Since many missed it: The Bar Association hires lobbyists to get Shared Custody law VETOED --> Anyone else think this is a big deal?

DoItLive247 · 2016-03-11T21:43:45+00:00

"There is now zero child support flowing to one parent, and if one parent doesn't use his time, mom's now raising this child without any support from the dad. Who's paying for school trips? Who's paying for school pictures? To low-income families, that hit is hard," she said.

Because it is always Dad /s

You go back to court and have a new order issued to reflect the actual time being exercised. They don't like it now because the playing field will be leveled and a father doesn't have to fight just to get 50/50.

TheRedThrowAwayPill · 2016-03-11T16:43:52+00:00

This is the standard procedure whenever reform of family law is attempted. I'm guessing the Florida state chapter of NOW is also involved, though NOW tends to try and work these things under the radar these days.

Yup. http://www.flnow.org/2016FlBills.pdf

I live in NY and it's the same here every time too. NOW NY and the NY State Family Bar Association get seats in any kind of discussion going on - typically in secret - whenever family law reform comes up. They've actually managed to make the system even more Draconian in the last couple of years.

Rethgil · 2016-03-11T22:17:38+00:00

Someone pointed out to me that shared custody would mean the end of huge divorce payments and alimony meamt to be going towards child care. And therefore drastically reduce the profits law firms make for their female clients who get them.

Now why would The Bar Association possibly have an interest in stopping such law changes....?

SRSLovesGawker · 2016-03-11T16:19:43+00:00

Family law is a racket. We've known it for a while, it shouldn't come as a shock that those who profit from it the most would take whatever steps they can to protect it.

2016-03-11T18:08:29+00:00

If they do not make it fair soon: No man will get married and have children.

mikesteane · 2016-03-12T00:33:02+00:00

It is a major issue not just for the obvious reason that their intention is to continue the gravy train they are riding, but but also because organisations whose function is the application of the law should have NO part in making those laws. It is the same as the need for separating the government from the courts and the established churches from the government.

Tedesche · 2016-03-12T01:10:18+00:00

Seems to me like a bar association should be expected to remain politically neutral as much as possible. Very worrying that the people who decide who can and can't practice law have a political bias that they inject into their professional duties.

lostapwbm · 2016-03-12T03:19:37+00:00

This is a little blast from the past:

ARE divorce lawyers really sleazier than other lawyers?

That, in a nutshell, is the question before a committee of New York lawyers who are trying to decide whether sweeping new ethical rules for divorce lawyers should be extended to all attorneys.

The rules, which are to take effect in November, require divorce lawyers to provide reliable estimates, itemize their bills, and hand all clients copies of a consumers' bill of rights. They prohibit lawyers from demanding non-refundable retainers or from making clients sign over their mortgages to guarantee that they'll pay their legal fees. They also prohibit sex with clients.

That's right. Divorce lawyers had to be told, EXPLICITLY, to not fuck the clients.

By many accounts, more complaints have been filed against divorce lawyers than any other kind. The National Discipline Databank of the American Bar Association, which cautions that its figures are incomplete, said that in 1990, divorce lawyers were punished more often than other lawyers for ethics violations.

That's right. Back in 1990, divorce lawyers, not criminal defense lawyers, not lobbyists, not EVIL securities lawyers, or corporate lawyers, or even ambulance-chasing personal injury lawyers; divorce lawyers were taking more L's from ethics committees than any other group of attorneys.

So, some lawyers say, matrimonial lawyers in particular ought to be banned from sex with clients, just as psychiatrists are.

Note: Lawyers in general are banned from having sex with clients because CONFLICT OF INTEREST (unless you had a sexual relationship prior to the formation of an attorney-client relationship, then it's kosher).

1993:THE NATION; Are Divorce Lawyers Really the Sleaziest?

Like I said, it's old, but if you believe, as I do, that the Family Law Bar gets away with things that would get any other group of lawyers promptly suspended or disbarred, it's good entertainment.

TheDude41 · 2016-03-12T03:26:37+00:00

DougDante · 2016-03-12T11:43:18+00:00

That what happened in Michigan. They also changed the child support formula so that in shared custody situations the low income parent (read:mom) gets child support from the high income parent (read:dad), and it's regularly discarded when the outcome is unjust (read:when mom must pay dad)

DaneWhitman · 2016-03-11T16:12:33+00:00

This pretty shameless on the Florida Bar's part. We can't have a fairer, more streamlined divorce process; that would be bad for business.

Greg_W_Allan · 2016-03-11T23:15:23+00:00

My first act upon becoming emperor will be the execution of all lawyers.

Title	Since many missed it: The Bar Association hires lobbyists to get Shared Custody law VETOED --> Anyone else think this is a big deal?
Author	eaton80
Upvotes	78
Comments	15
Date	March 11, 2016 4:00 PM UTC (10 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/49zdm1/since_many_missed_it_the_bar_association_hires/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/since-many-missed-it-the-bar-association-hires.954203 https://theredarchive.com/post/954203

Comments