Federal officials have reversed their claim that they have “equal rights” to children to raise them

WND EXCLUSIVE

FEDS ABANDON ‘EQUAL RIGHTS‘ CLAIM TO RAISE YOUR KIDS

‘Much work to be done before decades of federal overreach is reversed’

Federal officials have reversed their claim that they have “equal rights” to children to raise them, a claim that stirred outrage in many quarters of America when it was first made a few months back.

The claim originally was included in a draft policy by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education and generously allowed that parents, too, should be allowed to help raise their own children along with the government, through various programs.

The document, the “Draft Policy Statement on Family Engagement From the Early Years to the Early Grades,” stated at the time: “It is the position of the departments that all early childhood programs and schools recognize families as equal partners in improving children’s development, learning and wellness across all settings, and over the course of their children’s developmental and educational experiences.”

That one sentence, wrote William A. Estrada, the director of federal relations policy for the Home School Legal Defense Association, “unmasks the federal government’s true philosophy behind decades of federal involvement in welfare, kindergarten through 12th grade education spending and policies, programs like Head Start, and now the push to create universal early education for young children from birth through age 5: the federal government believes that its role is equal with the role of parents.”

See what American education has become, in “Crimes of the Educators: How Utopians Are Using Government Schools to Destroy America’s Children.”

The newest release of the statement, however, now provides that, “Families are children’s first and most important teachers, advocates, and nurturers. Strong family engagement in early childhood systems and programs is central – not supplemental – to promoting children’s healthy intellectual, physical, and social-emotional development; preparing children for school; and supporting academic achievement in elementary school and beyond. Research indicates that families’ involvement in children’s learning and development impacts lifelong health, developmental, and academic outcomes.”

The HSLDA had blasted the earlier statement, in fact, dispatching Estrada to meet with senior officials from the U.S. Department of Education and “personally” explaining the significant issues with the draft statement, including opposition from parents to the “bureaucratic arrogance.”

The change is a very mich improved version, the HSLDA pointed out, making clear that “families have strong and sustained effects on children’s learning, development, and wellness.”

“Despite this victory,” the group explained. “there are other problems with the document that remain. The document’s working definition of ‘family’ still includes not only a child’s parents or legal guardians, but ‘all adults who interact with early childhood systems in support of their child, to include biological, adoptive, and foster parents; grandparents; legal and infromal guardians; and adult siblings.’”

HSLDA exlained, “In situations where conflict may exist between a child’s parents and other family members regarding educational choices, this still quite broad definition of family is not hepful for clarity regarding parental rights in education.”

The organization explained, “There is much work to be done before decades of federal overreach in K-12 education is reversed.”

The document does still include a suggestion that families and institutions “partner” to give children better results in school.

WND reported the original plan by the government was to “systematically” engage families about their own children.

“At HSLDA, we believe that these statements reveal these agencies’ true beliefs: that a child’s God-given family does not matter. Family is whomever or whatever the government says it is,” Estrada wrote at the time.

He cited other government agendas, such as pushing the political correctness in Common Core, “dangerous U.N. treaties,” as well as suggestions for universal preschool.

See what American education has become, in “Crimes of the Educators: How Utopians Are Using Government Schools to Destroy America’s Children.”

causes.comcauses409526updates965813

Capitol Hill

Federal officials have reversed their claim that they have “equal rights” to children to raise them, a claim that stirred outrage in many quarters of America when it was first made a few months back. The claim originally was included in a draft policy by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the […]

Source: Published: 06/20/2016 at 10:07 PM
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/feds-abandon-equal-rights-claim-to-raise-your-kids/#dor0e34P3TQHb9bv.99

Feds abandon ‘equal rights’ claim to raise your kids

Overrulled Documentary Parental Rights - 2015

Voy a luchar por mis padres - 2015

An Example of an Anti-Father’s Rights, Liberal Moron!

If You Support Men’s and Father’s For Equal Parental Rights, You Have to Vote for Cara Nicole, Not Juan Mendez! Why? Because Juan Mendez, An Example of an Anti-Father’s Rights, Liberal Moron!  – Men’s Rights Group of AZ

If you think Juan Mendez is a complete fool, moron and just unfit to hold public office your not the only one!

In fact, according to the American’s for Parental Equality and men’s rights advocates, you could be right!

Many men’s and father’s rights activist have long held the opinion that Juan Mendez has single-handedly  worked against legislation to change bias family court laws. This opinion appears to be true in recent public statements Juan Mendez has made.

