Subject: February Central-Ohio FACE Newsletter, et. al.

From: [email-masked] (aaron.l.hoffmeyer)
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1993 06:32:51 GMT

The Central-Ohio Fathers And Children for Equality (FACE) February Newsletter

This is my 13th Newsletter.  I hope I don't break a nail or something
like that.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Comparatively few fathers are committed to their children in the way
that most women are. When men feel guilty, it is more often as husbands
who do not do enough to help their wives than as fathers who do not do
enough with their children."
	-Penelope Leach, Psychologist

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Children have the Right to have the issue of custody truly and honestly
decided without sexual prejudice or bias (permitting a continued
parent-child relationship through joint custody, equal to that prior
to divorce) with the best interest of the child and BOTH parents as the
only consideration.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Children have the Right to know, and be able to visit with
grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins and other relatives on both sides
of the family so that a heritage may be conveyed.

========================================================================

Contents

Shadows of a Dad

	- post-divorce fathers don't feel so good....

Dad Did It

	- it seems the angst of many feminists is related to the
	  relationships, er, uh, check that, *lack of* relationships
	  they had with their fathers.  I've been sayin' it for months
	  and so have many others, when children, both boys and girls,
	  miss out on having a relationship with their fathers, they
	  suffer.  Boys turn out hypermasculine and are much more
	  likely to fail academically, be violent, and end up in
	  prison.  70% of juvenile offenders are products of
	  single-parent homes, virtually all of them raised by
	  mothers.  Girls tend to not be empathetic with men and are
	  also more likely to end up in trouble.

Children Deserve Access to Both Parents

	- an article from Kentucky, a state which awards primary
	  custody, usually sole custody, to women in 98% of all
	  divorces involving children.

Refusal to Visit

	- a court rules that a child's refusal to visit dad does not
	  warrant a declaration of emancipation.  On a related note,
	  the new domestic relations judge here in Franklin County Ohio
	  verbally ordered a 17-year-old girl to go on her scheduled
	  visits with her father or the judge would throw her in jail
	  for contempt (probably an idle threat, but it might do the
	  job....).  In the local case the 17-year-old girl, of course,
	  was receiving child support, but didn't want to see her dad.
	  The judge basically said, "B***s***!  You're going to see
	  your dad."  What a great country!

Ex-girlfriend Wins Housekeeping Pay

	- In a legal precedence establishing case that could have
	  far-reaching consequences, a jury has ordered a man to pay
	  for housekeeping to a former girlfriend/roommate.  An
	  appellate court agreed.  I think I'll sue my old college
	  roommates because I always got stuck doing the dishes.  What
	  do you think?

Statute of Limitations

	- child support is not covered by the statute of limitations, this
          Maine court ruled.

Child Support Order Shocks Mom

	- at first when I read this, I was shocked too.  How could a
	  court order a non-custodial parent making less than $10k per
	  year to pay $300 per month in child support to a custodial
	  parent making $53k?  But then I read on ... the $300 per
	  month is, in effect, deducted from the alimony payments this
	  non-custodial mother receives.  What a tangled web.  The net
	  is that this custodial father is paying this non-custodial
	  mother.

Just the Facts....

	- some compelling and telling facts.

We're Number 1

	- ditto.

Children Without Support Often end up in Poverty

	- a report from two national groups that asserts that 75% of
	  children entitled to child support don't receive it.  Oh,
	  based on a survey of 300 of their members.

Poverty Awaits Unsupported Kids:  Rebuttal

	- a rebuttal to the above article written by David K. Garrod, Ph.D.

Income Imputed for Second Job

	- another ruling....  Second job income can be imputed,
	  especially if you are a teacher or if you normally work more
	  than one job.

Paternity Cases Given a Kick in Pants with New, Speedier Process

	- an update on the new paternity system employed in Ohio, which
	  is very similar to laws and procedures adopted in other
	  states (it was all the rage at the last national governors'
	  conference).  It seems to be improving the paternity case
	  bottleneck, but the underlying assumption is that these evil
	  men aren't acknowledging paternity to get out of child
	  support.  It is interesting that the state is compelled to
	  pay for what used to be the mother's expenses in securing
	  child support from a father of children whom they did not
	  marry, but no state that I know of has adopted legislation
	  that would secure the visitation rights of the father to such
	  a child.  If he wants those rights, he must go to court and
	  fight for them himself -- with his own money.

Cast Asunder -- at War over Ben Schulman

	- the battles that arise when one divorced parent decides to
	  move -- or not.

Britain Opens First Battered Men's Refuge

	- finally, a nation besides Denmark has acknowledged that men
	  can be victims of domestic violence by opening a shelter for
	  battered men.

========================================================================

Shadows of a Dad 
By Julie Bonnin

One man say he feels like an inconvenience, a visitor to his own
children. Another describes himself as a father stripped of his
identity.

And for many of the other participants in a University of Texas at
Austin study of divorced men who do not have primary custody of their
children, a near constant anger broils beneath the surface of their
lives.

"I can't even look at a little girl about the same age as my little
girl without thinking about her and feeling the stress," said one.

"It's an anger that you have to suppress," he continued. "It's a
constant. Not a day goes by that you don't, two or three times during
the day, suppress those feelings, which can't be healthy for you."

The UT sociologists behind the study, Debra Umberson and Christine
Williams, came up with much the same conclusion after interviewing 45
Austin men and analyzing a national sample of nearly 1,000
non-custodial fathers: Divorced fathers who don't live with their kids
exhibit high levels of poor mental health, which may be linked to their
tendency to withdraw from and repress feelings about their children.

The revelation is worth noting, and not simply because of the number of
men whose lives are affected. (Roughly one-half of all the fathers in
the United States will become non-custodial parents, the researchers
say.)

If some non-custodial fathers work hard to avoid thoughts and emotions
concerning their children, the behavior eventually may lead them to not
pay child support or visit their children.

"Repressing their feelings doesn't help women or children," Umberson
says.

The more a father remains in contact, the greater he's likely to pay
child support.

And, the researchers say, a host of barriers work to prevent even the
best-intentioned of non-custodial fathers from having positive and
sustained involvement with their kids: time, distance, financial
constraints, bias in the legal system, a lack of support networks and
the demands of new relationships.

The two researchers (who are both divorced, but not parents), say they
were drawn to the project because no one else was.

Sociologists looking at the issue of divorce traditionally have focused
on women and children, who have been shown to take the hardest economic
hit when a family splits. But until now, researchers have failed to
examine how divorced fathers are affected, say Williams and Umberson,
who hope to publish a book based on the study.

