Family Courts v. Father’s Unalienable Rights

By Shane Flait

Family Court Violates the Purpose of Courts and Fathers’ Unalienable Rights! The purpose of court is to reveal truth so as to administer justice to maintain liberty of the innocent, punish the guilty proportionately to his offense and compensate for damage done if possible to the aggrieved. The court’s process for accomplishing this must be recognized as a fair process. Family court ignores all of this. This process requires exposing the truth in order to administer appropriate justice. That’s because liberty is impossible without justice; and justice is impossible without truth. Truth and Justice are inseparable and support each other.

Establishing truth invokes the maxim that ‘the certainty of a thing arises only by making it a thing certain’. This implies that the court should seek clear proof of allegations made against someone and not rule on just the allegations or weakly supported ones. The importance of discerning the truth directly relates to the deprivation of rights and punishment that the court may order. Any court that ignores the ‘due process’ that would bring out the truth and punish falsehood is a kangaroo court.

A court action requires a justifiable cause to impose its orders:

Courts are in the business of resolving a dispute or a ‘wrong’ done – civilly or criminally. In order for people to know that they are in trouble, laws must be clear – not vague – so a case can be decided fairly ‘for or against’ one of the litigants. The cause that justifies a court action must be clear. A criminal complaint must allege all ‘elements’ that must be present for it to be considered a crime of a particular sort like theft, or murder. Severe deprivation of rights are at stake so the burden of proof is ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’. Civil actions (i.e. not criminal) which can deny or simply reduce any fundamental right of a litigant must require a burden of proof that’s ‘clear and convincing’ and also must have a clear constitutional criteria that must be met before any denial can be imposed.

Civil torts (i.e. wrongs) also, have characteristic ‘elements’ that must have occurred for the case to continue and not be dismissed. Implied or actual contracts are often at issue. Since only money is at stake the burden of proof is ‘preponderance of evidence’ – 51% or more of the evidence must be on the winner’s side. All these requirements are necessary to assure that people are not punished or deprived of rights at the whim of some judge or plaintiff. Otherwise, we wouldn’t have any rights -which, in fact, we do because we are a Republic with guaranteed constitutional rights.

Family Court: Elements of the Complaints:

Though all courts have previously required certain characteristic elements in all complaints be present to justify the court’s action and, if proved, its ordered deprivations, punishments, or awards among the litigants, the family court complaints make deprivations, punishments and award under no-fault divorce! This is anti-law. It’s the mark of state tyranny. No wrong need be committed for one litigant to be punished, denied his rights, and virtually enslaved while the other is rewarded at the expense of the first.

The judgment of complaint for a no-fault divorce severely deprives the unalienable rights of a fit father to parent his children, to use his property as he sees fit, and to earn income as he sees fit. These very deprivations work to benefit and award the mother. Parental unfitness is an unnecessary criteria for allocating the ‘noncustodial’ status – most often to fathers. To repeat, for a father to be denied physical custody of his child, he doesn’t have to be found unfit or commit any wrong. The judge invokes a completely arbitrary criteria to what he thinks is ‘the best interests of the child’ to determine what judgments he’ll issue. The state uses this ‘excuse’ to deprive a father of all his unalienable rights. That constitutes a tyranny.

Most all the father’s property can be transferred to the mother including his children. She receives child support payments from him which supports her, the children, and often much more while leaving the father destitute, if not nearly so. A complaint for modification of a no-fault divorce judgment generally requires a material change in the relevant circumstances that the previous judgment was based upon.

When there is no marriage but there is a child, then a complaint for paternity can be filed. The state allows this since it claims that it has an interest in the child. At issue is the same as for divorce accept there is no distribution of (marital) assets. The father will still be deprived and punished.

How the family court ignores due process in divorce and paternity-related actions:

First, family court deals exclusively with fundamental rights of litigants. At stake is your right to parent your child, to control and choose your income and profession, your right to maintain your professional and driver’s licenses, your right to have or maintain your passport and travel as you see fit. And of course there is jail waiting for you if you don’t comply. So you would think that the highest level of ‘due process’ should be operating to protect the rights of each litigant. Wrong! There is virtually no due process to assure truth and preserve rights. Family court makes no adherence to the constitutionally required due process when fundamental rights are at stake. Violations of maxims and all higher laws abound and all judgments have no burden of proof.

There is no jury trial in family court. There is only a ‘bench’ trial which means that the judge is both judge and jury for you. Determination of the issues of divorce (except the distribution of assets) is assigned at a temporary order hearing without benefit of a trial and evidence.  Under such scenarios, lawyer and judge-threatened agreements are common place experiences for fathers without the protection of a jury. Absent an agreement by the parents, judges generally assign only one parent as the custodial (having full physical custody) parent.  The other – noncustodial – parent has virtually or operationally no parental rights as we all understand what parenting implies. You should recognize that such a setup will necessarily lead to injustice! With all protections gone, special interest groups will take over how certain judgment outcomes will prevail. In fact a whole divorce and domestic violence industry has done just that. And that’s the tyranny that fathers face.

Special interest groups and their influence in court financial interests:

First, they have interest in setting larger child support orders. The court coffers and DOR (Department of Revenue)/CSE (Child Support Enforcement) receive federal incentive payments and there are Court-DOR agreements for DOR money that goes to the court systems. County jails make money by more inmates – alleged to deadbeat dads. Women and lawyers love this.

Second, VAWA has made abuse allegations more easily allowed and prosecuted.  Visitation centers and lawyers benefit by this as well as do battered women shelters and batterer’s groups – for men only. Incidentally, battering is relatively rare; accusations are very common.

Third, they foster aggravating parental exchanges and unequal allotment of rights – as the court imposes. This makes a lot of money and job security for lawyers, family services officers, psychologists, GALS, parenting class coordinators, women’s groups, and affiliated VAWA organizations who receive some $5 Billion over 5 years  – and mothers too.

—————————————————-