Category: Blog

Utopia, TX–Background: Recently I criticized USA Today financial columnist Sandra Block’s column Husbands should consider delaying Social Security benefits (USA Today, 1/15/08). I wrote:

“[Block] all but comes right out and says that men are selfish for retiring at retirement age. Instead, men should continue to work, work, work while–guess what?–women should retire earlier. According to Block, by working well past retirement age, men can ‘make up for all the times you came home with beer on your breath, left your socks on the bathroom floor or gave your wife a DustBuster for Valentine’s Day.’

“I guess 40 years of working longer hours than your wife at a job more demanding and hazardous than hers–as most men do–isn’t enough…to write a Letter to the Editor of USA Today, email letters@usatoday.com.”

Two of our blog readers’ letters were published in USA Today’s January 24 edition–“Husbands don’t ‘owe’ a delayed retirement” by Robert Franklin and “Cease stereotypes” by Tim Murray. The letters appear below–well done gentlemen.

Husbands don’t ‘owe’ a delayed retirement
Robert Franklin – Utopia, Texas

I was extremely disappointed with Sandra Block’s column “Husbands should consider delaying Social Security benefits” (Your Money, Money, Jan. 15).

Block writes: “Here’s some advice for married men who will turn 62 this year: If you want to make up for all the times you came home with beer on your breath, left your socks on the bathroom floor or gave your wife a DustBuster for Valentine’s Day, hold off on filing for your Social Security benefits.”

Why does she not just first make her case, which boils down, in part, to the fact that a spouse can choose the higher of the two spouse’s Social Security payments upon the death of one partner?

Why does she need to throw in the notion that the man owes it to the woman to work more years because he’s deficient?

Isn’t a main concept behind the column that the husband’s payout is probably higher than the wife’s? That means he has probably worked more, earned more and contributed more money to the support of the family. And according to the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics survey, on average, men work about an hour more than women per day.

So why the disrespect for the man? Why the misandry?

Cease stereotypes
Tim Murray – Pittsburgh

I suppose Sandra Block thought she was being humorous when she wrote her column “Husbands should consider delaying Social Security benefits.”

If the column is intended to explain an economic issue, why does she go out of her way to lead off with good old-fashioned male-bashing? Husbands don’t “owe” it to their wives to continue working past retirement age to make up for stereotypical male failings. I guess we husbands owe it to our wives to keep working until we drop dead — all to make up for being born male.

Los Angeles, CA–“When he took me to Europe one summer we went to the site of the forced labor camp at Ohrdruf, which his unit, the 4th Armored Division of Patton’s Third Army, helped liberate, and later to the museum at Dachau, an extermination camp. As we walked around, I could tell my father was moved.

“He knelt down and put his hands on my shoulders. He said, ‘Joey, someday somebody’s going to tell you this didn’t happen. But I was here, and I saw it. The Germans murdered these people, millions of them.’ As he got up he said, ‘Never turn away from the truth, no matter how ugly.'”

The story below was sent to me last year by a reader. It really belongs in Tim Russert’s Wisdom of Our Fathers.

Chester James Staub, May 4th, 1912 – January 13th, 1997

Today is the tenth anniversary of my father’s death. Every year I send out a reminder and perhaps an anecdote. But ten years is enough, so I’ll finish, and I’ll do so with sharing the eulogy I delivered at his memorial service. I spoke extemporaneously then, but I remember most of what I said. My father loved baseball. He loved pretty girls, big band music, and fast cars. He loved to dance. He loved his country and its flag and all that they stood for. He loved old movies. He loved to read, mostly 20th century history. He loved cold beer and grilled cheese sandwiches and potatoes fried in a skillet. He loved his family and he loved my mother, after a fashion. He loved Johnny Carson and Carol Burnett and the Newman character on Seinfeld.

But most of all he loved me. I know because he told me so, often. He always said that the best moment of his life was holding me for the first time, to be surpassed only, he would go on, by all the moments with me since then. He loved me deeply and wasn’t afraid to show it. But I tell you it wasn’t always easy, being loved like that. There were times he spoiled me, and other times when his adoration made it hard for him to see me as I was, and vice versa. But we worked it out, he and I, and we came to know each other, and I learned from it all that a great love is, as he said, a flame that can both illuminate and burn.

