Mother held in contempt and has to pay father's attorney fees. Any of you having visitation problems (that's at least 3 out of 4 fathers) should read this case, In re Marriage of Rideout.

It is a lengthy opinion and describes in a lot of detail all the steps the father had taken regarding his visitation. Do the same in your case.

Recent WA appellate case expounds principle that all children of a father from multiple relationships should be treated equally in claims to his support. Courts should consolidate all support orders on father when considering new or modifications of child support. Every father who is supporting children in his own household as well as paying child support to children from one or more other relationships should read this decision. This spells relief for you guys. It will be interesting to see if this decisions gets reviewed by the state supreme court.

Having read the new law regarding relocation of children I fail to see where this law is of any benefit to fathers. I also fail to see any truth to the claims that this bill does away with the Littlefield and Pape decisions (actually, it mostly codifies these decisions). It also expands the ease of the conditions and circumstances under which the residential parent may move the children. For example: "There is a rebuttable presumption that the intended relocation of the child will be permitted." (Sec. 14). There are many other loopholes which are an obvious boon to the family law lawyers and paralegals but of no good to fathers. This law is nothing for anyone to brag about and I'm glad DADS had nothing to do with it. Personally, I think the NOW gang is having a good chuckle on this one.

The Supreme Court set the stage (9/28/99) for an important ruling on grandparents' rights to see their grandchildren even when parents object - a case that could affect laws in all 50 states.

The case involves Washington state, where the state's highest court ruled that such a law violates parents' ``fundamental right'' to rear their families without governmental interference. All other states have similar laws. See Washington State ruling above.

Greetings from Bob Karls. I have been active in fathers rights since 1979. I have been the Washington State representative for Dads Against Discrimination and DADS America (DADS) since 1987. DADS has a full time office in Seattle. We hold monthly meetings and do public access TV shows on fathers issues. Members can receive low cost counseling in dealing with their custody, visitation, child support, paternity and domestic violence problems. We have attorney referrals for the Seattle area although the counseling stresses pro se representation and guidance.

The State Supreme Court has recently adopted a new rule for attorneys regarding the loss of their lawyer licenses for being behind on child support. Didn't you know they eat their own.

For those of you in mandatory arbitration for support modifications (i.e. Snohomish County), a new case has overturned the "mandatory" part of the rule which required the court to award attorney fees and costs if you appealed the arbitrator's award to a judge and failed to improve on the arbitrator's award before the judge.

If you receive calls from fathers Washington State, or fathers whose domestic relations cases are in Washington State, feel free to pass the this information on how to contact us.

Washington TV
 

DADS TV SHOW - Sunday - Public Access Channel 29/77 - 6:00 - 6:30 pm.

All I need to know as to any candidate is his position on whether to return the Cuban boy, Elian Gonzalez, to his father. I don't care if the candidate is democrat, republican, reform, whatever, - if he is against returning the boy to his father, I don't need to know any more. He won't get my vote.

Considering that those who favor returning the boy to his father are a clearly lopsided majority, you'd think the candidates would point their differences out on this issue. The FATHERHOOD issue should be raised at every opportunity and the positions of the candidates on Elian Gonzalez should be widely publicized.

The most recent "moveaway" case was just published in the advance sheets: In re Marriage of Pape, 139 Wn.2d 694 (Dec., 1999). If you are a non-custodial father faced with a "moveaway" of your children by the mother, you would be doing yourself a favor by reading the Pape decision as well as the previous decision of In re Marriage of Littlefield, 133 Wn.2d 39 (Aug. 1997). These are the two major cases regarding the "parenting plan" laws and "moveaway" cases.

In Kitsap County (not Seattle, but West by 30 miles) covering Bremerton, Silverdale, Port Orchard, and Bangor (the military base) Ch# 12 at 9:00 p.m.