Stuart Showalter is a child custody policy advisor to Indiana state policy makers as well as attorneys on child custody cases. For parents he offers child custody based life coaching to help them maintain control of their lives, increase their fitness as parents and manage their litigation so they can truly serve the best interest of their children. He provides this Law Blog as free opinion on various issues. Reader submissions of topics are welcomed. Send to Stuart@StuartShowalter.com
I have previously written about FaceBook in the context of overall social networking sites and about Social Networking sites making their way into the Courtroom. Now there is another twist to the FaceBook phenomena and child custody battles.
This time it was an Indiana woman who created a fake Facebook profile to get information from her ex-husband to use in a custody battle. Her unscrupulous act backfired on her when the father discerned the motivations of the person behind the fake profile.
The father, David Voelkert, was arrested by FBI agents on June 3 for allegedly installing a listening device in his wife’s vehicle. However, it turns out that it was just a ruse to expose the wife.
In late May 2011 the 29-year-old ex-wife, Angela Voelkert, using a fake Facebook page under the pseudonym “Jessica Studebaker” spied on her ex-husband through the site. Angela was purported to be a young girl who attended high school and worked at Subway when she contacted David. Even though Angela had a friend write the introductory message to David he still caught on as to what it was – an attempt by his wife to engage him in conversation and collect information for the custody battle.
David told “Studebaker” that he was planning to kill his wife and escape with his children and that he had installed a listening device in her car. David duly documented the ruse by having a letter notarized about a week before the messages were sent. He stated, “I am lying to this person to gain positive proof that it is indeed my ex-wife trying to again tamper in my life. In no way do I have plans to leave with my children or do any harm to Angela Dawn Voelkert or anyone else.” After FBI agents interviewed the bank worker who notarized the letter David Voelkert was released.
This is one of those types of incidents that will not gain one favour with a judge during a child custody proceeding. Indiana Code 31-17-2-8 does provide for the 8 factors that a court must consider in an initial child custody decision or modification. Of those is the mental health of the parents and a pattern of domestic violence which has been broadly defined to include stalking or cyber-stalking.
Parents who would like to achieve the best outcome for their children in a contested child custody case should visit my website and contact my scheduler to make an appointment to meet with me. Attorneys may request a free consultation to learn how I can maximize their advocacy for their clients.
Connect with me for the latest Indiana child custody related policy considerations, findings, court rulings and discussions.
Today is Father's Day. This day is a celebration of fathers inaugurated in the early twentieth century to complement Mother's Day in celebrating fatherhood and male parenting. Father's Day is celebrated on a variety of dates worldwide and typically involves gift-giving, special dinners to fathers, and family-oriented activities. The first observance of Father's Day actually took place in Fairmont, West Virginia on July 5, 1908. It was organized by Mrs. Grace Golden Clayton, who wanted to celebrate the lives of the 210 fathers who had been lost in the Monongah Mining disaster several months earlier in Monongah, West Virginia, on December 6, 1907. It is possible that Clayton was influenced by the first celebration of Mother's Day that same year, just a few miles away. Credit for Father's Day went to Sonora Dodd from Spokane, who invented independently her own celebration of Father's Day just two years later, also influenced by Jarvis' Mother's Day. Clayton's celebration was forgotten until 1972, when one of the attendants to the celebration saw Nixon's proclamation of Father's Day, and worked to recover its legacy.
Just as I said about Mother's Day I believe Father's day has been trivialized and can be added to the ever growing list of commercial events rather than a day set aside to reflect upon the contributions of the people or person it was intended to honour. I still wonder each year what attaching stickers of the characters of the latest popular animated children's program to coloured eggs has to do with Jesus. Unlike Mother's Day though, I don't think the commercialization has grown in an attempt to include every male who has reached adulthood.
In my posting on Mother's Day I did not hold back on chastising those women whom I believe pretend to be mothers but, in fact, are little more than gestational hosts who ferry their children off to other care providers shortly after birth. Well, fathers owe no less of a duty to their children than mothers do. Unlike mothers in general though I do believe that fathers are making progress towards being more involved with their children.
I see anecdotal evidence of this everywhere. Sporting events have always appeared to be the father's domain but the term “soccer mom” was coined from the role that mothers played in hustling groups of children from one event to the next. Now I see more girls being brought to their games and practices by fathers alone than I do mothers alone.
