Walsh County adopts shared-parenting measure, for now
December 4, 2012 at 2:05 pm in Grand Forks Herald
County commissioners voted Tuesday to approve an ordinance on parental custody rights, but left it to the courts to decide if they had the authority to do so. Continue Reading
My goodness, insult the 66% and stay out of court. Clearly, we need a constitutional amendment requiring an I.Q. test to run for county commission. Rule number one in governing: Stay out of court!!!! Only in North Dakota. Really, people, Only in North Dakota (or MAYBE Mississippi) could this possibly happen. #1 state in governing….How funny is that?!?!!!
Hot debate. What do you think?
16 
14
This Shared parenting ordinance could help the save the county some money.
Instead of two parties battling over custody and/or visitation, the shared parenting would help to lay out the parenting role of the father and mother.
I assume this is why the “establishment” consisting of the states attorney, private practice attorneys, social services, etc,
do not want this.
How can you justify your job, funding and such, when your workload from child custody is laid out in black and white from Shared Parenting versus a mess that takes time and money to sort out?
I think there are certain people that do not want this to go through, even if it was voted in. I would be certain that this will be turned into a mess, so other counties in North Dakota will be relunctant to adopt it.
How do attorney’s make money? I would assume divorces and custody battles would top the list, followed by DUI’s, etc.. Eliminate the mess that child custody is and the money will stop flowing.
Hot debate. What do you think?
15 
20
No matter what “roles” are set by the court some parents will always go against those roles simply because “no one is going to tell me how to raise my children” or “no one knows what’s best for my children except for me. . .not even the other parent”.
Like or Dislike:
7 
7
Robert, there is no evidence that shared parenting laws would decrease litigation. I suspect that it would simply shift when and why. Disagreements over activities and daily schedules. Complaints that the other parent, while successfully avoiding paying any child support, isn’t really participating in “shared custody”. In my opinion this initiative would not exist if there were not a child support obligation imposed on non-custodial parents. While there are genuine arguments regarding the appropriateness of child support, I’d guess there would be significantly less custody battles and litigation if a non-custodial parent didn’t have to pay child support. If you are a good parent who does not have custody it is the exception, not the rule, that the custodial parent restricts your contact with a child. If this or a similar initiative is successful my prediction is that there would be virtually no change in the amount of “shared-parenting”, just a lot of people who previously paid child support very happy that they have no support obligation and no increase in responsibility. Most parents care about their children and want what is best; their fights are about money either directly or indirectly.
Like or Dislike:
5 
8
so ASSUMING that noncustodial parents are trying to get out of child support.. and have more time with their kids. But custodial parents fight against shared parenting for what reasons? Other than they will lose money.. If two people live in the same town and both parents are “fit”, why would this be wrong? If it does come down to money, the custodial will lose a little, the noncustodial’s support payments will go down, but the child will be spending more time with NC, so they will have to spend more money to care for child. So in essence the child has the same amount of money being spent on them, and isnt child support FOR THE CHILD???
Like or Dislike:
7 
3
Robert: I’m not arguing the merits of shared parenting. My complaint is with units of government, starting with the ND Legislature, who ignore legal advice, spend the court’s time and change nothing. Listen to your doctor. Listen to your attorney. Stay out of court.
Like or Dislike:
11 
9
Shared Parenting would eliminate the stigma of children living with one custodial parent. Why is it that after a divorce, if one parent wants more time they have to prove they are “fit”? Does one parent become “unfit” after a divorce? I do not understand that logic. If both parties are good parents and law abiding citizens why is one basically chosen over the other? I could understand if one parent is truly a harm to their children but not all cases are so.
I am proud of all you have accomplished Mitch! This is one step closer to people really understanding how truly twisted the family law system is! OUR KIDS DESERVE TO HAVE BOTH PARENTS! NOT WEEKEND VISITORS!
Hot debate. What do you think?
22 
8
Children deserve to have 2 parents who are supportive, encouraging, fostering their abilities and potential, etc…not one parent who is all of those and another who is verbally and emotionally abusive, controlling, uses intimidation to control, etc. towards they and the other parent. Some parents are very good at hiding their abusive nature, or rather deceiving others to believe the parent claiming such is out of their mind. This is why children need to be given a voice and choice in this matter. What they say and how they respond when with each parent speaks volumes.