The little that is known provides a damning profile of "deadbeat
dads" who dodge child support payments and shun their sons and
daughters.

More than half of all men who are court-ordered to pay child support
fail to do so, according to U.S. Census Bureau statistics; 43 percent
of divorced fathers rarely or never visit their children, according to
a study done in 1987.

[Comment: This statistic is probably derived from one quoted by
Newsweek several months ago. This factoid lumps together fathers who
have NO support orders with all fathers who have ever been behind on
child support and all fathers refusing to pay ordered support.
Newsweek's statistics have been misquoted at length. This is just
another instance. The Newsweek information and the statement above are
NOT correct--the above statement is refuted later in this article and
totally debunked in another article in this issue.]

In interview after interview, the UT researchers found that to be
untrue.

"The stereotype is that men aren't involved in a parenting role,
especially after divorce," Williams says. "A lot of people assume that
parenting doesn't matter to men after divorce."

It took the researchers more than a year to find 45 men who would agree
to sit down and talk about their relationships with their children
under a condition of anonymity and a $25 payment for their time.

The sociologists began their research by sifting through personal
contacts.

But if the sample is not scientifically representative, it does present
intimate snapshots of the post-divorce reality that greeted the diverse
sampling of non-custodial fathers. Participants included laborers,
university professors, salesmen, an astronomer and a city
administrator with income levels ranging from $5,000 to $80,000.

Again and again, the researchers found men repressing the emotions that
arose in the wake of divorce. Frequently, the most vivid feeling was of
trying to keep things from spinning out of control.

"There were so many men who would say `I almost just didn't come (to
the interview), because I knew all these feelings would resurface,'"
Williams says.

"We teach young boys not to cry, not to feel when they're distressed.
So what's the solution? To run away, to make yourself scarce?"

Another way to avoid the pain is to remarry; other studies have shown
that 83 percent of divorced men remarry--most within three years--after a
breakup.

Divorced men have been shown to be more prone to suicide, accidental
death and to substance abuse. Fathers who live apart from their
children are more likely to engage in risky behavior than those living
with kids.

Exacerbating the problems of non-custodial fathers are negative
characterizations they say plaque them.

"The system assumes that the woman is fair-minded, relatively the sane
individual I think," said one man. "They assume that I'm the drunken,
pickup-driving, beer-can-littering, child-abusing wife-beater."

"The point," says Bob Curry of Texas Fathers for Equal Rights, "is not
that the situation is totally backward, because there are men like
that. But you read the newspapers and women are always the victims and
men are the perpetrators. (As a non-custodial father) you don't have
anything to say about where your children go to school, what doctors
they see, what sports they play, but you have to have a smile on your
face, pretend to everyone at home, at work and at church that
everything's OK.  Because if you don't meet your responsibilities,
you're just another uncaring, unfeeling father."

Curry's group disputes the veracity of U.S. Census Bureau statistics
the UT sociologists cite which estimate the number of non-paying,
non-custodial fathers. Primary among their complaints is that the
census study questioned only women and didn't take into account the
tendency for survey respondents to under-report their income. They cite
a 1988 survey done by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
and other studies, that have found much higher rates of compliance for
child-support payments.

One thing the researchers and men's groups agree on; State and federal
government leaders and those in the judicial system need to address
claims of bias against men when it comes to custody disputes, and the
media needs to provide more positive role models and portrayals of
non-custodial fathers.

"These men face enormous barriers to maintaining relationships with
their children--the state should not constitute an additional one,"
the researchers write.

And, says Umberson: "If divorce rates are going to stay as high as they
are, we need some kind of positive image of what it means to be a
father who doesn't live with the kids."

But the needs of these men range far beyond legal empowerment or
efforts to stamp out negative stereotypes, the researchers say.

Several fathers who were interviewed, Williams says, "didn't know how
to be with their kids; they didn't know if they should discipline them
or be friends with them. They're really just kind of thrown into it.
For some of them, (court-ordered visitation) is the first time they
were ever alone with their kids."

A few respondents sounded a note of optimism about their new role--"Now
it's really cool because I have the whole weekend with them," said one
father. "I get them to bed, I get them up and get them dressed. We've
really gotten very close since the divorce."

But others told about ex-wives, girlfriends or family who pressured
them to cut off ties with their children--unsuccessfully.

"I was under a great deal of pressure to break and run," one 
man said. "There's a great deal of pressure upon me to do just 
that, and I'm proud of the fact that I just stuck it out, and stuck it 
out, and stuck it out."

Source: Austin American-Statesman, December, 1992

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves."
	-  Abraham Lincoln

========================================================================

Dad Did It

You remember the images from men's movement gatherings:  men baying at
the moon, reciting tribal chants and weeping--all because they felt
neglected by their fathers. The men's movement has lately received some
unlikely company in the Bash Dad department. In a forthcoming book _The
Father-Daughter Dance_, authors Barbara Goulter and Joan Minninger cite
the absence of the father during childhood as a key source of feminist
anger. Goulter and Minninger see a special significance in the personal
histories of several pillars of the women's movement.  Both Germaine
Greer and Susan Sontag wrote seminal works in the Seventies; both grew
up father deprived. More recently, Greer penned _Daddy, We hardly Knew
You_, detailing her search for her father's background. Gloria Steinem
and Kate Millett also produced tomes that revealed much about their
early abandonment by their fathers. "Perhaps it was true that for all
their theories about the oppressiveness of the male presence," write
the authors, "what had always been driving Germain and Susan and Kate,
and maybe a lot of other women, too, was really the oppressiveness of
the male absence."

Source: MANTRACK, _Playboy_ magazine, February, 1993

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"When it's steamboat time, you steam."
	-  Mark Twain

========================================================================

Children Deserve Access to Both Parents
By Tracy Wright Cox

Woody Allen and Mia Farrow, Dan Quayle and Murphy Brown.  What do these
"couples" have in common besides image problems? They are battling the
"Unmarried with Children" dilemma that plagues our country.

The _Messenger-Inquirer_ has editorially addressed some of the real
problems of the family values debate. One point well-made was that
seven out of ten juvenile offenders come from single-parent settings.

In Kentucky, 98 percent of the custodial parents are women.  Now,
before the National Organization for Women sends me a nasty letter,
this is not a male-female debate about who would be the better parent.
This is a children's rights issue. Raising children is the most
important and most difficult job in the world.  Children need and
deserve a balance. Children need and deserve both parents.

