subject: No-fault Divorce Punishes Fathers Without Due Process And Without A Finding Of Unfitness [print this page] No-fault divorce sets up a legal tyranny against a father because it assigns punishment to him and rewards the mother without allowing him the due process required to protect his rights. Paternity suits do much the same. Here's how and why it happens...
Before no-fault divorce was established, a person seeking divorce (the complainant) had to demonstrate cause on the part of his or her spouse that would justified a breaking of the marriage contract before the court would dissolve the marriage, divide family assets, allocate custody of children and destroy the two-parent structure essential for children. Without a cause, the state was limited in its actions and intrusion into the private affairs of the family.
But under no-fault divorce, that state has claimed unprecedented authority and access into the affairs of family which was previously considered sacrosanct - i.e. off-limits to government. It completely usurps the defendant's constitutional rights including his right to due (a fair) process.
Now, no regard is given to the constitutional right of due process for either party which secures the right of an individual to be heard when issues of life, liberty, or property - and his children - are at stake all of which is paramount in divorce and paternity suits.
Constitutionally, no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, property, or any right granted him by statue unless the matter involved is first adjudicated or ruled against him at trial. This solemn rule is completely ignored.
*Fathers face all punishment and deprivations of rights and children with no protective due process:
For the most important contractual obligation in society, i.e. marriage, no-fault divorce allows the plaintiff mother to break her contractual obligation without the right of due process being given to the father. His life can be ruined, his liberty restrained in countless ways, and his children and property taken away by the courts. His children will suffer the loss of him and his legacy. He's deprived of the right to his family and property.
The family court never proves unfitness much less any fault in a father yet deprives him of physical custody of his children and perhaps allows him shared legal custody whose right is often deny to him at the whim of the mother.
Beyond depriving him of his parental rights to his children, the court orders him to make weekly payments to the mother for up to 22 years in some states. These payments approach and often exceed 33% of his gross income, but can be used for whatever the mother chooses. Nevertheless, they're euphemistically called 'child support' payments for feminism's political correct purposes. They almost ensure his impoverishment but are extorted from him through threat of loss of his driver's license, his state workers licenses, and immediate jailing without a jury trial under contempt charges for not paying it all.
*Some constitutional due process violations associated with no-fault divorce:
Historically, using a court to complain for rewards from another without proving a wrong done by him has never been an acceptable complaint in any court. It's against the maxims of law.
But the family court process fosters such pleadings under no-fault divorce and unjustly rewards complainants - most often mothers - while maliciously punishing defendants - most often fathers - who are never proven to have done harm. Here are some due process violations that family court processes rests upon:
1. A mother wishes to break the marriage contract at her whim citing irreconcilable differences. But she will ask the court for benefits granted at the expense of the father. The violation is that no one has a right to approach the court to request benefits from someone without proving a harm done by him. Also benefits extracted should reflect a balanced or proportional remedy of the harm done.
2. The father is effectively deprived of his right to argue that he has committed no criminal act which would warrant benefits to be taken from him. Nor is he allowed to argue that an unconstitutional act is taking place against him. He's forced to argue not that he's a fit parent but only that he's the better parent with no objective standards prescribed by law. This effectively violates his right to be heard and defend himself when his rights are at stake.
3. The punishment of denying him his parental rights and exacting almost endless payments from him without proving any wrong-doing on his part and which were once reserved only for proved criminally negligent acts of a father is a constitutional violation - essentially establishing an unlawful peonage and slavery of him.
The no-fault court process follows the same procedure when a paternity suit is filed absent a divorce. The mother is rewarded while the father's rights are denied and he is punished for no proven - or even alleged- wrong doing.
Though the violations can go either way according to the perverted family court process, feminists' influence and complicity in maintaining the abuse of women excuse and the best interest of the child excuse assure women-favored family court outcomes.