Like or Dislike:
11 
3
So basically you think that the child should say? Because a small child can do that…
Truth is – The current family court system is flawed. There NEEDS to be change. End of Story.
Like or Dislike:
13 
3
There are ways to determine whether or not a child should have to live with both parents for an equal amount of time even if they are too young to talk. Even the youngest of children respond to adults in ways that can indicate that something is not right.
Like or Dislike:
8 
3
No 2 cases are ever the same. This should not or ever be considered a black and white or cut and dried issue. Every case has its own particulars and judges should be able to hear all the facts and make decisions for each child’s needs…not what a parent thinks they are entitled to.
Like or Dislike:
10 
6
An actual attempt to give both parents equal rights to raise their children. This may help fathers keep their rights and parent their children instead of being trampled on by the courts having to prove they are a fit parent. Rather requiring the court to prove a parent is unfit before restricting their relationship with their children.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
23 
7
What about the rights of children to grow up in a positive environment?
I have read and heard so much about the rights of parents, but not much about the rights of children.
And, I keep reading and hearing “good, now maybe dads can have equal rights”. There are actually moms out there who are in the same situation. Why not call this “equal rights for dads” because that’s what it seems like everyone is leaning towards.
Like or Dislike:
4 
10
There are VERY few mothers out there, unless they have basically been proven to be crack addicts that don’t get custody of their children in the states of ND and MN. Men have ALWAYS taken a back seat even if THEY were the more supportive parent. I know, I have personal experience and immediate family members who have suffered at the hands of the courts because one spouse was able to get a ‘better’ attorney. Men are viewed no better than an ATM machine.
I am sorry if you were in a bad situation and had an abusive spouse, but there are a LOT of great dads out there who simply could no longer live with their gold digging, manipulative, toxic female counter parts. Women don’t immediately deserve custody because they bore the child for 9 months. I hope that these changes are sweeping and far reaching.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
21 
3
You are correct there are mothers in the same situation. But it is about 50 fathers for 1 mother in the situation.
Like or Dislike:
10 
1
This is NOT about parents so we need to stop looking at “equal rights for parents”. Instead we should be focusing on the ones who this is really about – children. We cannot determine who the best parent is or is not, but common sense says that a positive environment is the best one. While parents do influence the choices children make, even in their adult years, it is the environment in which they are forced to live that will determine how they end up.
This thing called “shared parenting” will not work in many situations because the adults in children’s lives don’t always agree on things and don’t have the children’s best interest in mind. Also, what happens in situations in which one parent uses intimidation to control the children and other parent? What happens in situations in which one parent is verbally and emotionally abusive towards and about the other parent to and in front of the children? What happens in situations in which one parent makes demeaning statments to the children about themselves and calls them names? What happens in situations in which children are never allowed to share their feelings because a parent doesn’t believe they have the right to speak and often tells them to “shut the ____ up”? You cannot tell me that having “equal time” with such a parent as they do with a parent who is supportive, encouraging, etc. is good for those who this is really about – the children.
People have said time and time again that children are “resilient”. While some children are resilient, many are not. We need to look at what is best for them instead of worry about giving parents “equal time, authority, etc.”.
I’ve heard so much about “equal rights for parents” but I have yet to hear about the rights of those who really matter – children. This tells me that children are not going to be given a choice or a voice in the matter and many will be forced to live in environments that will “sabotage” their potential to grow up to be great leaders and adults who make wise decisions.
The ones who really know how their parents are are children. They know how each treats both them and the other parent. They are the ones who often hear and are told negative things about one parent by the other. They are the ones who really know who the best parent is to raise them. They are the ones who really know what a favorable environment is in which they should live. No, they cannot predict the outcome of living in a positive our negative environment, but they know how they feel in both types of environments.
Stop listening to parents who are whining about “equal rights” and start listen to the ones who this is really about who should have a choice and voice in the matter – CHILDREN.
