What you did not see!

As stated above, the key to success is "sweat" and "mentorship." Here is the photo in it's entirety. What you did not see above is the "orange arm" almost pulling me through the finish line. A close, long time friend was excited when I decided to run the marathon. While he did not have time in his schedule to train that particular year for a marathon, he committed to making "me" successful. He put together a "marathon team" to run the marathon with me so I would have a different member of the team run "every step" of the way with me. Additionally, he ran the last 10K with me, himself ... PULLING ME THROUGH THE FINISH LINE IN JUST UNDER 4:50!

WHERE IS OUR CONSTITUTION?

In the wake of a new presidential administration, many Americans are finally waking up! We fell asleep at the switch a long time ago. While we lay blissfully slumbering, many of our constitutional rights were usurped. The Federal Government has only those powers delegated to it in the Constitution - or at least that is what we all agreed to when we ratified the United States Constitution. Anyone think that those powers have significantly expanded to include powers that were specifically reserved to the States and the People, respectively?

We blindly trusted the Bush administration to do "what needed to be done" in order to fight terrorism. We largely ignored, by failing to ask the hard questions, any constitutional usurpation. Now, only in the light of something that matters to us - loss of economic prosperity - have we begun to wipe the sleep from our eyes. Yes, that's right, until we were hit in the pocketbook we weren't paying attention. Are we going to remain asleep during another administration?

Is the "bail out" constitutional? Does the United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 8 prohibit the bail out? Hmm ... Congress may tax and spend for three things. Is the bail out among those things for which Congress may tax and spend?

What about the United States now being the majority owner of significant industry? Essentially we have turned private industry into public industry. Not only does the United States now have a significant financial stake in what was once private industry, but the United States has unprecedented power to make decisions regarding those industries. Wow ... does this seem like a "free market economy" to you?

Articles regarding these subjects and more will be forth coming. Please feel free to email me at profesc.research@gmail.com and let me know the particular topics that interest you.

Emergency, Temporary Change of Custody - Standards and Quantums of Evidence

Judges, lawyers and litigants, all need a "standard" consistently applied to emergency temporary change of custody motions. Currently, there is a writ pending before the Oklahoma Supreme Court aimed at providing that very standard. Assuming the S.Ct. actually assumes original jurisdiction and does not "dodge" the issue, we will all have a guide-post by which to determine or advise clients. Most attorneys agree that the moving party - the one seeking the emergency, temporary change of custody - has the burden of proof. However, Oklahoma law does not currently provide: 1) An enumerated legal standard for emergency, temporary change of custody; 2) A quantum of evidence with which the moving party must meet the standard. Judges are free to create an arbitrary standard. Many Oklahoma County Judges use the standard of "irreparable harm." That standard comes from the more general civil standard used in Preliminary Injunctions. It was intended to be used for civil matters, not to define the well-being or best interest of our children. Essentially, in a family law scenario, that standard is unattainable. A more in-depth review of "irreparable harm" is necessary - what constitutes irreparable harm? Harm that cannot be cured by payment of money? If that is the definition, how is it that an Oklahoma County Judge, recently found the physical and/or psychological harm emanating from K-9 fecal matter covering the house in which a child was kept did not amount to "irreparable" harm? Perhaps because this Judge also applied some quantum of evidence requirement that he failed to enumerate?

Hmmm ... what is a "quantum of evidence?" That is more familiar as: 1) Beyond a reasonable doubt; 2) Clear and convincing evidence; or 3) Preponderance of the evidence. The function of a standard of proof, as that concept is embodied in the Due Process Clause and in the realm of fact finding, is to instruct the fact finder concerning the degree of confidence our society thinks he should have in the correctness of factual conclusions for a particular type of adjudication. The standard serves to allocate the risk of error between the litigants and to indicate the relative importance attached to the ultimate decision (Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418, 423, 99 S.Ct. 1804, 1808 [U.S.Tex.,1979]; See also In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 370, 90 S.Ct. 1068, 1076, 25 L.Ed.2d 368 [1970] [Harlan, J., concurring]).

Obviously, the non-moveant is most protected if the moving party has the burden of proving their case by the first quantum - beyond a reasonable doubt. That standard applies to the guilt or innocence of a criminal defendant (Hogan v. State, 139 P.3d 907, 923 [Okla.Crim.App.,2006]). The clear-and-convincing standard is employed in civil cases involving allegations of fraud or some other quasi-criminal wrongdoing by the defendant. The interest at stake in those cases is deemed to be more substantial than mere loss of money and some jurisdictions reduce the risk to the defendant of having his reputation tarnished erroneously by increasing the plaintiff's burden of proof (Johnson v. Board of Governors of Registered Dentists of State of Okl., 913 P.2d 1339, 1345 [Okl.,1996]). The parties equally share the risk with the third quantum - preponderance of the evidence (Id.). What quantum of evidence was applied in the K-9 fecal case? We do not, and will never, know. It was not specifically enumerated on the record and current law establishes no specific quantum as applied to emergency, temporary change of custody actions.

