Additional Titles










Divorce And Child Support Are Eviscerating Military Recruitment










David R. Usher
October 12, 2005

Last week, the U.S. Senate approved reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (led by Senator Joe Biden of Delaware), amidst a hail of public criticism of the program. A substantial collection of mainstream organizations and scientists oppose VAWA for one basic reason: it funds sexism, not prevention of domestic violence.

VAWA is at best an extremely dubious program. Certainly, we all agree it does help women living in abuse. But we also know that it fails to help or protect men living in abuse. In fact, the program holds male victims of domestic violence responsible for women�s violence, even where the man is a saint.

VAWA: The WMD of divorce

The problems do not stop there. VAWA is the preferred �weapon of mass destruction� used by women�s attorneys in planning and execution of divorces. VAWA is written such that one fax containing a mere statement of fear is all that is necessary to seize full control of family, home, assets, and bank accounts.

Advocates of VAWA point out that courts are overwhelmed and need laws such as VAWA to protect women.

This is the self-fulfilling prophesy of VAWA -- judges only have time to hear about 5% of divorce cases. But courts are overwhelmed particularly because spouse abuse allegations are filed in the majority of divorce cases � and judges simply do not have the docket time to hear them. A short hearing, absent of all due process standards required for stripping a citizen of home, property, and family are discarded.

The standard of proof is, in essence, �free-floating fear�. Dr. Stephen Baskerville describes the abject constitutional error of VAWA, in his latest article, �Violence Against the Constitution�, We can no longer allow feminists to steal by overwhelming the court system. Half the husbands in America have been thrown out of their families. No one can possibly believe that most of these guys are violent wife abusers.

From false child abuse, to false spouse abuse allegations

Here is the truth: In the late 1970�s, feminists used false child abuse allegations in large numbers to take over marriages and create father absence in record numbers. This worked fairly well for them until a number of highly publicized false child abuse cases were heard, including the McMartin ritual abuse case, Fells Acres Day School, Wee Care, Wenatchee, and the Little Rascals case exposed the trickery. These cases, filed to collect insurance money, all rested on wild allegations about children being abused in hot air balloons or remote caves in Utah, using modern-day tea-leaf readers providing professional testimony about that child abuse supposedly existing under every rock.

In these cases it was quite obvious (and even proven) that children had been programmed to give certain responses, or were �inadvertently� taught the language that made it appear that some sort of child abuse had taken place.

All of a sudden, false child abuse cases in divorce began backfiring on feminists. Winning a child abuse case involves programming a child to be very convincing and clear about what happened. Judges were giving custody to men after realizing that women were abusing their children and the system.

Spouse abuse allegations are perfect for feminists because no third party needs to be taught a story. Anything can be claimed and little or nothing can be controverted, so judges usually operate on fear alone.

Intentional abuse of VAWA drives widespread organized robbery

Since child abuse allegations were no longer a reliable method to achieve feminist social hegemony, they figured out that false domestic violence allegations are far easier to abuse because winning the case depends only on tears and fears to emote Victorian-era sexism in the hearts of judges.

I know a former presiding circuit court judge who confessed to our men�s group of having tremendous difficulty not rolling over in front of teary-eyed women in these very short hearings. He pointed out one major reason that judges grant these orders without much consideration: they are terrified of ending up on the front page of the paper because some woman got hurt or killed. In the end, judges destroy 99 men to prevent one woman from getting a few bruises.

Here is the reality of VAWA: I observed a woman in the elevator in the St. Louis County Courthouse a few years back who had just left her tearful hearing and was now laughing hysterically (with tears still running down her face) bragging about how she just screwed the daylights out of her husband for a lot of money and property (and of course primary custody of the children). This woman knew exactly how to work the system.

Here is a very recent case. Meet Mr. Michael Brady. He used to work in as a technician in the chemical business, but now trades commodities. He has two dogs, loves karaoke, and hiking and fishing. He�s pretty much a nice normal guy.

Mike took in an old girlfriend who was on the down-and-outs. She said her husband had died from drug use (it turns out she was using hard drugs too). He knew she had BPD (borderline personality disorder). Then, she became his fianc�e. Of course, we all know a lot of guys willing to compassionately help out an imperfect damsel in distress.

Then she filed false domestic abuse allegations, claiming attempted strangulation and bruises on the arms. There was no medical or DNA evidence that such event took place. She was drinking at the time. The judge kicked him out of his home for one month, during which time she cleaned the house out, ran up a lot of bills, and stole some items.

But this is nothing compared to what happens to married men, who lose their homes, children, standing in legitimate society, life savings, and up to half their future earnings when a false allegation of abuse is made.

