Vendaval
Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005 Status: offline
|
"Deployed troops battle for child custody" By PAULINE ARRILLAGA, AP National Writer Sat May 5, 5:22 PM ET "Crouch and an unknown number of others among the 140,000-plus single parents in uniform fight a war on two fronts: For the nation they are sworn to defend, and for the children they are losing because of that duty. A federal law called the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act is meant to protect them by staying civil court actions and administrative proceedings during military activation. They can't be evicted. Creditors can't seize their property. Civilian health benefits, if suspended during deployment, must be reinstated. And yet service members' children can be — and are being — taken from them after they are deployed. Some family court judges say that determining what's best for a child in a custody case is simply not comparable to deciding civil property disputes and the like; they have ruled that family law trumps the federal law protecting servicemembers. And so, in many cases when a soldier deploys, the ex-spouse seeks custody, and temporary changes become lasting. Even some supporters of the federal law say it should be changed — that soldiers should be assured that they can regain custody of children after they return. "Now, they've got a great argument when Johnny comes marching home that the child should remain where they are, even though it was a temporary order," says Lt. Col. Steve Elliott, a judge advocate with the Oklahoma National Guard, referring to non-deployed parents. Military mothers and fathers, meanwhile, speak of birthdays missed. Bonds, once strong, weakened. Returning from duty not to joyful reunions but to endless hearings. They are people like Marine Cpl. Levi Bradley, helping to fight the insurgency in Fallujah, Iraq, at the same time he battles for custody of his son in a Kansas family court. Like Sgt. Mike Grantham of the Iowa National Guard, whose two kids lived with him until he was mobilized to train troops after 9/11. Like Army Reserve Capt. Brad Carlson, fighting for custody of his American-born children in a foreign land after his marriage crumbled while he was deployed to the Middle East and his European wife refused to return to the States. And like Eva Crouch, who spent two years and some $25,000 pushing her case through the Kentucky courts. "I'd have spent a million," she says. "My child was my life ... I go serve my country, and I come back and have to go through hell and high water." In the midst of World War II, back in 1943, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the soldiers' relief law should be "liberally construed to protect those who have been obliged to drop their own affairs to take up the burdens of the nation." Shielding soldiers, after all, would allow them "to devote their entire energy" to the nation's defense, as the law itself states. But in child custody cases, the opposite often happens. "The minute these guys are getting deployed, the other parent is going, `I can do whatever I want now,'" says Jean Ann Uvodich, an attorney who represented Bradley. "If you have an ex who wants to take advantage, they can and will. The obstacle is that the judge needs to respect the law." " http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070505/ap_on_re_us/parents_at_war
_____________________________
"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light. So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that great day, I will tease you all the same." "WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE http://KinkMeet.co.uk
|