I am not sure he loved my mother, or she him. It was clear to me very early on that they had only married to give me a stable home. I knew they loved me, and they were certainly civil and even social with each other, but that was all. Perhaps they had tried to make it work at one point, but by the time I was in junior high it had become merely a waiting game. I told them once, when I was in seventh grade, that they didn’t have to stay together because of me, I was fine. We were eating dinner when I brought it up, and my father turned to me, put down his fork, and said, “What’s between your mother and me is none of your damn business. We love you. That’s all you need to know.” My mother added, “That goes for me, too, Joey.” And so it went. When I left home they split up, and
whatever deal they had made, they took to their graves. Maybe there wasn’t so much love between them, but I learned from him and her something about the nature of sacrifice and, more importantly, that they were right: it wasn’t any of my business and some things ought not to be.

My father taught me much.

Norfolk, VA–“That’s right. Contempt. Sneering, mocking, name-calling, eye-rolling, sarcastic, cynical, bitter-tasting contempt. Contempt is a very bad sign in a marriage…the Silly Husband has been a common figure in commercials, TV and movies for ages. I’ve been fine with that, but lately it seems commercials have taken on a more acrid flavor.

“Instead of Silly Husband, the guy I see most often now is Ridiculous Lazy Idiot Who Can’t Do Anything Right. That guy is so common that right after the tax commercial the archetype showed up again in a Domino’s Pizza commercial. When the husband finds out he has 30 minutes before the pizza comes, he appears in a red satin robe. ‘Are you thinking what I’m thinking?’

“The wife deadpans, ‘What are we going to do with the other 28 minutes?’

“That’s harsh. If my husband said something so cold to me, I wouldn’t stand there smiling. I’d sneak off somewhere to lick my wounds. Forget the pizza.

“Sure, these are just commercials. I should ignore them, turn them off, stop watching so much TV. And yet, I can’t ignore that human beings tend to copy the examples in front of them…

“I hope I never end up like that. Every time I see one of those commercials…I’ll take that display of contempt and use it as a cue to pounce on my husband and kiss him all over.”

I couldn’t say it any better than Norfolk Virginian-Pilot columnist Jacey Eckhart does in her recent column ‘Silly husband’ commercials are starting to tax my patience (1/22/08), which is quoted above. To send her a nice note, write to jacey87@mac.com. To send a Letter to the Editor, click on letters@pilotonline.com.

To watch the ad Eckhart refers to–Domino’s Pizza’s “What are we going to do with the other 28 minutes?”–click here or see below.

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acCnKmZDpfA]

Riverside, CA–Background: Recently California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Connecticut Governor M. Jodi Rell, and numerous California and Connecticut legislators took strong measures to protect goldfish, bunny rabbits, cats, dogs, and hamsters like little Cinnamon (pictured) from abusive relationships.

Earlier this year Rell signed a bill to protect pet victims of domestic violence and explained with a straight face, “Pets are too often the silent victims of domestic violence. They cannot fight back, and they are presently afforded no protection under our current legal system.’

According to Dr. Ned Holstein, Executive Director of Fathers & Families, Massachusetts has picked up this crucial public health issue with HB 1546.

Earlier this year Mike McCormick, Executive Director of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children, and I co-authored a column on the bill Schwarzenegger signed– see CA Legislators Vote to Protect Pets from Domestic Violence but Deny Services to Male DV Victims (Long Beach Press-Telegram, 4/21/07).

The story below from the Riverside Press-Enterprise decries the fact that–no joke–there are “few resources to protect Inland Empire pets caught up in domestic violence.” But all hope is not lost:

“Animal Safety Net [is] one of few safe-house programs for animals caught in the web of domestic violence…

“Riverside County Department of Animal Services officials have acknowledged the need to protect animals in violent households…In most parts of the country, pets continue to be silent victims of domestic violence, [Madeline Bernstein, president of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in Los Angeles] said…

“Animal Safety Net works with prosecutors, social workers, sheriff’s officials and domestic-violence shelters to remove animals from abusive situations and temporarily house them in secret foster homes until the domestic-violence victims can find a safe place for the animals.

“It starts when police or social workers ask domestic-violence victims if they fear for their pets. If they do, authorities can retrieve the pets and place them in protective custody…there have been discussions within the department about ways to serve pets caught up in domestic violence, John Welsh said.