The Deviess County court system must develop a mediation system to help
unmarried and divorcing parents resolve anger so they can learn to
focus on the needs of the children. A divorce should not be granted
unless a mediator guides the parents to agree on what is best for the
children.

There is a misconception that most fathers are deadbeats who abandon
their children and don't pay child support. The Children's Rights
Council of Kentucky has hundreds of fathers and mothers who are
desperately fighting for the right to be part of their children's
lives.

Unfortunately, our system focuses only on the financial needs of our
children. Emotional support doesn't fit into a computer spreadsheet
program.

Our legislators need to design laws that help ensure children will have
access to their parents and extended families. Custodial parents have
all control over the children. They decide where the children attend
school and if they attend church. They can elect to move out of state
without permission of the non-custodial parent. They incur no
penalties for denying visitation. And they do not need to be
accountable for child support payments. The non-custodial parent faces
jail if unable to pay support and is often forced out of the child's
life entirely.

The system is failing our children. Judges and attorneys need to work
toward shared parenting, instead of pitting one parent against the
other in a legal tug-of-war. Shared Parenting helps eliminate parental
kidnappings. A child wouldn't be forced to divorce a parent. The
children would have both parents.

Too often, legislators do not act on anything that may be viewed as
controversial because they fear losing votes. They need to develop a
Bill of Rights for Kentucky's children that addresses all forms of
child abuse. Judges are used to handling divorce cases by granting
women custody automatically and giving fathers a mere 85 days-a-year
standard visitation. Judges, attorneys and legislators often lack the
education, compassion and courage needed to make changes in a system
that is hurting the family. The statistics prove this.

In the three years since I formed The Children's Rights Council of
Kentucky, I have received hundreds of calls. Fathers, mothers,
grandparents and stepparents have shared their stories and their pain.
When I appeared on WHAS radio's Metz Here this past summer, the phone
lines stayed lit throughout the three-hour show with callers from
across the eastern half of the United States who wanted to tell their
stories about being denied visitation with their children. All the
experiences I've heard are horrible, but one stands out.

An Owensboro father raised his two infant children for a year.  The
mother had left with another man. She returned a year later.  The
mother filed for custody and won. The children now live 3,000 miles
away. The father was given only a post office box to which he was to
mail child support. He has no contact with the children even though a
Kentucky court had granted him standard visitation. When he does talk
to his children, they are not allowed to call him "dad" and they must
call their new stepfather "dad." The father cannot afford to visit his
children, much less litigate from 3,000 miles away. Even if he went
back to court, there is no law protecting a child's right to have two
parents.

The Hyde Bill now pending in Congress would make child support laws
tougher without addressing the issue of a custodial parent denying a
child access to a non-custodial parent. Bill Clinton said he would
support tougher child support laws. I urge you to write our legislators
and ask that a child access amendment be attached to this bill.

[Comment: This is a dated article. The bill passed. No amendment was
added, although the bill did provide for the creation of a commission
to study access.]

It's too bad Dan Quayle chose the sitcom character Murphy Brown as a
example of the breakdown in family values. The Children's Rights
Council could have shown him thousands of real people--non-custodial
mothers and fathers in real pain--whose children have been forced out
of their lives.

Source: The Owensboro, Kentucky _Messenger-Inquirer_, September 20, 1992

========================================================================

Refusal to Visit

A 17-year-old girl's refusal to visit her non-custodial father did not
justify a court's finding that she was emancipated, and its resulting
termination of the father's support obligation, the Indiana Court of
Appeals, Fifth District, has ruled. The father's support obligation
would otherwise have continued until the girl reached age 21. In
reaching its decision, the Appeals Court said there was no indication
that the custodial parent had interfered with the non-custodial
parent's visitation rights. Even evidence that the daughter is employed
and living independently of her mother does not necessarily warrant a
finding of emancipation, the Appeals Court said.

Source: Speak Out For Children, Fall 1992

========================================================================

Ex-girlfriend Wins Housekeeping Pay

A man owes $6,600 to a former girlfriend who demanded payment for
cleaning, cooking and pouring the beer while she lived with him for
seven years, an appeals court says.

Linda Walsh deserves compensation for household chores, even though her
ex-boyfriend, Harlan Ray, did the yard work, maintained their cars and
agreed to share expenses with her, the 4th District Court of Appeals in
Madison, Wisconsin said.

"This opens the door for an argument that true roommates, not even
boyfriend-girlfriend, could end up with the same results," said Ray's
lawyer, Daniel Berkos.

Ms. Walsh and her two sons moved into Ray's home after they met in
1979. Ray's two children stayed in the home half the time.

Ms. Walsh bought groceries. Ray made mortgage payments and paid utility
bills. They had separate bank accounts.

Two years after their 1987 breakup, Ms. Walsh sued for house-keeping
pay. A jury sided with her, and the appeals court upheld that verdict.

"Chores and groceries for a household of up to six people, three of
them being Ray and his children, may readily amount to a considerable
investment in time and money," the appeals court said.

Berkos said they may appeal.

Source: The Associated Press, December, 1992

========================================================================

Statute of Limitations

The six-year statute of limitations for civil actions does not preclude
a claim for support arrearages which exceeds that limit, the Maine
Supreme Judicial Court has ruled. The claim for arrearages that
occurred over the eleven year period prior to the filing of the claim
was for $17,000. Despite the delay in seeking enforcement of the child
support obligation, the non-custodial parent was liable for the entire
arrearage, the Supreme Judicial Court decided. The court ruled that
unpaid child support obligations are the equivalent of judgments, which
are exempted from the statute of limitations. Similar rulings had been
made in other states, the Maine court said.

Source: Speak Out For Children, Fall 1992

========================================================================

Child Support Order Shocks Mom
By Julia Helgason

Connie Ferguson, whose annual salary is $9,400, was shocked when Green
County Domestic Relations Court ordered her to pay her ex-husband more
than half her take home pay in child support.

They have two children in junior high, and court records show that he
earns $53,000-a-year.

"It just doesn't make any sense," Ferguson said. "If my kids needed
money, I'd work two jobs, I'd scrub floors. But the fact is, their
financial needs are well provided for."

Child support payments are calculated from guidelines and tables handed
down by the Ohio Supreme Court. Judges are allowed to make exceptions
under extenuating circumstances.  Ferguson has appealed the decision in
her case.

