The War Against Families

Dr. Stephen Baskerville: Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family.

We need to open our eyes. Most people in America today do not realize the following:
“The government is engaged in a massive war on fathers.”
“[The] crisis of fatherhood is almost entirely the creation of the government. It’s government hoax.”
“Fathers are the main obstacle to the government’s expansion of power.”

Mothers must realize these tactics and stop falling for the trap. This is the only way to protect our children. Mothers must open their eyes to what is going on. Fathers, we need to unite to put a stop to this madness. This is an all out war against the family.

Guess Which Mass Murderers Came From A Fatherless Home

“This book [Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family] is about our unwillingness to confront the most destructive and dangerous injustice in our society today: the systematic seizure of children by government officials and the criminalization of their parents. A parent today who has committed no legal infraction can have his (or sometimes her) parenthood and relationship with his children criminalized entirely through the actions of others in ways that are completely beyond his control. It focuses largely on fathers and on divorce, because these are the ones most commonly involved. But because the father is, as Margaret Mead once pointed out, the weakest link in the family chain, the threat to fathers is the first step in a larger assault on parents generally and the family as an institution.4 The state-sponsored destruction of fathers and fatherhood is connected to a larger trend of government agencies assuming control over children from parents of either or both genders in what has been characterized as “the assault on parenthood” or “the war against parents.””

«Stephen Baskerville’s “Taken into Custody” details for us the brutal police-state machinery which has grown up in the past forty years to encour­age, enforce, and profit from it. Here is the reality behind such commonplace euphemisms as “marital breakdown” and “custody disputes”:

A man comes home one day to find his house empty. On the table is a note from his wife saying she has taken the children to live with her sister or parents or boyfriend, or to a “battered women’s shelter.” Soon after comes a knock on the door. He is summoned to appear [at] a family court within a few hours. In a hearing that lasts a few minutes his children are legally removed from his care … and he is ordered to stay away from them most or all of the time. He is also ordered to begin making child support payments, an order is entered to garnish his wages, and his name is placed on a federal government data­base for monitoring “delinquents.” If he tries to see his children outside the authorized time, or fails to make the payments, he can be arrested. Without being permitted to speak, he is told the hearing is over.

The man may be accused of domestic violence or child sexual abuse, in which case there may be no hearing at all … but the police will simply come to the door and order him to leave his home within hours, or minutes, even if no evidence has been presented against him… The man may also be ordered to pay alimony and the fees of lawyers he has not hired and threatened with arrest if he refuses or is unable… If he refuses to hire a lawyer he will be ordered to pay his spouse’s lawyer. Either way, he will pay $50,000-$150,000 and possibly much more… If he refuses to answer questions or pay he can be jailed without a trial… If he objects, he can be ordered to undergo a psychiatric evaluation.

At his “trial,” he will be interrogated about the most intimate details of his family life. And no answer is correct. If he works long hours, he is a careerist who ne­glects his children. If he cares for his children, he is failing to earn as much income for them as he might. If he disciplines his children, he is controlling or even abusive. If he does not, he is neglectful. If he does not bathe them, he is neglecting them. If he does, he may be molesting them. All this costs him “$400-$500 an hour, and the ordeal lasts as long as the lawyers and judge wish to drive up the fees.”

Whatever the outcome of the trial, for the rest of his children’s childhood they and he will live under constant surveillance and control by the court. He will be told when he can see his children, what he can do with them, where he can take them … what religious services he may (or must) attend with them and what subjects he may discuss with them in private… He can be ordered to work certain hours and at certain jobs, the earnings from which will be confiscated… If he loses his job or is hospitalized he will be declared a felon and jailed for failure to pay child support. His home can be entered by officials of the court… His financial records will be demanded and examined by the court and his bank account will be raided… His children can be compelled to act as informers against him. He can be ordered to sell his house and turn the proceeds over to attorneys he has not hired. Baskerville notes that the very monstrousness of the injustices being com­mitted against fathers prevents some people from accepting that they are taking place.

A common initial reaction to the horror stories is “if things are really as bad as that, wouldn’t we have heard about it before now?”  There are several reasons. One, of course, is that journalists whose job it is to inform us of corruption in public life prefer to entertain us with features on “gay marriage” and movie stars’ romances. But a second is that the family courts directly retaliate against parents who attempt to organize or speak out. It is a crime in many jurisdictions to criticize a family court judge; where it is not, judges can simply issue individual gag orders from the bench. Baskerville reports instances of fathers who were arrested for talking to reporters about their cases. Sheriff’s deputies photograph protest demonstrations by fathers’ groups. Internet sites have been shut down. Archaic laws against “defamatory libel” and “scandalizing the court” have been resurrected to prosecute critics. Court officials have been deputized to monitor fathers’ criticisms of the court in the press and in their private correspondence (which they can be ordered to hand over on pain of incarceration). Meanwhile, officials are free to discuss the private lives of fathers openly in public meetings and post information about their cases on the Internet.
Family court proceedings occur behind closed doors, and most often no records are kept. In cases where they are, they have sometimes been illegally falsified by unknown persons. Judges cite “family privacy” as the rational for secrecy. But in fact, the Clerk of Courts is required to make plenty of informa­tion about “defendants” (fathers) public: Social Security numbers, unlisted telephone numbers, and more. They are prohibited, however, from divulging the name of the judge assigned to the case. Baskerville draws the obvious con­clusion: The purpose of all the secrecy and censorship is not to protect family privacy but to allow the courts to invade it with impunity.»

Jeff Nyquist interviews author and researcher Stephen Baskerville about the divorce industry and the destruction of the family in the United States. Since the adoption of unilateral divorce in the 1970s millions of innocent parents have lost their rights under a system that violates the constitutional guarantee of due process of law for preserving individual freedom and property. Today judges can sieze assets and children, arrest parents and jail them indefinitely without trial by jury. According to Baskerville, “The deadbeat dad is a myth. Today’s divorce courts are machinery largely created for plundering fathers. Separate the children from the father, then plunder the father.” The game is organized by feminists, exploited by lawyers, while the rest of society remains silent.

Mrs. Phyllis Schlafly: Who Killed the American Family?


Taking Our Families Back