support. Fatherhood is good. Father knows what is best for his

children. Father's shouldn't be questioned. Fatherhood is America -- God,Country, and Apple Pie.

"We believe in, fight for, live by virtue words about which we have deep-setideas. Such words include civilization, Christianity, good, proper, right,democracy, patriotism, motherhood, fatherhood, science, medicine, healthand love."(Aaron Delwiche, Propaganda Analysis (1995)).One of the most deeplyingrained instincts all human beings possess is the instinct to protect theyoung. Although all species possesses the instinct to ensure the survival ofthe next generation, humans are one of the few mammals (including wolvesand dolphins) which will protect of the young of others, not just their own. Thisinstinct has ensured our survival and enabled us to evolve into the complexsocial creatures we are today. Few of us would blindly drive past an infantplaying precariously close to the street. Our perception of the child's dangerwill leave us greatly distressed if we do not indulge the urge to stop and findthe child's mother.

Only the most callous human being would deny the plea of a frantic parent tohelp their child. As Americans, we pride ourselves for protecting the weak andtaking a stand against oppression, especially when we think the recipient ofthe unfair treatment is a child. Americans root for the underdog. The Father'sRights movement preys upon the honor and fears of the American public bypublishing horror stories about evil government agencies, man-hating batteredwomen's advocacy groups, and vindictive ex-spouses snatching away theirchildren in the middle of the night.

Concealing the truth about physical abuse, child abuse, controlling behaviorand stalking they may have committed from the public, Father's Rightsadvocates convince the public "it could happen to you." Governmentagencies, domestic violence shelters, and court-ordered visitation centersbecome part of "the domestic violence industry" (conjuring up images of acallous, profit driven corporation). A woman's documentation of abusebecomes a "cry wolf" restraining order (creating and image of the little boywho cried wolf when there really wasn't any). Enforcement of abuseprevention orders by law enforcement personnel and courts becomes the"domestic violence witchhunt" (conjuring up images of innocent people beingburned at the stake due to unfounded paranoia of the supernatural).


7/13

"By portraying themselves as god-fearing, hard-working Americans like therest of us, they convince the public that they, and their ideas, are 'of thepeople.' " (Aaron Delwiche, Propaganda Analysis, (1995)). What makes the Father'sRights advocate's plea so compelling is their claim that it is their children whoare being hurt by these phantasms. By playing on the audience's deep-seated

fears, Father's Rights advocates hope to redirect attention away from themerits of the particular proposal they are advocating for and towards stepsthat can be taken to reduce the fear. (Aaron Delwiche, Propaganda Analysis, (1995)).Steps they may ask the audience to take might include asking a member ofthe voting public to sign a petition seeking concessions from Congress in childsupport laws, enticing an innocent bystander into delivering a message to astalking victim which she will find frightening, conning an employee of a stateagency into investigating false allegations against the victim for the purposesof harassing her, or luring civic-minded individuals into funding their campaignto harass victims by providing funding or political support for their activities.

The person lured into the Father's Rights advocates machinations hasno idea that his true agenda is to punish his victim for leaving him, not

to see his child. As far as the citizen knows, he is "helping" a child.

There are over a quarter of a billion people in this country. The overwhelmingmajority of these men, women and children are honest, law-abiding citizens.Even amongst divorced couples, the likelihood of a man engaging in the typeof pathological, prolonged vendetta against an ex-spouse or ex-girlfriendpromoted by the Father's Rights movement is quite rare. Although most

Americans are aware of abuse prevention laws, the percentage of thepopulation who has needed protection to escape an abuser is relatively small.Even amongst women who have previously gotten a restraining order, manymay have only needed the order in the initial stages of a divorce when the

jilted spouses' behavior crossed the line into combativeness. Most men areevolved enough to recognize their behavior is becoming unmanageable andseek therapy or the counsel of friends to help them deal with feelings of griefand anger. We are a benevolent society. Few people have personally comeinto contact with an abuser intent upon harassing his former intimate. Even

fewer have experienced the rare pleasure of being the object of obsession.The type of vendetta a typical Father's Rights advocate is engaged in isbeyond the comprehension of the average American. For this reason, Father'sRights advocates prove true W.C. Fields famous quotation, "there's a suckerborn every minute." With few exceptions, the batterer is capable of locating asteady supply of "suckers" to carry out each element of his vendetta withoutquestion.


