Britney Spears Endangers Her Baby, Blames it on Men

According to the Reuters article Spears explains driving with infant son in her lap:

"Pop star Britney Spears, reacting to a furor over photos showing her driving a car with her infant son in her lap, insists she's a good mother and that the incident was the result of 'frightful encounter with the paparazzi.'

"Pictures published in the New York Post and elsewhere Tuesday showed Spears at the wheel of her sport utility vehicle, holding her 5-month-old baby, Sean, on her lap. A man identified as her bodyguard is shown next to her in the front passenger seat.

"According to the Post, Spears drove for at least two miles along the Pacific Coast Highway in the oceanfront area of Malibu on Monday.

"A source close to Spears, 24, told Reuters that the incident occurred after the singer had driven to a Starbucks shop with her son strapped properly into his car seat in the back of her SUV.

"She moved the baby to her lap after stopping at the coffee shop to let her bodyguard go inside, then became unnerved as photographers swarmed around the vehicle as she waited for him to return, the source said. When the bodyguard got back in the car, Spears quickly drove off with her son still in her lap.

"'I had a horrifying, frightful encounter with the paparazzi while I was with my baby,' Spears said in a statement issued through her publicist. She said Monday's episode reminded her of an incident last summer in which she was 'trapped' in her car by a throng of photographers.

"'I instinctively took measures to get my baby and me out of harm's way, but the paparazzi continued to stalk us, and took photos of us which were sold to the media,' she said. 'I love my child and would do anything to protect him.'"

A few comments:

1) As usual, when in trouble, blame a man

2) Spears said "I was terrified that this time the physically aggressive paparazzi would put both me and my baby in danger. I instinctively took measures to get my baby and me out of harm's way...'I love my child and would do anything to protect him.'" How exactly is driving two miles on winding Pacific Coast Highway "protecting your baby?"

3) Apparently Britney's allegations about the photographers weren't true. According to the BBC, "X17, the agency who took the photographs, have denied her claims. 'These pictures were taken in a very peaceful context, in which photographers exhibited no aggressive behavior,' a statement read. Kelly Davis, vice president of X17, said only two photographers were involved, one of whom happened to be in the coffee shop car park when Spears arrived. 'At the point where she made the decision to drive with the baby in her lap, there was only one photographer and he wasn't even shooting,' said Davis."

4) Most importantly, even if the photographers were trying to aggressively photograph her, so what? This is a reason to put a baby's life in danger? Stand there and be photographed--big deal.

5) Interestingly, this is the same scam that Princess Diana's defenders used after her death--somehow the "threat" of being photographed justified Diana & Co.  driving at dangerous speeds.

6) News reports now say that Britney is now taking "some" responsibility for the incident. "Some"? Who exactly is supposed to take the rest?

When in Doubt, Blame a Man

Though the incidents are totally unrelated, Spears' "Blame a Man" act reminds me a little of Terry Barton, the 18-year veteran of the Forest Service who intentionally started a forest fire which would ultimately destroy 137,000 acres and led to the deaths of several firefighters. (Barton pleaded guilty to two federal charges for setting the fire and lying to investigators, as well as to a state charge of fourth-degree arson). In my column Colorado Arsonist Terry Barton's Smart Strategy: When in Trouble, Blame a Man (Cybercast News Service, 7/3/02)  I wrote:

"Terry Barton might not be a very good forest ranger, but she certainly is a good observer of contemporary social attitudes. Having committed a crime, the US Forest Service employee knows that the best way to arouse public sympathy and deflect attention away from what she has done is to blame a man.

"First she tried to pin the crime on a male camper in a gold minivan. Luckily for this individual, who was facing the possibility of a stiff prison sentence, meticulous and ardent Forest Service investigators exposed Barton's claim as false.

"Confronted with this evidence, Barton decided to switch male scapegoats, saying that she caused the blaze when she burned a heartbreaking letter from her estranged husband.

"Remarkably, some people are buying it."

