Because divorce should NOT mean losing your children


Parents that come to us find a place where they can find tools that help them fight back!

When they keep you in the dark and hide the rules and procedures and make statutes that violate your rights…

you have two options:

1. take it and continue to be beaten


2. fight back!

We help you FIGHT BACK!

We help you recognize the tactics and patterns that the family courts use and interrupt these patterns. They’ve made living your life difficult on you, isn’t it time that you make it difficult back on them?

If the family courts have been bullying you…If the family courts made you feel bad…If the family courts are robbing you…

Join us tomorrow night and learn the #1 way to STOP the Family Court Bullying and TAKE YOUR LIFE BACK!



Your Rights are not Dependent on the Legislature!

“Ultimately all judicial power rests with the Supreme Court of the United States. They are the final arbiter of all judicial issues.” The three branches of government are set up as co-equal branches of government so that no one branch of our government can rule over the others. “Our founders didn’t want any part of this government getting too strong. They certainly didn’t want a king to form. They expected these branches to fight each other for power.” ~Ron B Palmer

Each branch can assert its own legitimate power to reign in one of the other co-equal branches that begins to exceed its authorized power. It was expected that all of them should be “power grabbing” because that’s what our founding fathers intended for them to do. That’s how you balance power. So when one of them throws the fight, they screw up the honesty and integrity of the system. What the legislators have been doing is asking the courts to step aside and let them take over. Our founding fathers were afraid of this and therefore split it into two houses. This tells us that we should not allow this to happen.

“Some judges believe that the legislature should be the supreme power…and they don’t really take on their role as a co-equal branch, and this causes problems….This essentially breaks the system from the way our founders set it up, and what these judges believe is that even if something might be unconstitutional they like to defer to the legislature and allow the legislature to work it out even when the legislature is denying fundamental liberties to people. Fortunately for us this is not the majority view of the Supreme Court.” ~Ron B Palmer.

The legislature is not a ruler over the courts. The courts have their own powers and they are supposed to be using those, not acting like minions to the legislature. The legislature is supposed to represent the will of the people but the founding fathers were very wary of legislative power and further weakened this power by setting up two separate houses of Congress. Part of the reason for this divide that they understood that the will of the people in the short term can easily become the will of the mob. For this reason the House of Representatives has two-year terms keeping them very close to the short term will of the people and the Senate has six year terms, allowing them to be more circumspect. All Bills that pass into Statutes however must remain compliant with the Constitution as that is the boundaries for government power that the Will of The People set. And the only way to change that is through United States constitutional amendments, not through Statutes!

One of Ron’s favorite quotes comes from a Mel Gibson movie the Patriot. When the main character as a previous war hero was asked to join the Continental Army he stated, “why would I trade one tyrant 3,000 miles away for 3,000 tyrants one mile away?” This quote nicely sums up the danger of a pure democracy and is instructive on why we do NOT have a pure democracy in this country. Our Constitution clearly is designed to limit those in power from trampling the rights of individuals. It almost did not pass because it did not originally include explicit statements on these rights. It passed only when it was promised that these would be quickly added and that was done with the Bill of Rights.

In our system there are protections against incursions into the rights of individuals. The Supreme Court holds all judicial power under our Constitution and it falls to them to make final judicial determinations about the Constitutionality of our statutes. However, it does NOT fall only to them. The Executive branch also has the right to make its own determinations of constitutionality and base their actions on that belief. Further, our founding fathers expected every individual to do the same.

In summary, the legislature is supposed to be representing what they believe to be the will of the people within their communities within the guidelines of the constitution (which is the Supreme will of the people and sets the ways in which that Supreme will of the people can be altered short of which the fickle day-to-day will of the people cannot exceed the boundaries that the people have set within our constitution.) This protects us from the Will of the mob and still allows us to govern ourselves. The courts are supposed to evaluate the short-term or immediate will of the people and measure that against the Supreme Will of the people to see if in there exuberance they have not surpassed what they set as the boundaries for themselves. It’s the judges that use their tests to determine this in day-to-day cases. That is precisely why they are called judges. They make rulings on the applicability and constitutionality of the statutes. And if they find that a statute is interfering, burdening, or prohibiting the exercise of the fundamental liberties and rights guaranteed to the people by the people, they can rule to suspend that statute in that case. Then if the losing party wishes to challenge this ruling they can take it to appeal.