More important though is what I see elsewhere. Fathers pushing a baby stroller, one sitting on a wall somewhere just chatting with his child, playing with their children at the park, attending school functions or shopping for new clothing with them. In short, these are men who are taking an active role in providing the care for their children and the monumentally important task of demonstrating the role of a father.
Unfortunately for many children though they don't have the involvement of their fathers. The Indianapolis Star reported yesterday that Fathers' absence takes heavy toll on children which provided a sobering account of some of the effects. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 24 million American children -- one in three -- live without their fathers at home.
Often times this is the result of a divorce wherein judges, attorneys, mothers and – even at times – fathers do not believe that children need to be in the care and custody of anyone but their mothers. However, progress is being made in that arena. Where there is a decline though is in fathers who take responsibility for their actions and children particularly from the time of conception. The epidemic and consequences of children born out-of-wedlock continues to grow.
This is the fault of both mothers and fathers. I place no blame on one more than the other though. Part of being a responsible father is to provide a stable and nurturing environment in which to raise a child. First and foremost in this is marriage. It also includes financial stability – having a job, home, significant assets – to provide for the needs of the child. Men who cannot do this are not fitting of being fathers. There is much more to being a father than inseminating a woman. It may be a biological prerogative to go forth and multiply but children need both parents to be ensured of successful maturation and to do what we ultimately exist to do – pass along our genetic material.
For those people who stand in the way of allowing children to have what they need most in life which is the care, companionship and support of two loving parents – shame on you.
For those men who completed the task of being a chromosome delivery portal and nothing more – shame on you also. It is time to step-up and be a real man and do what real men do and what this day is set aside to honour – be a father to the children you produced.
For those men who are providing the caring, supportive, stable and nurturing environment that children need or have done that already – Happy Father's Day.
If you need assistance with parenting issues or a child custody matter please visit my website and contact my scheduler. to make an appointment to meet with me.
If you would like to follow my activities more closely then send a friend request to my Political FaceBook page.
Last night I got summoned by a woman wanting help in a Domestic Violence situation. I wrote about another incident where I was recently called to come assist in a similar situation which I wrote about in So I get called to a Domestic Violence situation.
Last night I came upon the scene to find two neighbors in the yard, an unidentified man and the mother. She is screaming, “He's got my baby, he's got my baby. I just want my baby back!” Immediately inside the house are two men in a battle on the floor. Another neighbor is in the living room holding the baby.
I go in an order the men apart and get the attacker off of the father. The attacker then flees the house. The neighbor puts the baby in the crib and the father heads outside after the attacker who flees with the unidentified man down the road. A neighbor and I ensure that Father doesn't go after the attackers. We go inside to check on the baby but Mother had taken the child.
Father calls the police. An officer, who has previously responded to that residence, arrives while I am still on the phone with the dispatcher. He takes information from Father and the rest of us on scene. Father then goes with the officer.
About an hour later Father is home with his child, the Mother is in jail after being arrested for home invasion and domestic battery, and the police are looking for the other two perpetrators.
These two recent Domestic Violence situations both have something in common besides the woman seeking assistance. The woman was the aggressor or attacker in these incidents. In the case last night Mother was arrested. In the other incident I did not report it to the police.
What is alarming here is that these woman, the criminals, are the ones seeking assistance. They are the ones who feel so emboldened by policies and society's false perception of who a Domestic Violence perpetrator is that they feel that they may commit these crimes without repercussion. There is good reason for them to feel that they won't be held accountable.
Some of what I came to learn about this latest situation from one of the neighbors was that Mother had stabbed Father about three months ago. Father refused the neighbor's request to call the police then. Mother has a Protective Order against Father. Mother brook into Father's home while he was away. Mother had been violent against Father on numerous occasions during the time they still lived together but Father never called the police.
What I got to witness last night was apparently the phantom illusion of a female committing an act of Domestic Violence against a male. Organizations like the female only Indiana Coalition Against Domestic Violence or the Julian Center profit from the common misconception that women do not commit acts of Domestic Violence. However, RADAR provides us with the truth about Domestic Violence.
That truth is what I often witness; that women commit egregious acts of violence against fathers whom with they are in a relationship. The situation last night could very likely have been avoided if Father had done what all men in these situations should do. That is, the first time that a woman becomes violent have witnesses or record the incident and then call the police.
The statistics will continue to support the myth so long as men fail to take the proper action and have these mother's arrested and charged for the crimes they are committing.