Dayton attorney John Rion, who represents Ferguson's former husband,
suggested that no one would give the situation a thought if the gender
roles were reversed, and a man were paying his ex-wife more than half
his take home pay. In addition, in Ferguson's case, her former
husband is paying Ferguson $800-a-month alimony.

But Ferguson says the child support guidelines are flawed, and a lot of
people--including support paying fathers--agree.

"The formula is bad, the methodology is wrong," said Andrew Cvercko,
President of CAPRA, an acronym for Children and Parents Rights
Association, a statewide umbrella organization for divorced parents.

Cvercko said child support guidelines are especially harmful when they
reduce a parent to poverty, or when they put a parent in a position
where it doesn't pay him or her to work.

Cverko of Youngstown sits on a task force appointed by the state to
re-evaluate the child support guidelines.

Jeffrey Startzman, administrator of Montgomery County's domestic
relations court, sits on the same task force. Changes in the guidelines
will likely be forthcoming in 18 months or so, Startzman said. He would
not speculate on the nature of the changes.

The current system works like this: The court adds both parents
salaries together. In Ferguson's case, the total is $62,400.

The guidelines say an average intact family with two children and gross
annual earnings of $62,400, would spend $11,796-a-year on the
children.

Under the prevailing philosophy that children shouldn't be penalized
when their parents divorce, $11,796-a-year should be spent on
Ferguson's children.

To decide who pays how much, the court pro-rates the amount based on
the incomes. Since Ferguson receives the $800-a-month alimony from the
children's father, the court adds that amount to her salary and deducts
it from his.

This done, her share of the children's support comes to $297-a-month.

Ferguson says it's not fair. Most court officials say it is. Startz-
man says, "Fair or not, its' reality."

What the formula doesn't consider, Startzman said, is that an intact
family has but one set of household expenses, while the divorced family
has two rents or mortgage payments, two sets of utilities and so on.
That leaves less money to spend on children.

Meanwhile, $297-a-month is deducted from Connie Ferguson's pay
pending the outcome of her appeal. She says it takes away her incentive
to work, since after deducting the cost of gas and parking, she
estimates she takes home less than $2.50-an-hour.

Ferguson attends Sinclair College part time. "I could quit work, go to
school full time and get through twice as fast," she said. That would
increase her earning power, and be better for her children in the long
run.

But court officials say it probably wouldn't work. She would likely be
accused of quitting her job to avoid paying child support, in which
case she would have to continue child support payments even if she
weren't working.

If she failed to pay, she could be found in contempt of court and fined
or jailed or both.

Guideline Review

What            To correct iniquities in child support guidelines, the
		Ohio legislature created the Child Support Guidelines
		Advisory Commission.

Members         The commission, formed in February of last year,
		includes legislators, judges, lawyers, enforcement
		agency officials and members of various advocacy
		groups.

Purpose         The 21-member commission, which meets about
		once-a-month in Columbus, is charged with submitting
		recommendations for change by March 1993.

Source: Dayton Daily News, November 30, 1992

========================================================================

Just the Facts....

By David K. Garrod, Ph.D.

This is a collection of custody and child support related statistics
for the US--with their sources:

Total Custodial Mothers: 		11,268,000 
Total Custodial Fathers: 		2,907,000

Source: Current Population Reports, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Series
P-20, No. 458, 1991.

While 20.5% of custodial parents are men, you should not assume that
20.5% of fathers are given custody at an initial divorce custody
hearing. Many, and probably most, fathers gain custody some years after
the mother had initially been given custody either when the child was
allowed to have a say in the matter, or when the mother could not
handle the situation, the father was given custody.

Total amount of child support owed: 	$14,800,000,000
Amount received: 			$11,100,000,000

Composed of ... paid in full: 		$7,600,000,000 
... paid in part: 			$3,500,000,000

Percentage of child support paid in 
terms of dollars paid/dollars owed: 	75%

Source: Current Population Reports, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Series
P-23, No 173, 1989.

66% of all support not paid by non-custodial fathers is due to
inability to pay.

Source: U.S. General Accounting Office Report, GAO/HRD-92-39FS January
1992.

Custodial mothers who receive a support award: 		79.6% 
Custodial fathers who receive a support award: 		29.9%

Non-custodial mothers who totally default on support: 	46.9% 
Non-custodial fathers who totally default on support: 	26.9%

Non-custodial mothers who pay support at any level: 	20.0%
Non-custodial fathers who pay support at any level: 	61.0%

 All the following are for custodial parents: 

Single mothers who work less than full time: 		66.2%
Single fathers who work less than full time: 		10.2%

Single mothers who work more than 44 hours per week: 	 7.0%
Single fathers who work more than 44 hours per week: 	24.5%

Single mothers who receive public assistance: 		46.2% 
Single fathers who receive public assistance: 		20.8%

Source: Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, U.S. Department of 
Health and Human Services, Office of Income Security Policy, 
Oct., 1991 Authors: Meyer and Garansky.

========================================================================

We're Number 1

Percentage of children and elderly of industrialized nations living 
in poverty, 1984-1987:

	Country 	Children	Elderly
			in Poverty 	in Poverty

United States 		20.4 		10.9

Canada 			9.3 		2.2

Australia 		9.0 		4.0

United Kingdom 		7.4 		5.2

France 			4.6 		4.5

Netherlands 		3.8 		3.4

Germany 		2.8 		2.8

Sweden 			1.6 		4.3

Source: Timothy M. Smeeding, "U.S. Poverty and Income Security Policy
in a Cross National Perspective," October 1991, Luxembourg, October,
1991, Luxembourg Income Study, working paper 70.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts."
	-  Will Rogers

========================================================================

Children Without Support Often end up in Poverty

A report released Monday by the National Child Support Assurance
Consortium said children who do not receive the benefit of child
support payments frequently end up in poverty.

A survey of 300 single mothers in four states, including some in Ohio's
Trumbull County, found that 75 percent of children entitled to child
support were not receiving regular payments, the consortium said.

The report said more than half of the mothers reported their children
began missing regular health checkups, and 32 percent said their
children have gone hungry because of a lack of child support.

Fifty-two percent of the mothers were receiving food stamps within one
year after the fathers left, the report said. Also, 41 percent
received Aid to Dependent Children and Medicaid, the report said.

It also said nearly one-half of the mothers had to move in with friends
or families to avoid becoming homeless, and 10 percent became homeless
within one year of the fathers' departure.

The Association for Children for Enforcement of Support, based in
Toledo, is part of the consortium. ACES interviewed mothers in Trumbull
County, Atlanta and Portland, Ore. Another consortium member, the
Health and Welfare Council of Nassau County, N.Y., conducted interviews
on Long Island.

