California Senate Bill Could Curtail Divorced Dads' Rights
by Jim Brown
August 13, 2004
(AgapePress) - Resistance is growing against a bill in the California Senate that would allow custodial mothers to move children of divorce thousands of miles away from their fathers. If passed, that legislation would it make nearly impossible for non-custodial parents to prevent their kids from being moved at any time to virtually any place the other parent chooses -- even out of the country.Feminist groups are among those pressuring lawmakers to pass the bill (SB 730). However, opponents claim the legislation would give custodial parents -- who are usually women -- carte blanche to control the lives of the children of divorce. Men's issue columnist Glen Sacks says the bill, which is sponsored by Senate president John Burton, would give non-custodial fathers virtually no say in what happens to their children.
"It's anti-male legislation," Sacks says, "but it's also anti-child legislation, most importantly. And what it basically does is it's saying, 'Children don't need two parents. Who cares? Let's do what's convenient for Mom rather than respecting the bond between children and both of their parents.'"
The Democratic Senator Burton and others who support the bill have been receiving a barrage of protests from supporters of a group founded by Sacks called the Alliance for Children Concerned About Move-Aways (ACCAMA). Although the group has organized significant opposition to the bill, Sacks says it will be difficult to sway the minds of Democrats who are hostile to father's rights.
Nevertheless, ACCAMA is making an all out effort. The activist group has "bombarded the politicians in Sacramento with well over a thousand letters, faxes, calls, and e-mails protesting SB 730 and protesting unrestricted move-aways," the columnist says.
Also, Sacks says, "Over 50 mental health and family law attorneys have endorsed ACCAMA's efforts to preserve the LaMusga decision and to stop this legislation." He refers to the April decision by the California Supreme Court in the case of LaMusga v. LaMusga, which gave courts the power to restrain proposed move-aways that are harmful to children and their relationship with non-custodial parents.