It seems that the problem, when one understands the purposes intended to be served by enumerated legal standard and quantum of evidence, suggests the answer. The more general standard of "best interest of the child", should be applied to ordinary change of custody motions (assuming the Gibbons standard of permanent, substantial, material change of condition(s) have been met). Emergency, temporary change of custody motions, however, imply by their very nature that a temporary change is in the best interest of the child(ren). Thus, a good standard and quantum for emergency, temporary change of custody could be:

"Actual physical or psychological harm to a parent or child proven by preponderance of the evidence" or "A credible threat of physical or psychological harm to a parent or child proven by clear and convincing evidence."

First, one need not - and would not likely be able to - prove actual, or a credible threat of physical or psychological harm beyond a reasonable doubt. Setting such a high quantum would result in many children remaining in harm's way while investigations are conducted. During the conduct of investigations, at-risk children could be permanently harmed. Thus, beyond a reasonable doubt is not an appropriate standard for an emergency, temporary change of custody. Since a "threat of harm" is less concrete than "actual" harm, the quantum of "clear and convincing" is most appropriate. This standard liens toward protecting the party from whom custody is potentially being removed - a change of custody is more than the loss of mere money and could potentially harm the non-moveant's reputation. Proving actual harm is a bit easier, i.e. bruising, police reports, expert testimony etc. When dealing with actual, physical harm all the evidence is in plain view and the parties should equally bare the risk of error. Thus, the lesser standard of preponderance of the evidence is most appropriate.

A legal standard determines the substance sought (i.e. gold), while the quantum of evidence determines the size of screens built into the legal sifter. The suggested standard would permit lawyers to accurately assay their clients' circumstances and determine when an actual "emergency" exists. It would also permit Judges, especially when an ex parte motion requires temporary deprivation of substantive and procedural due process, to provide more consistent and well reasoned results until all parties can have "their day in court."

The question of appropriate legal standard and applicable quantum of evidence is clearly a question capable of repetition while evading review. Hopefully, even if the pending writ is mooted by litigant conduct, the S.Ct. will answer the question. Enumerating a legal standard and quantum of evidence for emergency, temporary change of custody will result in consistency of decisions and, thus, will decrease acrimonious and costly litigation. The best interests of Oklahoma children will be best served by an established standard/quantum applied in an even-handed manner.

Oklahoma Judge Richard Kirby Overturned - but Two had already Suffered Unconsitutional Jail Sentences at the hands of his honor

The Oklahoma Supreme Court overturned Associate Judge Richard Kirby, who jailed two litigants for Direct Contempt of Court, holding that the litigants' constitutional rights were violated by Judge Richard Kirby (see In Re J.H., 2008 OK 104). While the Court of Civil Appeals upheld Judge Richard Kirby in his Direct Contempt of the two litigants, the Oklahoma Supreme Court opted to actually apply the Constitution. The Supreme Court was concerned with those pesky little things called CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS! You know, like oversight by Judge Richard Kirby of the right to due process - both substantive and procedural - the right to counsel when one is at risk to lose liberty/freedom etc. As it turns out, Judge Richard Kirby denied the litigants due process by charging them with "direct contempt of court" - as opposed to the proper charge Judge Richard Kirby could have brought, if there was one, of "indirect contempt of court." While there is a well-reasoned dissent supporting Judge Richard Kirby's decision, ultimately the Supreme Court reversed in a 7 to 2 decision mandating that all litigants in future such contempt proceedings be given the fundamental rights to notice, adequate time for preparing a defense, a jury trial (if demanded) etc. Unfortunately for the two litigants involved, the Supreme Court's ruling is of little consequence - they had long since served the unconsitutional sentences, improvidently doled out by Judge Richard Kirby, in the Oklahoma County Jail prior to the appeal. Someone had to pay the tuition cost for Judge Richard Kirby's constitutional education. It is just sad that two people had to suffer an unconsititional jail sentence to pay for Judge Richard Kirby's eduction in the fundamental legal principles on which this nation was founded! Unlike the student loan program, there is no way Judge Richard Kirby can repay the debt to the litigants who paid dearly for his education by serving jail time. Happy New Year to those who were wrongly jailed at the hands of his honor.

Santa Clause, The Easter Bunny The Tooth Fairy and Divorce

By Michael E. Chionopoulos

Published in Res Gestae February, 2009

Amicable divorce is much like Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy – we all know they are fantasies, but we intently want to believe each of their surreal images and the concomitant message of perennial hope. Awaking with a licentious hang-over throbbing in one’s libido only to discover his/her matrimonial bonds were formed with defective emotional epoxy is a traumatic event – particularly when there are minor children involved. Nonetheless, most couples embark upon the task of seeking the ever elusive amicable divorce.

With the betrothed now having become the begrudged, the best of parsimonious intentions turn into acrimonious conduct with each party seeking legal validation of their emotional positions. Parties often seek a post-connubial order visiting maximum legal malevolence upon the other. This is especially true if one of the parties had entertained the company of an extra-nuptial paramour. The spurned spouse will often request a “be good” order seeking to preclude the other spouse from having the former paramour spend the night during visitation or shared custody with the parties’ children. In a temporary order, such a condition seems harmless enough. However, a constitutional issue arises when a decree or post-decree order contains “be good” language.