Therefore, when the system works properly, the burden should be on the party trying to deprive the liberty. When a parent tries to disrupt and interfere with another parent’s ability to exercise their individual liberties, rights, and freedoms they are the ones that should have the burden to prove that they have met the standards that authorize the court to do so. They must prove that conditions are so grievous that it warrants overcoming a fundamental liberty. An example would be violation of a criminal statute.

This would reduce the number of parents whose liberties are attacked from the expense, burdens, and suffering of having to appeal. It would be the parent doing the attacking having to appeal when the judge shoots them down for not having met the burden to prove that they have what is needed to invoke the authority and power of the State to deprive the parent being attacked. Not the parent that is attacked.

The parent being attacked shouldn’t be restricted from exercising their rights and freedoms on how and where they spend their future income and how and what choices they make in raising their children all within the laws applied to everyone regardless of marital or nonmarital status when the other parent fails to provide the proper evidence to the court. The attacking parent is supposed to overcome a very high bar, not the parent being attacked –innocent until proven guilty. It should be no different than convicting a criminal. Nobody should lose their individual rights to be who they choose to be or to make their own private decisions involving their children just because they choose not to be with another person. Who has ever heard of such absurdity outside the family courts? Parents in divorce or separation live this absurdity every day.

When you really look at what has been going on, generations of people have been sold a multitude of excuses and absurdities. And the only way for them to continue is to keep you confused, highly stressed, alone, and in the dark. They made you believe that what they do is right and that’s all it took. They pandered to your desires and you bought it hook, line, and sinker. Then you didn’t notice that they placed their hands in your pocketbooks and your ankles in shackles until it was too late and you were rendered paralyzed and believed you were helpless. They trapped you in your own emotions.

There is a way out, you just have to reframe the discussions away from the lies that they’ve been teaching and put it right back onto the constitutional principles. You’ve learned to accept their lies. We can help you learn to find your way out of them. We’ll be discussing this more in our webinar on Friday, April 4, 2014.

See you there! If you still need to register, here’s the registration link: HOLD MY SEAT PLEASE, I WANT OFF THIS ROLLERCOASTER! I WANT MY LIFE BACK!

Would I Have Paid an Attorney If I had Known…

Would I Have Paid an Attorney If I had Known…

…that they were going to subject me to a costly, time-consuming, gut wrenching, life altering battle that could have been avoided by applying my constitutional parental rights in the first place! (By the way, choosing not to apply the constitution does not mean that the constitution does not apply to the family courts. It means that the attorney chose to ignore the Constitution and not apply it. That’s all. Since the Constitution applies to all courts of law and courts of equity, there is no such thing as the Constitution not applying. As that would mean that the court is established outside the Constitution. Again, not the case.)

The following questions will lead to some suggestions at the end of the poll:

Did you know that most family statutes are unconstitutional? free polls 


Were you given any other option to fight the other parent other than digging up dirt on them and making them look bad? free polls 
Were you told by an attorney that it was unlikely you would get custody of your own children in divorce? free polls 
How much would you pay an attorney for an order that was useless and unenforceable? free polls 
Were you told by your attorney that you had parental rights that were separate and individual to you and not tied to the marriage? free polls 

Would I have paid an attorney if I really knew what they were going to do with my money? I thought that I hired an attorney because I needed to have someone that knew the law. Nobody told me that I was paying someone to play politics for me in a racket that has grown to epic proportions because I’ve been kept in the dark about the reality of their practices.

The representation that I got had nothing to do with protecting my rights but rather playing a game with my life and using my wallet to do it with!

Here’s some thought: What if you started pushing for laws that require attorneys to tell parents their constitutional parental rights before they can ask for a contract of services or collect any money from you?

And what if they were required to have you sign a document that shows what your rights are according to the Supreme Law of the Land?

Why not pass laws that require the bar associations and boards of legal specializations (in Texas for instance, the Board of Law Examiners appointed by the Texas Supreme Court independent from the State Bar Association administers the exam and issues the license) in the states where that apply before they are allowed to certify a lawyer as an “attorney-at-law” and claim that they are “qualified” to practice family law that the attorney demonstrate an understanding that “laws” including the “Supreme Law of the Land”, the United States Constitution and all of the United States Supreme Court opinions that have defined and established parental rights and family privacy  apply to the family courts

Then why not require that the attorneys demonstrate that they will vigorously represent the parent by using these laws and informing the judge if any statutes that he/she is trying to apply violate their understanding of these cases and the supreme law of the land — in other words object to the statute as being unconstitutional! (They require them to demonstrate that they know how to fill out the paperwork and write a legal opinion in what they call the “performance” test.)

