We mary, hope to raise a family, watch our children grow up, and be there to guide and help them through their youth and into young adulthood. And maybe, someday, watch as our grandchildren come into this world. Such was my dream, and still is.  However, history is replete with broken families, and worse still, governments’ less than informed and oft misguided interference with family bonds and relationships.

Former Lord Chancellor, Lord Mackay, stated it for Britain as succinctly as our American counterparts: “. . .the bedrock of a free society lies in the independence and integrity of the family. That view is founded on the belief that, save where there is a demonstrable and recognised neglect or abuse, it is for the parents to decide how to bring up their children, not the organs of the state, be they legislative, executive or judicial.”   This principle is echoed from the earliest of U.S. Supreme Court rulings, and brilliantly summarized in the most recent case of In Re Troxel.

Regardless, the vast majority of State family law practices pit one parent against the other in an adversarial contest to determine who is the “better” parent, and who is to be the “noncustodial” (non-citizen – no rights) parent. How pathetic can all this get? And under this scheme what has “the best interest of the child” become? Regrettably a hollow phrase to cover up discrimination, your child being used as fodder for state revenue, and the agrandizement of political careers. If it has any meaning at all, then it represents the rights of parents and children to remain in each other’s lives, whether the parents are maried or divorced. The only proper position for the State is keeping fit, willing, and able parents directly involved in the lives of their children. As Thomas Jefferson put it: “All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” – the happiness and fulfilment that comes with being a parent and raising your children (In Re Troxel).

Thankfully, there is a light at the end of the tunnel to this depravity. More and more it is being exposed for the degenerate scheme that it is, and family law systems are being examined, updated, and in some cases completely revised.

It would be unfair to the reader not to address the utter frustration, bewilderment, anger, and even rage at what has been forced upon parents and, particularly fathers, by numerous States and their judiciary – the very judiciary that is supposed to be protecting our rights. For many fathers it is highly unlikely they will ever be reunited with their own flesh and blood, their own children. In all probability many of these children will live out their lives believing the lie that out of the blue, without reason, without distress, without a broken heart, their fathers just up and left them. And the paternal grandparents will likely suffer a siminlar fate of loss.

As The Reformer has allowed me, Paul H. Deering, to make a significant contribution to this page; I must ask: How can one begin to explain how it feels to be in a courtroom, chained up like an animal, looking across at a man behind a bench in a black robe and know that he has broken the solemn vows he took to uphold our Constitutions, utterly failed to protect the litigants from discrimination, and acted as a co-prosecutor? Utter betrayal for a start. The U.S. Supreme court has unequivically stated that a judge that acts without jurisdiction is committing treason. So the judge in my case, Rudy Nichols, who is hiding behind the black robe of the judiciary, acting as co-prosecutor, and committing a capital offense, has the gaul to be judging me! I’ve searched so long and so hard for the right words. . .  and I still cannot find them.  Nor can I find the words to describe how I feel about the two public defenders, Alan S. Graff (Bar No. P61709) and James Daniel Shanahan (bar No. 20267) that would not lift a finger to bring a defense, even though I as a paralegal prepared the grounds of defense for them. They would leave me there in chains, my freedom taken from me, and do nothing! The latter, Shanahan, even had the gaul to inform a friend that he would do nothing because the case just “wasn’t popular.”

Conversely, I would like to thank those that made this website and the Open Letters herein possible. First there is Randall Scotti that spent countless hours providing statutes and case law when I did not have access to them, and as a personal friend . dug up many of the documents and supporting evidence that are posted within this website. This website simply wouldn’t be possible without his selfless assistance. Secondly to Joe Jurecki who has remained committed to the cause of family law reform, and fathers’ and children rights. To R. K. Hendrick that provided numerous recommendations to friends on FaceBook, all of whom have been so supportive.  And lastly to those, like Michael Tindall, and the numerous family rights groups, that keep the flame of hope alive.

I hope that every person reading these pages is moved to take action. Though my case is likely one of the worst in Michigan history, there are countless men and children that are suffering across this nation, and the numbers grow, even as you read. Do more, take action, add your voice to the social media, join and be active in family rights groups, and think before you vote. It is a matter of our children’s’ future!