Too often men are focused on not wanting to incite the woman further or have been verbally beaten into submission thinking that they could not provide suitable care for the children while the mother is in jail. Men carry their own inhibitions, denying that these women are criminals who are unlawfully attacking them and creating a dangerous environment for the children. Instead they wrongly believe that they did something to upset her and cause this. Further, many believe as it is their responsibility as “man of the house” to maintain order and handle these issues on their own.
It is not something that a man should handle on his own. To be proper men and fathers these victims need to seek outside assistance to help remedy the violence perpetrated against them and in their household. When these women attack it is not about trying to control the man or out of anger against him but, rather, it is commonly an effort to maintain control over the children.
That is what the focus must be on: the children. Any man who would not support a stranger coming into his home, attacking him and endangering the child should not provide an exemption to someone just because she happened to have been the host for the developing fetus before birth.
Parents who would like to achieve the best outcome for their children in a contested child custody case should visit my website and contact my scheduler to make an appointment to meet with me. Attorneys may request a free consultation to learn how I can maximize their advocacy for their clients.
Connect with me for the latest Indiana child custody related policy considerations, findings, court rulings and discussions.
I tend to view myself as being quite knowledgeable about child custody law in Indiana. I attend all the meetings of the Domestic Relations Committee of the Indiana Judicial Center and I also write child custody law. Additionally, I read all of the higher court opinions as they relate to child custody law where I often see the same results; attorneys not being intimately familiar with child custody law.
Two days ago the Indiana Court of Appeals handed down another opinion where apparently an attorney had been deficient in his or her obligation to ensure that the client was well-advised about the child custody statutes and the Indiana Parenting Time Guidelines.
In this case Father's parenting time was described to the appellate court as: “overnight parenting time every other weekend, over some holidays, and for two weeks during the summer.” The opinion included a footnote about that schedule which read: “Father testified that until just prior to the hearing in this case, he was unaware of his right under the Parenting Time Guidelines to have the children for approximately half of the summer, and that if his counsel in the dissolution had advised him of such, he would have taken that extended parenting time.”
Here, Father and the children could have spent more time with each other but, according to Father, his attorney failed to inform him that he was entitled to a minimum of half the Summer with his children instead of two weeks. Apparently the trial court made no findings as to why Father received less than the IPTG minimums. From what I could glean from the appellate ruling it appears that it was an agreed entry.
The IPTG at Section II(B)(3) provide that extended parenting time for children age 5 and older is: “One-half of the summer vacation. The time may be either consecutive or split into two (2) segments. The noncustodial parent shall give notice to the custodial parent of the selection by April 1 of each year. If such notice is not given, the custodial parent shall make the selection.”
A few questions come to mind my mind about this situation –
What would a parent pay to get three additional weeks per year with his or her child?
How did this father find this attorney?
What were the attorney's qualifications to take on a child custody case?
What amount of money did this father pay to that attorney to get less than what the IPTG suggest as a minimum to maintain a suitable relationship with his child?
What is the potential psychological impact that this could have had on the child?
What is the prospect of this father getting half the Summer break with his child in the future?
I can't answer the first four questions but if you are in a similar situation then you certainly can. As for the last question I do have the answer for that.
Very unlikely. The reason for that is because it is the policy of the State of Indiana to bring child custody proceedings to a conclusion and maintain consistency for the child. “This doctrine is reinforced by the concern for finality in custody matters.” See Baxendale v. Raich, 878 N.E.2d 1252, 1258 (Ind. 2008).
Thus, a parent seeking to modify a child custody order has a significant burden to overcome. That parent must show a substantial change in at least one of the factors that a court must consider under I.C. 31-17-2-8 and that the modification is in the best interest of the child. Here that just isn't likely to be the case. It is a long-held standard that a party is responsible for the oversights of his or her attorney.
So, onto the point I intend to make. It is extremely important that you start a child custody proceeding being as prepared as possible. That means being organizationally equipped, having knowledgeable counsel inclusive of an attorney if you are going to use one, knowing the pitfalls and being the best parent you can be.
Parents who would like to achieve the best outcome for their children in a contested child custody case should visit my website and contact my scheduler to make an appointment to meet with me. Attorneys may request a free consultation to learn how I can maximize their advocacy for their clients.
Connect with me for the latest Indiana child custody related policy considerations, findings, court rulings and discussions.
So the Indiana Court of Appeals hands down another decision on a pro se appeal, this time on 13 June 2011 where the trial court's denial of Father's petition to modify custody was affirmed. Unlike most pro se litigants this Father's appeal wasn't denied based purely upon a failure to comply with the Rules of Appellate Procedure. In fact, the trial court found Father was “completely cogent and prepared in court to show how poor the mother has done...”. However, Father's appeal was seriously deficient in numerous areas but the panel chose to decide the case on its merits.