Freedom of association must be free from obstruction by state government.[1] Parents’ rights to exercise control over their childrens’ upbringing, education and other aspects, has long been held to be constitutionally protected.[2] Moreover, when a State seeks to inquire about an individual's associations, a heavy burden lies upon it to show that the inquiry is necessary to protect a legitimate state interest.[3] The test for sticking a governmental nose into parents’ rights to determine who may see their children is two pronged: What will serve the best interests of the child; weighed against what harm will come to the child without state meddling.[4] State invasion into parents’ rights to determine those with whom their children may have contact is a serious constitutional digression.[5]

Florida’s public policy is to assure a minor child frequent and continuing contact with both parents after marriage has been dissolved.[6] That being true, absent a showing that the parent’s new significant other presents a danger to the child, any state interference with who the parent permits his/her children to interact with is simply unconstitutional. If, on the other hand, the parents’ agree that neither will have a visitor of the opposite sex spend the night when they have the children, having that put into a court order would not necessarily be unconstitutional. However, if one parent subsequently fails to abide by that agreed order, can one be held in contempt?

There are no cases directly on point, but there are at least two ways to assay that conundrum: A traditional contractual analysis, i.e. offer, acceptance and consideration. Even under a contract analysis, it is non sequitur that a court could enforce a contract with the semi-criminal procedure of in-direct contempt. The second manner in which to analyze the issue is one of simply enforcing a court order. Much like the first analysis, it seems non sequitur that a court could punish with a quasi-criminal action that which it lacked constitutional authority to order in the first place.

Ultimately, the argument that it is immoral – and therefore not in the best interest of the child and, in fact damaging to the child – to expose the parties’ child(ren) to a live-in or overnight paramour during visitation does not pass constitutional muster. Of course, Florida has a legitimate and compelling interest in protecting children. However, absent specific justification, that line is crossed when a court projects its glomming governmental fingers into the parents’ constitutional pie. No matter how morally repugnant each of us or the court may find the fact that children are exposed to a parent with a live-in, unmarried significant other, absent a specific showing of detriment to the child(ren)’s interests, the courts may not superimpose their morality over the law. Indeed, such judicial activism will not find repose in the cool shade of our constitutionally rooted tree.

[1] Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290, 301 (U.S. 2000).

[2] Pierce v. Soc'y of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 534 (U.S. 1925)

[3] Baird v. State Bar of Ariz., 401 U.S. 1, 6-7 (U.S. 1971).

[4] Clearly, this Court has consistently held all statutes that have attempted to compel visitation or custody with a grandparent based solely on the best interest of the child standard, without the required showing of harm to the child, to be unconstitutional. We agree with the district court below and likewise hold that section 61.13(2)(b)2.c. of the Florida Statutes is unconstitutional as violative of Florida's right of privacy because it fails to require a showing of harm to the child prior to compelling and forcing the invasion of grandparent visitation into the parental privacy rights. Section 61.13(2)(b)2.c. provides that a court "may award the grandparents visitation rights with a minor child if it is in the child's best interest."§ 61.13(2)(b)2.c., Fla. Stat. (2001). This provision does not require a showing of the essential element of harm to the child should visitation with a grandparent be denied (Sullivan v. Sapp, 866 So. 2d 28, 37-38 [Fla. 2004]).

[5] Id.

[6] Schutz v. Schutz, 581 So. 2d 1290, 1293 (Fla. 1991)

Contact Author

Several people have contacted me by leaving messages related to certain articles. If you would like to contact me, please send email to profesc.research@gmail.com. I will look forward to hearing from anyone that would like to contact me.

OKLAHOMA CITY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW DEAN ACCUSED OF SEXUAL DISCRIMINATION

Professor Danne Johnson has filed a Federal Law suit against Oklahoma City University School of Law and against Dean Lawrence Hellman. Professor Johnson allegedly accuses Dean Lawrence Hellman of sexual discrimination and violation of the Equal Pay Act of 1963. According to media reports, Johnson has been an associate professor of law since 2003 and contends male law professors at the school make as much as 52% more than their female counterparts at OCU.

Nothing from my "Law School" surprises me. In particular, any allegation regarding Dean Hellman would be unsurprising to me. My personal experiences with him as an Alumni left me to seriously question whether he has any objective sense of "fairness." Of course, that does not mean he is wrong or guilty in the instance of Professor Johnson - that is a factual finding left for the Federal Court to determine. If Dean Hellman is guilty of sexual discrimination, I hope the Federal Court holds him accountable to the full extent of its power. Dean Hellman should be sent the clear message that he should treat all people with equal dignity and respect - even if he is not guilty of sexual discrimination.