Less than 10 percent of the mothers interviewed had annual incomes of
more than $25,000, and most were working but living at or near the
poverty line.

Debbie Kline, regional coordinator for ACES, said the group "finally
has the numbers" to show the effect a lack of child support can have
on children.

Gayle Channing, legislative director for the Public Children Services
Association of Ohio, and other child advocates said they hope the
findings result in change.

"This whole thing is predicated on the fact that moms and children
don't have enough money to live on," Channing said.

Source: United Press International, January 25, 1993

[Comment: A different version of this article, titled `Poverty awaits
unsupported kids,' appeared in the Columbus Dispatch on January 25,
1993, attributed to Jonathan Riskind, Dispatch Statehouse Reporter.]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"One of the things that we know historically and biologically is that
males are designed to be relatively irresponsible."
	-  US Representative Newt Gingrich

========================================================================

Poverty Awaits Unsupported Kids: Rebuttal
By David K. Garrod, Ph.D., a member of the Indiana Child 
Support Advisory Commission (a legislatively-appointed 
advisory committee)

On Monday, January 25, 1993, the Dispatch printed an article, `Poverty
awaits unsupported kids,' summarizing a report released by the National
Child Support Assurance Consortium.  This report, based on a survey of
300 selected women in four counties, asserted that children who do not
receive the benefit of child support payments frequently end up in
poverty. One of the statistics included in the report was that 75% of
the children entitled to support of the mothers sampled did not receive
regular support payments.

I find the numbers quoted in the report most interesting; although for
what they didn't say rather than what they did.

The Association for Children for Enforcement of Support (ACES), a group
often seen represented on Sally Jesse Raphael, Oprah Winfrey and
similar talk shows, claims to have over 20,000 active members. ACES is
now a subgroup of the National Child Support Assurance Consortium. One
must therefore ask, why does their survey only cover 300 mothers? Do
these represent the worst cases they could find or what? Why are
their findings in direct conflict with Consumer Expenditure Surveys
and Bureau of the Census statistics that use data samples over 100
times greater in size than this latest report?

This report is more an indictment of the incompetence of certain
mothers and of the welfare system than of child support. I am totally
against non-payment of child support, however, I also recognize that
government statistics have repeatedly shown that even if one only asks
the recipients of the support, where the inducement is to under-report
the receipt, those recipients over the years over many tens of
thousands of data samples have reported receipt of about 75% of all
support ordered. Government reports have also stated that about 66%
of non-payment is due to inability of the father to pay. Thus one is
left with the inescapable conclusion that only 10% of unpaid child
support is due to deadbeat dads--those that have the money but refuse to
pay.

For this latest report to state that half of their sample mothers
allowed their children to miss medical check-ups and about a third
allowed their children to go hungry is disgraceful. There is a welfare
system safety net for mothers with children. Medical check-ups are free
or almost free to mothers in need; the AFDC and food stamp programs
exist precisely to relieve the suffering of children. For mothers to
allow their own children to go hungry in today's welfare society says
little about the child support issue but much about those mothers' lack
of priorities to ensure the health and well-being of their own
children.

It further would not surprise me if the report is so substantially
flawed to be meaningless. Representatives of ACES testified at three of
the seven public hearings of the Indiana Child Support Advisory
Committee and when called upon to substantiate their claims by cases,
surveys or statistical information they failed to do so and, in fact,
ceased making further comments.

We have a welfare system that is designed to provide minimum basic
needs for women and children when there is no child support. Over 60%
of women with children living in poverty never even have any child
support order, and do not report child mistreatment numbers anything
close to the appalling representations made in the report. It seems
much more likely that this report, therefore, is motivated by a
malicious desire of the mothers of ACES to see their ex-spouses in
jail, out of motivations of revenge, rather than having anything to do
with the facts of child support non-compliance consequences.

Since the National Child Support Assurance Consortium asserts that the
cause of mothers living in poverty is non-payment of child support, let
us look at the actual numbers of support orders. Data courtesy of U.S.
Census Bureau Report P-60, No.  173, Sept. 1991.

Women with children under age 21 present from absent fathers for the
year 1990:

						     Living in poverty
Marital		Number in	Percent 	Number in 
Status		thousands	awarded 	thousands	Percent
				support 

Married 	2,531 		79.0 		 176 		 6.95

Divorced 	3,056 		76.8 		 820 		26.8

Separated 	1,352 		47.9 		 612 		45.3

Widowed 	   65 		NSM 		   8 		12.3

Never Married 	2,955 		23.9 		1,590 		53.8

TOTAL 		9,955 		57.7 		3,206 		32.2

NOTE: About half of the mothers in poverty are never-married mothers
and about three quarters of these have NEVER had any child support
order.

The AFDC/Welfare medical benefits problem which is driving most federal
and state thinking (costs having more than doubled in real dollars in
less than a decade), is primarily due to never-married mothers. Yes,
it would help if all child support ordered was collected, but it would
not have much significant impact on the cost to the government. In
fact, it is probable that the total cost of the compliance machinery
that has been established in the last 6-7 years ACTUALLY EXCEEDS the
amount of extra child support collected!

[Comments: This was sent to the Dispatch on February 2, 1993. To date,
they have not printed one word of it, nor have they printed any other
rebuttals to their article.]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The best way to secure liberty is to exercise it."
	-  John Perry Barlow

========================================================================

Income Imputed for Second Job

The Virginia Court of Appeals ruled that a non-custodial parent may
have income imputed from a second job for purposes of computing child
support. The non-custodial parent in this case is a school teacher and
a second job would be particularly relevant during the summer. The
Appeals Court said that the lower court was wrong to exclude imputed
income in calculating child support. The Appeals Court added that as a
general rule a court should not impute to a person income from more
than one job.  However, if there is a history of a spouse working more
than one job, then income from all jobs should be considered for
purposes of calculating child support. (Cochrand v. Cochrand; VA Ct.
App.  No. 1569-91-1, 7/7/92)

The above decisions are summarized from Family Law Reporter, and appear
here by permission of the publisher, The Bureau of National Affairs,
Inc.

========================================================================

Paternity Cases Given a Kick in Pants with New, Speedier Process

On Mondays, the issue of "paternity establishment" becomes very real at
the Franklin County Child Enforcement Agency.

Each week, more than 80 sets of parents and their children come,
willingly or grudgingly, through the agency's offices to take part in a
new process that can have a man legally declared to be a child's father
without going to court.