* “Texas reported that of 77,056 attorneys, only 697 in the entire state were certified in family law (which is, arguably, the applicable specialty).” 

Require and request that your legislators pass a Bill that require attorneys to reveal if they make campaign contributions and the names of the judges they contribute too.

Require and request that your legislators pass a Bill that turns the professional code of conduct of attorneys into laws with sanctions and punishment.

Require and request that your legislator pass laws that require attorneys to read to you all of your fundamental parental rights and to tell you which ones they are going to protect BEFORE you make a decision of whether or not you want that representation! Require that they have a law that requires them to have you sign these rights that they are protecting. After all, you should know what you are buying, right?

Require and request that they make these requirements because it has become necessary since the laws do not allow individuals to hire anyone other than a licensed attorney approved by the STATE BAR or Board that is appointed to serve this function. These laws are necessary to protect the people from being tricked and ripped off and taken advantage of. (When people hire an attorney they believed that they were receiving a service that included the protection of all of their rights and that the attorney would know how to challenge any infringement on their rights, including a statute that is unconstitutional! They may not have known specifically what to ask for, but they knew they thought they were paying for protection.)

Make it very public if the legislator is unwilling to pass laws that protect people from the financial devastation and the negative effects of the unregulated business practices of attorneys that are driving people into poverty in the neighborhoods and communities where you live!

Ask for transparency and professional conduct requirements with sanctions under the law. Ask for an agency, similar to the one they created to collect child support, to vigorously prosecute those that violate these fundamental duties that protect you from being ripped off when you hire an attorney that has been certified. If that attorney made you think he/she was capable and willing to represent you in the manner that protects your ability to continue to exercise your rights with the least amount of harm and damage and turmoil to your life as possible, the parent that hired them should have some sort of recourse or assurance that the certification is assurance that their expectations will be fulfilled (at least regarding the type of representation that they will receive).

Tomorrow  we’ll be unraveling some of the mysteries behind engaging others in the reform movement and Designing your Own Destiny.

If you haven’t registered for the webinar, you can do so here, while there are seats left! DESIGN MY OWN DESTINY

Have more questions or need some help with something, you can contact us here: FIX FAMILY COURTS before you are driven into bankruptcy and you lose time with your child. Don’t end up like all those before…don’t get taken advantage of!



“God Blessed Me With an Angel…” and then I got Divorced

…And no divorce court has the right to deprive me and you.

“Believe half of what you see and nuttin what you’re told.”

For some people it’s maybe a scent that bring them back home.

For me, it’s sounds. The cantor of a voice and the diction of the words. There’s a life that I know that my children have never known. I did that. I wanted it that way.

There’s a life that I lived that my children have never lived. I worked for that. I wanted it that way.

There’s a life that my children did know. I made good choices and was able to give them that. I made good choices because I thought that would protect my children from ever having to know the life that I once knew.

What I never knew and didn’t know. My choices that I had to make to provide this life for my children weren’t going to protect them from a danger worse than any ghetto or projects or gangs or rough neighborhoods. Even these neighborhoods had codes and rules that were known. Their family values stronger yet. Sure there were bad things that happened and there was a constant struggle for survival on many different levels. Mostly not by choice for the children.

And sure there were kids who were lucky if they had one fit parent.

I thought that life would be better in the middle…

Don’t drink, don’t do drugs, stay in school, don’t stay with single guys. The rules were simple the path was treacherous. The prize I thought was worth it.

I thought by making these right choices that nobody would or could take my family away or what I had earned and built…I thought if I just made money the right way and lived a life in a good neighborhood my children could be safe and live a happy life and make a life for themselves that wasn’t filled with the threat of not knowing where their next meal would come from or whether a stray bullet might pierce them or someone they loved in the night. I thought making good choices would protect my children from losing a family member to a senseless crime. I thought that my children wouldn’t have to know that kind of loss.

I thought that by making right choices that the law would be on my side. I thought that if I just taught my children right…

When I finally had a chance to have a family of my own…four beautiful children and a great big home. Everything I thought had all been worth it…

Most the people I knew in neighborhoods from when I was young don’t have an address that you would want to look up…And here I was living in a country club!