Among some of the trial court's other findings were these about Mother.
“The mother’s mental health is poor as she has entered into a marriage after two weeks, stayed in a relationship that has been physically and verbally abusive due to alcohol issues with her new husband and she seemingly has no ability or will to make these issues better for her or her children.” “That although the mother has stated she was pushing for the divorce that was filed by her current husband, the court was able to verify on its computer that the divorce has been dismissed.” “The mother cannot seem to get past her relationship issues and seems only to focus on her well being and/or happiness...” “...the court could find there are substantial changes thanks to mother’s complete inability to focus on the well being of the children rather than her well being...”
This has long been a concern of mine; where a mother puts her personal interest above that of a child. This is the primary reason that the most dangerous custody arrangement for children is sole custody with the mother. One of the things that bothered me most about my son's mother was her proclamation – “There can only be one person in your life that is the most important and that must be yourself.” She then went to live with one of her boyfriends and continued to treat our child as an inconvenience.
That attitude is what often leads to the abuse of children. It comes from both genders. As in this case the primary motivator for the mother is attachment to a man. It may have been financial, resulting from her insecurity or some other emotional issue. Here she chose someone who is violently abusive. In another case I knew of, a child was being sexually abused by the mother's live-in sexual partner. The mother refused to eject the abuser from the home even though she was aware of his sexual abuse of her daughter.
There are also the cases that we often see in the media where a man has violently assaulted a small child or infant, sometimes resulting in death, where the mother stood by and did nothing. Again, these men are people who see the child as an inconvenience. There is no biological connection between these men and the children so supporting those children is not conducive to the natural drive to reproduce, protect the offspring and see that they survive to reproduce. These men are naturally driven to mate with the woman and reproduce with her to pass along their genes. Supporting another man's children is in conflict with their biological mandate.
This is the basis for the divergence in attitude between my son's mother and I. I readily admit that when she said she did not want to have anymore children, although we had agreed to at least five, she was no longer the most important person in my life, my son was. It wasn't a conscious decision but I can look back and through applying what I have learned through my life see that this did happen.
My efforts were dedicated to my son not only because he was an infant and dependent upon me but because, in a purely biological sense, his mother could no longer assist in passing along my genes. I was left to be the person who was solely responsible for all the daily needs of our child; feeding, comfort, diaper changes, providing support and education.
Over time she became increasingly resentful of him for taking my attention and efforts away from her. Ultimately her psychological abuse of him turned physical including pointing a loaded gun at him and threatening to kill him. It was about a month later that she left and told me I am the one who wants him, I am the one who can keep him and take care of him.
Why then is it that women like this are able to obtain or retain custody of the children? In my case it was that she made a pay-off to Indiana Supreme Court Justice Steve David. In this case it was something different.
Here are some of the trial court's findings about the father.
“The court also found that the father in this case has convictions in his past as well and he is currently on the sex offender registry for the State of Indiana.” “That upon further research on the computer during the hearing, the offenses were for Child Exploitation in both 2001 and 2002.” “Clearly the father has mental and/or physical health issues as well.” “...the father has committed atrocious acts against children in the past.”
The trial court did find that there had been a substantial change in circumstances but that modification of custody would not be in the best interest of the child. The Court of Appeals affirmed citing that since Father did not provide a transcript of the trial court trial then all the panel could rely upon was the findings. The panel then concluded that even though there had been a change the findings do not demonstrate that the trial court abused its discretion by finding that modification was not in the best interest of the child.
Had Father complied with the Rules of Appellate Procedure he may have had a different result. I have previously written about pro se appeals here.
I am often confronted by parents who bring to me evidence that there has been a substantial change in one or more of the eight factors so therefore they should be able to get a custody modification. This case clearly details why that is not so. I start by looking at the modification statute.
A trial court may not modify a child custody order unless (1) the modification is in the best interests of the child and (2) there is a substantial change in one or more of the factors a court may consider under Indiana Code § 31-17-2-8 when it originally determines custody. See In re Paternity of M.P.M.W., 908 N.E.2d 1205, 1208 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009).
In this case, the trial court found that although there was a substantial change in the factors in favor of Father, it was ultimately “not in the best interests of the child to modify custody.” Therefore, the statutory requirement had not been met. It is still left to that broad and undefined “best interests of the child” which is left to the discretion of the judge.