For some, it means having blood drawn for genetic testing.

Agency Director Joseph J. Pilat, whose office is just across the hall
from the room where the blood samples are taken, hears the cries of the
children all Monday long.

Parents and their children--waiting to have blood drawn--congregate in
an area set aside in the middle of the agency's offices on the 14th
floor of the Franklin County Courthouse.

At least once-a-week, child support workers say, somebody's emotions
boil over in shouting or, rarely, into shoving.

"It's pretty hard to ignore," Pilat said.

The commotion aside, agency officials are happy with results of the new
administrative paternity process, made possible by a state law that
took effect in July.

Between late August, when the agency held its first administrative
paternity hearings, and the end of November, 238 of 600 paternity cases
were settled out of court.

Agency officials consider that a big improvement over the old system,
in which every case took six to eight months to move through the court
system.

The faster paternity is established, the sooner single mothers can
start receiving child support payments, Pilat said.

The shortcut process results in more voluntary acknowledgments by
fathers, Pilat said, simply because it happens faster.

"We believe time makes a difference," in paternity cases, he said.
"When the old procedure sometimes took more than a year, people would
become removed from the whole situation and be more likely to say,
`That's not my kid.'"

The law gives a man the option of acknowledging outright that he is the
father or agreeing to be bound by the results of a genetic test.

If the test, which compares the man's and the child's DNA, shows a 95
percent or greater chance that the man is the father, the agency can
legally declare the man the father and order support payments,
without going to court.

Since the law went into effect, the agency has sent all paternity cases
through the process. If either party refuses to participate, the case
is dropped or, if either party requests, it is filed in court as a
traditional paternity lawsuit.

In cases where mothers are receiving welfare, the agency auto-
matically sues for paternity.

Hugh Greentree, the hearing officer who oversees the administrative
paternity process, originally expected to spend half a day-a-week on
paternity hearings and another half day on subsequent support
hearings.

Instead, he and several legal assistants spend all day every Monday
ushering couples through paternity hearings.

Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays are devoted to longer hearings, about
half-a-day per couple, for determining support.

"This is a far more successful program than anyone expected," Greentree
said as legal assistants hurried to distribute paperwork for the day's
fifth round of paternity hearings, 20 minutes behind schedule.

The new system worked well for one couple, amicably separated.

The father, an east side man, said he was there to acknowledge his
paternity because he wants to provide for his 10-month-old son.

"We were living together, but now we're not, and she's going to need
some help," the man said of the child's mother.

He also wanted to stake his claim to the child, he said.

"That way, if she should meet somebody, there won't be any question ...
no man can adopt my son or anything."

The couple will have another hearing in about four weeks, at which a
hearing officer will order a support amount using guidelines that
take into account the parents' incomes and number of children.

Pleased as they are with the efficiency of the new setup, child support
officials have some concerns about enforcement.

"One hang-up is the (administrative) hearings result in admin-
istrative orders rather than court orders," Pilat said.

While the administrative orders are a legally binding as a court order,
Pilat and others in the field are unsure how easily they can be
enforced if a father doesn't pay. Because the law is so new,
enforcement of the orders hasn't been tested, he said.

Pilat hopes lawmakers will revisit the bill.

"We want to make sure these administrative orders are enforceable in
court," he said.

Source: The Columbus Dispatch, January 3, 1993 

========================================================================

Cast Asunder -- at War over Ben Schulman
By Joann S. Lublin

After Couples Divorce, Long Distance Moves are often Wrenching

In today's 2-career families, a job opening can mean a nasty custody
battle.

The pain of divorce wears new guises in the 1990's.

The simultaneous rise in dual-career couples and the divorce rate in
recent years has created crises for an unprecedented number of
American parents and children.

More than a million youngsters watch their fathers and mothers split
up every year and often find themselves spending part of their time
with each parent. Joint custody or visitation rights, difficult at
best, can become a major problem when one parent is transferred or
takes a job far away and the other is unable or unwilling to move, too.
In about half of married couples, both spouses are employed. About half
of all marriages taking place in the past 20 years will end in divorce,
according to the National Center for Health Statistics.

So people with careers they care about are torn between staying close
to their kids and working where the opportunity is. The options all
have drawbacks. Children are shuttled hundreds of miles back and forth
between parents. A distant parent fades from the children's lives. A
parent rejects a move in order to stay near the child and rues the
sacrifice of career objectives.

Untenable Alternatives

With good jobs scarce in a sour economy, parents' choices are limited
and wrenching.

"It's a heartbreak issue," says Judith S. Wallerstein, a psychologist
who runs the Center for the Family in Transition in Corte Madera,
Calif.

Paul Insel, a scientist at the University of California at San Diego,
gave up career mobility. Last year, Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. offered
him a research job that would probably have doubled his salary, but it
entailed a move to Princeton, N.J., all the way across the country. Dr.
Insel knew that his former wife, Louise, a psychiatric nurse, would
neither relocate nor let him uproot their daughters, who were eight to
13. The couple share custody.

A cross country transfer would have meant "ending my relationship
with my children," the 46-year-old researcher says. He turned down the
offer. Dose he regret staying put? "About once-a-week," he says.

The relocation quandary often leads to bitter court fights.  Among
divorced working parents, relocation "really is the hot issue," says
Helene Brezinsky, a New York matrimonial attorney who says she is
"litigating this issue nonstop."

========================================================================

States Restricting Moves

A major reason: Nine states--including Illinois, New York and
California--now restrict relocation by a custodial parent, usually the
mother. Parents with physical custody can't just up and leave the state
without the other parent's blessing. Only one or two states limited
these moves a decade ago, reports Jeff Atkinson, a former chairman of
the American Bar Association's child custody committee. He expects a
rise in costly relocation lawsuits because good jobs often necessitate
moving and more courts want to preserve both parents' ties with their
children.

Increasing numbers of fathers with joint legal custody or visitation
rights are suing to block ex-wives from taking the children along when
they land new jobs far away.

In an acrimonious Illinois case, an ex-husband is trying to block the
move of his former wife, and economist, and their two children, aged
seven and eight. The economist and her new husband, a salesman, sold
their suburban Chicago home after lining up jobs and building a new
house outside Phoenix, Ariz., last spring.

The jobs still await them in Phoenix, but since last spring, the family
has been forced to live in a friend's basement in another Chicago
suburb--with sheets separating certain sleeping areas--because the court
suit has dragged on since July 1991. (Final hearings are scheduled for
next week.) The cramped living arrangement and parental hostilities are
hurting the youngsters' school performance, the mother says.

