S.P.A.R.C.

Separated Parenting Access & Resource Center
crazy gamesriddles and jokesfunny picturesdeath psychic!mad triviafunny & odd!pregnancy testshape testwin custodyrecipes

Author Topic: This is the week in Iowa!  (Read 7553 times)

MYSONSDAD

  • Sr. Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1730
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
RE: From a Grandmother........
« Reply #20 on: Apr 08, 2004, 06:21:46 PM »
She sent it to just the Mrs., I sent mine to the Governor.

I would like to send it to the Lt. Governor. Maybe I will mention it to her tomorrow. Even thought she should send it to the President.

We are all in this together. I think if everyone stands together and keep the same goals, it will someday change. We have to do it for the kids. They need us.


OzrkChic

  • Guest
RE: This is the week in Iowa!
« Reply #21 on: Apr 08, 2004, 09:32:26 PM »
I'm new to posting here but have been reading for over a year. I have been following this thread with great interest. Is this bill on the internet anywhere that is accessible to the public? I would like to read it and know exactly what it says. My DH has been a victim of the Iowa courts more times than I care to remember. That is another post though.

Thanks,
OzrkChic

Kitty C.

  • Moderator
  • SuperHero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2612
  • Karma: 938
    • View Profile
Here's the bill/file............
« Reply #22 on: Apr 09, 2004, 07:36:49 AM »
http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Cool-ICE/default.asp?Category=billinfo&Service=Billbook&hbill=HF22

Everything that's crossed out is the 'old' version and everything that's underlined is what's been added.  It gives more teeth, even tho it says 'may' instead of 'shall', in that is says 'upon the request of EITHER parent'.

MSD, it is HF22 not HR22, but don't worry about it.  F is for 'File' and R is for 'Resolution'.  Don't ask me what the difference is, LOL!
Handle every stressful situation like a dog........if you can't play with it or eat it, pee on it and walk away.......

IceMountain

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 160
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
RE: The effect on families...
« Reply #23 on: Apr 10, 2004, 12:11:18 AM »
What do you think the effect will be on families where the parents have already divorced and have joint legal custody????

KITTY.... Thanks so much for all the effort you put in to keeping everybody informed about this bill.

Thanks, also, for posting the update to the bill.  I had not seen this before.  I really like the new wording.  It opens more doors and provides for more 'proof' before a joint physical is denied to one parent.  (the previous wording was pretty 'vague' and 'loose')

HAWKEYE.... I saw your post on the Iowa Board.  It's what first brought my attention to this bill.  Thank You!

I, too, would like to be present for the signing of this bill.

HF22!!!  I'm going to write my letter now~~~~>


Hawkeye

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 212
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
RE: The effect on families...
« Reply #24 on: Apr 10, 2004, 07:40:16 AM »
"What do you think the effect will be on families where the parents have already divorced and have joint legal custody?"

Good question and one that will affect me/us. Already have joint legal with my ex-wife, but that only means that we can duke it out in court.

Big whoop. More money in the lawyers pockets.

With HF22, she'll have to prove, and the judge will have to state by clear and convincing evidence, why our son should be denied equal access to both parents.

We went through a trial once, where she tried to change our stipulations but could not show any evidence and the judge stated that in his ruling.

Glad you found my message.... Spread the word!
Call, write or email Governor Vilsack!
Children Need Both Parents
http://www.cnbp.info



antonin

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 185
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
A FEW PROBLEMS WITH THIS BILL
« Reply #25 on: Apr 10, 2004, 08:51:57 AM »
The operative phrase here is “substantial equality,” which does not appear anywhere in the bill language. The terms that are used are “JOINT LEGAL and JOINT PHYSICAL custody (care)” These can mean anything and are not redefined in the bill to mean anything other than what they mean now in family court. Any attorney will tell you “JOINT PHYSICAL CUSTODY (care),” can mean 80/20, 70/30, etc. etc. etc. It is just a term without any specific definition. Before I obtained substantial equality in my parenting time, I had “JOINT PHYSICAL CUSTODY.” My parenting time was 3 weekends per month, a far cry from substantially equal placement, which is what I have now: 50/50.

Also…where is the term “clear and convincing evidence” in the bill?

The bill as written still gives the court the same powers it has now…”may” has to be “shall” or it won’t work. No teeth.
 
I always thought the best language I ever saw in a bill like this was one from Ohio. (They are still struggling trying to get it passed). The entire proposed bill:

http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=125_HB_232

 


 


Hawkeye

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 212
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
RE: A FEW PROBLEMS WITH THIS BILL
« Reply #26 on: Apr 10, 2004, 10:01:38 AM »

Well, it's not perfect, but it's a start.