Drexler Assures Newsweek that Boys Don't Need Fathers

Last week I mentioned that Newsweek did a story on the boy crisis in education (see Some Vindication for Boy Advocates). As we've noted before, the presence or absence of a father in a child's life has a huge impact on a child's school performance. In the story it was noted (accurately) that "An adolescent boy without a father figure is like an explorer without a map."

At this Peggy Drexler, author of the anti-father book Raising Boys Without Men: How Maverick Moms Are Creating the Next Generation of Exceptional Men, couldn't resist opening her yap, sending a letter in which she assured us (of course) that boys don't need fathers. Read Drexler's letter here. I've criticized Drexler and Raising Boys in my columns Are Boys Really Better off Without Fathers? (San Francisco Chronicle, 8/31/05) and Raising Boys Without Men: Lesbian Parents Good, Dads Bad (World Net Daily, 9/10/05).

In dismissing the importance of fathers, Drexler stresses that single or double mothers can raise boys effectively. As I noted in one of the above columns, "of course there are many single and lesbian mothers who can and do effectively raise boys, just as there are many 'traditional' couples who can't. But children raised by a mother and a father fare much better, on average, than children raised by single mothers. As comedian Chris Rock famously noted, yes, certainly women can raise children without men, but that doesn't make it a good idea. Drexler encourages women to choose to have fatherless children, a choice which is clearly not in children's best interests."

Perhaps Chris Rock explains it best--to hear Rock on fatherlessness, click here (Warning--explicit language).  

New Feminist Scam: Shared Parenting Advocates are 'Fathers Supremacy Groups'

In the latest "Ask Beth" column in the Boston Globe, extreme feminist Garland Waller writes:

"Fathers supremacy groups promulgate Parental Alienation Syndrome. Lawyers and judges mistakenly believe it has some merit, even though the American Psychological Association discounts it.

"What is important is that parents who are abusers use it to 'prove' that the person bringing up the abuse is an 'alienator.' So if a loving, protective parent alleges abuse, that parent can lose custody because he/she is an 'alienator,' and an abuser can get custody."

I've been noticing this phrase--"Fathers supremacy groups"--more and more. For example the Michigan National Organization for Women uses it in this Action Alert regarding Breaking the Silence: Children's Stories. I would love to see Waller or NOW try to find some examples of advocacy of "fathers' supremacy" advocacy in the materials of some of the major shared parenting/fatherhood groups.

Does anybody  remember that long, long ago, feminist groups actually encouraged fathers' involvement in their children's lives? Seems like ancient history...

Glenn Discusses 'Gray Divorce' on Montreal's Newstalk CJAD 800

I discussed gray divorce and my co-authored column The Rise in 'Gray Divorce': It's Always Hubby's Fault (Cincinnati Post, Kentucky Post, 1/30/06) on the Kevin and Trudie Show on CJAD 800, Montreal, Quebec, Canada on February 8. I like both Kevin Holden and Trudie Mason but their views of divorce in general is an example of what we wrote in the article--"media commentators agree on one thing--when the husband divorces his wife, it's hubby's fault. When the wife divorces her husband, well, it's hubby's fault too."

Still I give Trudie credit--she seemed very interested in and sympathetic to the problems divorced fathers have in maintaining meaningful relationships with their children.
 

Woman Whose Husband Was Trapped Underground in Recent Mining Accident Has New Appreciation for Men

The sacrifices men make to support their wives and children are greatly underappreciated both by the media, our family courts, our politicians, and by women themselves. Jennifer sent me the following letter:

"Through my most recent life experience,  I have found a brand new appreciation for so many men. 

"My husband was stuck underground in a fire 1/2 a mile below the earth's surface at a Potash mine.  It was in a 25 mile radius of tunnels under there filled with black smoke so thick the rescue teams could not even see their lights on their hats.  The smoke was so thick at the shaft (cage, or elevator)  that the second rescue team had to go down to rescue the first team. 

"It was the world's largest oven with heat so hot the earth was shifting under their feet but these men did not stop.  Thirty-two men were missing and presumed dead (those men were contractors for a company called Dynatec) The foreman at Dynatec who was down there with the 32 when the fire broke out instantly ordered the men to fight the fire.  They were nowhere near equipped to do so. With the heat and the smoke, they never had oxygen masks or anything--just fire extinguishers.