"If she can find a job in Arizona, I don't understand why she couldn't
come up with one in Chicago," argues her former husband, a bank
systems analyst. He says he opposes the move because seeing the
children just seven weeks-a-year would be "almost like severing the
ties." He says that if he loses in court, he may look for work in
Arizona, too.

The relocation predicament also affects employers--who occasionally are
willing to help find work for the new hire's former spouse, too.
Harvard University is currently wooing Terry Moe, a Stanford University
political science professor.  But he intends to pass up the Harvard job
unless his ex-wife, Debra, an Internal Revenue Service lawyer, also can
advance her career in the Boston area. "If there's no incentive to go,
it wouldn't work for me," Ms. Moe explains.

For the past four years, the Moes' daughter, now nine-years-old, has
spent alternate weeknights and weekends with each parent. Without the
child, "I would die," Prof. Moe says. "But I would never take her away
from her mom." He and his former wife remain very friendly; they even
used the same divorce lawyer.

Harvard faculty members have explored some job leads for Ms. Moe, and a
Harvard official says the university is willing to fly her East for a
job-hunting trip.

Through relocating two divorced working parents can create stress, the
greatest anguish occurs when such parents put a great physical distance
between them.

In a small apartment in Fern Creek, Ky., Harry Schulman slowly opens
the door to his son's darkened bedroom.

Plastic blocks, stuffed animals and a fire engine are scattered about.
Ninja Turtle slippers teeter on the edge of a cluttered dresser. "It
has been hard to come in" and clean the room, explains Mr. Schulman, a
31-year-old medical administrator, choking back tears. "It's difficult
for me to accept that he is not here."

The room has been empty since summer. In late August, Mr.  Schulman's
five-year-old son, Benjamin, joined his mother, Cheryl, a research
chemist in Hatboro, Pa., after she won a two-year custody fight.
During most of the time, Benjamin commuted between Hatboro and the
Louisville suburb every two weeks. His father had moved to his native
Kentucky in mid-1990 following the failure of his marriage and a
fruitless job search in Philadelphia.

"I am ripped apart over this," says the intense Mr. Schulman.  Benjamin
may visit his father only during summers and certain holidays. Mr.
Schulman say he is handling his own appeal of the court decision
because he still owes his lawyer $52,000 of her $72,000 fee.

Soon after Harry and Cheryl Schulman married in June 1986, she
reluctantly quit her $23,000-a-year job as a chemist near Philadelphia
to follow her husband to Texas, where he met a graduate-school
fellowship obligation by becoming an Air Force hospital administrator.
In Texas, she earned a master's degree and gave birth to Benjamin.

After Mr. Schulman's three year stint as an Air Force officer, the
couple began job-hunting in the Philadelphia area. Ms.  Schulman landed
another research chemist's position, paying $32,000 annually.

But her husband couldn't find work as a health-care administrator.
Mr. Schulman figures he sent out over 300 resumes to clinics and
hospitals nearby. He wangled just five job interviews in ten months. He
faults his inexperience, scant contacts and lack of a M.B.A. degree. To
help support his family, he joined the National Guard.

His long unemployment exacerbated the couple's long-simmering
domestic conflicts. In January 1990, the Schulmans sought marriage
counseling. Five months later, they separated.  Benjamin and Mr.
Schulman went to his parents' home in Louisville, without Ms.
Schulman's permission.

The move to Louisville ultimately shattered any hope of rec-
onciliation and was disruptive for Benjamin. Ms. Schulman quickly won a
court order requiring the boy's return to Pennsylvania.

"I had no job, and she had already filed for custody," Mr.  Schulman
recalls. "What was I supposed to do? Go Back to Philadelphia
[unemployed]?" The judge would have decided that "I couldn't support my
family and deny custody," he believes. The young father says that "to
have any future with Benjamin," he needed to stay where he could work
and earn money for the legal fight and for his son's support.

Remaining in Louisville "was probably the most difficult decision I
ever made in my life," Mr. Schulman recalls. Distraught over his
separation from his son and his failed marriage, he cried a lot, he
says, and could barely eat. He lost 30 pounds.

In August 1990, he began a $36,000-a-year job in Louisville managing an
81-bed chemical dependency facility. He tried in vain to persuade his
estranged wife to seek work in Louisville.

Ms. Schulman says she didn't want to leave a place and a job she liked.
"There was absolutely nothing to bring me to Louisville."

The slender, soft-spoken mother blames her ex-husband (their divorce
became final in July) for creating the painful geographic rift by
giving up his job search in Philadelphia. "He didn't think about what
would be best for Ben."

If you love your child, "you don't leave the state," Ms. Schulman
argues. "The whole problem with divorce today is that parents put
their needs ahead of their children's. This is a classic example." She
continues: "He could have gotten a job here."

Between July and November 1990, Mr. Schulman drove 28 hours every other
weekend to visit his son. The youngster then lived half-time with each
parent and commuted by plane or car.

The flights seemed to aggravate Benjamin's chronic ear infections, and
the strains of commuting were apparent in his frequent inattentiveness
at the child-care center he attended during his weeks in
Pennsylvania.

The commuting ceased with Judge Samuel W. Salus II's ruling on August
24. The judge rejected the advice of a psychologist agreed upon by
both sides that Mr. Schulman should get primary custody, though the
psychologist felt Benjamin would be best off if he could see both
parents frequently. Judge Salus said in his opinion that both parents
"are loving and caring,' but that the mother appears to be better able
"to sublimate her own needs to Benjamin's."

Benjamin, who now resides with his mother, will get to spend
Thanksgiving next week with his dad in Louisville.

Mr. Schulman seems rooted in Louisville, is engaged to be married and
since June 1991, has been earning more than $40,000-a-year
administering a large cardiology practice. Pending his appeal of the
custody decision, he has no plans to seek work in Philadelphia. "I
still don't know a soul there," he says.

[Comments: It appears a Domestic Relations judge has found a new reason
to favor a mother. She can better sublimate her own needs. Is there
anybody out there who hasn't sublimated their needs recently?

Source: The Wall Street Journal, November 20, 1992

========================================================================

Britain Opens First Battered Men's Refuge

The shelter protects husbands and boyfriends who complain of
ill-treatment by their female partners.

Britain's first refuge for battered men opened this week in response to
the growing number of husbands and boyfriends who complain of
ill-treatment by their female partners.