“In some regions, police, prosecutors, social workers and animal shelters work together to make sure that the animals are protected along with human victims, [Frank R. Ascione, a psychology professor at Utah State University] said. Some agencies refer pets to animal safe houses, and some county animal shelters take pains to hide the pets from abusers by housing them separately from pets up for adoption and by obscuring their names and ages, he said.

“At Animal Friends in The Valleys of Lake Elsinore, animal-control officers can remove pets from an abusive home and keep them in protective custody if the domestic-violence victim signs an affidavit swearing to the threat against the animal.

“‘We will do whatever it takes to make sure the animal is safe,’ said Monique Middleton, an officer at the shelter.”

Everyone’s concern and soul-searching over abused hamsters is touching–particularly when there is not one domestic violence shelter in all of Riverside County which does outreach to abused men. I’m not aware of one that will even take in an abused man.

And as far as I know there is not one police program in all of Riverside County which focuses on helping abused men escape their violent wives. This is despite decades of research which shows that women are as likely to abuse their husbands as vice versa, and that a third of all domestic violence related injuries are suffered by men.

The full article is Few resources protect Inland pets caught up in domestic violence (Riverside Press-Enterprise, 1/20/08)

To write a Letter to the Editor about this story, go to letters@pe.com. The reporter, Paige Austin, can be reached at 951-893-2106 or paustin@PE.com.

[Note: If you or someone you love is being abused, the Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men and Women provides crisis intervention and support services to victims of domestic violence and their families.]

London, England–What a wonderful Father-Son ad from First Choice Holidays in the UK. The ad is called “Slow Motion Hugs.”

To contact First Choice to commend them for their positive, accurate portrayal of a father-son relationship, click here.

The ad was produced by the Beattie McGuinness Bungay advertising agency in London. To commend BMB for creating the ad, see below.

Phone: 0207 632 0400
Fax: 0207 632 0401
Email: andrew@bmbagency.com

To watch the ad, click here.

Thanks to Dan, an English reader, for sending it.

Houston, TX–“I retired because I wanted to be with my family and my kids and it was just time…I’m having so much fun being in their lives and being a dad again–full-time dad and not a rent-a-dad or part-time dad. I’m really having a good time with it.”–Future Hall-of-Famer Craig Biggio

AK, a reader, sent me this recent Houston Chronicle article on Craig Biggio (above left) and wrote “Craig Biggio retired this past year after 20 years with the Houston Astros. He is 42 and could have certainly played longer. So why did he retire? To spend time with his family.”

AK sounds like a bit of a Biggio fan–Biggio’s playing skills were in steep decline when he retired, though he certainly could have continued to play in a more limited role–backup infielder/outfielder, pinch hitter, maybe a platoon regular. In his day he was a fantastic and underrated player. I’m glad he’s enjoying full-time fatherhood now.

It reminds me a bit of Al Kaline (above right), the great Detroit Tigers outfielder of the 1950s and 1960s who was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 1980. Kaline retired a little early, too, and said:

“I quit playing baseball because my son was getting ready to go to college and I hadn’t spent enough time with him. I wanted one summer with him before he went to college.”

The article is excerpted below.

Back on the field
Biggio could see himself staying in coaching profession
By BRIAN MCTAGGART
Houston Chronicle, 1/17/08

The coach roams around the baseball field with a piece of paper in his hand — a workout schedule for the day — while dozens of teenage boys sit in a pair of dugouts and await orders.

It’s the second day of baseball tryouts at St. Thomas High School, and a steady drizzle and cool temperatures do little to dampen the enthusiasm. Only once, when a passing student yells his name, is there any indication the coach under the visor has extraordinary credentials.

Craig Biggio tries to blend in with the rest of the coaching staff, which can be pretty difficult when you’ve amassed 3,060 hits in the major leagues, played in seven All-Star Games and have more doubles than any righthanded hitter in history.

Instead of dealing with the grind of a 162-game major league schedule and drawing a multi-million dollar salary, Biggio’s post-playing days have been filled volunteering as an assistant baseball and football coach at St. Thomas.

“They call me ‘coach Biggio,’ ” said Biggio, whose oldest son Conor is a freshman baseball and football player for the Eagles. “I really am enjoying it. I know I did the right thing in retiring when I did. It’s a great feeling.”

