Parenting Initiative Talking Points

A text of the Initiated Measure can be downloaded from the website: http://www.nd.gov/sos/electvote/elections/docs/petition3-2-2006.pdf

  • Although perhaps not perfect, North Dakota’s current custody laws assume that custody best rests with a mother and father who have the best interest of their child at heart.
  • In a divorce or custody situation, parents routinely agree to joint custody or stipulate to one parent having legal or physical custody of the children, and the so-called non-custodial parent negotiates visitation rights. During this process, courts remain only peripherally involved.
  • Right now, courts become involved only in instances when the parents are in conflict over custody arrangements and cannot agree on decisions about the best interest of the child. Then the court steps in to determine how the best interest of the child will be served by using 13 statutory guidelines and prescribing arrangements for custody, visitation, and parental rights and responsibilities.
  • The proposed initiative could do irreparable harm to families in North Dakota. Current North Dakota statutes address the rights of mothers and fathers, yet we must have a manageable process when mothers and fathers are in conflict, and we must do so in the interest of children’s long term welfare.

Legal Implications:

  • An initiated measure may not be changed by legislative action for seven years, unless over turned by 2/3 of the legislature, ultimately leaving any unintended negative consequences on children in place for a very long time.
  • The initiated measure would drastically alter the current child support system. These changes would take North Dakota out of compliance with Federal statutes and North Dakota could become ineligible for TANF funding.
  • Under the “fitness” provision of the measure, parents would have to resort to having the other parent declared unfit in order to escape the 50/50 custody mandate.
  • Under the initiated measure, the court would be required to step in during each instance of dispute between parents or when parenting plans (which are not defined) fail to resolve disputes, for example conflict over making medical or financial decisions for the child. The court would also be required to review and approve any stipulated changes to parenting plans to ensure the child’s best interest. In effect, the courts would be constantly intervening in people’s lives

Fiscal Impact:

  • Under the initiated measure, the current child support system would become obsolete. A new system would have to be designed for determining the amount of child support determined to be “actual cost for providing basic needs” (which is not defined in the measure); the management of payment from one parent to another would eliminate the court’s ability to enforce fiscal parental responsibility without extensive intrusion into the financial status of each parent on a continuing basis. Paying for totally revamping the system and all these intrusions would fall to North Dakota tax payers. The cost would be enormous.
  • North Dakota would probably be out of compliance with federal child support laws; thus counties and the state could be ineligible for federal TANF funding, eliminating or reducing drastically programs for children such as childcare support and education support.

Psychological and Social Impacts:

  • The initiated measure removes focus on the child and creates a system that becomes adult driven. It is a self-described “disgruntled spouse” initiative.
  • Courts would be required to settle a multitude of disputes between parents when they disagree on the best interest of the child. Each parent (with physical and legal custody) would have to agree on such things as medical treatment, mental health treatment, legal waivers for participation in activities, and many other day to day situations or the court could step in.
  • In all contested custody proceedings, the “unfit” standards proven by clear and convincing evidence would create even more hostility between the parents because each may attempt to prove this standard, increasing the probability of child abuse and neglect reports, reports of domestic violence, sexual abuse, and other harm to the child.
  • Now once the court makes a custody determination it remains in effect for two years in most cases. There would be no respite or reprieve for either the child or custodial parent under the new plan because either parent could petition the court on an on-going basis. The potential for harassment is unending.

Produced and Distributed by the Concerned Citizens for Children’s Rights
Robert “Tork” Kilichowski
Secretary/Treasurer
 

Talking Points Presumption of Joint Custody

What the proposed initiative attempt to do:

  • Attempts to establish a presumption of joint custody and re-write domestic violence and family law statutes in North Dakota.

Why the proposed initiative is dangerous:

  • Would place victims of domestic violence and their children in serious danger by requiring a victim of domestic violence to have ongoing contact with the abuser.
  • Could be used to gain tactical advantages in custody and child support negotiations.
  • Jeopardizing the best interest of the child by perpetuating high conflict situations.
  • Could result in inadequate orders of child support.
  • Gives legal rights to parent requesting joint custody but no corresponding requirement that parental responsibilities be met.
  • Addresses the interests of parents and not the interests of children.

This is NOT equal protection under the law.

Produced by:
The Concerned Citizens for Children’s Rights Committee
Robert “Tork” Kilichowski
Secretary- Treasurer