8/13

Differentiating Legitimate Fatherhood Groups from Illegitimate "Father's

Rights" Groups

It is unfortunate that the actions of irresponsible males have damaged thepositive image of fatherhood in our society. Negative stereotypes permeate

the media and society. The pairing of the term "father" with negativeterminology such as "deadbeat dad," "couch potato," or "sports widow"belittles the important role fathers could play in the family and the functionthey have in contributing to the emotional and moral development of theirchildren. "Bad names... are applied to other people... to link a person to anegative symbol. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes theaudience will reject the person or the idea on the basis of the negativesymbol, instead of looking at the available evidence" (Aaron Delwiche, Propaganda

Analysis, 1995).

Negative stereotyping of fathers is every bit as degrading to men as the pre-feminist virgin/whore dichotomy which stereotyped women as either sexobjects or mothers. Like a wolf in sheep's clothing, Father's Rights groupsoften solicit funds and gain media support by pretending to support theconcerns of the majority of nurturing fathers. They harness the righteousindignation of fathers chafing at the same types of demeaning stereotypeswhich drove feminists to stand their ground in the early 1970s and use it totheir own, illegitimate purpose.

Father's rights groups have learned to shift tactics, from incendiary rhetoric to

more modest proposals. They have honed a more tender image, supplyingbumper stickers that avow, "Kids need Fathers, Not Visitors." They have alsoforged strategic alliances. Twenty three groups (many of them headed bysignatories of the Father's Manifesto) recently came together under theagreeable name of "The Children's Rights Council," recruiting to the board

Abigail Van Buren, noted child psychiatrist Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, andRepublican Senator Fred Thompson of Tennessee. (DivorcedDads Emerge as aPolitical Force, Kate Zernike, the Boston Globe, May 19, 1998). What has gained them themost mileage, however, has been their use of scientific studies of childrenfrom intact, functional families on the role healthy, normal fathers have ontheir children to tout their own agenda.

How important are fathers to the development of their children? [Ed: See researchnotes athttp://www.thelizlibrary.org/]"Children who come from families withpsychologically involved fathers are cognitively more competent, have higherdegrees of compassion for others, manifest fewer sex-stereotyped beliefs andhave a more solid internal locus of control." (S. Robert Moradi, M.D., Psychiatric


9/13

Times, January 1997, Vol. XIV, Issue 1). Although it was traditionally believed thatfathers played a more important role in the development of their sons thantheir daughters, a positive relationship with a father figure is especiallyimportant to the development of females. "Girls with active and hardworkingdads are more ambitious, more successful in school, attend college more

often, and are more likely to attain careers of their own. They are lessdependent, more self-protective, and less likely to date or marry abusivemen."(Joe Kelley, Executive Director ofDads andDaughters, website www.dadsanddaughters.org/tenfacts.htm).

At first glance, illegitimate Father's Rights groups often purport to promote thecommon sense research of legitimate fatherhood interests to mask their trueagenda, regaining control of or punishing their ex-partner for leaving them bycontrolling the children. "These groups exert an inordinate amount of energyminimizing domestic violence and the very real detrimental effects it has onchildren and very little energy addressing issues that help children."(Patricia A.Levesh, Greater Boston Legal Services Battered Women's Legal Assistance Project, Letter to the

Editor, the Boston Globe, January 6, 1999). Inadvertently helping an illegitimategroup hurtsthe interests of children, not helps them. The ability to deconstructthe propaganda and differentiate between legitimate and illegitimate issues iscritical when assessing any group purporting to represent the interests ofchildren.

Perhaps the easiest way to differentiate between legitimate and illegitimatefatherhood groups is to compare their agendas and mission statements.