Most the people that lived where I had been were for all I knew buried or unrecognizable. And others you wouldn’t want to hold a reunion and take a walk down memory lane…And yet here I was with family and friends and my own businesses with success and respect in the cities and communities!

I thought that I had found a better life…I wasn’t greedy, I wasn’t rich by a millionaires standards, but certainly by any standards of how I grew up…

I worked hard from the time I was young and always made sure that I remained independent so that no one could force me to be what they wanted…

I thought that by giving back to society by following their rules and working hard that nobody could force me to live according to their ideas…as long as I followed the rules

As long as I followed the rules…I thought that I could just say no…

Stand and fight or be killed I thought were days long gone by…

But there was another danger out there…one that runs all the neighborhoods…a kingpin of sorts…or you could say almost like another type of gang…where some wear robes and others suits and fancy clothes.

I thought long and hard to find the differences and to convince myself that it’s just not so…but they drive fancy cars…not much different than drug dealers, and they live off of intimidating and threatening others.

They hurt your children and steal from you…

They force you into indentured servitude…

So upon reflection I have to ask myself was it all worth it…would I have thought it so important to make the right choices to live a different life if I had only known…

Was there really a different life to live…what is it that I have accomplished?

Everything that I worked so hard for…taken, liquidated, or destroyed…my own children turned and made into strangers…

I remember when I was young thinking how sad it was…adults in a drunken stooper or a constant drugged state…how sad I thought that they threw it all away or shot it all into their arms, up their nose, or down their throat!

And here I am now…am I any better. I may not be a drunk or a drug addict but you couldn’t tell by our portfolios. In fact, mine is probably looking worse since drunks, drug addicts, and child abusers still have children who claim to love them.

I’ve been told in the past that I should mentor the youth…but what is there to tell them…

…work hard to make your life better…

and you could fall in love, build a beautiful house in a nice neighborhood, have children follow all the laws and then have all you worked for taken by the court, your children taken, kicked out of your house, and be an indentured servant to a former partner forever by court order or sell drugs and drive a mercedes or a cadillac in the ghetto …YOU TELL ME WHICH ONE LOOKS BETTER


DIVORCE 101 Launching in Dallas Texas D.I.V.A.S.

DIVORCE 101 Launching in Dallas Texas D.I.V.A.S.

Sherry and Ron B Palmer are one of the speakers and trainers for D.I.V.A.S. DIVORCE 101 launching this Saturday in Flower Mound, Texas! They are one of the very few constitutional scholars, authors, coaches, and instructors to parents and attorneys all over the United States. They have launched a class that teaches parents how to integrate their parental rights from their book in real-world family court, collaborative, and mediation applications.

WHEN: Saturday, March 29, 2014 from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m.

WHERE: 3360 Long Prairie Road, Flower Mound, Texas 75022


Whether you’re divorced, married, single, or separated, come out to meet Amber Rodgers and hear her suvivor story, and meet Sherry and Ron B Palmer. You’ll never look at the divorce process the same, you’ll never be taken advantage of again, and you’ll never have to go through it alone or in the dark again!

DIVAS_4x6PC_FRONT divorce 101 flyer divas march 2014




“I Am The System…”

“We live in a system that’s designed for us to fail….When they get older they are going to face a system that tells them there is no you.” ~Prentice Powell

Allowing judges to force their idea of what kind of parent you should be to your child is nothing more than social engineering, systematically stripping children of their unique influences that come from their parents and instead allowing a judge’s biased beliefs to override fit parents. The child is then dependent on the court’s decision and only one of their parental influences. Divorce is not permission to come between a parent and their child. The other parent has no right or claim on the other parent’s time or relationship with that child. In the spirit of Prentice Powell…”ERROR” The system has malfunctioned.

What message is the family court sending to our children?

Thanks again Prentice Powell, for I couldn’t have said it better.

“I Just Want My Son…Back.”

This father, Prentice Powell, says all that needs to be said. Still think there is justice going on in family law courts? Thanks for posting this James Ryals Jr. Fathers and mothers are suffering from being robbed of their children by family courts every day!

Any judge and attorneys that think that it is their business or even their right to do this to a parent and a child should be ashamed!