Florida's 11th Circuit - Miami/Dade - Rules Law prohibiting Gay adoption is unconsitutional

While there is no "published" opinion, the news reported that a Circuit Judge in the 11th Florida Circuit (which is a trial court judge in Florida) has ruled the Florida Statute prohibiting gay people from adopting children unconstitutional. The news reported that the Judge butressed that decision with the fact that Florida permits placement of Foster Children with gay people and/or couples. Therefore, the Judge reasoned, that any argument Florida has a "rational basis" in prohibiting an adoption by a gay person or couple cannot stand up. Moreover, the news report stated that the Judge made the ruling based upon concerns regarding equal protection for the adopting parents and stating that such a prohibition would not be in the best interest of the children involved because they were entitled to a "permenancy" and a "loving home."

There can be no doubt that this decision will be appealed by the State (Ex rel Department of Families and Children - or DCF). Of course, it doesn't really matter which way the appellate court rules because that decision will undoubetly set in motion a long series of appeals likely to end up in the United States Supreme Court - or, at the very least, an application for certiorari (review) will ultimately be filed asking the US Supreme Court to review the most recent appellate decision.

The most likely, but not the only, route for appeal will be to exhaust all state courts of appeals and then proceed on the Federal side. The fact that the trial judge ruled, at least in part, based upon "due process", and perhaps other rights guaranteed by the US Constitution, will permit the matter to be heard in Federal Court based upon "Federal Question" jurisdiction. It is likely that the appellate process will take several years before the matter is finally resolved.

Constitutional Law

Well, I've had a bit of an "absence." However, I am proud to announce that I will be teaching the Foundations of Constitutional Law right here in Fort Myers, Florida. I promise a very interesting perspective. Classes will start September 25, 2008 and will meet once a week for twelve weeks. If you are interested in attending, please email rarias129@aol.com to get more information. It promises to be a fun and informative class!!!

Is Free Speech Really Free?

Free Speech, guaranteed by the United States Constitution, Amendment I, may not be free to all. The News Press published my commentary on that subject Wedneday, August 6, 2008. You can view the article by going to the side bar in this blog - under the News Press section. I hope many of you will comment on it on the News Press web page. The article, published this morning, has already received a significant number of comments. Thank you for your support!

Separation of Powers - Judicial Supremacy

From where does the "separation of powers doctrine" emanate? Why is it important to us? Separation of Powers is one key that has made our form of government successful. Essentially, it is a doctrine that keeps the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of our government from usurping the powers specifically reserved to the other branches of government.

Article I of the United States Constitution establishes the Executive branch of government and sets out powers and limitations. Article II establishes the Legislative branch and sets out its powers and limitations. Article III establishes the United States Supreme Court - but states that inferior courts shall be established by the Legislative branch.

The United States Supreme Court ("S.Ct."), under the leadership of Chief Justice Marshall, declared in Marbury v. Madison (1803) that the S.Ct. had the authority to determine whether or not a law was "Constitutional." While there was some discussion about this seeming expansion doctrine, it was not seriously questioned (and under today's standards Justice Marshall would be forced to recuse because it was he, while acting as Secretary of State, that did not publish certain judicial appointments prior to his departure and that gave rise to the facts). The doctrine was not squarely addressed again for about 150 years! In Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the S.Ct. affirmed its role in passing judgment on whether or not a law was "Constitutional."

Why is this important to us today? Unlike most state Supreme Courts, established by each individual state's constitution, the Chief Justice of the S.Ct. is appointed for life. In most states, Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life, but there is a rotation for the duties of "Chief Justice." Additionally, in several states - even appointed for life - the state Supreme Court Justices are subject to a "retention ballot" by the people every so often. In the S.Ct., however, the position of Chief Justice is a life time appointment with no check or balance.

Our current S.Ct. Chief Justice is quite young. Clearly, President Bush wanted to appoint not only the most qualified individual, but someone who would occupy that position for as many years as possible - and, of course, someone who had a philosophy similar to his own. It is in that way a President can continue to impact our government and society long after he leaves office.

There are many questions of supreme import coming before the courts. The judicial branch of government, far and away, has the most power of all branches within our system. That means the issues of most societal import will ultimately be decided in courts and the men and women deciding them will largely be those appointed for life. No matter where you stand on today's issues, you must fully understand how our government works in order to fully and meaningfully participate by expressing your opinion within our system. The point of this article is that all Americans need to have a deep understanding of the internal workings within our judicial system and how that branch of government impacts us on a daily basis.

The issues of abortion, same-sex-marriage, stem cell research and partial-birth-abortion are among some of the important issues. To succeed, a society must build. Part of that building is deciding the issues of import - which we can do upon a foundation of bedrock, or burrowed into the sand. Drilling into the bedrock of the documents that founded and set out the initial structure of our society and learning for oursevles the principles upon which those documents were drafted is important for every American. It is through that reading we can avoid making decisions while standing in the political sands manufactured by office seekers that intentionally shift under our feet to maximize their approval rating.

The issues of import will not be decided by Obama or McCain. No, Sir! Those issues will not even be decided by the legislators we send to Congress as our representatives - though they may pass laws on the issues. Ultimately and with absolute finality, as the "supreme law of the land", the S.Ct. will decide those issues. First, the S.Ct. will determine whether a law passed by the people and signed by the President is itself "Constitutional." Second, the S.Ct. will determine - in various facts and circumstances - whether or not a constitutionally acceptable law has been applied in an unconstitutional manner.

WOW! Now that is power! The future of our society ultimately rests with men and women that have a life-time appointment. Does this mean they are free to make the righteous, correct, moral decisions with political impunity and without fear of career reprisal? Perhaps. It also, however, could mean that they are free to explore and advance their own political agenda - whether mainstream America agrees with it or not - without opposition.

Republican or Democrat - it doesn't matter. The choice we make for President of the United States is going to give that person the power of appointing Federal Judges for life and, perhaps one or more S.Ct. Justices for life. Those choices will impact the next generation ... or infect the next generation, depending upon your view of the world. Accordingly, I urge each citizen - I implore you for the soul of our Nation - to critically think through your own value system and to make a diligent search of the documents on which this great nation was founded. There is no excuse for irresponsible voting. We have the highest literacy rate in the world and the Internet provides us instant access to those revered documents. Look at them! Read them! Understand them! Compare them to your own value system - with a complete understanding of the principles on which they were written - then search yourself and make the decision you believe to be right in your heart. Again, Republican or Democrat, it does not matter on which side of the issues we each fall individually - so long as we make an informed choice about the direction in which our country will go. It is our duty as citizens to make an informed decision in which we honestly believe!!

Church & State - Have we gone too Far?

Did our founding fathers really mean that we should not allow our children to pray at school? If so, why is it that the Army has "Chaplains" - mostly Christian, although recently there has been a specific effort to include other religions - for the specific purpose of ministering to soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines? The Chaplains are on active duty, paid by the government, to hold religious services for and minister to other government employees. Is this an unconstitutional conflict of Church and State? Seriously, how could it get any more DIRECT ... hired by the government to spread God's word to government employees!!! That seems much more direct to me than saying a prayer at school because it is a "public building." I'm not offended if Jewish Americans or Muslim Americans want to hold their own prayer groups at school ... why are the Christians persecuted? Why not let everyone hold a prayer group? Here's a thought ... LET'S BE TOLERANT AND ENCOURAGE COMMUNICATION AND UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE GROUPS! Wow ... what a novel idea!

A city government seal (Edmond, OK) is not permitted to contain a "cross" as a SMALL part of it's official city seal (see the 10th Circuit Opinion, Certiorari to the US S.Ct. denied). Yet all of the money spent in that same little town (and used to pay those 10th Circuit Court of Appeal Judges) has "IN GOD WE TRUST ON IT!" I am sure that someone can "justify" this with legalese, but the truth is that we are engaged in a double standard.

One must put the separation of Church and State in historic context. At the time of the Constitution's birth, many Americans had come from Europe, where the Church controlled the State or was the government. In view of that historic reality, it seems a much more reasonable interpretation that our founding fathers, and hence the Constitution, separated Church and State because the drafters did not want to restrict religion (many came here to AVOID religious persecution) but rather wanted to make sure the Church never became the government. This stands to reason. If a specific Church became the government, or had undue influence in governmental matters, such a situation would reduce the "freedom of religion" the framers were trying to protect by permitting a larger Church to squeeze out smaller Churches or "freeze" out minority religious views.

Have we now gone too far? Have we now, as a Nation, alienated God? Remember, the three major religions of the world all worship the same God ... Christians came from the Jewish people and worship the same God (with a dispute about Christ's role) and the Muslims worship the same God as well. In seeking to protect "Freedom of Religion" have we now limited it?

Same Sex Marriage - Florida's Law

The News Press was kind enough to publish an article for me wherein I set out Florida's legislative law on same-sex marriage. Essentially, in the wake of California and Massachusetts actions other states have passed legislation to ensure that same-sex marriages are not recognized in their own states. Marriage, and for that matter divorce, have always been left by the Federal government to be dealt with at the state level. Traditionally, through comity, each state has recognized the connubial formalities performed in another state - even if the actual requirements are or were different. Today, some are worried about states making decisions with which they disagree and want to acknowledge that particular state's right to make such decisions and also acknowledge their own state rights to disagree. So the law becomes more complex. The link to my article can be found on the left side of this page. Please also note that there is an interesting counter piece published by the News Press just below my article on the same page. This certainly gives, as one commentator put it, a well rounded view.

Some Responses From The News Press Article

The following are some of the responses to my article regarding same-sex marriage that were posted on the News Press page. Thank you for your comments!

