-----Original Message----->
From: operationsunlight Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2003 11:01 AM
To: Patricia Miles>
Subject: the system is very broken
Madam,
It is our understanding that Domestic Relations policies are presently being
reviewed. While this *seems* like good news, we are concerned that the actual
change will be to make the system even more draconian and destructive to the
family. We are concerned that Harrisburg will try to squeeze even more revenue
out of us non-custodial parents. We sincerely hope this is not the case.
The system is very broken. PFA's on demand, the gross favoritism of
females over males, the crushing support-quota system, the criminalization of
fatherhood, these must all be remedied. Is this what you are working on? You
have made Pennsylvania an extremely inhospitable place for anyone with
traditional values and the desire to raise a family.
The word is spreading amongst professionals and other hard-working, honest
persons.
Sincerely,
Michael L. Anderson
Operation Sunlight
-----Original Message-----
From: operation sunlight
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 8:58 AM
To: Patricia Miles
Subject: RE: the system is very broken Patricia Miles, Esq.
Hello:
Thank you for your prompt reply to our email. With all due respect, I do not
think that you are acknowledging the realities of the system. Perhaps you do not
know what it is really like. If I am mistaken in this thought, however, I would
be very grateful if you could explain your side to me. I have difficulty
believing that everyone in Harrisburg is as cynically evil as the practicing
divorce lawyers whom I have met. But then, I can be very naive. As we see it,
these are the basic problems with the present Domestic Law situation in
Pennsylvania:
- Children are used as 'bargaining chips' by unscrupulous parents with an eye
toward easy profit and vindictiveness. Children need two loving parents, even
when the traditional family breaks down. Children hate being put in the middle
like this. You're doing a fine job at ensuring that the cycle will continue ad
infinitum.
- Easy PFAs and guaranteed, huge financial gain for one side over the other
undermine the family. How many families can survive when one side is so
extremely advantaged by defecting? Marriage is never easy, but it does not need
the state to undermine it. Pennsylvania has made it extremely easy for a
discontented mother to fill out a PFA form and immediately 'win' everything. We
see this happen so often. Even if, occasionally, you are preventing a truly
abusive male, you are doing so by punishing ninety-nine good men. Besides, you
should check the US Dept. of Justice statistics on who is *really* battering
children. Or just open your eyes.
- Criminalization of fathers. Despite the law, fathers lose the battle (which
should not be a 'battle' in the first place) over 90% of the time. Fathers
routinely lose their children, their homes, their good names. Fathers are often
incarcerated and otherwise treated like criminals. This is becoming a civil
rights issue, comparable to the 'Jim Crow' laws of the bad old days.
- The support system is a quota. Obviously, both parents should contribute
fairly toward the life-style of the child. But that is not how it really works.
The system makes no allowance for the loss of job or reduction of income, which
is so prevalent today. (No, it doesn't. I've seen too many good men go to jail
over this one.) At the support conferences, the administration is highly biased
and unfair. The calculated amounts always come out grossly inflated. Forget the
fact that fathers are treated so badly, the simple financial extortion is
crippling.
- We are very curious about financial accounting at DRS. It is our
understanding that a significant percentage of the support revenue is matched by
federal funds. Obviously, this creates a significant pressure to maximize the
required support amounts, far beyond what is reasonable. Can you comment on
this?
Michael L. Anderson
Operation Sunlight
patricia.miles@supreme.court.state.pa.us
Dear Mr. Anderson:
As an initial matter, I'm interested in who is the "we" to whom you
refer. Are you using it in the royal sense or are you speaking for an
organization? In either event, the law is comprised of statutes enacted by the
legislature and signed by the governor, procedural rules promulgated by the
Supreme Court and case law developed over many years by trial and appellate
courts.
The committee I serve is charged only with making recommendations to the
Supreme Court. The committee receives input from the courts, the legislature,
attorneys, domestic relations personnel and the public in formulating
recommendations and strives to respond to all concerns raised. The court
recently adopted a pilot project recommended by the committee that is intended
to make family courts more user-friendlier and to ensure that family matters
move more swiftly through the courts.
I agree with you that children need both parents and should not be put in the
middle. The courts have repeatedly reinforced that concept. However, it is my
personal opinion that it is parents, not the system or the law, that use
children as pawns. In my many years as a divorce lawyer, a social worker and
even as a second wife (of a child support-paying husband) and stepmother, I have
seen many divorced parents work together to minimize the impact of divorce upon
their children because they put the children's need for a relationship with both
parents above any emotional needs they have to inflict their anger on their
ex-mates.
Protection From Abuse orders are granted or denied on the basis of whether or
not the evidence presented meets the standard of abuse set forth in the statute
at 23 Pa. C.S. section 6102. A party who does not agree with the trial court's
decision has the right of appeal to the Superior Court. While temporary support
may be ordered under the act, the plaintiff must promptly make a regular filing
through domestic relations to establish an ongoing order. In addition, while
temporary child custody may also be awarded in a PFA action, recent case law
reiterated that the court still must make a determination as to the best
interests of the child before awarding custody, even in a PFA case. Divorce,
equitable distribution, alimony, etc. cannot be addressed in a PFA action.
Family cases are civil matters like medical malpractice and fenderbenders. If
a judge enters an order in a custody, support, or PFA matter and the defendant,
male or female, willfully fails to comply, the court may find the defendant in
contempt and order incarceration. A party can appeal an order with which he or
she disagrees, but cannot simply disobey it.
The support guidelines distinguish between voluntary and involuntary
reductions of income. If the reduction is voluntary, in most cases the support
order will not be reduced. However, the guidelines state that "appropriate
adjustments will be made for substantial continuing involuntary decreases in
income". In most cases, a lay-off would be considered involuntary. Again,
if a party believes the domestic relations section or the trial court has erred
in the calculation, there is oversight through the appellate process.
Much of what has occurred in the area of support in the last 20 years is as a
result of federal mandate, including statewide guidelines, the statewide
computer system and centralized payment and disbursement. The federal government
makes incentive payments to the states for compliance and collections. However,
this does not affect the amount of the support order. DPW, which oversees the
child support system in Pennsylvania, has no authority as to the amount of the
support order. While the domestic relations officers and courts have some
discretion in the amount of the order, application of the guidelines results in
the presumptive amount of support. Any deviation up or down from that amount
must be justified by the trier of fact to overcome the presumption.
I can hear your anger in your correspondence, and I'm sorry you are having
such a bad time of it. The dissolution of a marriage is a difficult process and
emotionally charged for all involved. I wish you well.