Although both types of groups appeal to the public to help further the cause ofchildren, it doesn't take long for most Father's Rights advocates to get to theirtrue agenda ' abolishing abuse prevention legislation and child support laws.For example, the Alliance for Non-Custodial Parents Rights (ANCPR)announces that their mission is to "promote Equal Parenting (sharedparenting) for children and believes that child support enforcement and solecustody violate the constitutional rights of children and their non-custodialmothers and fathers" (www.pacificnet.net/~ljaks/). Another group, "Roe v. Wade forMen", advocates for an absolute right of a man to force a woman to abort afetus or forfeit future child support and provides boilerplate pro-se lawsuit

forms at http://members.aol.com/dnaand14ca/ for fathers attempting to enforce hisConstitutional right to "sow his wild oats."

Although much of this propaganda may initially sound innocuous, the readermust deconstruct the propaganda to get to the core message of "we don't feelwe should be punished for failing to support our children." Child support lawswere enacted by the legislature after much fact-finding about factors such as


10/13

cost-of-living, day-care, and the restrictions placed upon the career of thecustodial parent when juggling children with work. Any parent who has balkedat the day care provider's bill knows how expensive it is to provide quality carefor your children while working. To truly comprehend the issue, the readerneeds to recognize that failure to pay child support often results in great

hardship for the custodial parent and dependent child and can often meanloss of housing, inadequate nourishment, and inability to procure adequatemedical care for the child. It is to alleviate the suffering of innocent little humanbeings these so-called "fathers" have helped create that has prompted moststates to utilize the contempt power to disgorge court-ordered child support.Recalcitrant parents are not permitted to "literally sit on their hands anddefend any contempt allegation by relying on the prosecution's burden ofproof."(Hicks on Behalf of Feiock v. Feiock,479 U.S. 1305 (1986); 180 Cal.App.3d, at 654).However, most judges will grant generous repayment plans for a man whohas fallen behind on their child support for legitimate reasons. Draconianpenalties for failure to pay child support are only enforced after the non-custodial parent has demonstrated an extreme pattern of refusal to pay (orwork) in spite of a current ability to do so. Any group that advocates for non-support of minor children should be immediately suspect.

Another red flag is any site that refers to "throwaway fathers" or "the divorceindustry" (i.e., Coalition for the Preservation of Fatherhood(CPF) http://fatherhoodcoalition.org) or encourages changing divorce laws to penalizea woman for leaving a dissatisfying marriage (i.e., New Jersey Council forChildren's Rightshttp://www.vix.com/crc/CRCnj/home.htm). These groups seek to regaincontrol over spouses who are divorcing them, usually through forced marriagecounseling or enacting extreme economic penalties for filing for divorce,including loss of custody, loss of marital assets, and forced joint physicalcustody arrangements where the child is shuffled between incongruenthouseholds so that the father can avoid paying child support."When domesticviolence is or has been present in the relationship, shared parentingarrangements, couples counseling, or mediation arrangements may increasethe danger to children and to the nonviolent partner"(Congressional findings, VAWAproposed 1999 amendments, H.R. 357,Title II, s. 201 (20)). Once again, by deconstructing

the message these groups are sending the public, the agenda becomes clear.

Most child psychologists agree that divorced families are less desirable thanintact families from a child-rearing standpoint when the family is notdysfunctional. However, reducing children to chattels owned by the parentwho is least dissatisfied with the status quo, shuffling them between twohouseholds, or returning to the days when women were the legal property of


11/13

their husbands, is even more repugnant. Father's Rights advocates "realagenda is to make sure that men maintain control over custodial parents andhave access to their children regardless of the father's behavior andregardless of whether it's in the best interest of the childrenthemselves"(Patricia A. Levesh, Greater Boston Legal Services Battered Women's LegalAssistance Project, Letter to the Editor, the Boston Globe, January 6, 1999).

Although most people would agree that courts are not well equipped to handlethe emotional battlefield of a divorce, effectively returning to an era whenwomen, children, and property were all chattels owned by the husband is notthe answer. Judges (who are often male) are generally quite sensitive to theneeds of non-custodial fathers and will bend over backwards to award liberalvisitation agreements affording ample opportunity to remain an active part ofchildren's lives (sometimes to the detriment of children who have witnessedspousal abuse). It is only when a non-custodial parent has demonstrated anextreme pattern of using the child to control the custodial parent or there areserious questions about the child's wellbeing that visitation will be restricted orsupervised.

