August 18, 2017 by Robert Franklin, Esq, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization
The New Jersey Supreme Court has struck a blow for kids, families and common sense (NJ.com, 8/10/17). In the case of Bisbing v. Bisbing, the Court ruled that, when a parent with primary custody wants to relocate with the children, she may only do so if she proves that relocation is in the children’s best interests.
Given the current state of the law on child custody, that should have been nothing but the obvious, but in the Garden State, it wasn’t. Before the Bisbing case, non-custodial parents had the burden of proving that the moveaway wasn’t in the child’s best interests. The high court placed the burden of proof where it should have been all along – on the moving party.
August 17, 2017 by Robert Franklin, Esq, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization
Larissa MacFarquhar at The New Yorker is to be congratulated for this fine article on the child protective and foster care systems in New York (New Yorker, 8/7/17). The piece is long and covers most, but not all of the bases. What’s most powerful about it is that it takes time to hear from most of the players in the child protective and foster care systems. It shows the situation from many points of view, it brings home the hopelessness of a governmental entity trying to make decisions about children’s care that, often enough, it’s incompetent to make.
Most importantly, MacFarquhar makes sure her readers, along with the parents, lawyers, caseworkers and judges, walk that fine – sometimes almost indistinguishable – line between poverty and child neglect. After all, again as the article makes clear, the great majority of cases seen by child protective caseworkers are about neglect, not abuse. And what is neglect and what is poverty? My guess is that few people tasked with figuring that out in any given case would do so well. Multiply that single case by the number of cases actually handled at a single time by a caseworker and you have a prescription for getting matters wrong.
August 16, 2017 by Robert Franklin, Esq, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization
Karen Rinaldi’s major failing is her belief that sacrifice can never be done willingly, even joyfully. Her mother told her that motherhood is “all sacrifice,” which of course is utter nonsense, otherwise, why would so many women do it and with such enthusiasm? I have the sneaking suspicion that, had it been anyone in the world other than her mother, we wouldn’t be burdened by Rinaldi’s article. That her own mother sees motherhood as all sacrifice must have touched a nerve in her daughter. Why wouldn’t it? Her statement comes perilously close to a bitter regret about her decision to have kids. That, I suspect, is what sent Rinaldi scurrying to her gender feminism that, in her case, looks a lot like a security blanket.
Whatever the case, Rinaldi plunges straight into the resentful narrative that portrays children and their care as, in some never explained way, not only not part of a woman’s identity, but actually antithetical to it. Only a person who believes that a woman’s highest calling, indeed her only calling, is the world of paid work, however tedious and thankless. All other mothers tend strongly to see motherhood as one of the best things they’ve ever done, fulfilling and very much part of their identity. (BTW, fathers do too.)
August 14, 2017 by Robert Franklin, Esq, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization
As I said yesterday about Karen Rinaldi’s piece in the New York Times, her idea of “clarity” is her opting to view her chosen subject through a gender feminist lens rather than doing the hard work of a applying logic to facts and arriving at a sensible conclusion. Now, I say “hard” work, but in Rinaldi’s case, her work wouldn’t have been difficult at all, had she actually done it. That’s because her subject is motherhood and whether it’s a “sacrifice” as her mother said or “selfish” as Rinaldi prefers.
Of course, she could have just noted that motherhood can last the better part of a lifetime, so the chances of its being either altruistic or selfish but never both is remote. The facts of the matter are simple. Most women want to have children. They do so because their body’s biochemistry suggests they do so. Many women, once they’re mothers, find powerful and deep gratification and fulfillment from playing the part of mother to their kids. So indeed, there’s an element of selfishness to being a mother. Motherhood gives them what they want.
August 13, 2017 by Robert Franklin, Esq, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization
It can be truly amazing to watch gender feminists try to puzzle out the simplest, most obvious things and fail. Usually, that’s as a result of inhabiting their ideological boxes for so long that seemingly all of life for them is distorted beyond anything most of us would recognize. I just finished with an article in The Atlantic by Olga Khazan that, while far more grounded in reality than this piece, suffered from the same malady (New York Times, 8/4/17). Ideologies invariably adopt certain notions and never question them. That results in the need to force reality to conform to those notions and reality, being what it is, resists.
Karen Rinaldi wrote the Times piece. She also wrote a novel called “The End of Men” that suffered some pretty damning online reviews. Cindy had this to say: