Taking Shared Parenting to Washington D.C.

On September 16, 2008, IowaFathers.com and ACFC met with select members of the United States House of Representatives and select members of the United States Senate to discuss support of a federal law establishing a rebuttable presumption of joint physical care. This included scheduled meetings with every Iowa Representative.

Overall, the meetings went extremely well. Clearly, some of our Iowa Representatives understand the need for federal intervention in domestic relations while others simply requested additional information. Most were shocked to learn that Iowa has an average of 9,766 cases per year filed under Iowa Chapter 598 and that in 2007, the Iowa Child Support Recovery Unit had 191,466 cases with $327.4 million in collections.

One thing is certain, we learned how and what must be accomplished in order to be successful on the federal level. We intend to have follow-up meetings in the near future. With the ACFC headquartered just outside Washington D.C., we have laid the blueprint for other state parental rights organizations to follow.

Below are some pictures of our trip and meetings in Washington D.C. along with a copy of a proposal for a federal bill on joint physical care or shared parenting:

United States Congress

Committee:
Principal Author:

Bill No: Delegation:

Title of Bill:
An Act Relating to Physical Care of Children in Domestic Relations

Be It Enacted By The United States Congress

1     Preamble: An Act relating to joint physical care of children in domestic relations and
2     establishing a uniform federal law creating a rebuttable presumption that a request for joint
3     physical care is in the best interest of the child.
4
5     SECTION 1: This act may be cited as, "Shared Parenting bill."
6
7     SECTION 2: In any domestic relations proceeding, the states shall award joint physical
8     care to both joint custodial parents upon the request of either parent during the proceedings
9     on the initial dissolution petition or during the proceedings on a modification of the original

10   custody order.
11
12   SECTION 3: A rebuttable presumption exists that a request for joint physical care by either
13   parent is in the best interest of the child, the burden of proof to rebut the presumption rests
14   on the party denying that joint physical care is in the best interest of the child, and such
15   party shall demonstrate that joint physical care is not in the best interest of the child by clear
16   and convincing evidence.
17
18   SECTION 4: The states shall require the parents to submit, either individually or jointly, a
19   proposed joint physical care parenting plan. A proposed joint physical care parenting plan
20   shall address how the parents will make decisions affecting the child, how the parents will
21   provide a home for the child, how the child's time will be divided between the parents and
22   how each parent will facilitate the child's time with the other parent, arrangements in
23   addition to court ordered child support for the child's expenses, how the parents will resolve
24   major changes or disagreements affecting the child including changes that arise due to the
25   child's age and developmental needs, and any other issues the court may require.
26
27   SECTION 5: If a state court finds by clear and convincing evidence that joint physical care
28   is not in the best interest of the child and denies the request for joint physical care, the
29   determination shall be accompanied by specific findings of fact and conclusions of law that
30   the awarding of joint physical care is not in the best interest of the child. In determining the
31   best interest of the child relative to the denial of a request for joint physical care, a state
32   court shall consider that the best interest of the child includes the opportunity for maximum
33   continuous physical and emotional contact possible with both parents, unless direct physical
34   or significant emotional harm to the child may result from this contact.
35
36   SECTION 6: United States District Courts and United States Court of Appeals shall have
37   subject matter jurisdiction to intervene when civil liberties are violated.
38
39   SECTION 7: This bill shall go into effect 91 days after passage.
40

As stated before, we learned how and what must be accomplished to be successful on the federal level.   Legislators listen to constituents so PLEASE contact your Representatives in Washington D.C. and ask them to support a federal presumption of joint physical care or shared parenting! For your convenience, please see contact information below:

      1. Congressman Steve King, 5th District of Iowa
           (202)225-4426
            LUKE.HOLST@MAIL.HOUSE.GOV

      2.   Congressman Tom Latham, 4th District of Iowa
            (202) 225-5476
             TOM.LATHAM@MAIL.HOUSE.GOV

      3. Senator Charles Grassley, Iowa
           (202) 224-4743   (Becky Shipp, Administrative aid)
           emily_cook@grassley.senate.gov

      4. Senator Tom Harkin, Iowa
           (202) 224-3254
            rob_barron@harkin.senate.gov

      5. Congressman Dave Loebsack, 2nd District of Iowa
           (202) 225-6576
           KARA.MARCHIONE@MAIL.HOUSE.GOV

      6. Congressman Leonard Boswell, 3rd District of Iowa
          (202) 225-3806
            katy.siddall@mail.house.gov

      7. Congressman Bruce Braley, 1st District of Iowa
           (202) 225-2911
           Erika.Barrera@mail.house.gov