3/22/06 Legislative
Testimony – Alan Phillips
Chairman Dutton, members of the
Committee, my name is Alan Phillips. You heard earlier
from Doug Conley, a member of People for Equal
Parenting. I’m also a member of PEP. Thank you for the
opportunity to testify. I recently listened to a radio
interview with Representative Warren Chisum about some
of the subject matter this Committee deals with. He
specifically recommended working with this Committee and
I want to say that it’s an honor for me to be here today
to follow up on his suggestion. Before I testify I’d
also like to say “Thank you” to Nicole Bates for helping
to facilitate some testimony today that I don’t think
the Committee had originally anticipated receiving.
I
think my divorce was typical. My former spouse and I
divorced in 2005. During our legal proceedings neither
of us ever accused – much less proved – that the other
is an unfit parent. But after our divorce each of us
has always been treated differently than the other,
regarding time with our child. I’ve always been
disturbed about this. As a result, sometime ago I
joined PEP.
I’m
not angry at my former spouse. One of PEP’s positions
that I fully agree with is that the issue of child
custody is neither logically nor empirically about
gender. Do you know that according to a report from the
federal Office of Child Support Enforcement that by 2009
one out of every five noncustodial parents in America
will be a woman?
This statistic alone should make everyone aware
that it’s no longer possible to talk about child custody
as a gender issue. In other words: so-called Men’s
Rights Organizations – for all their good intentions –
are as wrong as the shrillest imaginable lunatic fringe
special-rights organization that might be against
treating men fairly. The problem here is not gender,
it’s law that presumes that in every divorce
somebody’s got to lose. And it’s getting worse …
fast. The same report I cited a moment ago, also says
that by 2009, there will be over 70 million Americans in
the child support system.
I’ve
come here today to ask the Committee to help Texans talk
about what’s really going on in custody law. Because of
financial incentives put into law during the Clinton
administration – a complex set of incentives described
in 42 U.S.C. §654 – the real problem we have is a
conflict in interest between all fit adult divorced
parents and the state. Divorce and unequal child
custody are a good source of revenue for the state. The
more it comes to be realized in the general public that
this is the case, well … it’s only natural to expect
that the more it will be the case that citizens will
gradually lose respect for government institutions that
certainly no longer appear to be neutral arbiters
between citizens because those institutions appear to be
self-interested.
Between now and next year’s general session PEP will
complete an analysis of the real costs … the total costs
– direct and indirect – of Texas’ child custody system.
It’s expected that those costs will be astronomical and
that, by becoming aware of those costs, the legislature
in general and this Committee in particular will want to
move as soon as possible to a presumption of equal
custody in divorces between fit parents. For it turns
out, as you heard earlier from Doug Conley, that the
custody system itself is the villain in this play and
that the children who are being produced by that system
implicate great expenses on public budgets versus their
peers who are not in that system. It also turns out
that the children that are being produced by that system
are more likely than their peers to become adults that
implicate great expenses on public budgets.
A
presumption of equal custody for all fit parents who are
divorcing is not only fair, it’ll save the state of
Texas a great deal of money over time. Thank you,
Chairman Dutton and the members of the Committee for
your kind attention.