_________________________________________________________________

Answering Paula. Your response sounds politically correct, its just like hearing Obama on the subject. Except that, that is not the Full Gospel. A careful reading will debunk your theological theory. Jesus said He came not to change God’s moral law (Matthew 5:17-20). God’s character is Grace, He is love but also LAW! America is in deep trouble due to the confusion Christians have for lack of knowledge of God’s ethics.6/25/2008 5:36:55
_________________________________________________________________

I have read several of the previous articles (Judge) Michael Chionopoulos wrote in the News Press. I researched him after the article he wrote about marriage and the First Amendment. We are truly fortunate to have such a well accomplished constitutional scholar here in Fort Myers - and I agree we should hear more from him. I, for one, would like to hear more about how Florida can pass the laws talked about in his article without violating the United States Constitution? I am hetrosexual, but much like the author below, Mr. Chionopoulos, I don't see how stopping same-sex marriage in another state matters to us. Nor do I see, Sir, how stopping it here in Florida matters to us. Do you think we have no homosexuals in Fort Myers? Do you think permitting them to have a marriage license makes them more homosexual? Mr. Chionopoulos, you are a brilliant scholar and I hope the News Press permits you to Answer. Keep writing! You make us think and we all need that!!6/25/2008 5:26:56 PM
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

As a judge, you know all too well that the minority view isn't always what's fair or Constitutionally right. Just as blacks and whites have been allowed to intermarry (despite majority opposition that most likely still exists), homosexuals should, too. The adoption, as you also know, is a slippery issue. Gay parents who adopted in another state or country may move to Florida, where they by darn should be recognized as that child's parents, as they are. I don't think we Christians should point to the Good Book to cut off people's humane rights, any more than we should slap fishes on our bumpers. Probably the best advise is to do What Jesus Would Do. And based on the Gospels, I believe Jesus would love homosexuals, and care far less about following any laws than showing Our Father's grace. An Okie6/25/2008 2:12:14 PM As a judge, you know all too well that the minority view isn't always what's fair or Constitutionally right. Just as blacks and whites have been allowed to intermarry (despite majority opposition that most likely still exists), homosexuals should, too. The adoption, as you also know, is a slippery issue. Gay parents who adopted in another state or country may move to Florida, where they by darn should be recognized as that child's parents, as they are. I don't think we Christians should point to the Good Book to cut off people's humane rights, any more than we should slap fishes on our bumpers. Probably the best advise is to do What Jesus Would Do. And based on the Gospels, I believe Jesus would love homosexuals, and care far less about following any laws than showing Our Father's grace. Paula

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder ("PTSD")

Regrettably, many men and women are returning home from Iraq and other areas of the Middle East with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder ("PTSD"). There has been much discussion about the topic of PTSD. In fact, some people do not even believe it exists. Rather, some believe it is a way for malingering soldiers to bilk government medical retirements. The truth is that while some individuals may abuse the system - like any other system - PTSD is real. It causes depression, leads to substance abuse and, in severe cases, suicide.

What causes PTSD? There is a division among experts, but most can agree on the basic fact that PTSD occurs when an individual participates in or witnesses violence that is incomprehensible. It simply traumatizes them. Most soldiers, men and women, have a certain "bravado" to maintain. After all, they are "soldiers" and "leaders" ... they are "TOUGH!" As a result, they repress their emotions because it is not "soldier-like" to be "sensitive" and emotional. As a result, their mind has to process the horrors of war without the benefit of communication.

What cures PTSD? There is a deep division among experts on this subject. Some think that it is necessary for the suffering individual to "purge" - to talk it out and get rid of the emotions. On the other hand, this particular author believes there is little, if any, benefit in such an approach. Rather, the most effective therapeutic approach is to reassure the traumatized person that they do NOT have to re-live the horror and trauma to get better. Rather, the cure is so simple it mystifies all those with PhDs and other significant psychological education and training.

The real cure: 1) Reduce situational anxiety to the fullest extent possible. Realizing that all stress inducing circumstances in a one's life cannot always be controlled, it is important to exercise full control over those stress sources that actually can be reduced; 2) Simultaneous to reducing situational anxiety, increase adaptive coping skills. Adaptive is emphasized because this is where most soldiers and others suffering from PTSD go wrong - they engage in in maladaptive coping skills, i.e. alcohol abuse, drug use etc. Some examples of adaptive coping skills are: weight lifting; bicycle riding; running; golf; chess; writing; reading etc.

The combination of reducing situational anxiety and increasing adaptive coping skills will bring PTSD under control in a brief period of time and usually without any medication. Nonetheless, it should still be done with the assistance of a health-care professional. The reason it is necessary to involve a health care professional is to ensure that the coping skills are effective; to monitor progress; and, in some very significant cases, it is important because in order to reduce situational anxiety it may be necessary or advisable for the suffering person to use anti-anxiety medications such as xanax or other benzodiazepine based medications and, perhaps, even an anti-depressant while they develop the positive coping skills to overcome the PTSD.

REAL AMERICAN HERO

It does not take a Congressional Medal of Honor, Silver Star etc. to be a "Real-live-Hero." Each and EVERY member of the 45th Infantry Brigade from the Oklahoma Army National Guard - called "Thunderbirds" because of the patch that they wear on their uniform - is a no kidding, "Real-Live-Hero!" Currently serving in Iraq, the 45th has a very non-traditional mission. Indeed, the Commanding General - in the photo provided - is like the Mayor of the International Zone (one of the most dangerous places in Baghdad). However, the 45th soldiers are spread all over Iraq in support of specific missions. Brigadier General Deering, though, is still responsible for them, as well as the airmen and sailors under his Command in the International Zone.