Biggio, 42, has been a fixture on the practice fields at the private Catholic school on Memorial Drive since October, shortly after his 20-year career with the Astros came to an end.

“This is a huge deal for us,” head baseball coach Ken Schulte said. “We thought we were getting a great kid, and in reality we wound up getting a heck of a coach, too.”

St. Thomas athletic director/head football coach Kurt Page approached Biggio a few days after the Astros’ season ended about helping coach the freshman football team. Schulte then recruited Biggio to help with baseball.

“I was happy to help out,” Biggio said. “I wasn’t sure how I was going to be accepted or they were going to accept me or how it was going to go, but for the 4 1/2 weeks of football that we did it, it was great. I loved it. They have a great bunch of kids over here at St. Thomas. They’re very respectful and just want to get better and want to play and work hard in school.”

Biggio’s participation in football wasn’t limited to practices. He worked the sidelines during freshman games, complete with a St. Thomas polo shirt and khaki pants like the rest of the coaches.

After initially being awed, the players grew accustomed to seeing Biggio around the field.

“The kids are just good kids, and after you meet them they’re just like, ‘Hey, you’re just like everybody else,’ ” he said. “It was really the whole adjustment process of them accepting me, and it didn’t take long at all.”

Craig Biggio, a regular guy? That’s something Conor knew all along.

“It’s not like, ‘Oh, my gosh, there’s Craig Biggio,’ ” said Conor, a defensive back/running back in football and — surprise! — second baseman in baseball. “He’s just doing the same thing as other coaches and treating everybody the same”…

“[Biggio] retired to be with his family, including Conor, 12-year-old son Cavan and 8-year-old daughter Quinn, all of whom are active in sports.

“There’s not much time, and hunting season has taken a (back seat) because of it,” Biggio said. “That is good, though. The deer are always going to be there and my kids aren’t. I retired because I wanted to be with my family and my kids and it was just time.

“This is the right thing to do, even though I can still play. I’m having so much fun being in their lives and being a dad again — full-time dad and not a rent-a-dad or part-time dad. I’m really having a good time with it”…

Read the full article and watch the video interview of Biggio here.

Fontana, CA–Background: Mary Winkler–who shot her husband in the back and then refused to aid him or call 911 as he slowly bled to death for 20 minutes–walked away a free woman last summer after serving a farcically brief “sentence” for her crimes.

Mary Winkler”s claims of abuse were largely uncorroborated during the trial. According to the testimony from Matthew Winkler’s oldest daughter, Patricia, the dead father–who as he lay dying looked at his wife and asked “why?”–was a good man and did not abuse her mother.

To learn more about this horrendous injustice, see my co-authored column No child custody for husband-killer Mary Winkler (World Net Daily, 9/14/07), or click here.

I think Bertha Martinez (pictured) is going to need Mary Winkler’s defense attorney–she was arrested and is being held on suspicion of murdering her disabled husband and her two kids.

Police say the couple had financial problems and had had trouble in their marriage, separating a year ago and then getting back together. I can hardly wait to hear Bertha explain how that monstrous 58-year-old disabled man beat, abused, and imprisoned a healthy 35-year-old woman, and why that necessitated her killing him and, um, killing their kids, too.

I bet her family is sitting there getting their stories straight right now–“OK, let’s practice–Bertha came over here screaming because…because…her husband was…uh…beating her, yes, that’s it, that’s what works–all together now ‘He was beating her’…”

Mom arrested in triple slaying
1/21/08
By RICHARD BROOKS
The Press-Enterprise

FONTANA – A 35-year-old Fontana woman is behind bars on suspicion of murdering her 58-year-old disabled husband and her two daughters, ages 7 years and 8 months, Fontana police said this morning.

Bertha Martinez went to a friend’s home about 10 a.m. Sunday and said her children were purple from the neck up, Sgt. Jeff Decker said. Officers were dispatched to check on the family and found the bodies of Marcelo Martinez and the couple’s children, 7-year-old Amy Martinez and 8-month-old Yomay Martinez.

The children were dead in their beds, apparently victims of strangulation or suffocation, Decker said. Their father was dead on the family room floor with head injuries from an apparent beating, the sergeant said.

Marcelo Martinez was a former warehouse worker who was disabled by a back injury, police said.