Subscribe to our website, attend our webinars, and put a STOP to the family court injustices today!





attorney and court habit loop pictureMany of you have gotten frustrated because you know that change is needed, but you haven’t been able to get enough people interested in the change, and those that do get interested lose interest.

Some lose interest because they feel they don’t believe that meaningful change will ever really happen or change has been too slow. We’ve had people tell us that there just isn’t time to wait for traditional reform, that our children need change now, and that they would like to see change happen in their lifetime.

So we got right on it and developed this webinar that is sure to wow even those most skeptical who thought that they had tried everything.

I know that some of this might come as a shock…how simple it is.

This free webinar takes a look at what it takes to get the change that you want now!

So if you seriously think you’ve tried everything you’re going to want to attend this webinar called ENGAGE AND DESIGN MY OWN DESTINY AFTER DIVORCE.

What is a habit loop? It’s where you develop a routine and do that over and over again when you receive the cue that triggers that habit. As soon as you go to an attorney and say I was served with divorce papers or I want to get a divorce, the routine that they use for that kicks in.

Attorneys have done the same job over and over again for years and years. They develop a routine on how they do things. We mentioned in a previous webinar that attorneys have a few strategies that they use, and almost every one of them take you down the path that opens you up to the arbitrary use of broad discretion that takes control over you, your life and your children!

What if changing your family court results were as simple as changing this habit? Now how could that happen the attorneys might wonder, they think that the process and procedures require things to be done the way they’ve been doing them.

Experts like Charles Duhigg and Claude Hopkins discovered that once something becomes a habit, your brain activity drops down to about the same amount of activity as it does when you’re asleep! No wonder you haven’t been getting anywhere when you try to change your attorney or the courts! So what does that mean for you?

You get lead down the same paths with the same bad results!

attorney and court habit loop picture

So when you go to an attorney who tells you that you should hire them because they have a lot of experience. You might think twice about how that experience might actually be a detriment to you. Who wants to hire an attorney whose brain is asleep on the job or is in auto-pilot! Don’t understand. Don’t worry, we’re going to discuss this in more detail during the webinar…so if you want to attend. Register here to tell us to HOLD YOU A SEAT

Naturally you want to know WHAT are these HABITS and how do YOU change them? We’ll go over the first 3 steps necessary for achieving this using long proven and tested methods and a formula that has garnered successful results for sport’s teams, businesses, and individuals for decades.

The only three things that you need to do right now is click on the registration link, register, and show up on Friday, March 28, 2014 at noon to get off the course that they’ve had you on all along and replace it with the course that you design to stay in control of your life and your children.

This webinar is not only about engaging your audience but also the formula that is finally the key for changing it all.

Register if you wish to discover innovative ways to engage your audience and turn those barriers that look like mountains into mole hills:

What is more powerful than teaching others how to get what they want!

If you want us to save you a seat so you can teach others about the family court habit and how to kick it, just let us know by clicking here: I’M READY TO KICK THE FAMILY COURT HABIT

You wanted real reform right now. You didn’t want to wait for years or even decades. How long does it take to break a habit?

You’ve been waiting for years for this change. Now we’ve put together this webinar to help you GET CHANGE FASTER! Register here for CHANGE NOW

We look forward to seeing you this Friday and to the success that you’re going to be able to reward yourself with after you LEARN HOW TO ENGAGE REFORMERS AND DESIGN YOUR OWN DESTINY AFTER DIVORCE!

If you haven’t registered yet because you cannot make it live, you can register here and receive the link to the recorded webinar when it is made available: I CANNOT MAKE IT IN PERSON BUT I WANT TO KNOW THIS POWERFUL INFORMATION SO I CAN HAVE SUCCESS TOO!

See you there!

How the Constitution Applies to Equity Courts…

How the Constitution Applies to Equity Courts…

Dr Drew on CNN Divorce Corp accessed 20140319…don’t feel bad Dr. Drew, many judges and attorneys mess this one up too! The Constitution DOES apply to Courts of Equity!

This post is not an attempt to attack Dr. Drew. We support wholeheartedly what he is doing and appreciate that he supports these issues. But we need to address the confusion about whether the Constitution applies to courts of equity.

Dr. Drew was right to say that you do not have a right to an attorney or a jury in divorce. The reason you do not have these rights is NOT because the constitution doesn’t apply to equity courts, it does. In fact the U.S. constitution specifically grants all judicial power over cases in Law and Equity to the U.S. Supreme Court in Article III, Section 2 which states, ”The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and in Equity, arising under this Constitution…”

The reason you do not have rights to an attorney or a jury is because the Constitution does NOT provide for these rights in cases of equity and in fact seems to specifically not grant them in cases of equity. So when the family courts deny this, they are following the Constitution.