"For purposes of determining child custody, it is not in the best interest of children to (a) force parents toshare custody over the objection of one or both parents when there is a history of domestic violence; (b)punish abused or protective parents who protect themselves or their children; (c) presume allegations ofdomestic violence or child sexual assault are likely to be made falsely or for tactical advantage duringcustody and divorce proceedings; and (d) make 'friendly parent' provisions a factor when there is abuseby one parent against the other or a child..."(Congressional findings, VAWA proposed 1999

amendments, H.R. 357,Title II, s. 241).

Despite claims to the contrary by Father's rights advocates, visitation is onlycut off in extreme circumstances. To reduce the divorce rate, society mustaddress the issues which cause marriages to break down, not force unhappycouples to remain married.

The most extreme groups are the ones openly advocating for abolishing orseriously restricting the issuance or enforcement of restraining orders (i.e.,Victims of False Allegations (VOFA) http://www.hky.com/frn/frlinks.html; Dads AgainstDivorce Discrimination (DADS) http://www.peak.org/~jedwards/DADS.html).

Once you get past the front-page media propaganda, you will findirrational hatred of restraining order laws typical of the hard-corebatterer. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Gender Bias Study didnot find that the rights of men had been trampled by the abuse prevention act.To the contrary, the high court found a disparity between the protectionpromised to women by the law and the actual manner in which it was applied.


12/13

A similar task force in New York found that, far from exaggerating the extentof the abuse they suffered, women minimized the severity of the violence.

Although obtaining a civil restraining order is a simple process in most stateswith a 51% preponderance of the evidence standard, it is much more difficultto have visitation denied or be successfully prosecuted for violating these

orders than the Father's Rights movement would have the public believe.

The issuance alone of a restraining order is rarely justification in divorce courtfor restricting parental rights, since courts must document with clear andconvincing evidence (a much higher standard) that the child witnessed theabuse and was harmed by it. Even if the perpetrator is arrested, the defendantis awarded every possible protection during the prosecution process to protecthis constitutional rights. The rules of evidence dictate that very little of theevidence a victim may have to support her claim of abuse actually makes itinto the courtroom, and that even less will be believed due to the batterer'sabsolute Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The victim, underthe guise of "cross-examination", must often withstand hours, evendays of humiliating cross-examination regarding every questionableincident which may have occurred since kindergarten, while the battererlaughs at her from his position of absolute privilege. It is rare that a victim, onsuch an uneven playing field, is able to demonstrate that she wasbatteredbeyond a reasonable doubt.

Patricia A. Levesh of the Greater Boston Legal Services Battered Women'sLegal Assistance Project recently wrote, "In our experience as advocates forthousands of victims of domestic violence in custody and visitation disputes,very few abusers are arrested, prosecuted, and/or sentenced" (Letter to theEditor, the Boston Globe, January 6, 1999). The angry men leading the charge againstthe abuse prevention laws are so blinded by personal grievance that theycannot see the broader picture. A batterer must work very, very hard to beconvicted of violating a restraining order, and work even harder to actuallyserve time for his behavior since most sentencing guidelines allow leniency forthe first few offenses.

Perhaps the largest tip off that a group may be illegitimate; however, is asingular focus on father's rights. By deconstructing the propaganda, onceagain the reader of Father's Rights literature is left wondering how the entire

judicial and legal system, which still consists overwhelmingly of men who alsohappen to be fathers, could be so biased against their own gender. Most ofthe judges on the bench, the legislatures who are creating the laws, evenmany of the support personnel (such as police) who oversee the enforcementof the law are also fathers. Although there are situations where men are


13/13

fighting archaic social roles, the reader should be skeptical of any group whichattempts to convince the public that there is an elaborate conspiracy todeprive fathers of their rights.

historical background of the father

Documents