Each 45th soldier now serving in Iraq ducks missiles on a daily basis. He or she continues to do their job, with pride and distinction, while being routinely shot at and having people try to run them over etc. Does not matter who you are, how much money you have, what you think of the current White House, what you think of the war itself or what you think of the upcoming elections; we can all agree, with the greatest of pride, that every 45th soldier is a "REAL-LIVE-HERO" to whom we owe the deepest sense of gratitude!

Recent Trips Abroad - Domesic Violence Prevention

In some recent travels, the cultural perceptions of both Americans and attitudes toward or about Domestic Violence began to emerge into trends. First, and not the least bit surprising, is that Americans are quite disfavored among most of the world. Generally, our Nation is seen by foreigners as self-serving, over-indulgent, arrogant and full of people with a misguided sense of entitlement. Of course, since that perception is fairly accurate when it comes to our Nation as a whole - and particularly those under the age of 30 - there is not much to be said about it. Foreign Governments, on the other hand, still welcome Americans by the droves - or at least our dollars (even as devalued as they have recently become). As you can see by the photo, this is not your average "public" place and was enjoyed at the invitation by one of import - as well as attending, and being invited as the key-note speaker, at a regional international symposium on Domestic Violence Prevention.

The issue of Domestic Violence Prevention simply must stay in the forefront of our minds. Here, in the United States, Domestic Violence has reached a pandemic level. Yet, our government continues to ignore it because to do something meaningful about it does not bring about social change fast enough for one to take political credit. Indeed, sponsoring a State Bill that would cost significant tax dollars leaves a Senator or Representative politically vulnerable at the next election. An opponent can spin the topic: "Senator X voted to spend $X,XXX,XXX.xx on this program ... WHERE ARE THE RESULTS FOR ALL YOUR MONEY?" Of course, meaningful programs will take a generation to ripen and bear social fruit. So, politicians continue to side-step the issue while America's children remain unprotected and, in many cases, are quickly converted to either predators or victims by the abuse itself.

HARD WORK - Family Values in Different Cultures

Now *THIS* is "hard work" ... but someone has to be a skilled diver!! After all ... "FREEDOM ISN'T FREE!" Outside the US things are *VERY* different - airport security in some small countries is, virtually, non-existent. You can also see my article below where I talk about Grand Parental rights and begin go get a feel for how other cultures have a completely different perception on what is right or wrong with respect to family values and, more importantly, how the governing law should reflect the family values of their culture. We must ask ourselves, do our current family laws in Oklahoma accurately reflect the social value system of family values that is maintained by the average citizen? Do we have special interest groups making (or trying to make) laws that deviate from the majority core values held by Oklahomans at large? These questions must addressed head on for Oklahoma to continue healthy growth. Economic policies are important, but if we are not accurately legslislatively addressing the needs of the next generation where are we really going economically?

Grand Parental Rights

Here is a new spin on our traditional thoughts of "Grand Parental Rights!" In the United States, and particularly in Oklahoma, Grand Parental rights has been the focus of much legislation. Essentially, attempts to legislate into a gap where in the more commonly non-traidtional home grand parents are not alienated from their biological grand children by a former daughter-in-law or son-in-law with custody who is resistent to allow, as primary custodial parent, their children to visit with the "other side" of the family.

However, today I am in a country where the law permits grand parents to sue for support from their family. Yes, that's right ... grand parents have the right to LEGALLY COMPEL their grand children to permit the grand parent to live with the grand child and to LEGALLY COMPEL the grand children to take care of a sick or elderly grand parent. This is a culture in which the nuclear family is so important, yet being westernized by the day, so that the legal powers to be have cemented their heritage by law.

Quite an interesting twist on the United States thought of "grand parental" rights. Think about it, in the United States we usually just put our elderly in an "Old person warehouse" ... a nursing home ... where they can live out their lives with little quality, but with equally little inconvenience on our own lives.

Who is missing the issue? If we "had" to take care of our own biological foreparents we might actually save enough federal funding so that our own grandchildren would be able to pay off Bush's war ... as opposed to our great, great grandchildren! Interesting cultural twist on the same term "grand parental rights!"

Reaction to House Bill 1026 Statutory Divorce Requirements

WOW! I was just informed of some of the comments posted by people regarding the Article published in The Oklahoman on March 22, 2008. I'm so flattered that I wanted to share them with you.
______________________________________
Judge Chionopoulos shares much wisdom in the article. We have many great jurists here in Oklahoma and Judge Chionopoulos was one of best.

Laure, Oklahoma City - Apr 3, 2008 8:45 AM
_________________________________________________________
This well written article makes a lot of sense and provides clarity to the otherwise confusing message of HB 1026. I agree there needs to be counselling and serious attempts at keeping a marriage intact but eliminating incompatibility and other reasons for divorce is not the answer to having a long term marriage. In today's society of accepting a woman's "right" to have unwed births as the norm then perhaps we need to start there in the law to preserve the sanctity of marriage? And as for reasons for divorce and what marriages should strive to be, as in life long commitments, then perhaps we need to be stating terms from the bible, where it is addressed in specific terms and not a House Bill trying to reduce divorce statistics? I appreciate Judge Chionopoulos' insight and writing style, and wish he were still on the bench here.