Your right to an attorney and a speedy public trial are provided for in the 6th Amendment which applies to criminal prosecutions only and does not apply to either civil or equity cases.

Your right to a jury comes from the 6th and 7th Amendments. The 6th deals with criminal cases only. And, the 7th deals with cases at common law, or in other words, civil cases. Equity cases can be considered a third type of case and the Constitution simply does not provide for a jury in these types of cases, even though it does govern cases at equity.

Please do not get confused by this legal trivia issue, while there are some instances where it is important, it simply is not an issue that deprives you of any constitutional right. Divorce Courts love to confuse parents and seem to foster confusion that enhances or protects their power. Your constitutional rights are NOT an area where you should be confused. No court in this country is allowed to violate the Constitution. No government official of any kind is permitted to violate the Constitution. But, it is up to you to know your rights and to stand up for your rights. Few divorce court attorneys or divorce court judges will do this even though they have sworn an oath to do so.


One of our students taking our first eight-week course on teaching parents how to argue their rights, sent the following question to us today which demonstrates the kind of confusion not understanding this issue creates:

“Sherry/Ron,  quick question–

See Dr. Drew interview on CNN with discussion of Divorce Corp., the movie, and of family courts problems:  

I have a question for you and Ron—  At minute 2:08 into this video:
1. Dr. Drew states, “Courts of Family Law were “Courts of Equity” (do what is fair) and NOT “Courts of Law” (follow the letter of the law), and your usual Constitutional Privileges don’t necessarily apply.”

 2. Is this valid that Family Courts are allowed to do this, if they are classified as Courts of Equity?  We are arguing that they are not following the letter of the law, with our constitutional rights…which would be a Court of Law (not equity).

Can you clarify my thoughts, I am a little confused on this point?  Obviously, the State Courts are not following the Constitution.  Just wanted to make sure I know how to argue this point…this one threw me for a loop.  Are we arguing that the Family Court need to be classified as Court of Law and NOT a Court of Equity, in order to follow the Constitution/Supreme Court case law/opinions?”

Ron B Palmer and Sherry Palmer with Fix Family Courts responds:

In all of the appellate opinions we have read so far, and they are many, we have yet to see an appellate opinion that said “the trial court exceeded their authority under the law but that’s okay since they are an equity court and that is allowed.” In every case where the trial court has exceeded the statute the appellate court has overturned the trial court actions.

There certainly is no U.S. Supreme Court opinion that has allowed a family law court to exceed the boundaries of the U.S. Constitution, and I, Ron B Palmer, have read every single opinion that could be found.

The differences between courts of equity and courts of law is very difficult to understand and is increasingly becoming irrelevant. There is only one remaining Federal Equity Court and few states still have these as separate courts.

We can understand where you might be interested in a jury trial but in cases of child custody risking your custody to the determination of 9 people whose emotional triggers in this area are unknown seems more risky than placing a constitutional argument before a judge. Appealing a jury verdict is more difficult as well.

So, in response to your question as to whether you should be arguing your Constitutional rights. YES, absolutely! You should always make sure that the court understands your Constitutional rights so that they don’t ignore them and you are not seen as forfeiting them. Your Constitutional rights are your protection from all of government infringing on your freedoms and your liberties protected by that document. It is your job to frame up your case to explain your protected fundamental parental rights to the judge so that he/she can make a proper legal ruling, even if that ruling is different from how they had been doing things before. 

Those who take our courses come to understand that no court in this country can legally act contrary to the Constitution in matters of divorce and child custody. There are no government officials who are excepted from our United States Constitution.

We hope that this clears things up on this matter.

Ron B Palmer and Sherry Palmer




Parker Leverett video stands up for his rights 2013

When children/teens decide to disobey. The child is dependent on the message that each parent sends to that child on what is acceptable and what is not.

How many have watched the video posted by Caleb Leverett called “14 year old Parker stands up for his rights”? One million viewers! And it appears that most of them are siding with the 14-year-old! And agreeing with this father’s actions!

