The proposed change in HB 1162 to the “best interest of the child” will further erode family and empower our problematic family court system.
ICYMI: Another Fake Hate Crime Hoax Exposed – Black Man Wrote “Notes” he found On this Car
Our most precious liberty, our children.
Some of you may know me. I represented Fremont (and several other towns as legislative districts changed) in the New Hampshire House of Representatives for 18 years. For 16 of those years, I sat on the Committee for Children and Family Law. I chose that committee because I considered it the quintessential liberty committee.
If the government can threaten the parentage of your children, they can manipulate most people to do whatever they want. I heard many stories of how the government manipulated people’s behavior. Judges or social workers would say words to the effect of “if you will admit you abused your children, you can keep them. All you have to do is pay the therapists we choose.”
I have seen accusations of child abuse used as political weapons. I personally know of two state representatives who were so attacked. One for having the “wrong” position on local school spending. They were ultimately exonerated, but only after months of agony for them and their children.
All this time, intervention by the Department on Children, Youth and Families was limited to either tangible abuse or neglect. It is explicitly recognized in the law that poverty and religion do not constitute abuse or neglect.
Now Democrats are trying to change the standard, lowering the bar from abuse and neglect to “best interest of the child.” They want to substitute opinion for evidence as one of the criteria dealing with troubled families under the abuse and neglect laws having been changed from “preserve the unity of the family” to “determining if the preservation of family unity is in the best interests of the child.”
Think about what might be considered in the best interest of the child to be raised:
• Wealthy parents vs. poor parents;
• Religious parents vs. non-religious parents;
• Parents of this religion or of that religion;
• Parents that believe in globalization vs parents that believe in nationalism;
• Parents who believe in public schooling, private schooling or homeschooling;
• Parents who do or don’t believe that global warming is man-made;
• Parents that believe in socialism vs. parents who believe in capitalism.
We have already seen judges making parenting decisions in divorce cases on exactly these types of criteria. Sometimes I have read criteria such as homeschooling or religion stated explicitly in the decree, reflecting the personal values of a judge.
Given the opportunity, why won’t these same judges use these new criteria in the same way? What better way to change a culture than to remove children from traditional families?
In fact, this was originally part of HB 377, which did pass the House of Representatives, but was laid on the table in the Senate. It has now been resurrected, buried in one of the omnibus bills being presented to the House of Representatives.
Now, there is only one choice. Either we allow the government to play god, or the whole of HB 1162 must be vetoed. Unfortunately, some good, or at least not bad, legislation will have to be lost. But this is what happens when you create omnibus legislation, you must throw out the good along with the bad and the ugly.
Governor Sununu, please veto HB 1162.
