Steve McDonough

Massachusetts Coordinator

daddyozz@verizon.net

www.myspace.com/daddyozz

Steve McDonough's Bio

Massachusetts Links

RESTRAINING ORDER HELP:

www.massoutrage.com/store/ma/win-your-own-restraining-order-case-in-massachuset/

massoutrage.com/ma/restraining-order-resources/fighting-false-restraining-orders/

CPF / The Fatherhood Coalition advocates for the institution of fatherhood, encompassing the full range of human behaviors and endeavors that flow from the father-child relationship. We work to promote shared parenting and to end the discrimination and persecution faced by divorced and unwed fathers.

fatherhoodcoalition.org

Register here and sign up for the Fathers List(FATHERS-L)

fatherhoodcoalition.org/Signup.html

Mass Dads:

www.massdads.com/index.html

Our mission is to help unite all parents and groups into a single voice to change the broken, biased and often corrupt family legal system that is destroying children due to ignorance and financial incentives provided by billions of dollars in federal funds.

fathersunite.org

Fathers & Families is a Massachusetts non-profit organization advocating for the right of every child to have two parents. Called by some a "fathers' rights organization," Fathers & Families is made up of men and women who believe that fathers are an essential part of a child's life and that divorce or separation should not change this.

fathersandfamilies.org/site/index.php

MassOutrage is a collection of real-world practical information about how the Massachusetts Department of Social Services (DSS) works, how restraining orders work, and how to fight them to save your family. This site will help you learn about the actual tactics used by the DSS to illegally kidnap children from families, and how radical victim-witness advocates (sometimes also from the DSS) exploit courts and others to illegally obtain restraining orders.

massoutrage.com

Falseallegations.com began in 1998 to educate persons caught up in the vortex of family and criminal court proceedings. The Drano Series, which Barb Johnson added to the website in 2000, presently contains almost 200 pleadings filed by Barb in both federal and state courts on behalf of folks looking for remedies and relief from the problems they encountered in the family and criminal courts.

falseallegations.com

PARENTS AGAINST PARENTAL ALIENATION is an egroup and monthly support group for Boston Area parents meeting in Framingham, MA. The Group seeks to promote shared parenting, and expand personal, community and cultural strategies in responding to parenting problems arising from divorce. The focus is on how to protect ourselves, our children and the community from the toxic emotional and relationship fallout that often occurs in a separation/divorce causing parental alienation.

groups.yahoo.com/group/ParentsAgainstParentalAlienation

Join the NEWTEAPARTY

groups.yahoo.com/group/newteaparty/

Need help with a restraining order?

www.restrainingorder911.com

Western Massachusetts

www.berkshirefatherhood.com

Glenn Sacks blog:

www.glennsacks.com/blog/

Lawsuit going forward:

MA. State House News Service: ‘Advocates for Fathers Sue Trial Court over Child Support Rules’

March 18th, 2009 by Glenn Sacks

“‘There are people who are literally being driven out of their homes and apartments because of their inability to pay,’ said Ned Holstein, founder of the nonprofit Fathers & Families.

“‘We believe in guidelines that will well take care of all the children and also be fair between the adults. These guidelines do not do that.’”

The Massachusetts State House News Service published an article today about Fathers & Families‘ highly-publicized recent challenge to the Massachusetts Child Support Guidelines. In “Advocates for Fathers Sue Trial Court over Child Support Rules,” Kyle Cheney wrote:

A fathers’ group says it is suing the Massachusetts Trial Court for what it says are unconstitutional child support guidelines that are decimating household budgets.

“There are people who are literally being driven out of their homes and apartments because of their inability to pay,” said Ned Holstein, founder of the nonprofit Fathers & Families. “We believe in guidelines that will well take care of all the children and also be fair between the adults. These guidelines do not do that”…

The guideline changes were intended to make the guidelines “simple, clear, and comprehensive,” according to a task force report that drew up the revisions. The 12-member task force was led by Trial Court Chief Justice Paula Carey. Holstein, a member of the panel, dissented from the majority opinion.

Under the new guidelines, wording was changed to enable the courts to account for costs associated with state law mandating health insurance coverage. Income calculations for parents paying child support now also factor in unreported and non-taxed income, as well as military pay and allowances. Income from secondary jobs or overtime pay is no longer automatically included or excluded in child support determinations, instead considered on a case-by-case basis.