The motive for the killings remains unclear, Decker said.

Los Angeles, CA–In the www.FreeCreditReport.com ad “Dream Girl,” believe it or not, the woman was the irresponsible one whose mistakes made life more difficult for her husband.

In the anti-male world of advertising, this is a true man-bites-dog story.

To watch the ad, click here or see below.

Thanks to Charles, a reader, for sending it.

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FspHU8hOxhY]

London, England–There is a controversy over one UK dating agency’s offer to connect men with Czech women “unspoiled by feminism.” Feminist domestic violence advocates are protesting, and one politician said, “Material like this is frankly disgusting and I am certain that everyone will share my revulsion.”

My feeling about international dating agencies in general is that I wouldn’t do it, but I wouldn’t criticize it. If that’s what men want, fine, it’s their lives. As for the comment that has generated the controversy–women “unspoiled by feminism”–I have a few thoughts:

1) If it really is an advertisement for doormat women, then yes, it’s offensive. But I doubt that’s what the agency meant, and I doubt that’s what most men who go to these agencies are looking for. While I’m sure these agencies do sometimes serve the “keep ’em barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen” type of male, probably the vast majority of the men just want a woman who doesn’t buy into the woman good/man bad Western feminist worldview. Do you really want to go through life with someone for whom it’s always his fault? I can understand men wanting to avoid this.

2) For the men at these agencies, “unspoiled by feminism” may well be code for “wants an intact family, isn’t fond of divorce.” Divorce is rampant in the West, and it is women, not men, who initiate the vast majority of divorces. Yes, sometimes the women have good cause or the relationship really is nonfunctional, but sometimes that is not the case. I can see why a man who’s been through the “I had no idea she wanted to divorce me” scenario–complete with concomitant restriction of access to his children and financial misfortune–would look for a crop of women who are less inclined to divorce.

3) Another way to look at it is this–if anybody, male or female, is considering marriage, and could choose from crop of potential partners #1, where the divorce potential was 1 in 2, and crop of potential partners #2 where the divorce rate was maybe 1 in 4, wouldn’t he or she be quite right to choose group #2? (BTW, does anybody know what divorce rates in the Czech Republic actually are?)

4) That being said, I’m skeptical that these foreign marriages work all that well. I’ve received plenty of letters from men who went for foreign brides and hooked up with the stereotypical beautiful and much younger spouse, and thought they had found true love, only to find that their foreign wives were more interested in their money and citizenship than them as people. If you’re one of those guys who wants her mostly for her beauty, don’t be shocked if she wants you mostly for your money.

5) I’m skeptical that Czech women are so unfamiliar with feminism. The Eastern Bloc countries employed many of the ideas that feminists recommend, including low-cost, 24 hour child care, free abortion on demand, and an emphasis on women having jobs and careers. I traveled throughout the East Bloc in the early ’80s, including Czechoslovakia. While it was obvious that the country’s economy was stifled by what Trotsky accurately called the “dead hand of the bureaucracy,” the women there were well-educated, and were hardly clueless naives.

The article is below.

Fury Over Dating Agency’s Sleazy Ads
Jan 21 2008
By James Moncur

A DATING agency’s sleazy offer of Czech women “unspoiled by feminism” was slammed yesterday.

Protesters have demanded that council officials investigate the activities of the Hand In Hand agency, whose website features the women in skimpy clothing and underwear.

They promise clients women 10 to 20 years younger than them who are “unspoiled by feminism at a very affordable price”.

It also claims they are “beautiful, intelligent and educated” and have a “culture of support and respect for their husband”.

Domestic abuse campaigner Kathryn Sharp said her jaw dropped when she read one of the fliers the agency are distributing around Dundee.

She said: “Its approach to women would be offensive to anyone, male or female. The implication is it is about the ability to buy a bride.

“As well as the offence it could cause to members of the public, the leaflet must raise concerns about exploitation of women in the Czech Republic.”

Another woman who complained said: “The small print on the leaflets probably explains the women cost a couple of goats and half a dozen chickens and that they always look forward to their daily beatings.”

Police have also been made aware of the agency’s leafleting activities.

Dundee councillor Joe Morrow pledged to act yesterday after receiving a number of complaints.

He said: “Material like this is frankly disgusting and I am certain that everyone in Dundee will share my revulsion that it is being handed out in public.”

