Through a family court order Victoria Anne
Franco was removed from Massachusetts in January of 2000. Victoria’s father, Mike Franco, went to pick
her for their weekly four-day block of time, but she was gone. Franco was the primary caregiver to Victoria
from age six months to 2-1/2 years old before Judge Anne Geoffrion (right)
allowed the mother to remove the child to Texas.
Victoria and Mike on Boston
Harbor, Summer 2002
Franco contends the family court is also
responsible for denying Victoria access to her large, loving family and friends
network because the court will not honor its order for visitation. The numerous
bias and ill-contrived actions, and countless inactions of judges on this
matter over many years have inherently, and without accountability, violated
this man and his family’s’ presumed right to equal protection under the law and
due process of law. As a result, a
form of neglect and abuse has been cast upon Victoria that will most certainly
scar her emotionally for life (see article, p. 2).
|
|
DAVID
G. SACKS 50 State Street Springfield ANNE GEOFFRION Hampden Div. Probate & Family Court
50 State Street Springfield DAVID M. FULLER 50 State Street Springfield |
The judges shown here
preside in the Hampden Division Probate and Family Court. While under the color of law they consorted in lies,
bigotry and cowardice, systematically separating a child from her
devoted and loving father. Victoria,
like many children trapped in the intrusive family court, spends little or no time with her dad. It is a corrupt court process, which interferes with the
father-child relationship, literally robbing kids and their dads “those
precious years” with each other.
-------- -------- -------- --------
Senate Bill 1075 for Shared Parenting will be heard before the Joint Committee on the Judiciary, Thursday, July 24 at 1 p.m. in Room A1 of the Statehouse, Boston. To review the bill, please go to www.state.ma.us/legis/bills/st01075.htm. Several legislators across the state are sponsoring SB1075. Please help us bring attention to the bill by contacting your local representatives. We encourage you to also contact the Committee Chairmen at 1-617-722-1200 and 1-617-722-2396.
Children suffer when divorced parents move
By Gwendolyn Richards
Globe and Mail News
Thursday, Jun. 26, 2003
Vancouver — Children of divorced
parents who move away are more likely to suffer from long-term mental and
health effects than those whose parents don't relocate, a new study suggests.
Sanford Braver, who led the study
published yesterday in the Journal of Family Psychology, said children who had
to deal with divorcing parents and the subsequent move of a parent — with or
without the child — to a location more than an hour away, were more likely to
feel they had a "hard and difficult" life and had adjusted less
favorably personally and emotionally.
Even more disturbing, Dr. Braver
said, is the fact that study participants whose parents relocated after divorce
seemed to experience health problems.
"Children whose parents had
moved reported their general health as less well off than children whose
parents had divorced but neither of whom had moved," he said.
The health index used by the
study also indicates that these children may have increasingly poor health as
they age, especially for conditions related to stress and coping, such as heart
disease and rheumatoid arthritis, Braver added.
About half of all marriages
currently end in divorce and between 30 and 40 per cent of those divorces
involve children. It used to be difficult for a divorced parent to move away
with a child, but Braver said courts in many U.S. states have taken the point
of view that if the move is made in good faith — not to thwart the other
parent's relationship with the child — and benefits the custodial parent, then
it shouldn't be restricted.
"The courts were working
under the premise that anything that will improve the life of the primary
parent will have a beneficial effect on the children. As a result we're having
more and more unfettered moves," he said.
Canadian courts generally handle
the relocation question that most states do, Braver said, so the study's
results may impact how the difficult decision is handled in this country
[Canada].
Braver hopes his study will send
a message to the courts that they need to take into account potential harm
being inflicted on children of divorce.
"A move away is going to
exact some costs from the child and [the courts] need to weigh that factor in
the balance and make sure on a case-by-case basis that this should be
allowed," he said.
"If these decisions were
misguided then it's our hope that such decisions get rectified in the future so
as not to adversely affect even more children."
Grant Gold, a family lawyer in
Toronto, said the study may be helpful, but it is not definitive.
"It's way more ammunition
for someone to say, 'This is why it's not in the children's best interest,'
" he said. Mr. Gold also noted it's more common
for people to move in the United States than in Canada.
The study surveyed a group of
Arizona State University students who were asked whether their parents were
divorced, whether a move was involved and questions about their health and
well-being. Respondents whose parents
had divorced were then divided into two groups – one for those where a move had
been involved in the divorce and one for those whose parents didn't relocate.
While those whose parents had
moved showed increased negative effects, Braver said there was no difference
between those who had moved with a parent and those who had a parent move away.
Although the study proves there
is a link between moves and the negative impact on children, researchers could
not prove it was a causal link. More research is needed, Braver said.
For more information about
fatherhood issues that may affect you and your family, please contact the
Fathers’ Rights Hotline at 1-413-295-DADS or log on to
www.fatherhoodcoalition.org.