Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Just a sampling of what you can get by joining the BFC

Expand Messages
  • berkshire_fatherhood_coalition
    A SAMPLING OF WHAT YOU GET BY JOINING THE BERKSHIRE FATHERHOOD COALITION NEWSLETTER Rinaldo Del Gallo, III, Esq. 79 Nancy Avenue Pittsfield, MA 01201 PHONE:
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 7, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      A SAMPLING OF WHAT YOU GET BY JOINING THE BERKSHIRE FATHERHOOD COALITION
      NEWSLETTER





      Rinaldo Del Gallo, III, Esq.

      79 Nancy Avenue

      Pittsfield, MA 01201

      PHONE: 413-443-3150

      FAX: 413-499-0187

      E-mails: R_Del_Gallo@..., RDelGalloIII@...



      March 7, 2006



      SENT TO: editor@... <mailto:editor@...> ,
      letters@... <mailto:letters@...>



      RE: Speaker illuminates roles of women in history of Burlington
      <http://www.bristolpress.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16246665&BRD=1643&PAG=\
      461&dept_id=10486&rfi=6>

      By JOANNA MECHLINSKI, The Bristol Press

      03/06/2006





      http://www.bristolpress.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16246665&BRD=1643&PAG=4\
      61&dept_id=10486&rfi=6
      <http://www.bristolpress.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16246665&BRD=1643&PAG=\
      461&dept_id=10486&rfi=6>



      Dear Editor of the Bristol Press:



      In your article 3/6/06 article, "Speaker illuminates roles of women
      in history of Burlington Speaker illuminates roles of women in history
      of Burlington," it was stated: "Throughout the 17th century,
      Prescott (a history professor at Central State University) said, married
      women were controlled entirely by their husbands. They had no legal
      status, much as slaves or animals. In the rare instances where divorce
      was granted, custody of children automatically went to the husband
      because they, too, were considered marital property."



      Women were treated poorly in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries, and
      pioneers such as Lucretta Mott, Susan B. Anthony, and Elizabeth Cady
      Stanton who sought equal rights in the family law arena for woman are to
      be admired; they are considered heroine's by the modern fathers'
      rights movement for their drive to have gender equality in family law.
      But there are certainly some things to be considered serious advantages
      of 19th century women over 21st century men. Foremost, it was extremely
      hard to get a divorce in the 19th century. (It was almost impossible in
      the 17th century, save for adultery.) It is true that in the 19th
      century, once divorced, the father nearly automatically won custody. But
      as a practical matter, the granting of a divorce was an almost
      indescribably rare occurrence. The father would have to show that there
      was something terribly wrong with the mother in terms of fault, such as
      complete abandonment or adultery. If the mother committed adultery, the
      adultery of the father was a defense. While in the 19th century almost
      always lost their children, and while in the 21st century men almost
      always lose their children, the former was tremendously more likely to
      happen.



      In the 19th century, whether there was cause for divorce would have to
      be put to a jury in many states (such as Massachusetts), and the
      granting of a divorce was given with the solemnity of giving a death
      sentence. Moreover, there was a strong social taboo against seeking a
      divorce in the first instance, so libels for divorce were hardly
      initiated. In those rare few instances where a divorce was granted, as
      was the case throughout recorded history, the custodial parent was
      required to pay for the upkeep of the children—to grant one party
      the children and compel the other party to pay for it was thought
      immoral. Today's male will find himself infinitely more likely to
      be divorced (by orders of magnitude) and almost certainly likely to pay
      a hefty fine to have the other spouse raise his children. The 19th
      century woman did not have to worry about a child support amount they
      could not possibly afford to pay, or having "imputed income"
      where the court literally pretends there is an income that does not
      exist when deciding child support. The 19th century woman's right
      to travel was not impeded. Now the fathers often lose their
      driver's license, and they often are denied their right to work in
      their chosen profession by suspension of professional licenses.



      Today, woman file for 70% of all divorces, and there is nothing one can
      do to stop a divorce from issuing, regardless of the inability to show
      fault in the legal sense by the wife. Many states, such as
      Massachusetts, have dispensed with jury trials. "No fault"
      divorce has been interpreted to mean not only that two consenting adults
      can divorce without showing fault, but that the mother may dump the
      father just by saying the marriage is not working out. On a point of
      historical accuracy, (and this was a historian speaking on historical
      matters in her capacity as a historian), while without doubt woman of
      the 19th century lacked many of the rights of men, to claim they had a
      legal status no different from slaves, animals, or inanimate objects
      simply is literary hyperbole—the reader should understand this is a
      rhetorical flourish based upon the bona fide inferior treatment of women
      and not a literal truth as a matter of the common law at the time.



