So, I'm happy to report that one of our posts (the one pinned to the top of our page) got trolled again. I love this, because it means we're being effective.
So, in order to make the point, I presume, that the position of this page and its followers is invalid, she cites an opinion piece (linked below) by Huffington Post Feminist "Divorce Coach", Cathy W. Meyer; "Do Dads Really Get Dissed In Divorce Court?"
Please note the following quote taken directly from the website of Ms. Myers:
"I think the female spirit is the most beautiful, complex thing God has ever created. I believe that we can do anything we put our minds too. If you don’t believe me, watch Man on Wire."
Ok, I think helps lend some perspective on where this piece is starting from.
So, let's look at the arguments:
Now in her piece, the author cites statistics from a Pew Center Research study from June 2011 in which data is pulled from The US Center for Disease Control and Prevention's ongoing study "National Study for Family Growth."
Her first argument, as taken from both reports, is that working mother's spend twice as much time participating in daily care activities as working fathers.
However, in neither report, can I find any statistical definition of how this variable is defined.
Never the less, let’s assume, even accept, that the premise that different roles within the family structure lend themselves to the working mothers being more involved in child caring activities than the father.
The article then goes into alarmist mode.
"More startling are the stats on absent fathers or the amount of time fathers spend with children once the divorce is final. According to the above study, when fathers and children live separately, 22 percent of fathers see their children more than once a week. Twenty-nine percent of fathers see their children one to four times a month. The most disturbing fact though is that 27 percent of fathers have no contact with their children at all."
You'll note here, that the author is implying that fathers are choosing to be absent. She makes a weak acknowledgement for the counter argument noting that "some" fathers assert that the Family Court system, the body of Family Court Law, parental alienation, or child support laws are creating absent fathers.
She then goes on to refute this by citing another study by Divorcepeers.com claiming that 91% of all custody disputes are settled without intervention by the Court.
And in those cases, cites these statistics:
In 51% of the cases, both parties agreed that Mom become the custodial parent.
In 29% of the cases, the decision was made without 3rd party involvement.
11% of decisions for custody to Mom were made during mediation. Translation: Dad is now educated about the realities of Family Law and Court Tendencies.
5% of custody decisions required a court appointed parenting plan evaluator.
Of the 4% for the cases went to trial, of that 4%, only 1.5% complete custody litigation. Translation: if it goes to trial 98.5% of trial cases are decided by the Court.
Then the big close, in 91% of custody cases are decided with no interference from the Court system
Ahh, now can see the beauty of Feminist argument framing tactics.
So, lets approach this in an honest way.
In 51% of the cases, both parties agreed Mom should be the custodial parent - Cool, if both parties agree, that's awesome - to each their own.
What does the other 49% mean - that they agreed Dad should be the custodial parent? That there was a dispute over custody? Was any custody disputed centered around equal or shared custody?
She doesn't say. Interesting.
71% of the cases were resolved with mediation or Court Intervention. What were the financial controls and budget constraints affecting these outcomes? Is the ability to use child support to pay legal fees a factor? How about informative educations from legal professionals about the reality of family law and how things are likely to turn out?
She doesn't address this. Interesting.
5% of custody decisions required a court appointed parenting plan evaluator. Translation: I have no idea, because she didn't define this variable - 5% of what?
I suspect this was mindfully left undefined. Interesting.
And lastly 98.5% of custody cases that go to trial are decided by the Court.
And she uses these statistics to support her argument that Family Law is not biased?
It's pretty clear to me, that the statistics she is throwing out support our argument that the body of Family Court Law has been engineered to achieve a predetermined outcome.
So she closes with the following assertions:
Fathers are far less involved with children during marriage. However, no statistical definition is provided.
Fathers are less involved after divorce. Controls for financial or court restraints are not accounted for.
Mothers gain custody because the vast majority of fathers choose to. Roughly half of Dads do this before Court intervention. The other half give in before going to trial - why is this?
Her last assertion is garbage. She's saying the same thing she said in he previous three points.
I love the circular logic here. Current outcomes prove that the current outcomes are correct.
I wonder what would happen to current outcomes under the presumption of equal parenting?
And interestingly enough, if in fact Cathy Meyer's argument is correct, then she and other feminists would have absolutely nothing to fear from Family Court reforms that presume 50/50 custody and parenting rights, because men would voluntarily grant primary custody to the mother as she claims they are doing now. Yet, she's using her argument as a reason to prevent these reforms.
Nice try - Very Dishonest.