"Realizing this, the foreman ordered his men to start setting up Brattice (sealed off smoke proof walls). They made 7 walls of Brattice and sealed off all air vents so the smoke couldn't come through then went to refuge in a room that had oxygen tanks (enough oxygen for only 36 hours max).  Our rescue teams (11 total) were out for 27 hours, some down well after their oxygen limit.

"They did finally get our men out.  Nobody was killed and I tell you it was sheer intelligence that saved every last one of those lives.  Even men who drink beer everyday after work and who are often belittled saved the lives of our men. 

"Crazy things that ran through my mind all night. We didn't know if we were going to see our husbands again.  Sure they told the media they were perfectly safe but they didn't really know that for sure  I know now just how much I really do love my husband and just how smart and brave he is.  I haven't left his side since 7:00 AM Monday morning and I think we get along a lot better.  I did take him for granted and I plan on treating him like gold for the rest of our lives.

"You are right--we do belittle men. Thank God we left that night on happy terms and didn't have an argument before he left for work.  Never leave on bad terms, because you never really know if you are going to see that person again.  And always kiss and hug your spouse when you say good bye.  I was sure happy I did and I know 72 wives that will from now on.

"Just thought you might want to hear something about men on a more positive note.  I know you are sick of men being cut down.  I deeply love my husband and I will treat him like gold from here on in."

Jennifer's story reminds me of Terry Helms, one of the Virginia miners killed in January. According to the Associated Press' "After Reports to the Contrary, Only One Miner Survives" (1/4/06):

"Nick Helms, who waited all day for news of his father, Terry, said his father, a strapping 50-year-old, had endured numerous injuries in a 30-year career and hated mining because of the dangers, but refused to quit because the job put food on the table.

"'He gave his life in there so I could go to the movies,' Mr. Helms, 25, said of his father. Switching to the present tense, Mr. Helms added, 'He is very selfless.'"

For generations men risked their safety and their lives to provide for their wives and children, and some still do today. In my column Hate My Father? No Ma'am! (World Net Daily, 4/8/02), I wrote of the "feminist re-writing of the pre-feminist past as a virtual dark ages where men lived like nobles and women were their serfs." I noted:

"Tens of millions of male blue collar workers--who put their bodies on the line in the coal mines and steel mills so their wives and children could live in safety and comfort--have been turned into oppressors. Their wives and children, for whom these men sacrificed so much, have been turned into their victims.

"Edited out of our history are the tragedies of millions of American men who were killed or maimed on what early trade unionists called the 'battlefield of labor.' The miners who died in cave-ins, explosions, or of black lung disease. The sailors and fisherman who died at sea. The oil refinery workers killed in explosions. The factory workers killed in industrial accidents. The construction workers who died carving train tracks and then highways through majestic mountain cliffs or the scorching desert. The construction workers who died building our bridges, dams, high rises, stadiums, and apartments. "

Also on the subject, see my column The Price of Fatherhood--a Father's Reply to Ann Crittenden's 'Mothers' Manifesto' (Los Angeles Daily Journal, San Francisco Daily Journal, 1/10/02) and my co-authored column Indiana Woman's 'Housework Strike': Maybe It's Husbands Who Should Strike (Gary Post-Tribune, 11/8/02).
 

Shared Parenting Advocate/Family Law Attorney Lisa Scott Launches RealFamilyLaw.com

Shared Parenting Advocate/Family Law Attorney Lisa Scott has just launched www.RealFamilyLaw.com to expose the truth about what is happening in our family law system. Lisa, the all-time leader in appearances on His Side with Glenn Sacks, says that she was "tired of having her stuff rejected by elitist bar publications and politically-correct newspapers" and decided to start her own website.

One of Lisa's specialties is confronting the false allegations of domestic violence that are used to drive so many men out of their children's lives. In Lisa's article Confessions of a Family Law Reform Activist or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Parenting Act she explains:

"When I graduated from law school in 1987, the Parenting Act had just been passed by the Washington State Legislature...[it] was supposed to be the end of custody battles between parents. They were supposed to work things out, for the best interests of their children.