Like or Dislike:
10 
17
This is where there would be hearing to determine if both parents are fit under the clear and convincing evidence standards. If one parent is abusive to the other and can prove such abuse then judges would have the say in how much time that parent would get.
Have you read any of the studies involving divorced children and how much they need to have both parents? The statistics are staggering. Before you shut the book on this issue I would urge you to read into that. I agree that not all people “deserve” equal parenting time, as some people are just not good parents. However, there are alot of noncustodial parents that are basically deemed “bad parents” because they got divorced.. If you were told you could only see your children every other weekend (52 days a year) how would you feel? How do you think your children would feel?
Shared Parenting IS about the children.
Like or Dislike:
16 
3
I agree that children need both a male and female role model in their lives. . .preferrably their parents. However, if one parent (whether mom or dad) is very negative, unsupportive, critical, intimidating, controlling, etc., that is not a healthy environment in which children should live. It can be very damaging to a child if they have to live in such an environment even though they would have both parents in their lives.
Like or Dislike:
6 
9
This LAW does not STOP the court from making that determination based on EVIDENCE. It stops them from making it an assumption that one parent is better than the other WITHOUT evidence which is what happens now.
Like or Dislike:
16 
2
First of all, this has to end up in court. Walsh Co. voters passed it overwelmingly, so the commissioners really don’t have much of a choice but to enact it. And, it stands in direct conflict with state law, so there is really no other means of addressing the issue except in court.
Having said that, I stand completely opposed to the shared parenting mandate. First, what this law in fact does, is mandate joint physical custody. 50% time for each parent, cookie cutter / one size fits all mentality. Oh wait…. unless one parent is unfit. What this will then do, is create and avalanche of divorce cases where each parent will try to prove the other unfit. How will that affect a kid who loves both parents but watches them try and prove each other unfit to parent.
Secondly, think of what joint physical custody will mean to a child. Mom lives here, dad lives 100 miles away. Finding daycare. Anybody who has raised kids knows that finding decent daycare is already a nightmare. Add to that trying to find a daycare provider who will watch the kids for six months, then not have them, then take them back in six months later. Ya, right! Later on in life, after school starts, the child will forced into attending one semester of school in one district and one semester in another. Imagine the complications. Two curriculums to try and coordinate between schools. Imagine the extracurricular issues. Starting a sports season on one team, finishing on another.
This list goes on and on. In short, divorces are tough for kids no matter what. But, mandating joint physical custody isn’t going to make that better, it is going to make that worse.
Like or Dislike:
15 
7
I agree wholeheartedly. It cannot be good or healthy for children to have to adjust to different schools and daycare facilities so much. Going back and forth between communities like this is not good. Children who are forced into this situation will constantly have to try to adjust and re-adjust. It can have as negative an impact as having to live in a negative environment.
Like or Dislike:
11 
5
BECAUSE IT SHOULD BE ABOUT WHAT’S BEST FOR THE KIDS…From experience…(one parent takes the child to the other, and the other returns the child back to the custodial home)… with a child starting at the age of 6 having to travel 1 1/2 hrs one way (3 rnd trp for each parent) every other weekend and every other holiday… often missing out on team sports, kids parties, weekend events at school, etc…..From this own child’s mouth…”Why do kids have to do all the traveling and go back and forth?” “The grown-ups should have to instead.” “If my other parent wants to see me they should COME TO SEE ME, INSTEAD OF ME GOING TO SEE THEM.” “I want to sleep in my own bed, and have time to play with my friends and my stuff.” It was exhausting and frustrating for everyone…not a good choice decided by the court. One parent finally got full custody…the other parent makes arrangements for visits and/or events, child also spends some prearranged vacation time with the other parent…child much happier. Other parent also getting to know child’s friends and life during visits. So far so good…it’s better for all.
Like or Dislike:
4 
6
Thanks to citori and GF Resident, I don’t feel so alone on this issue.
If divorced or separated parents live in the same school district, I can see how this could work for the child to develop in a positive manner. Do I think children need both their father and mother to be in their life? Absolutely! But with various individuals’ occupations and lifestyles, I don’t see how this can ever be 50/50. I feel this really needs to be a case-by-case decision. What happened to the Norberg family in Fargo should not happen to anybody, which is the result of one parent trying to accuse the other of being unfit. Unfortunately, I can definitely see this sort of thing happening again if the Supreme Court upholds this decision.