This case also gives rise to another statutory factor in child custody modification proceedings. I.C. § 31-17-2-21 states that “[T]he court shall not hear evidence on a matter occurring before the last custody proceeding between the parties unless the matter relates to a change in the factors relating to the best interests of the child[.]”
What this means is that you generally may not introduce evidence in a child custody modification proceeding that pre-dates the most recent proceeding. However, if it relates to the best interest of the child and one of the changed factors then it may be introduced. This is something that I have had to explain to lawyers who tell a client, “That was before the last hearing, we can't use it.”
Here is an example that I use. Father wants to modify custody. After their divorce mother neglected the children while living on her own. CPS substantiated the neglect. Now mother has divorced her second husband and is again living on her own. It could be reasonably predicted that as she is now living on her own and since she neglected the children last time she was on her own then she likely will again. Therefore, custody should be modified to Father.
Case law supports this contention. The paramount concern in consideration of child custody modification has always been the child’s best interests. See Joe v. Lebow, 670 N.E.2d 9, 21 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996) (quoting Pierce v. Pierce, 620 N.E.2d 726, 729 (Ind. Ct. App. 1993)). It is well within the discretion of the trial court to consider evidence entered in prior hearings in the same custody case when ruling on a motion to modify child custody and visitation. See Arms v. Arms, 803 N.E.2d 1201, 1209 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) where it was stated that evidence from a prior hearing was just as relevant to instant hearing, as past behavior was a valid predictor of future conduct.
Here is where the case gets very interesting, moreso than it already has. Some of the trial court's findings including references to searches on the court's computer and that the court had done “research”.
“That although the mother has stated she was pushing for the divorce that was filed by her current husband, the court was able to verify on its computer that the divorce has been dismissed. As well, there are currently no contact orders between the mother and her husband thanks to pending criminal charges. The court also found on the computer that the mother’s current husband has been convicted of crimes before and, as stated above, faces charges currently for acts against the mother. The court also found that the father in this case has convictions in his past as well and he is currently on the sex offender registry for the State of Indiana. That upon further research on the computer during the hearing, the offenses were for Child Exploitation in both 2001 and 2002.”
The panel of the Indiana Court of Appeals reviewing this case did not miss the glaring admissions of the trial court's own investigation. There is a prohibition against a trial court conducting its own investigation and receiving ex parte evidence. That places the judge in the role of an advocate rather than an arbitrator and denies the parties of their right to engage in the evidentiary process.
The Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 2.9(c) states that with regard to ex parte communications: A judge shall not investigate facts in a matter independently, and shall consider only the evidence presented and any facts that may properly be judicially noticed. Commentary [6] to Rule 2.9 (c) clarifies that “[t]he prohibition against a judge investigating the facts in a matter extends to information available in all mediums.”
This case pleases me that I read every child custody decision as it provided the opportunity to share many lessons about child custody proceedings and the law in one neatly tied-together case. But it's not over with yet. This case also reveals something that is becoming more epidemic as the generational effect of the destruction of the American family is coming to fruition.
Sadly, the most unfortunate finding by the trial court was: “Quite honestly, neither parent in this matter seems fit to raise a child.”
Parents who would like to achieve the best outcome for their children in a contested child custody case should visit my website and contact my scheduler to make an appointment to meet with me. Attorneys may request a free consultation to learn how I can maximize their advocacy for their clients.
Connect with me for the latest Indiana child custody related policy considerations, findings, court rulings and discussions.
As I am nearing the weight that I was on the 21st anniversary of my birth I take a moment to reflect upon weight loss in general, what it has taken to get there and the benefits that I have received. I expect, rather I demand of myself, that I will lose the three pounds necessary to achieve the interim goal of my age 21 weight by the end of June. After that, the final goal is my high school graduation weight of 129 when I was age 17.
That was not my initial goal though. At age 19 I was a professional athlete who got struck by a vehicle and nearly killed. It wasn't until four years ago, at age 38, that I was able to begin athletics again. It took that many years for my body to restore itself to a usable level, for the pain to become manageable and to be able to walk without periodically stumbling or falling. The pain resulting from major nerve damage, which had been so severe the first year that contact with the surface of my skin such as wearing a sock had the same feeling as being burnt by fire, gradually subsided. By my mid-30's pain was no longer chronic. I began having pain-free periods after being well-rested, sometimes lasting until noon or occasionally later.
