During the last few years, the Texas legislature has managed to pile up a few of the most incredibly dumb laws that any Family Code has ever seen.  Some of them are incomprehensible drivel, some the work of liberal do-gooders, some inspired by right-wing fundamentalist goombahs.  This page is dedicated to exploring just a little of their insanity.  We're not sure the whole web would have enough band-width to explore all of it.

    Who does it make it happy?  The lawyers.  After they charge you for the divorce, they get to charge you again to interpret it.  It's like a doctor who breaks your leg and then wants to charge you for setting it.

Solution:  Plain language schedules or a "standard interpretation" that goes out with each of these monsters.

    Problem:  Asinine law that requires that every Petition and Waiver have a statement (in BOLD letters) that the State of Texas wants you to be nice to each other in your divorce and that you promise to try and if you can't be, then, gosh, maybe you should use a mediator.  Like making a patient sign a statement that Texas encourages them to be healthy before you'll put on a bandage.  Accomplishes nothing except to waste reams of paper every year.

    Who does it make happy?  Professional arbitrators and mediators who use it as an excuse to tell you how to run your life.  One more shot for incompetant lawyers to remove some dollars from your wallet. I mean, let's face it:  if they were good lawyers, would they be working as mediators?

    Solution:  Toss it out.  People who want to act like jerks in their divorces will do it whether they sign this statement or not. If you're in a contested case, you're better off with a Judge than an arbitrator.

    Problem:  Judges are now allowed to order any divorcing parent to take classes on the impact divorce has on children.  Don't have to have any reason or show any evidence that the children are being hurt in any way.  They can order it just because they want to and they can throw you in jail if you don't do it.  And, since the classes cost money, it's essentially a punishment for getting a divorce, something which isn't against the law.

Who does it make happy?  Fundamentalist Judges who consider a divorce a "sin" rather than a right.  Do-gooder social workers who have a whole new way of sticking their noses into your personal life and charging you for it.  Lawyers who get to charge you extra because your case is dragging on longer than it should.

Solution:  Classes should only be ordered if there is some substantial evidence that the children of the marriage are being harmed in some way.  Anything else is arbitrary and unequal application of the law.

    Who does it make happy?  Men's rights groups who want to pretend that they've made some kind of progress, when they haven't.  Lawyers who can now pretend that they're getting joint custody for men.

    Solution:  Grow up.  People who are getting divorces are getting divorces.  There's no way that children can live in two houses at the same time or go to different school districts every other day.  Joint Custody might have worked for Ozzie and Harriet, but not for modern Americans.

    The problem:  Judges are now allowed to order that parents who get custody will stay in the county after the divorce.  Essentially reduces custodial parents to the status of criminals, with restricted freedom of movement.  What's next?  Order that women have to go on living with their husbands after the divorce, so that visitation is more convenient?  Or maybe just chain them in the basement, along with the dog.

    Who does it make happy?  Fundamentalists who want to make divorces a punishable offense.  Men's rights fanatics who want to go on controlling their wives after the divorce.   Crooked lawyers who like to see people get into fights so they'll make more money off of the divorces.

    The solution?  Throw the bum out.  Americans have the right to move anywhere they want to, anytime they want to, unless they're on probation or parole. Divorce is not a crime.

    Texas law provides that, in every divorce involving children, an order to garnish wages has to be signed at the time of the divorce.  It doesn't have to be issued at that time, but it can be, for no other reason than that the person getting custody (or the Judge) happens to feel like it.  In our tradition of law, wages were only garnished for serious offenses and NEVER in a blanket manner, covering a whole class of people.  Basically, then, this treats the parent who isn't getting custody (which usually means the father) like he's a criminal when he hasn't done anything wrong. Further, it totally violates the privacy of the non-custodial parent by bringing his private life into the work-place.

Who does it make happy?  The Texas Attorney General's Office, which has private lawyers doing their paperwork for them now.  Lawyers who get to charge for more paperwork that usually isn't needed.  Women's rights groups who think all men will act like jerks if you give them half a chance.

    The solution:  get rid of the law.  Wages should only be garnished if the non-custodial parent has failed to pay his child support.  At the very least, he's entitled to a hearing before he's treated like he's done something criminal.