Like or Dislike:
7 
3
So it is better to just assume the father is not a good parent? That is what often happens now. I have seen over and over alcoholic drug addicted mothers awarded children in these battles because the father has to prove himself fit rather than others proving him unfit.
Like or Dislike:
11 
4
WC Res….I agree. In most homes where children are living with both parents there is not 50/50 time spent with the kids for many reasons of life.
What’s important to the kids after divorce or a separation is that they see both parents. Assuming it’s a safe situation for the kids. The kids will rarely keep track if things are 50/50.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1
This is another indictment against the referral system. Leave laws to the lawmakers. Heck, the ND legislature already passes enough unconstitutional laws without the help of the voters. North Dakotans seem to love the referral system. I just don’t get it.
Like or Dislike:
3 
6
For some issues, it is better for the citizens to use the referral system to pass laws.
While the Legislative System is there, we know how that can work out. Lobbyists are working 24/7 during the legislative session to get legislators to vote for their interests.
In this country, we have the oil cartel, insurance cartel, banking cartel, medical cartel, lawyer cartel and many other special interest groups that are trying to get legislation for their $elf intere$t.
Sometimes, the citizens have to tell the legislature that “enough is enough” and use the referral system.
If you do not believe me, just wait and see what the oil cartel will try to get from this legislative session!
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
I disagree, Robert. The only referral I think had any merit was the smoking ban and the only reason it needed to be referred is because Bismarck didn’t have the sense to pass it. For the most part, it’s bad government. It’s interesting that you don’t mention donations from the Nat. Education Assn, United Auto Workers, Carpenter’s Union, Teamsters, AFL-CIO, Plumbers and Pipefitters Union or the American Fed. Of Teachers(all in the top 20 in donations). When these groups donate, it’s to promote like-thinking candidates, but when Republican campaigns receive donations, your side brings them to court. It really gives you away!
Like or Dislike:
5 
2
While I do not have any calibrated eyeballs, what I saw during the statewide initiated measure on Shared Parenting, was that certain special interest groups opposed Shared Parenting.
This included the lawyers, social services, courts, etc.
As for the unions, they are a special interest group. Not a very powerful special interest group in North Dakota though.
The Republicans in Bismarck caters to the corporations. The Democrats cater to the labor groups. Who has the majority in the Legislature? Republicans. North Dakota is a “Right to Starve” State. That proves the unions are not a powerful force in ND. Corporations (businesses) have the power.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
Haven’t seen alot of starving people in North Dakota….. but come to think of it I have seen alot of fat people.
Like or Dislike:
4 
2
There’s no insurance cartel or banking cartel!?! There’s no lawyer cartel!?! How can I debate such drivel? What is a “social service special interest group” or a “court specia interest group?” Glen: help me out, here. Robert is fighting demons that don’t exist!! Should I just ignore or engage?
Like or Dislike:
2 
2
No one could change Don Quixote’s mind either.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2
There sure are a lot of “dislikes” in response to posts that discuss a child’s right to live in a positive environment. It makes me wonder if people don’t realize the implications on children who have to live in negative environments. The effects are not just short-term people. . .they are long-term as well, even into adulthood. Before children are placed in an environment, those making such a decision must consider both the short- and long-term effects. An environment in which a person exists can change who that person is and has the potential to be and do when they are adults. An environment effects everything. . .mental health, emotional health, physical health, academics, ability and desire to thrive, and change a child from a social individual to a recluse. In many situations, one parent has created a positive environment for children to grow up in while the other has not. No, this does not mean the children and the latter parent should not spend time together, but children should not be forced to live in such an unhealthy environment (a negative environment IS and unhealthy one).
Like or Dislike:
1 
2
But all of your responses are implicating that the noncustodial parent is a bad parent..
Again I would like to point out that there are an abundance of studies that prove that kids NEED both parents and if parents can put their PERSONAL issues with the other aside, their children WILL benefit.
http://www.sharedparentingworks.org – Has plenty of resources for someone in opposition to look through and hopefully come to understand the ramifications of fatherless children/families.