A spokesman for Hand In Hand in Dundee, one of a number of franchises of the agency in the UK, insisted they were above board. He added: “We are simply an introduction agency and not a buy-a-bride service.”

But it emerged last night that Hand In Hand have been criticised by websites investigating internet scams and blacklisted by one – agencyscams.com.

Their investigator said: “I first ran across this agency three years ago. All the girls are the same as then. Bad sign.”

Denver, CO–Still another scholar has concluded that moveaways hurt children in most cases.

Dr. William G. Austin of Denver reviewed 77 research studies and summarized them in the January, 2008 issue of Family Court Review. He concluded, “Methodologically sound survey studies show strong effects on child outcomes due to residential mobility following divorce. The measurement of child adjustment problems . . .  ranges from greater frequency of school behavior problems with younger children to lower academic achievement, greater teen pregnancy, and lower psychological well-being in older children.’

Kenneth Waldron looked at over 70 published studies and reached similar conclusions in the Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers in 2005.

As did Sanford Braver in the Journal of Family Psychology in 2003.

As did Richard Warshak in the Family Law Quarterly in 2000.

Unfortunately, Austin also wrote, “It would be unsound to use the research reviewed here as a basis for a presumption or bias against relocation of a child . . . ‘  Why do the psychologists usually oppose presumptions that would work well for most children? Because they hold the illusion that every case can be analyzed in depth by wise students of human behavior such as themselves. Lawyers file motions. Surgeons operate, and psychologists analyze.

They overlook the real world of crowded courtrooms, apathetic judges, no money for psychologists, and incompetent attorneys (if there is any attorney at all). In the real world, a presumption that works for most children is an absolute necessity.

In truth, there is already a presumption at work  —  but it is the wrong presumption, the one that says the custodial parent can leave with the kids. Even if not written into the statute book, it is very real in the courtrooms of many states. We need to replace the wrong presumption with the right one.

If there is no de facto presumption already in effect in Massachusetts in favor of moveaways, please explain to me the outcome in the case of Pizzino v. Miller:

Mr. and Mrs. Miller have two sons. Mrs. Miller began an affair with Mr. Pizzino. After awhile, it was discovered and led to a divorce. Despite her misbehavior, Mrs. Miller was awarded physical custody of the children – no surprise there. Over the next year or so, she acquired a few contempt citations for interfering with Mr. Miller”s access to his boys. After awhile, she married Mr. Pizzino. There was only one problem: Mr. Pizzino was active duty military and was stationed in South Carolina.

The new Mrs. Pizzino applied to the court to move to South Carolina with the two boys. She wanted to live with her new husband, of course. The GAL (a psychologist retained by the court) found that Mr. Miller was a great dad and the children were closely bonded to him. The psychologist recommended against the relocation, and the family court denied the moveaway.

Now enter the Massachusetts Appeals Court. Under crazy Massachusetts case law, the Appeals Court found that mom”s history of interfering with dad”s access to the children was not relevant (!). Also, the children”s strong relationship with dad was not a good enough reason to prevent the move. Therefore, the family court judge”s ruling should be overturned and the kids should go to South Carolina.

Somebody smarter than I please explain to me how this is good for the boys. They have lived their entire lives in Massachusetts and will now move to a military base in South Carolina. The research literature shows that the move will probably be very tough on them. They will live with a man whom they barely know and whom they probably don”t like since he is partly responsible for the break-up of their parents” marriage. Their mom will be distracted by her new marriage. They will need to make new friends in a military culture that is foreign to them, in a new community where their New England accent will be considered strange, in new schools that probably will be inferior.

Here”s the icing on the cake. The military will almost certainly move Mr. Pizzino from time to time, meaning that the children face not just one move, but a series of moves.

Oh, and one detail:  they will rarely see their father, whom they love, partly because of the distance, and partly because mom has a history of obstructing their time together.

Here”s the best part: under Massachusetts” perverted law, all this is done because it is allegedly in the best interests of the children. Go figure.

Click here to read the Fathers & Families bill in the Massachusetts Legislature that would tighten up on moveaways. We pushed this bill through the House a few years ago, and this year we hope to get it through both chambers.

Together with you in the love of our children,
Ned Holstein, M.D., M.S.
Executive Director