"Well, apparently, a whole lot of divorcing parents didn't get the memo. Within a few years of beginning practice, I had been involved in numerous custody battles. Not just disagreements between spouses, but knock-down, drag-out custody wars with all the trappings: allegations of child abuse, neglect, drug abuse, alcoholism, mental problems, and that 800-pound gorilla of them all: domestic violence.

"Virtually every time I represented a father in a parenting case, he was accused of abuse. I began to anticipate the dreaded 'crimes list,' that litany of alleged wrongs committed by my client against the wife and children, beginning with 'he kicked me in the stomach while I was pregnant' (15 years ago) culminating with 'his abuse is escalating,' 'I'm fearful for my safety,' and of course, 'he's inappropriately touching the children.' It's as though these allegations were produced by the same scriptwriter, since so many of the buzzwords were repeated over and over.

"As I would learn later, they often were produced by the same writers, the 'battered women's advocates,' who appeared to be taking a few extreme cases of domestic violence and applying them across the board. Men who physically battered their wives started by verbally battering them, so in their twisted logic, every man who verbally 'abused' his spouse necessarily must be physically battering her too. Women who wanted an easy way of out a marriage, and to assure custody of the children, eagerly signed up for 'victim's benefits.' All the woman had to do was say she was abused, and the domestic violence advocates eagerly welcomed a new customer. Never mind that the wife was playing fast and loose with the real facts...Every factor determining the children's residential time with each parent could be trumped by one nearly irrefutable claim: domestic violence."

First-Grader Suspended For Sexual Harassment

According to the Associated Press:

"A Brockton, Massachusetts first grader was suspended for three days after school officials said he sexually harassed a girl in his class by allegedly putting two fingers inside the girl's waistband while she sat on the floor in front of him.

"The boy's mother, Berthena Dorinvil, said she 'screamed' about last week's suspension from Downey Elementary School, and added her son doesn't know what sexual harassment is.

"'He doesn't know those things,' she told The Enterprise of Brockton. 'He's only 6 years old.'

"School officials declined comment to The Enterprise, citing the child's age.

"'They would have not suspended the child without doing an investigation,' said spokeswoman Cynthia McNally.

"Dorinvil said the school principal, Diane Gosselin, called her to pick up her son Jan. 30. She said her son asked the principal if the police were going to come get him.

"The principal told Dorinvil the girl complained to the teacher after her son touched the girl's waistband, hitting her skin, in a room full of children.

"Dorinvil said her son told her he touched the girl's shirt, not her skin, after the girl touched him.

"'He was playing with her,' Dorinvil said."

The boy's mother is standing up for him and has some choice things to say during an interview--click here to watch.

Glenn Discusses New California Move-Away Decision on the Michael Reagan Show

I discussed the new California Supreme Court move-away decision in Brown vs. Yana on the Michael Reagan Show on the Radio America network on February 6.

Sacks, Allred Debate New California Supreme Court Move-Away Decision

I debated Gloria Allred, who won the Burgess case, on KABC radio here in Los Angeles Friday evening. On Friday during the day Gloria and I were paired against each other in a KABC TV news piece. Both times Gloria was....(sigh) Gloria. She's good at what she does but at this point I've debated her on these issues so many times that I usually can guess what she's going to say next.

For example, Gloria often says that restrictions on move-aways unfairly restrict custodial moms from moving, while not restricting noncustodial fathers. I answer that in these cases both parents are free to move wherever they want--it is the children who may not be moved if a court determines that it is against their best interests.

Gloria often says that restrictions on move-aways keep custodial parents "held hostage" in their neighborhoods, and that they should be able to "move on with their lives." I respond that both parents retain responsibilities to their children after divorce which are sometimes inconvenient or limiting, and ask "Would we argue that noncustodial parents' responsibility to pay child support holds them 'hostage?' Do we condone the behavior of divorced parents who decide to drop out of their children's lives or stop paying child support because they've decided to 'move on with their lives?'"