Juan Mendez was recently asked,

“What do you plan to do to bring equality to fathers being denied rights to their children in family court when there is no domestic violence or criminal history?”

Juan Mendez looked a little shocked by the question and even asked for it to be repeated so he could compose himself. Then, the idiot (in our opinion) spilled his feminist guts.

At least from his statements…

Mendez openly plans to keep denying father’s rights to their biological children.

A Facebook video of this moron has now reached 34 thousand views of how Mendez side-stepped the entire question while throwing a bone to his liberal-feminist allies.

Source: Juan Mendez, An Example of an Anti-Father’s Rights, Liberal Moron! – Men’s Rights Group of AZ

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

“We have not endorsed a presidential candidate” ~ The Father’s Rights Movement (TFRM)

NOT a witch hunt TFRM - 2016For anyone reading this blog, TFRM does not, I repeat, DOES NOT endorse Donald Trump for president. We have not endorsed a presidential candidate. It is dishonest for Dr. Koziol to make a presidential endorsement using the TFRM logo. Please cease and desist using the logo on this blog.TAKE BACK FATHERHOOD 2015 - AFLA

TFRM is an official nonprofit organization. We have not endorsed Donald Trump, and for very good reason. He has not made one statement for Family Law reform.
frm-usa-2015

In fact, when every single one of the republican presidential candidates were presented a family law reform question that was voted on by thousands, Trump didn’t even bother to answer. Other candidates at least answered the question, albeit poorly.

Continue reading “We have not endorsed a presidential candidate” ~ The Father’s Rights Movement (TFRM)

Elections 2016 Candidates’ policy positions that directly address families.

Where Presidential Candidates Stand on Supporting Families

With the focus during this presidential race on Obamacare, immigration reform, terrorism, and the economy, it’s not surprising that the leading Republican and Democratic candidates have had little to say about what they would do to support strong families. Moreover, the media haven’t been particularly interested in what the candidates would do once elected to build and maintain what is arguably the most important institution in American culture.


Given my role as president of National Fatherhood Initiative, you might not be surprised that I’m concerned by this lack of attention. I became further concerned as I watched the results roll in during the Iowa caucus. That’s because Ted Cruz‘ win on the Republican side was helped greatly by Iowa Republicans’ desire to vote for a candidate who shares their values. There’s no doubt that Iowans — Republicans and Democrats — have long-shared the value of promoting strong families. The issue — which was certainly more prominent in the last election cycle — has been lost on pretty much everyone except, of course, the people who matter most — voters.

To be fair, I’m convinced that each of the leading candidates believes in the importance of supporting families. But the proof is in the pudding, as they say. And I have no doubt they’d go about supporting families a bit differently. So I decided to conduct a review of the five leading candidates’ stands on promoting strong families and, most importantly, how they would help build and maintain strong families if elected. I not only wanted to know for myself where they stand. I wanted to help you and others who care about this issue to be better informed when deciding who will get your vote.

To conduct my review, I went straight to today’s political version of the horse’s mouth — the candidates’ “for president” websites. While acknowledging that some positions each of the candidates has articulated might indirectly strengthen families — such as policies to get more Americans working — I looked for policy positions that directly address strengthening families.

The Republicans

  • Ted Cruz seeks to “restore a culture of life, marriage, and family.” Unfortunately, Mr. Cruz offers nothing substantive on how he would restore that culture. His website simply touts his record on family planning (primarily his efforts to defund Planned Parenthood), anti-abortion legislation, and strengthening marriage.
  • Donald Trump says absolutely nothing about strengthening families. Period.
  • Marco Rubio offers the most substantive, detailed position on strengthening families among the leading Republicans. Mr. Rubio would seek to reform the tax code to treat parents fairly with, for example, a new $2,500 per child tax credit. He would seek to increase the availability of 4 to 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave for new parents upon the birth of a child, to care for ailing parents, for seriously ill employees, and for military families. He would pay for this leave through tax incentives for businesses that offer such leave rather than through legislative mandate. And he would promote marriage by allowing states to use federal anti-poverty funding for programs that use marriage as a means to lift families out of poverty.