The organization behind the refuge is Families Need Fathers, which
started as a pressure group fighting for access rights for fathers who
had lost custody of their children after divorce. It evolved into a
general campaign for men's rights.

Bruce Littington, spokesman for the group, says Families Need Fathers
branches receive up to 7000 calls each year from male victims of
violent partners.

Roger Williams, who runs the refuge, began by offering a place to stay
for a male friend whose wife was constantly attacking him, and things
just grew, he says. Williams believes there is a pressing need out
there.

"People don't think it happens," said Littington, "but, believe me, it
does. There is a particular feeling of powerlessness in a man,
conditioned not to hit women, who is then faced with daily physical
assaults upon his person." He said men can usually contain the
violence, but that the real worry is when the woman turns on a man with
kitchen implements such as knives and rolling pins.

Geoffrey, who does not want his last name revealed, has helped
establish the refuge. He is a middle-aged man whose wife has won
custody of their young son. "I wish the refuge had been available to me
two years ago," he said. "I was physically assaulted by my wife and
emotionally abused over a period of four years. After our son was born,
my wife just exploded. Out of the blue, she would scratch my face to
bits and then coolly walk away."

Another resident of the refuge Matthew, 23, said his girlfriend began
assaulting him when they were both in school. It culminated in her
breaking four of his ribs. "I never told anyone, it was so
embarrassing--imagine telling your mates down at the pub that you are
battered and bruised because your girlfriend beats you," he said.

Dr. Malcolm George, neurophysiologist and lecturer at Queen Mary and
Westfield College, London, has studied 40 men who have been attacked by
their wives.

"Men get worried when the violence involves a weapon," he said. "Most
of the men would tolerate being hit with fists, but they told me about
assaults with baseball bats, boiling water and knives. Women resort to
weapons because they do not have the strength physically to overpower
men."

The opening of the refuge comes hot on the heels of the establishment
of a new group called Survivors, which campaigns for male victims of
rape. It appears that in England it is becoming acceptable for men to
admit they can be victims of women.

The British feminist establishment has an ambivalent attitude towards
this new trend. While welcoming a common recognition of the
oppression of violent abuse, women's groups are at pains to point out
that the number of battered and raped women in this country far exceeds
that of battered and raped men.

"Just because it appears novel, there is a danger of forgetting that
men are the usual aggressors," said a spokeswoman from Women Against
Rape.

Sandra Horley, director of Chiswick Family Rescue, Britain's first
battered women's refuge, said, "We certainly care about battered
husbands, but let's get things into perspective. According to
research, 76 percent of domestic violence cases reported to the police
are caused by men attacking their female partners.  Only 1.1 percent of
cases are women attacking men. There is a danger that if men's refuges
become established, vital resources will be diverted from the women's
refuge movement.

[Comment: The statement by Sandra Horley bears a reply.  According to a
study at the University of New Hampshire, studies by Dr. Susan
Steinmetz and Drs. M.A. Straus and R.J. Gelles and others, domestic
violence is split almost 50/50 between the genders.]

Source: Scripps Howard News Service

========================================================================

DISCLAIMER

First, the advice given during meetings, by members directly and in
telephone conversations, should not be taken as legal advice.  It is
the opinion of the person answering the questions at the time, and the
answers are based upon legal advice that attorneys on our board have
given in similar situations. Consult your attorney or one of our
recommended attorneys before taking any action in your case.

Second, the articles in the Newsletter are culled from a variety of
sources, cover many topics and reflect differing opinions.  Every
article is the expressed opinion of only the author of that article.
These articles do not necessarily represent the collective opinion of
FACE nor of the FACE directors. Even articles written as editorials by
members of this group are not the opinion of the group itself or of
leadership. The Newsletter attempts to present both sides on issues, so
that readers can form their own opinions and make informed decisions.
This group is for equality in the justice system. We are NOT against
women. Women who become non-custodial parents face the same kinds of
problems non-custodial fathers face. We don't think that child support
guidelines are fair. But we do advocate that parents pay their child
support. We are NOT advocates of child abuse. However, we want the
courts and social systems to recognize that many contentious ex-spouses
make bogus allegations of abuse during custody battles. We are not in
favor of the exclusive use of the adversarial court system for
resolving custody disputes. We think that mediation of these disputes
is a more effective and less expensive solution and wish the courts
would utilize this resource more often. We are not advocates for
fathers in spite of mothers. We are advocates for fathers and children,
because fathers are disproportionately torn away from their children in
divorces. We don't think that is right or fair. We believe that many
fathers, when given the opportunity to be good parents, can do the job
quite effectively and that both parents and the children benefit. We
believe in equal legal rights and equal physical access to children of
divorce for both parents. Hence the name--Fathers And Children for
Equality.

========================================================================

     The FACE Newsletter Staff

Jack Quinn 		Research, Contributing Editor

Aaron Hoffmeyer 	Research, Typesetting, Contributing Editor

Paul Bokros 		Research, Contributing Editor, Mailing List

         The FACE Officers

Mike Driscoll 		President

Doug Morrissey
Mike Hamill 		Vice-Presidents

John McKinley 		Treasurer

R.W. Fowler 		Secretary

The Fathers and Children for Equality Foundation is supported by the
Ohio United Way.

(c) 1993. All copyrights are implied and applicable.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

ATTORNEY REFERRAL LIST

(listed alphabetically)

Andrew Fishman				Patricia Grimm
765 South Front Street			4937 West Broad Street
Columbus, Ohio 43206			Columbus, Ohio 43228
(614) 444-3606				(614) 878-1092

Bradley Frick				Ralph A. Kerns
50 West Broad Street, Suite 3300	1017 Dublin Road
Columbus, Ohio 43215			Columbus, Ohio 43206
(614) 228-0505				(614) 488-8900

------------------------------------------------------------------------

F.A.C.E.
P.O. Box 18022
Columbus, Ohio 43218
(614) 257-6767

Aaron L. Hoffmeyer
[email-masked] 

P.S.  Distribute at will.

THE THIN ICE
	- R. Waters
 
Momma loves her baby
And Daddy loves you too
And the sea may look warm to you Babe
And the sky may look blue
Ooooh Babe
Ooooh Baby Blue
Ooooh Babe

If you should go skating
On the thin ice of modern life
Dragging behind you the silent reproach
Of a million tear stained eyes
Don't be surprised, when a crack in the ice
Appears under your feet
You slip out of your depth and out of your mind
With your fear flowing out behind you
As you claw the thin ice