Father Denounces Move-Aways on KABC-TV

The best part of the radio or TV jousting was the appearance of Harvey LaForge, a reader of mine, on KABC-TV. LaForge's 14 year-old daughter was moved to
Hawaii against his will four years ago. He had joint legal and physical
custody of his daughter and a near equal timeshare but it didn't matter--mom's desire for her new squeeze 3,000 miles away was more important than this girl having a father.

The Sackson Horde is Smarter Than Me

Thanks to the dozens of you who pointed out my stupid error in last week's enewsletter. In my discussion of the LaForge move-away case I wrote "Had Harvey's case been decided under Burgess instead of LaMusga, today his daughter would probably have both of her parents in her life." Of course, I had it reversed--it should've read "Had Harvey's case been decided under LaMusga instead of Burgess, today his daughter would probably have both of her parents in her life." Sometimes no matter how much you proofread things you still make errors.

Could a Father Be More Proud?

I found this Valentine in my second grade daughter's backpack the other day. It's a letter from a sad little boy in her class who is new to the school and doesn't have any friends. Apparently my daughter befriended him and made him feel better.  The boy wrote:

"Thank you for playing with me when no one would play with me. You are a good freind. Talking with me when I was sad. Thank you for being my freind when nodotty was my freind. Eveyone hate's me but not you. You are a truw friend. Your friend, Jon."

Another Bizarre Father Screwing

According to the article Not guilty, but not off the hook (2/6/06):

"A man who spent 13 years in prison after being wrongly convicted of murder faces a debt of more than $38,000 in child-support payments that started accumulating while he was locked up...

"Larry Souter...was convicted in 1992 in the death of Kristi Ringler, who was found shortly before 3 a.m. on Aug. 25, 1979, lying in the center of state Route 37 near White Cloud in Newaygo County. She died later that day in a Grand Rapids hospital.

"Through the years, medical experts disagreed about the nature of Ringler's fatal injury. One said she likely received the wound after being struck by an automobile; another said the injury matched the shape of a whiskey bottle found alongside the highway.

"In 1991, after one expert reiterated his belief in the likelihood of the whiskey bottle theory, Souter was charged with murder.

"Prosecutors accused Souter, who had just met Ringler in a bar on the night of her death, of killing her. He was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to 20 to 60 years in prison.

"Defense attorneys fought the conviction and found that evidence that could have helped Souter at trial was lost or missing, including police reports suggesting Ringler was hit by a motor home's mirror.

"A federal judge released Souter last April 1.

"In 1987, before his conviction, [Larry] Souter was ordered to pay $100 a week in his divorce with Christine Souter. He stopped paying when he went to prison in 1992 but didn't ask to have payments suspended until 1995.

"Court documents show that in 1997, he owed $23,000 in back support. As of last month, interest and penalties had pushed it to $38,082.25.

"Federal law prohibits judges from retroactively wiping out such debts...

"David Sarnacki, an attorney for Souter's ex-wife, wrote in a court filing that his client 'has endured the substantial burden of raising her two children without defendant's contribution of child support.'"

I love the quote from his ex-wife's attorney. Yes, he didn't pay child support because he was in prison framed on a murder charge. I guess we should be grateful the lawyer didn't refer to Souter as a "deadbeat dad." That'll probably be next. One would also think that after seeing her ex-husband rot in jail for 13 years for a crime he didn't commit, she would feel so damn sorry for the poor guy that she would back off. I guess not.

In a previous article Souter had discussed putting his life back together and his plans. Now he may be headed back on the road to jail.

I wrote about California legislation designed to deal with the problem of ex-offenders and child support in my co-authored column Schwarzenegger Should Sign Bill to Reduce Prisoner Recidivism (Riverside Press-Enterprise, 9/21/05). The Bradley Amendment, under which child support arrearages cannot be retroactively forgiven, is the cause of countless bizarre injustices, and often hurts deployed military personnel. In my co-authored column Laws must protect the rights of military dads (Army Times, Marine Corps Times, 3/28/05) family law attorney Jeff Leving and I wrote:

"[Child] support orders are based on civilian pay, which is generally higher than active duty pay. When reservists are called up to active duty they sometimes pay an impossibly high percentage of their income in child support.