But how many actually have thought this through? How many feel sorry for Parker? What kind of message do you think that this sends to the legislators and the judges and attorneys when you side with a 14 year old choosing one parent over the other? Wouldn’t this make the legislators feel like they have been giving you exactly what you want, laws that allow the judges and attorneys to use the child based on the child’s preference?

Are you telling the legislators that if a child throws a fit and refuses to go back to the parent that has the scheduled parenting time, that everyone should give in to that…let’s call it what it is, as I have to agree with this mother, it’s a temper tantrum being supported by the other parent.

It’s clear that this method of sitting in front of the house and the father claiming that he is helpless, that it’s all his child, that he has nothing to do with this, is utterly absurd. If he has no authority over his son then he has no business claiming that he can parent. And how many fathers have suffered because the mother has pulled the same stunt in their case?

What would he do if his son one day refused to go to school or refused to follow the speed limit laws when he starts to drive, or refused to follow the laws and decided to drink or smoke! Would the father idly sit there and claim that there was nothing he could do?! Of course not and they are usually the first ones to try and say that this is different, right? WRONG

While Parker seems like a likable kid and respectful young man, he is still a minor, and it is not good parenting on the father’s part to sit there and claim that he plays no role or responsibility in Parker’s actions; and puts this all on his son to make up for an order that he, the father, doesn’t like. Recruiting your children to do your battle is never a good idea and is harmful to the child and to the power and authority of both parents! This is damaging and creates insecurities in children and teens. Regardless of how it might appear here on the surface, it is not a supportive act that should be cheered and encouraged. This practice should be abolished and prohibited with either mother or father. NO parent, regardless of gender, should use their children in this way. Yet so many people don’t see it for what it is. They think that the father is just being supportive of his son and doing what is right for his son, and sending the wrong message to legislators and judges and attorneys. You are sending the message that you want them to keep using the children and tearing their lives apart by ordering one parent out of their lives by depriving one of the parents their ability to continue to parent their child in the manner that they see fit.

And if you think that Parker is being abused and is trapped, then you don’t know much about 14 year olds. Most teens don’t like to be disciplined and when they are, if there is someone they think will side with them and get them out of the discipline, don’t you think they will! And if there was real abuse going on, surely he knows how to report that through the proper channels as well.

We don’t allow children to vote, sign contracts, smoke or drink, but we somehow think they are wise enough to determine who should parent them and how they should be parented? So if you have an order that protects your time with your children, this should just be ignored when the child decides they want to change the orders? Why even get orders in the first place then? Why spend all that money? Why not just let the children run their own lives?

That’s what you are essentially doing here when you let a child be used to do the dirty work of one of their parents! Then all the other parent has to do is stand back and say they are innocent, it’s the child’s wishes, etc., and not have to spend the money to go to court, right? Would this same parent be doing the very same thing if the table was turned and his son was against him and refusing to go with him during his parenting time? If you asked them while the child was siding with them, they would say they would let the child go where the child chose, right. Sure that’s why we have so many parents hurt and upset and airing grievances every day in every state, and that voice is growing and the pain and damage is mounting.

Ask yourself, if they were married would we allow the child to make this kind of decision? Does this mean that we have a deep-seated bias and prejudice against divorced parents? Do we treat divorced parents equally, or is it simply okay in our society to discriminate against divorced parents?

So now think about your initial reaction. Did you side with Parker at first? Did you catch yourself and ask yourself what would be the underlying message that you would be sending to the legislators? What is it that you are telling them that you really want if you side with Parker? Was your reaction indicative of how you really want the courts to respond? Are you contradicting yourself and confusing the legislators? It’s no wonder the legislators think that they have passed laws that reflect the voice of the people and have been letting the judge use the children, order all kinds of expensive studies, etc. All in the name of doing what you’ve told them to do, to base their decision on the wishes of the child, right?

Have you ever been alienated and wondered why the courts were listening to your children when the children were just an extension of the other parent’s voice? Have you been in the position where your children were siding with the other parent and everyone swore, including the other parent, that no one was influencing the children?

There are many influences over children and they aren’t all verbal. We know that parents influence their children in many ways. So my question is why is this father choosing not to parent his son in a manner that teaches him to respect both of his parents? It is not required under the law for both or either parent to be likable or liked by everyone or anyone for that matter. And that’s a good thing because that’s what allows parents to make unpopular decisions with their children and not feel like any stranger could just walk up and rip your child from you at any given moment that your child says they no longer want to be with you. “Shame on you for throwing that toy in the trash or for not allowing that teenager to have a friend stay over night, or play their ex-box all night, or for the stepparent disciplining the child, or for the parent parenting the child.”