For Instance:
“Fatherless children are at a dramatically greater risk of drug and alcohol abuse, mental illness, suicide, poor educational performance, teen pregnancy, and criminality.” Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics, Survey on Child Health, Washington, DC, 1993.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
I think what GF Resident is saying, is advocating what is best for the children…not putting blame on a parent. There are many MEN that ARE single father’s and custodial parent. In some cases ‘the other parent’ is often not acting responsibly and or has issues the kids don’t need to be exposed to. Again, What’s best for the kids?
The Courts are the ones that need to do a better job on assessing the situation for the children before decisions are made on what the parents are often forced to have to accommodate. What works for some will not work for all.
Kids don’t judge either parent…they love both of them…no matter what. Judgement and attitude come from the parents, and should be their problem, yet often transfers to the kids.
Many courts unknowingly put the children in a ping-pong ball situation. It’s frustrating and exhausting for them…they have NO normal.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Oh, I agree that there is no normal. However, why is the “norm” always leaving one parent begging for more time? Shouldnt people be given the chance to be the best parents they can be and to have equal access to their children? Or should people stay in terrible marriages just so they can spend more than 48 hours in 14 days with their kids? The system in place now of awarding “primary residential responsibility” in essence creates a one sided situation that can almost never be flipped back over. Why is one parent “almost” deemed unfit in divorces? And has to prove themselves “fit enough” to have more custody? Whatever the familiy situation is… the current system is flawed and creates fractured families worse than the divorce its self…
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
I agree the current system is flawed. The courts fail all involved most of the time.
To be realistic, in many cases, there was probably not equal parenting going on before a divorce. What is best for the kids? The sad part of divorce with kids involved is the parents are divorcing each other…not their kids. This is the most excruciating part of divorce for parents. For the kids to live more normal, often one of the parents has to deal with the separation from their kids and try and adjust to spending less time with them.
Talk to kids going through this. They don’t care or look at it as equal time spent with each parent. They care about the kind of time spent with them, or the quality of the time spent, just like before the divorce.
One child told me that when they went to the other parents home, they didn’t see much of the parent while there because the parent was working then out doing something else. The child would rather have an afternoon of almost undivided attention, than a weekend or week of ‘fly-by’s', so to speak.
The thing that is becoming more normal for most kids is fractured families, blended families, one parent families…the kids don’t judge each other or each other’s families because everyone’s in the same boat. To the kids, their’s or their friend’s family situation is not an issue…unless it’s being made so, usually by a grown-up.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
Actually, I have neither said nor implied that all non-custodial parents are “unfit” or “bad” parents. There are both custodial and non-custodial parents who haven’t created the most healthy or positive of environments in which their children should be allowed to live. I just think that too many times children end up in negative environments whether or not it is the best thing for them and whether or not they want to be in that type of environment and knowing what both short- and long-term implications are. I am an adult who is very concerned for children.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
So how do we determine which parent created this home you speak of? If it is infact the noncustodial’s home, how does that person prove they are better than the other? A lengthy and expensive battle in the courts is how, and even then, the judge may say “the child has been in that home for years, they will stay there.” Thus shuting the book on the person who MAY have the better home.
I am also concerned for the children. However, this system is SO BIAS that it is hard for good noncustodial parents to get a fair shot. The point of shared parenting is to allow children equal access to their parents. What if both places are a safe, secure and nuturing enviornment? One parent will still be left out and the child will be left without the positives from that home.
I still think there are far to many questions that are left unanswered and far to many good parents left in the dust by the current system.
If these parents were both concidered good parents while they were married, shouldnt they be given the same treatment after a divorce?
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
And that placement happens all the time in ND because the child is automaticly placed with the mother with no evaluation of her parenting. Because it is assumed the father is a bad parent.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
This issue of Shared Parenting will never go away. With so many children involved in custody disputes (divorce, out of wedlock births, etc.) something needs to be done.
The legislature can look the other way, but eventually the citizens will act. Too many people (parents, grandparents, etc.) are sick of the system and want to see a fair system of child custody.
Like or Dislike:
5 
1