How did you get substantial equality?

antonin

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 185
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
RE: A FEW PROBLEMS WITH THIS BILL
« Reply #27 on: Apr 10, 2004, 10:32:03 AM »

Here's my story--do not know if I will ever recover before I die. As you can see, it cost me everything I had. Hopefully your bill will prevent such things as follows:

Ex snatched my daughter Sept. 01. Loots house. Takes all possessions. Moved 65 miles away to ex’s father’s. Ex filed ex parte for sole custody and EOW. Child support of 246.00 a week and temp custody to mother.
I filed for custody.
Wife enrolled herself and daughter (6 years old at the time) in a women’s shelter after filing.
Ex claimed I was physically abusive to daughter and herself.
FOC investigator recommended 50/50 placement.
Mother refuses to move back to area where daughter grew up and where I lived and worked. Stipulated agreement gave me 18 months to move 65 miles to within 20 mi of ex’s residence to implement 50/50. I took all bills, including ex’s 64,000.00 student loan, her credit cards (20,000, my loans and credit cards (60,000) , 246.00 a week CS,( for 3 years, child support is calculated as though mother had sole custody, regardless of father’s parenting time with child), 200.00 a week alimony (for 3 years), and paid 665.00 a month for ex’s truck and car insurance. I put house on market April 03. Purchase agreement signed. House deal goes bad in Sept 03. (Buyers do not qualify and I find out 1 day before I am scheduled to move). The choice is between my daughter and a measure of financial stability. I choose my daughter. I move to apt. in child’s area. I begin 50/50 custody Fall 03 and drive 130 mi. RT to work each day. I file bankruptcy. My house is repossessed. I sell house during redemption period. Loose all my equity. I do not have enough to pay off ex’s bills as per decree. After the ex was awarded 2600.00 a month in alimony, CS, etc. etc., I was short way over 2000.00 a month for basic living expenses as in rent, food, and gas. I managed for a while by getting instant loans at those check cashing places and paying them 440.00 a month in interest charges. My take home pay is 5000.00 a month net (5000-2600 to mother=2400-1500 a month joint credit debt=900-700.00 for mother’s student loan payment=-200-1000.00 a month rent=-1200.00-500.00 gas=-1700.00,etc. etc.)
If you examine the details of the above, you can deduce that this financial ruin is a direct result of the mother's actions: using the court system to legally kidnap my daughter and move her 65 miles away and using daughter as a cash cow to enable the mother’s own support. The mother still does not work! You will also see that I paid a great financial price to be with my daughter, but I’d do it again the same way if I had to. My expenses for my daughter are over 1000.00 a month. I am essentially paying child support twice, since CS is calculated as though mother had sole custody and does not account for 50/50. Additionally, I have 500.00 a month gasoline expenses commuting 130 RT to work each day. I will be paying on ex’s student loan (not dischargeable in bankruptcy) until I die and beyond. I am 54 years old. My daughter is 8. My retirement is ruined. My house is gone: it would’ve been paid off in 9 years and I would have had a place to live in my old age. The reason I agreed to this was that I knew I would get the 50/50 if I did. I allowed it to happen because I had a lousy lawyer and could not change because of finances. I thought best to give ex the money, get the 50/50 agreement rather than fight this thing for 5 years and let time slip away. I am 54 years old: my daughter is 8: I will not have the luxury of being around as long as younger parents.  
Since there was not enough money to pay off ex’s debts from the sale of the house as stated in the decree. (I had to sell it fast (before redemption period expired) at 20,000.00 below market value. I had my bankruptcy attorney draw up a document (which she signed) that negated the provision that her debts be paid before the house could be transfered. The document also stated that the house sale funds would be placed in the attorney's escrow account and he would use the money to negotiate payment of her debts with her creditors. I think he will be able to settle with them.

Hawkeye

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 212
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
RE: This is the week in Iowa!
« Reply #28 on: Apr 13, 2004, 07:00:59 AM »

Governor Vilsack should receive HF22 in the next two days. Because he will get the bill while legislators are still in session he has three days to sign or veto the bill. Now is the time more than ever to contact the Governor by phone and e-mails. We got word that the Governor is receiving pressure from all over the country. Be sure to ask family and friends to contact the Governor, ring the phone off of the wall. Always be polite and encouraging.
 
In addition, the Governor signed a bill today that has been under the radar. The bill will require the state to assign a visitation schedule when paternity is established. In the past the state only established child support and the non-custodial parent would have to go to court to get visitation scheduled. Thanks for your support.
 
Sincerely,
 
Mark Griebel
Chairman, CNBP
 
Office of the Governor
State Capitol
Des Moines, Iowa 50319
515-281-5211
Fax 515-281-6611
http://www.governor.state.ia.us/comments/capitol_correspond/index.html
Governor Thomas J. Vilsack writes that "Iowans have traditionally recognized that strong families are essential to ensuring that our children will enjoy a secure future...Iowans intuitively understand that children need to receive the support and guidance of both parents...[and] an emerging set of scientific data supports our belief that a healthy bond between a child and the child's parents has a direct impact on the future success of the child...."

Governor Vilsack continues, "...children with two parents who actively and positively engage in their life by providing financial support, love, guidance and discipline, have a greater chance for success than children who receive an active involvement from only one parent."


MYSONSDAD

  • Sr. Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1730
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
Sent another letter this morning
« Reply #29 on: Apr 13, 2004, 10:36:30 AM »
I know some feel there are problems with this Bill, but it is a postive step in the right direction. Every journey begins with the first step.

Keep us posted on the outcome!

"Children learn what they live"

 

Copyright © SPARC - A Parenting Advocacy Group
Use of this website does not constitute a client/attorney relationship and this site does not provide legal advice.
If you need legal assistance for divorce, child custody, or child support issues, seek advice from a divorce lawyer.