“The recommendations include provisions that place greater value and emphasis on the involvement of both parents in the lives of children; consider the increase in health insurance costs and the requirement of mandatory health insurance in Massachusetts; provide greater guidance relative to when a child support order should be modified; and set forth specific deviation factors for deviation from the guidelines,” according to a Trial Court statement in November announcing the new guidelines. “These guidelines will apply to the circumstances of many more families in the Commonwealth”…

In a Wednesday statement on the suit, Fathers and Families describes the new guidelines as “a radical increase in child support implemented at the worst possible moment, as businesses shut doors and layoffs surge.”

According to a recent Fathers & Families press release:

The new guidelines, which affect a quarter million families, were not formulated using the actual costs of raising a child. In some cases, child support orders will triple, even in cases in which the payer is poor and his child is well off. And in high income cases, the child support order for one child could reach nearly $50,000 a year.

The new guidelines will cause almost all child support orders to increase substantially. As a result, middle-class recipients will enjoy a standard of living almost double that of payers who earn about the same amount.

Holstein served on the Massachusetts Task Force that recommended the new guidelines, but authored a minority report dissenting from the main recommendations. Dr. Holstein said, “These increases are radical and unexplained and will harm children. Kids want to live with both parents after divorce, and we all want kids to be well cared for in both homes. But these new guidelines will create a ‘castle versus a hovel’ situation for kids. Kids are saddened and depressed when child-support orders force their Dads to live in poverty.”

Massachusetts Appeals Court ruling 1/20/09:

Judges are too busy to give you your constitutional rights of due process:

Closing argument. The father argues that the judge erred in denying his request to make a closing argument. It appears that the hearing, which was originally scheduled for one day, was extended to a second day, and that by the close of the evidence in this case, the judge had to start a trial in a different case. Neither party made a closing statement. The judge had considerable familiarity with the parties' history and situation. In light of the foregoing and the father's failure to show how the inability to make a closing argument prejudiced him, we discern no error warranting relief.

Fathers & Families Going to Court Again to Stop New Massachusetts Child Support Guidelines

January 13th, 2009 by Ned Holstein, MD, MS

The new Massachusetts Child Support Guidelines went into effect January 1. They are causing substantial increases in child support in almost all cases. Many payors will see increases of “only” 20%, but some will see a tripling of their child support order, even when they are poor and the recipient is wealthy. In high income cases, the child support order for one child could exceed $50,000 per year.

We are bringing a lawsuit in state court to stop the new Guidelines. We need your financial gifts to sustain our legal expenses. When we went to federal court on January 5, there was an outpouring of gifts, and we need you to rise to the occasion again by clicking HERE.

How much money is legitimately needed to support a child? Far less than the Guidelines require, in many cases. If a recipient and payor earn the same amount, when all factors are taken into consideration, the recipient will enjoy a standard of living almost double that of the payor. This holds true throughout the broad range of middle class incomes. For details, see the Minority Report I wrote about the new Guidelines.

Instead of the child-friendly “two-condo solution,” the new Guidelines produce a “castle and shack” outcome.

Fathers & Families believes the new Child Support Guidelines violate the Massachusetts constitution in several ways. They violate both the due process and equal protection rights of payors of child support. Also, the Guidelines violate Article 30 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights by having a secret committee prepare them, and a single judge declare them to be law. In contrast, Article 30 requires legislative approval of the Guidelines.

We argued these points before Judge D.P. Woodlock in federal court on January 5. We had a great turnout—almost 50 of our supporters took time off from work to attend the hearing. Judge Woodlock decided that the case belonged in state court, not in federal court. He did not rule on the merits of our case.

We had good reasons for going to federal court, but we did not win, so now we are going to state court. To do so, we again need your help and support by making as large a tax-deductible gift as you possibly can by clicking HERE.

Federal Court Rules Draconian New Child Support Guidelines Must Be Contested in State Courts, Not Federal

January 5th, 2009 by Glenn Sacks

Federal judge Douglas Woodlock today refused to decide the merits of a constitutional challenge to Massachusetts’ draconian new child support guidelines, claiming that the guidelines are a state matter.

Dr. Ned Holstein, MD, executive director of Fathers and Families, which filed the suit to block the new guidelines from coming into effect, said the group is considering re-filing the lawsuit in state court within days.

According to the Associated Press, “In its complaint, the group said the new guidelines call for support payments to be calculated based primarily on income, not the expenses incurred by the parents to raise the child.”