The Democrats

  • Hilary Clinton‘s efforts to strengthen families would rest on guaranteeing paid family and medical leave. Specifically, Ms. Clinton would like to see up to 12 weeks of paid family leave under most of the same conditions as Mr. Rubio — leave for new parents, for those caring for elderly parents, and for seriously ill employees. She would pay for the cost with increased taxes on the wealthy to avoid burdening businesses with the cost.
  • Bernie Sanders position also rests on guaranteeing up to 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave for the same reasons as Ms. Clinton. In contrast to Ms. Clinton and Mr. Rubio, he would pay for it through an insurance-style program that would be funded by a deduction from workers’ paychecks. Given that he likens it to Social Security, I assume workers would not be able to opt out of this deduction.

Depending on whether you tend to look at the proverbial glass as half full or half empty, you might be encouraged that three of the leading candidates would seek to implement reforms that would directly strengthen families. On the other hand, you might be discouraged that two of them have chosen not to address this important institution with specific reforms. Either way, I hope this post has given you a little more information to chew on as you decide which candidate to support. And maybe, just maybe, the candidates will have more to say on this issue as the campaign moves on to New Hampshire and beyond.

FatherSource Email Sign UpThis post originally appeared on The Huffington Post.

Christopher A. Brown discusses the presidential candidates and where they stand on supporting families in his latest post.

Source: Where Presidential Candidates Stand on Supporting Families

Be Good to Yourself. You’ll Be Better to Your Kids.

Continue reading Elections 2016 Candidates’ policy positions that directly address families.

An Important Human Rights Issue

Unfriendly Family Courts

There is often talk about the glass ceiling and little talk about the glass floor.

cf783-it2527sconstitutionalMen are being denied their rights as fathers, workers and human beings by the courts and other institutions that have simply gone too far.

Feminist movements while promoting equality seem to be replacing the good old boys’ club with a good old girls’ one. Some in the country think it is time for men to take a stand and work with visioned women for REAL equality.

Google Community Pic2 - 2016This show will feature Harry Croutch of the National Coalition for Men and Men’s Legal Center in San Diego along with RK Hendrick, Esq, an attorney and author of the book “How To Avoid Getting Screwed When Getting Laid”. Eric Von Sydow will be commenting on his books and role in helping men cope in today’s society. Join us for what is sure to be a provocative discussion.

Here we are starting another year in the same position as last year and the year before that and the year before that. Three years now since I saw my two children and three more to go if the situation remains the same. My son Scott will be sixteen in three years time and he will instantly have the freedom to choose to find me. Which is why I keep my blog running.  I have said this over and over again during the last three years, all we want is equality. Not too much to ask in 2014. A fathers right to see his children and a child’s right to see his or her father.  Men are often accused of being controlling, but when a mother denies a father access to his children and a child access to his or father then that is the extreme of controlling behavior. But that seems to go unrecognised. Balanced? I don’t think so. Fair? I don’t think so. Equal? I don’t think so.  Children are not tools to be used as a punishment against a father.
Here we are starting another year in the same position as last year and the year before that and the year before that. Three years now since I saw my two children and three more to go if the situation remains the same. My son Scott will be sixteen in three years time and he will instantly have the freedom to choose to find me. Which is why I keep my blog running. I have said this over and over again during the last three years, all we want is equality. Not too much to ask in 2014. A fathers right to see his children and a child’s right to see his or her father. Men are often accused of being controlling, but when a mother denies a father access to his children and a child access to his or father then that is the extreme of controlling behavior. But that seems to go unrecognised. Balanced? I don’t think so. Fair? I don’t think so. Equal? I don’t think so. Children are not tools to be used as a punishment against a father.

Men’s Rights – An Important Human Rights IssueParent have rights - Stand up for Zoraya - 2015
Reason for Protest: To bring awareness to the corruption and fraudulent acts of Family Courts and Child Protective Services. Our children, parents and families are being abused, destroyed and in some cases, murdered while the APA maintains its “no policy” policy, which we believe contributes to the problem which consist with the corruption within the system that is supposed to be in the best interest of our children and families. We ask for a conference:

In support of a petition:

In support of the NATP Strategic Plan to Fight Child Psychological Abuse (see the NATP Facebook page)

Peaceful, polite protests also to be held simultaneously at State APA Headquarters and at Psychological Organizations around the world:

Sign/Poster Themes: – “Collusion with Delusion Must Stop” – “Mental Health Must Not Be Complicit in Child Abuse” – “Pathogenic Parenting is Child Abuse”

Continue reading An Important Human Rights Issue