At my highest point, which not surprisingly was during my divorce and while getting an upper body workout from masonry and roofing work, I weighed 196 pounds. Typically, following my mid 20's, my weight had fluctuated between 165-185 pounds, often with the seasons. It seems that the Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year's food eating frenzies, which occurred during a time of reduced outdoor activity, was not conducive to maintaining my weight.
On 12 December 2009 I decided I was going to start running competitively. That day I was 178 pounds. My goal then seemed easily attainable – a waist size the same as my hips – which I estimated would put me at a weight of about 155 pounds.
Rolling my ankle, resulting in a triple sprain, in February didn't help this mission. But through proper diet, walking and pure determination I had reached that goal by Spring.
Still dissatisfied with my body image I pursued further weight loss. Additionally, the proper balance of weight to provide the muscle mass to carry myself, yet minimize the load I had to carry, had not been reached. I kept setting and achieving incremental goals. Three pounds, seven pounds or one pant size smaller.
The process was as much psychological as it was physical. I relied upon the instruction I had received at the United States Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs, Colorado when I was age 17 and also upon research I had conducted at the current time using the internet and health and nutrition books that I have.
While researching I came across every fad diet, hypnosis, medical procedure, device, exercise machine and all other possibly conceivable methods by which one could be persuaded to part with their money in the pursuit of weight lose. All of which do not produce the desired results. One claim that I would find reminded me of some late night infomercial about cleansing the body of toxins and the digestive tract of years of “built up sludge” lining the intestinal walls. The claim was that an adult can never return to their teenage weight because of maturation stages where bulk is added but more importantly because of this weighty mass of “built up sludge”.
To me it simply sounded like nonsense. None of the other diets or various other “secrets” to weight loss made sense either. In making a logical examination, as I do with everything, I asked myself – if any of these weight loss methods actually produced the desired results then why would there be new methods? The simple answer is – they don't! They only exist to separate people from their money not fat from their bodies.
I couldn't help myself from obsessing about that claim I had heard that a person cannot naturally return to their normal teenage weight. This concept is borne by common folklore as well as weight charts which differentiate based upon age. People kept telling me that it's just not biologically possible. To me it all sounded like a myth just as the “you must drink at least 64 ounces of water per day” myth is so commonly accepted, promoted and repeated, even by so-called knowledgeable medical professionals.
Inclusive of all the walking, running and bicycle riding that I do each day, while 90+ degrees lately, I have not consumed 64 ounces or more of water or any other beverage each day. But I have ensured that I stay properly hydrated. That 64 ounce myth may sound catchy just like a fad diet but what they have in common is what keeps people on a diet treadmill -- neither is based upon sound scientific evidence.
It is important that everyone maintain a healthy lifestyle of which part of that is a healthy weight. If you are involved in a child custody case then it can have added importance. By law a parent's health is one of the eight factors that a court must consider when making a child custody decision. A healthy lifestyle and a healthy weight can both be achieved regardless of what justifications some people may provide for their failure to do so.
My weight loss has certainly allowed me to be more competitive but it has done much more for me. All of my vital signs have improved. My resting pulse is generally around 45 now. I eat less, usually around 1200-1500 calories per day which is inclusive of my daily 5-10 miles of running and walking. More important, I generally feel more rested, alert and energetic.
The level of stress placed on my body has been reduced which has a corresponding effect on mental stress. The reduced caloric intake will lower my immune response and increase my longevity. As my son places higher demands on my time and energy level I am able to keep up. That is the most important thing to me.
So, I say now and assure you that I will attain that impossible weight of 129 pounds that carried this 5' 10” body across the finish line in 100+ races per year 25 years ago.
Parents who would like to achieve the best outcome for their children in a contested child custody case should visit my website and contact my scheduler to make an appointment to meet with me. Attorneys may request a free consultation to learn how I can maximize their advocacy for their clients.
Connect with me for the latest Indiana child custody related policy considerations, findings, court rulings and discussions.
As a child custody policy advisor I have written and had child custody related legislation passed into law. My counseling of lawyers and appearances as an expert witness have helped them achieve more favorable results for their clients including winning appeals, gaining parenting time, reducing conflict, and mediating agreements. Additionally I made important contributions to the amended Indiana Parenting Time Guidelines that went into effect March 2013 and am currently formulating recommendations for the Indiana Child Support Guidelines which are to be amended this year. For parents I offer child custody based life coaching to help them maintain control of their lives and increase their fitness as parents so they can truly serve the best interest of their children.