The new guidelines will cause almost all child support orders to increase substantially — when all factors are considered, middle-class recipients will enjoy a standard of living almost double that of payers who earn about the same amount. In some cases, child support orders will triple, even in cases in which the payer is poor and the child is economically comfortable because the custodial parent earns over $100,000. And in high income cases, the child support order for one child could be nearly $50,000.

The Massachusetts Lawyers’ Weekly adds:

“Fathers & Families argues that Massachusetts Chief Administrative Judge Robert Mulligan and the Trial Court violated the federal equal protection clause by implementing discriminatory rules, the federal due process clause by passing a law by ‘judicial fiat,’ and the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights by passing a law without the participation of the other two branches of state government.”

Dr. Holstein served on the commonwealth’s Task Force that recommended the new guidelines, but authored a minority report dissenting from the main recommendations. Dr. Holstein said:

“The new guidelines will harm children. Kids want to live with both parents after divorce, and we want them to be well cared for in both homes. We call it the “two condo solution.” But these new guidelines will create a ‘castle versus a hovel’ situation for kids. These increases are radical and unexplained and come at the worst possible moment–just as a bad recession is causing people to lose their jobs or suffer declining incomes.”

Fathers & Families needs a big war chest to pursue its legal offensive–please support this effort with your tax-deductible gift to Fathers & Families by clicking here. For those of you outside of Massachusetts, remember that a victory here could establish precedents that will help you in your state.

There was a large courtroom turnout in support of Fathers & Families' suit, close to 50 people –thanks to all of you who managed to get away from work on a post-holiday Monday morning to support this case.

Fathers & Families Files Lawsuit to Stop New Massachusetts Child Support Guidelines

December 31st, 2008 by Ned Holstein, MD, MS

Fathers and Families has filed suit in Federal District Court in Boston to stop the scheduled January 1 implementation of new Child Support Guidelines. The suit seeks a temporary injunction halting the use of the new guidelines until a full hearing can be held. It will be heard before Judge D.P. Woodlock on Monday, January 5 at 10 AM in courtroom 1.

We need a big war chest to pursue our legal offensive. Please support this effort with your tax-deductible gift to Fathers & Families, by clicking here. If you make your gift today, it is still eligible for a 2008 tax deduction. For those of you outside of Massachusetts, remember that a victory here could establish precedents that will help you in your state.

If you are in the Boston area, you must make it a point to attend the hearing on Monday. Judge Woodlock needs to see that our position has broad support. If you “leave it to the other guy,” it won’t happen. The hearing is expected to last between thirty and sixty minutes. Directions can be found here.

Fathers & Families’ attorney Gregory Hession of Springfield argues that the new guidelines were not formulated using the actual costs of raising a child, as required by federal law, and are thus “arbitrary and capricious.” The pleadings before the court assert that the process used to put together the new guidelines violated the due process and equal protection rights of the payers of child support, as protected under the United States Constitution. Additionally, the state bypassed the normal legislative process by having a secret committee prepare them and a single judge declare them to be law, in violation of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights.

The new guidelines will cause almost all child support orders to increase substantially — when all factors are considered, middle-class recipients will enjoy a standard of living almost double that of payers who earn about the same amount. In some cases, child support orders will triple, even in cases in which the payer is poor and the child is economically comfortable because the custodial parent earns over $100,000. And in high income cases, the child support order for one child could be nearly $50,000.

You can read the legal Complaint by clicking here, and the Memorandum of Law by clicking here.

Fathers & Families Executive Director Ned Holstein, MD, served on the commonwealth’s Task Force that recommended the new guidelines, but authored a minority report dissenting from the main recommendations. Dr. Holstein said, “The new guidelines will harm children. Kids want to live with both parents after divorce, and we want them to be well cared for in both homes. But these new guidelines will create a ‘castle versus a hovel’ situation for kids. These increases are radical and unexplained. They come at the worst possible moment, just as a bad recession is causing people to lose their jobs or suffer declining incomes. Our lawsuit is a way of saying, ‘Let’s pause and reconsider the wisdom of these controversial changes at this moment.’”

Fathers & Families Press release on the lawsuit can be seen here.

Hundreds gathered at Faneuil Hall Square in Boston on Sunday, December 10, 2006 as Fathers-4-Justice™ U.S. (F4J) protested the Massachusetts family court system which routinely strips fit mothers and fathers of their fundamental right to parent their children.