"For example, a California naval reservist who has three children and who takes home $4,000 a month in his civilian job would have a child support obligation of about $1,600 a month. If this father is a petty officer second class (E5) who has been in the reserves for six or seven years--a middle-ranked reservist--his active-duty pay would only be $2,205 before taxes, in addition to a housing allowance. Under current California child support guidelines, the reservist's child support obligation should be $550 a month, not $1,600.

"A reasonable reader unfamiliar with the wonders of the child support system would probably think 'OK, but the courts would just straighten it out when the reservist gets back--certainly they wouldn't punish him for something that happened because he was serving.' However, the federal Bradley Amendment prohibits judges from retroactively modifying child support beyond the date which an obligor has applied for a modification. Reservists can be mobilized with as little as one day's notice. If a reservist didn't have time or didn't know he had to file for a downward modification, the arrearages stay, along with the interest and penalties charged on them.

"When the arrearage reaches $5,000--a common occurrence during long deployments--the father can become a felon who can be incarcerated or subject to a barrage of harsh civil penalties, including seizure of driver's licenses, business licenses and passports."

To learn more, see below:

• Ron Henry's Child Support at a Crossroads: When the Real World Intrudes Upon Academics and Advocates (Family Law Quarterly, Vol. 33, No. 1, 1999)

• Child-support-law amendment comes to attention of Hill; Provision revision could end to horror stories  (Washington Times, 4/27/99)

• Read the Bradley Amendment here

• His Side: Showdown in Motown: Michigan Dads vs. Leader of ACES (4/18/04)

• His Side: Child Support Civil Rights Violations (7/18/04)

Couldn't Have Said It Better Myself

From the editorial Abduction and fathers' rights (The Daily Dispatch, 2/4/06):

"When children are abducted, the authorities scramble to recover them safe and sound.

"Most of the time.

"When children are kidnapped from a custodial parent, and that custodial parent is a man, sometimes it seems that bringing the abducting mother to justice and returning sons and daughters to their father's home is less a priority.

"A Friday incident in North Carolina reminds us of another case that hits even closer to home.

"The Associated Press reports that two girls abducted from their father by their mother in Ahoskie more than six years ago were recovered just this week after they were found in a car during a routine traffic stop - in Lillington, less than 175 miles away...

"...we have to believe that if it was the father who took the children from their mother, a dragnet would've caught him long ago. The courts wouldn't simply have issued almost meaningless orders that are all but ignored by law enforcement and the courts themselves until a cop stumbles across kidnapped children - again, six years later in the same state - quite by happenstance.

"Simply put, the law often fails fathers in custody disputes.

"Witness the case of toddler Andy Hakes, who was taken from his father Jacob - son of Henderson's Molly Hakes - by the boy's mother. Andy's mother bounced between relatives' homes in Colorado and Arizona for six months, ignoring Virginia court orders to return her son to his custodial father. Though the Hakes family often had leads on where the boy was being kept, they said the authorities in those communities would flat-out tell them that they didn't want to get involved.

"If Andy Hakes or the Steyne girls had been abducted by their fathers, it's far more likely that those men would've been hunted down and arrested in shorter order. When mothers steal their children from fathers, it seems at times like nobody's in any hurry to see that Daddy gets them back.

"It's wrong to assume children are better off - or even safe - with their mothers, especially when those mothers are committing a criminal act in keeping them."

To write a letter to editor Glenn Craven, click here.

I've written a few columns about parental abductions, including The Betrayal of the Military Father (Los Angeles Daily News, 5/4/03) and  Shared Custody Could Help Prevent Abductions (Colorado Springs Gazette, 9/22/02).

Best Wishes,
Glenn Sacks
GlennSacks.com
HisSide.com

Subscribe to this E-Newsletter

Email this E-Newsletter to a Friend

Missed an E-Newsletter? Find all of Glenn's E-Newsletters here

GlennSacks.com / HisSide.com

To be removed from our list, send an email to remove@glennsacks.com with the subject line "Remove." Please allow up to 2 weeks for removal to be processed.