Family Court Predators

Men and boys urgently need an equal voice representing their interests. We ask the government to act now to ensure men and boys receive the support they deserve and need.

Welcome to Leon Koziol.Com

 

untitled The Family Court Turkey: Who Gets That “Award” In Your Case?

Administrator’s Note: This is the first of a three-part series we call the “Thanksgiving Trilogy” or Turkey Trilogy. The entire series was first published on Thanksgiving Day 2016. And now we are featuriung it each day in succession on Black Friday weekend. With all the uncompensated work we have put into our joint reform efforts over the years, we have neither the resources nor the time to make it viral. We leave that to you, our fellow victims, tortured as you must be right now. So kindly pick one, pick them all, and make good therapy of your time by sending them out to the world. Send it to your representative in Congress or state legislature, a commission, good government group, your lawyer, even your parent “adversary.” Maybe you’ll be very happy you did.

By Dr. Leon Koziol

View original post 590 more words

Writ as a parent and victim of retributions by our divorce and family courts

Join Supreme Court Petition for Shared Parenting and Judicial Accountability

Welcome to Leon Koziol.Com

By Dr. Leon R. Koziol of the Parenting Rights Institute

I am proposing an extraordinary writ from the Supreme Court to hear its first ever shared parenting case mandated by the Constitution and proper accountability for the routine violations of basic rights in our nation’s divorce and family courts.

Unlike the standard petitions for writ under Rule 14 of the Supreme Court, I will be filing under Rule 2o. It is a rarely used form of petition “in aid of the court’s jurisdiction.”

In this case I am maintaining that undue obstacles put in the way of parents in our federal and state domestic courts ultimately impair access to our high court contrary to due process and Article III of the Constitution.

I will file for this writ as a parent and victim of retributions by our divorce and family courts but only if a sufficient number join.

You don’t have to be a litigant or victimized parent but you must have incurred some kind of harm from this system to justify your participation.

You can do so at no charge although we rely on donations or purchases by clicking here.

You will join as a separate petitioner and not as a party represented by me. I am not acting as a legal advisor. This is a bold and timely petition seeking greater access for parents before our high court.I will ask that a Special Master be appointed to investigate an epidemic in these courts with hearings held around the country should the Court accept this petition.

I will be publishing a series of posts here at www.leonkoziol.com to explain the content and objectives over the next few weeks.

If a sufficient number of parents or court victims join, I will prepare the petition for viewing. You can retain counsel if you like and a period will be set aside from the time of publication here for you to withdraw your participation in the event you disapprove of any aspect of that completed petition. You can also offer input or modifications but keep in  mind that I have little assistance and resources. My time is better spent here and your time can be ideally applied to viral assistance, recruitment and donations.

The tentative issues follow:

Continue reading Writ as a parent and victim of retributions by our divorce and family courts

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

The top 10 reasons young men need equality too.

EQUALITY 4 MEN
Fathers and Equality - 2015-16

4455793558_b3fecf50e7The equality4men campaign is concerned with the inequalities that impact men and boys of all backgrounds at every stage of life. The years when boys first enter adulthood are the most vulnerable years of most men’s lives. 

The following list of 10 reasons we need equality for young men is drawn from our eBook Equality For Men which you can buy today. 

1. Life Expectancy ~  In England and Wales, boys and young men aged 15 to 24 are two and a half times more likely to die than women and girls of the same age. 

2. Premature Death ~  Compared with women of the same age, young men are four times more likely to die in an accident, four times more likely to kill themselves and three times more likely to be murdered. On average, five young men die prematurely every single day and most of these deaths are avoidable.

3. Murder ~  Young men are three times more likely to be murdered than young women with 3 young men being murdered every week in England & Wales.Violence and Crime linked to fatherlessness - 2015

Continue reading The top 10 reasons young men need equality too.

Men’s Rights Facebook Page Removed

Men’s Rights Facebook Page A Voice For Men Removed On Day Of Annual Conference – Breitbart

fb7The timing for the unpublishing could not be any worse for the group, as they are now unable to publish post-conference articles and summaries of the event. It may have just be a coincidence, but a coordinated mass reporting operation could also have been the cause – so far, no group has come forward to take responsibility for the removal of the page.

After having amassed around 35,000 likes on the social media platform, the page was deleted for having “violated community standards” – it was not revealed what exact regulation was violated, and Elam was adamant that they had done nothing wrong.

Speaking to a crowd at the International Conference on Men’s Issues in the ExCel Centre in London, Paul Elam revealed that the Facebook page for “A Voice For Men,” one of the organizing groups for the event, has been unpublished by the social network on the second day of the conference.

Continue reading Men’s Rights Facebook Page Removed

The Politics of Fatherhood

by Stephen Baskerville, Ph.D.

Fatherhood is rapidly becoming the number one social policy issue in America. President Bill Clinton stated in 1995 that

“the single biggest social problem in our society may be the growing absence of fathers from their children’s homes, because it contributes to so many other social problems.”
~ President Bill Clinton

In 1997, Congress created task forces to promote fatherhood, and in 1998 the governors’ and mayors’ conferences followed. President George W. Bush recently unveiled a $315 million dollar package for responsible fatherhood.” Nonprofit organizations such as the National Fatherhood Initiative were formed in the mid-1990s. Fatherhood was seen as the most serious social problem by almost 80% of respondents to a 1996 Gallup poll (NFI 1996 1 ).

Fatherhood advocates insist that the crisis of fatherless children is “the most destructive trend of our generation” (Blankenhorn 1995 1 ). Virtually every major social pathology has been linked to fatherlessness: violent crime, drug and alcohol abuse, truancy, teen pregnancy, suicide — all correlate more strongly to fatherlessness than to any other single factor. The majority of prisoners, juvenile detention inmates, high school dropouts, pregnant teenagers, adolescent murderers, and rapists all come from fatherless homes (Daniels 1998; NFI 1996). The connection is so strong that controlling for fatherlessness erases the relationships between race and crime and between low income and crime (Kamarck and Galston 1990).

Yet despite its salience in public policy debates and within psychology, sociology, and law, fatherhood has received little attention from political scientists.

This neglect is not a minor omission. Arguably it is what has left the phenomenon unexplained. For despite a decade of attention, little attempt has been made to account for where the fatherhood crisis comes from in the first place. While it doubtless has a number of contributing social and economic causes that stretch back decades, there is evidence that the critical dimensions it has assumed in the last decade proceed at least in part from public policy, and that the problem should be seen less as sociological or psychological and more as political.

Continue reading The Politics of Fatherhood