As long as parents are acting within the law, applying parenting rules differently based on individual bias and personal beliefs would put a huge “chilling effect” on parenting throughout this country. So siding with the child here rather than requiring that the father go through the proper channels to change orders or to prosecute someone for child abuse properly just keeps all of the divorced parents in the same quandary that they have been in for over the last 200 years!

Why encourage and perpetuate the bad practice of picking on parenting style differences or parenting styles that you don’t favor? It could happen to you!

Why not do what is healthy for the child and be a parent that influences their child to spend their time with each parent as equally as possible, and let the child know that when they turn 18 then they can make those choices if they still feel the same way? Why not teach the child how to learn to cope with different parenting styles and develop respect for each of their parents? Just as they have to adjust to different teachers and teaching styles throughout their education. And different bosses and people that they’ll work with over the years throughout their lifetime.

So the next time you find yourself holding an order in your hand that you thought would protect you, only to find out that it is absolutely worthless, that you spent maybe even over $100,000.00 to get, but doesn’t seem to be worth the cost of the paper it’s printed on now, you can remember that you sided with kids like Parker. Are you authorizing the bias and prejudice directed at you, a fit parent, simply because you are in a divorce or divorced?

You say that’s not what you want, that you want the courts to respect and protect your fundamental parental rights, yet, here you are cheering on this teenage boy for the very civil disobedience that you complain about in your own case and in fact paid a pretty penny to prevent, or so you thought would prevent! Here you are cheering on Parker, while you claim to want to prevent children being used in their parent’s fights? How is this different from supporting those bigots who fought to keep women and blacks down?

Caleb calls this video his son’s “rights.” Really? It’s the child’s right to break court orders? What type of respect is Parker learning for the law and authority? Would Parker have done this if his father hadn’t supported it? What if Caleb had told him to behave and do as he was told?

It’s fine for the father to teach his child “civil disobedience.” This certainly isn’t the way to teach a child civil disobedience however! What this father is teaching his son here is not a good value. Civil disobedience is based on good values and should not be used to teach your child to disrespect one of their fit and loving parents. And if one of the parents feel that the other parent is not fit, then they should take that up through the proper channels to prove that and not go to the court of public opinion and manipulate that public opinion. The value being taught here is that it is okay to bully a parent if that parent is divorced.

I would think that Parker might be having less stress in his life and could focus on being a kid and being happy with both of his parents if he weren’t being manipulated into this. It’s a good thing that married parents aren’t put to this teenage test! For if they were, we might as well have children running the world. There have been many times that my teenagers decide they don’t like something one day and then the next day or week it’s like they got over it and moved on to something else or some other endeavor.

If you don’t allow a child to test their boundaries and assure them that the security and structure and schedule that both parents have put in place for that child will remain, the child is left without that assurance and worse, is left without the guidance and security in knowing that both parents have power and authority over them. Instead the child is taught that they can help one of their parent’s undermine orders and be used by that parent as their soldier in an effort to take the child from the other.

The divorce courts are depriving our children of this security and stability by giving in to teenage temper tantrums. The divorce courts are forcing divorced parents to give up on actually parenting their children and instead to placate them. What kind of world are these divorce court judges creating? what kind of horrible social experiment are these divorce court judges submitting our children to?

I find this video a shame and a refusal on the father’s part to parent appropriately and to teach his son to respect authority appropriately. And if you claim that the mother is abusive, I suggest that you look for additional evidence on this. You might be shocked one day if that same lowered bar of abuse is turned onto you. Do we act like Nazis then and condemn people on baseless accusations. Do we send divorced parents to the gulag because the other parent slanders them? Perhaps it is okay because they are divorced and are therefore second class parents under the law?

So I ask you again, was your initial reaction really the message that you wanted to send to the legislators, the attorneys, and the judge? Isn’t judges and attorneys using children what got our family courts in the mess that they are in today? Isn’t asking them to make a choice between parents and allowing the children to make decisions in this causing the courts to use bias and prejudice, to ignore constitutional protected rights, and allowing the courts to justify costing families excessive amounts of money and drive them into bankruptcy?

Are we condemning other divorced parents to second-class citizen status without thinking it through?