Clicking on banner ads keeps JWR alive
Jewish World Review Sept. 14, 1999 /4 Tishrei, 5760

Kathleen Parker

Kathleen Parker
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Suzanne Fields
Arianna Huffington
Tony Snow
Michael Barone
Michael Medved
Lawrence Kudlow
Greg Crosby
Kathleen Parker
Dr. Laura
Debbie Schlussel
Michael Kelly
Bob Greene
Michelle Malkin
Paul Greenberg
David Limbaugh
David Corn
Marianne Jennings
Sam Schulman
Philip Weiss
Mort Zuckerman
Chris Matthews
Nat Hentoff
Larry Elder
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Don Feder
Linda Chavez
Mona Charen
Thomas Sowell
Walter Williams
Ben Wattenberg
Bruce Williams
Dr. Peter Gott
Consumer Reports
Weekly Standard


Fathers' group seeks to right inequities --
WHAT'S WORSE than being falsely accused of domestic violence -- locked out of your house, denied contact with your children, disbelieved?

Only this: to be a victim of domestic violence without protection, with no place to go but home to the abuser.

So the story of domestic violence unfolds from both sides. One, usually the man, claims to be the victim of false accusations; the other, usually the woman, claims to be a victim of violence.

The two sides create a conundrum for lawmakers and judges: How do we protect the innocent without battering the rights of the falsely accused? What is the truth?

The problem is that everyone's telling a piece of the truth. Women and children have been battered behind closed doors for centuries, not just decades. Recent efforts to raise awareness have been both warranted and, one hopes, beneficial.

At the same time, however, we've created a monster. Men have been falsely accused as women get nasty during divorce and custody disputes. To protect the innocent, courts generally give accusers the benefit of the doubt. Men are guilty, in other words, until proven innocent.

Given that you can't prove a negative, men are sidelined from their own lives -- often at great cost to the children who need them -- and women get the goods. It's a fact of life so often these days that some men are challenging a system they say discriminates against men.

In Massachusetts Tuesday, six divorced men and the Fatherhood Coalition, a fathers' advocacy group, filed a federal anti-discrimination lawsuit against the judges in Massachusetts state courts. The suit charges that the judges routinely violate the U.S. Constitution by handing out restraining orders at the mere suggestion of domestic violence, denying men due process and equal-protection rights.

Typically, subjects of restraining orders are barred from their homes and denied access to their children -- without a"meaningful" hearing to defend themselves, the plaintiffs state. In Massachusetts, restraining orders are issued for a year at a time. That's a long time to be locked out of your life if you're innocent.

Advocates for battered women have commented predictably on the lawsuit. Cheryl Garrity, president of the Massachusetts chapter of the National Organization for Women, called the suit "an attempt to undo the protections that battered women have gained over the past 10 years."

Dropping agendas, one could view the lawsuit instead as a step toward fashioning a better brand of justice. His-and-her stories are usually at variance during divorce and custody proceedings. One does not have to suspend disbelief to imagine that people under emotional duress might fabricate or exaggerate to protect their interests. It happens.

But presuming guilt and laying waste to a person's life on the basis of another's word is simple witch-hunting. The routine issuance of draconian restraining orders is the foul product of our late 20th-century demonization of men, while due process has become the punch line in the gender joke.

Regardless of which statistic or story you buy, we clearly need to adjust our public policies to suggest fairness. One option under discussion in Massachusetts is to construct a two-tier restraining-order system that recognizes the difference between "domestic violence" and "family conflict."

A serious, violent household requires one treatment, a household under temporary marital stress another. John Maguire, a member of the Fatherhood Coalition, suggests a reasonable, eight-week restraining order for the marital-stress variety. During that time, couples would work with mediators to sort out their differences.

Said Maguire, "Let the law reflect the reality." Which is that some men abuse; some women . . . exaggerate.

JWR contributor Kathleen Parker can be reached by clicking here.


09/09/99: Son now has a license to grow up
09/07/99: A slap in the face of domestic violence
09/01/99: No, ma'am: Legislation on manners misses the mark
08/26/99: For better boys, try a little tenderness
08/24/99:The ABC's of campaign questions
08/19/99: Male 'sluts'
08/11/99: Language doesn't excuse bad behavior
08/09/99: When justice delayed is still justice
08/03/99: Unemployment? Not in this profession
07/30/99: It's not about race -- it's about crack babies
07/22/99: Tragedy tells us what's important
07/19/99: Study denouncing fathers sends danger signals
07/15/99:'Happy marriage' belongs in the Dictionary of Oxymorons next to 'deliciously low-fat.'
07/11/99: 'Brother Man': An American demagogue in Paris
07/08/99: Only parents can fix broken families
07/06/99: America is home, sweet home
07/01/99: Tales out of Yuppiedom
06/28/99: Men aren't the only abusers
06/23/99: Is the entire country guzzling LSD punch?
06/20/99: The voice remains -- as always -- there beside me 06/16/99:Stating the obvious, a new growth industry
06/14/99: Calling for a cease-fire in the gender war
06/10/99: We owe children an apology

©1999, Tribune Media Services