      In some instances, women enjoyed significant superior rights to men, as
      the common law presumption that any crimes they committed were done at
      their husband's insistence, leaving their husband, and not
      themselves, liable for crimes. Husbands were also liable for their
      wives torts and breaches of contract. And trust me, you would much
      rather be a 19th century woman who sued for divorce based upon the
      husband's adultery (which was weighed heavily when alimony was being
      determined), rather than a 21st century male based on the same cause
      (which is presently completely ignored in terms of child custody,
      alimony, or the division of assets). And how many present fathers who
      are the subject of divorce action are likely to get their attorney fees
      paid by mother under the doctrine of necessaries?



      How many women in the 19th century actually found themselves in jail or
      on a "most wanted" list due to the ancillaries of divorce? And
      while their choice of professions was severely limited in the 19th
      century, how many women found that they were legally proscribed from
      practicing their legal chosen profession? If the modern divorced father
      is delinquent in child support, his right to travel will be severely
      hampered (can't drive a car due to license suspension), and he may
      even be prohibited from working his chosen profession (by suspension of
      professional licenses).



      Once divorced, the 19th century woman was free to go her own way, albeit
      in a prejudiced society where many avenues of opportunity were closed.
      But today's 21st century male often finds himself unable to change
      to lesser paying but more spiritually rewarding careers, less physically
      dangerous careers, or pursue higher education because of the demands for
      child support. Many have to report to court officers, where job
      applications and career choice is done under the supervision and control
      of a state officer.

      21st century fathers have to work overtime or take on additional
      part-time jobs just to survive.



      True, 19th century women had it pretty bad in terms of divorce. But the
      present 20th century male is much more likely to be divorced in orders
      of magnitude, much more likely to be divorced for insignificant reasons
      without a showing of fault, and when he is divorced, he is much more
      likely to be treated worse by the courts, with tremendous losses of
      child custody and financial derpivations.



      Rinaldo Del Gallo, III, Esq.

      Spokesperson of the Berkshire Fatherhood Coalition

      Practicing Family Law Attorney







      WANT TO JOINT THE BEST FAMILY LAW/FATHER'S RIGHTS NEWSLETTER ON THE
      NET?



      GO HERE:



      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Berkshire_Fatherhood_Coalition/
      <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Berkshire_Fatherhood_Coalition/>



      OR JUST SEND AN E-MAIL TO:



      Berkshire_Fatherhood_Coalition-subscribe@yahoogroups.com



      OR CLICK AND SEND TO:



      Berkshire_Fatherhood_Coalition-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      <mailto:Berkshire_Fatherhood_Coalition-subscribe@yahoogroups.com>



      Who are we and what do we do: Go to BerkshireFatherhoodCoalition.com



      We hope that you decide to join this newsletter of the Berkshire
      Fatherhood Coalition.



      Produced by Family Law Attorney Rinaldo Del Gallo, spokesperson of the
      Berkshire Fatherhood Coalition, it contains news articles from around
      the world regarding family law and father's rights.



      The newsletter is a several hundred-dollar value, but is provided for
      free.



      It also contains case law updates, and detailed case analysis. It also
      updates on family law events—not just our group, but others as well.
      It is widely regarded as the best family law newsletter on the net.



      While there is a focus on Massachusetts law, the news from around the
      world section is of relevance to father's rights activist
      everywhere.



      The "Family Law News From Around the World" section has legal
      updates from all over the world, with perspectives as diverse as
      Christian conservatives, gay rights activist and feminist.



      While Attorney Del Gallo does add commentary, it is a NEWSLETTER, and
      other people write 95% of the content. It is a product of no small
      effort of sifting wheat from chaff, as to what are the big stories of
      the day as pertains to family law and father's rights.



      If you care about father's rights and family law, you will want to
      be a member.



      This is not a small newspaper--There are currently well over 1,900
      subscribers.



      CAUSES NEED STRENGTH, AND THERE IS STRENGTH IN NUMBERS.

      Just by joining, you are helping.



      For the kid's sake—please join.



      The Berkshire Fatherhood Coalition.



      PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO A FRIEND





























      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.