We know that 86% of domestic violence involves a partner who has been drinking or drugging (U.S. Department of Justice). We know that women initiate slightly over half of all serious spousal altercations. There is no reason to pretend that family violence is purely a matter of sex.

VAWA drives the majority of serious child abuse

Children are the ones most damaged the by this system of organized itinerant gold-diggers. At least two-thirds of serous or fatal child abuse and neglect are caused by single mothers, whose children are often dragged around like couches. Unstable mothers move frequently, from boyfriend to boyfriend and from state to state. We have all seen many newspaper articles about children who died in a fire (or whatever) while the mother was out partying at a bar.

What is astonishing is this: radical women�s advocates actually used these so-called �abused homeless women� as their newest victim-poster-girls to terrify congress and get VAWA reauthorized!

In Missouri, we do things more intelligently. Our move-away law (Rsmo 452.377), perhaps the best in the America, greatly helps prevent serious child abuse by changing custody to the father when unstable mothers get out of line. We got this enacted in 1998, despite tremendous lobbying against it by the National Organization for Women (which demands that even the most unstable mothers should have a unilateral right to do whatever they want with children).

We know that the vast majority of child abuse is caused by unstable mothers (the natural father being the lowest risk group for fatal child abuse and neglect). There is no reason to allow VAWA to drive child abuse.

VAWA abused in immigrations

VAWA permits any women dating or marrying a male U.S. citizen (whether overseas or not), to get a green card immediately simply by claiming spousal abuse at the nearest U.S. Embassy. Who needs to swim rivers or hike the desert with idiotic power tools like this?

Feminist groups are screeching about how vicious American men are seeking nice foreign women so they can abuse them. In fact, some states have introduced legislation requiring men to turn in their divorce and criminal histories to dating sites, which then must provide it to the women they meet. This forms a tremendous arena for feminist con artists to predate in: they can prey on men they know are truly nice, gullible wimps who unable to defend or stand up for themselves.

We do not know how many women are abusing the system to immigrate to the U.S. The scuttlebut among men is this: you are risking everything if you think that meeting a nice Russian woman on the internet is a good idea. This is what feminists want. They don�t want nice American men to avoid doing business with the �American Woman�.

There is absolutely no reason on earth to grant an automatic green card and financing on the basis of any allegation of dating or spousal abuse. But we do this if the alleger happens to be a woman.

An action not involving national security or treason by American citizens on foreign soil is under the jurisdiction of the country in which it took place. The United Nations and various feminist NGO�s are making great strides preventing abuse of women in third world countries. In time, this problem will be ended. We can no longer permit N.O.W. to organize foreign women in actively abusing American citizens for purposes of immigration.

Congress authorizes organized larceny

In approving VAWA by a 100% vote, every Senator in Congress has become part of a system of organized robbery that uses fear and hate of men to steal. Whether this was done wittingly or unwittingly is not an issue. Congress either knows or should know what it is voting on. The Senate cannot plead ignorance, because it refused to allow Dr. Murray Straus, who is perhaps the preeminent scientist on domestic violence, to testify about what is wrong with VAWA, along with many others objecting to the bill.

Given the fact that VAWA helps drive child abuse, father-absence, and the widespread looting of families; and where radical feminists misuse some of the billions in VAWA funding to push gay marriage and abortion, why on earth did 100% of Senators vote to give feminazis at least four billion dollars?

Here is the likely reason why. Congress is already bought and paid for � with allegations. Every Congressman and male staffer knows that it only takes one allegation of a sexual impropriety to end a career. NOW collects sex dirt on all male members of Congress just for this purpose. How many Congressmen and male aides are so chaste as to feel secure opposing VAWA? And in an era where false allegations are so commonplace, could a chaste Senator even feel safe? The Senate record reflects that none of them do..

The courts must intervene

Unfortunately, it may well be up to state and federal courts to declare VAWA unconstitutional in its entirety, where it fails to provide equal protection under the law without regard for sex, and has become a system of organized grand larceny.

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail Address:

The deluge of false allegations that keeps trial courts so busy they won�t actually hear allegations is no reason for courts to roll over and participate in this system of organized crime, which may well be worthy of a RICO suit.

Let us hope that our new Supreme Court appointees are ready to not only end abortion, but will also end the larger radical feminist conspiracy that has aborted about half the families in America and provably hurt far more women and children than it has helped.

� 2005 David Usher - All Rights Reserved

E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale

David R. Usher is Legislative Analyst for the American Coalition for Fathers and Children, Missouri Coalition And is a co-founder and past Secretary of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children












Feminist groups are screeching about how vicious American men are seeking nice foreign women so they can abuse them.