E, Newcastle - Mar 25, 2008 11:37 AM
___________________________________
I am very impressed with Mr. Chionopoulos' summary of divorce information. I am an advocate for marriage but even a stronger advocate for marriage education. Oklahoma offers a multitude of opportunities for free and convenient relationship and marriage education. I appreciate Mr. Chionopoulos' information and enjoyed his perspective on HB 1026.

Anna, Oklahoma City - Mar 25, 2008 8:40 AM
___________________________________
I wholly agree with Judge Chionopoulos' opinion that incompatibility should be retained as a ground for divorce in Oklahoma. Although it is easy to point to lower divorce rates in fault-based states like New York and thus conclude it must be because of the absence of incompatibility as a ground for divorce, that conclusion does not hold water. Too many socioeconomic factors come into play to draw such a simple conclusion. One such factor could be that the medium age for first marriages of men and women in New York is about five years greater than in Oklahoma. The 2005 Census records medium ages for first time marriages of men/women respectively as New York 29.3/27.3 verses Oklahoma’s 25.6/23.5. As Judge Chionopoulos states, requiring one person to blame the other for a divorce to go forward sets a bitter tone from the outset that permeates the proceedings and serves only to line the divorce lawyers' pockets. The focus should be on "think before you act" both before one marries and again before one decides to divorce. If the State is to act at all in this area it should be to provide counseling and other assistance during these times rather than creating and/or escalating animosity between the parties at the outset a divorce.

Cathy, Oklahoma City - Mar 25, 2008 8:23 AM
____________________________________
This is not so much about Judge Chionopoulos, although many, many people realized in hind-sight that they were very, very wrong for rushing to judgment (especially as lawyers and judges) and some have even said so, as much as it is about the topic of whether incompatability should be excluded as a statutory ground for divorce. I do a lot of divorce work and I agree with the Honorable Judge Chionopoulos; eliminating incompatability from the grounds permitting divorce would only add more emotion and bitterness to already volitile situation. Without being able to plead what amounts to "no-fault", one person or the other will have to "prove" that the opposing party actually did one of the remaining 11 grounds. It is nonsense for the Oklahoma Legislature to believe that they can "force people to stay married!" Oh, by the way, we probably should not talk about all of the shining examples of marital fidelity in our State Capitol as examples!!! Judge Chionopoulos is right, making it more difficult to get married and enacting legislation that forces good initial decision-making and personal/moral accountability is more solid policy making then making it difficult, more costly and more traumatic for the children. My personal opinion about Judge Chionopoulos notwithstanding, I must agree with the comments below - he is, indeed, a brilliant jurist. Perhaps he should be in the Oklahoma Legislature setting policy? He seems to at least understand it, which is apparently more than can be said for those who would pass laws without having a grasp on how they impact the "average person."

SH, Oklahoma City - Mar 24, 2008 9:51 PM
____________________________________
PS - I saw the allegations in The Oklahoman, but did The Oklahoman ever even tell a follow up story as to the investigation outcomes on Judge Chionopoulos? If so, I missed it.

Kersten, Norman - Mar 24, 2008 6:07 PM
____________________________________
WOW! Much activity on Monday from a Saturday article. I did read it - and I have appeared in front of Judge Chionopoulos. It is true, as they have already said, he is a brilliant jurist. So, it is really no surprise that he is keeping up with Oklahoma Domestic law and still trying to have a positive impact on Oklahoma families. While we Cleveland County lawyers tend to stay out of Oklahoma County politics, it was apparent to everyone in Oklahoma that Judge Chionopoulos was not treated fairly. Judge Chionopoulos was denied the basic "due process of law" that, as a Judge, he was required to maintain for everyone else. This article shows me two things: 1) The man is truely a legal scholar far beyond most of those who don a robe; 2) Even after the gross injustice with which he was treated, he cares enough to try and make a positive difference in the lives of Oklahomans. I commend him for being so selfless. With the Presidential elections coming we hear "Its about the Economy, STUPID!" As for Oklahoma jurisprudence, regardless of what county, I would like to say in domestic law "Its about the children, STUPID!" That seems to me to be what Judge Chionopoulos cares most about even now. He should be given an apology and an award. I don't know him, where he is, or what he is or was but I do know he cared about the children in the cases I had and evidently, even after the unjust and shameful manner in which he was treated, he evidently still cares about the children. Good for him and Thank You, Judge Chionopoulos, where ever you are at this point.

Kersten, Norman - Mar 24, 2008 6:06 PM
___________________________________
This is an example of "good-common-sense" (something we, as Oklahomans, like to pride ourselves in having) that proves Judge Chionopoulos should be on the Oklahoma Supreme Court. I appeared in front of him. As this article demonstrates, he knew the rules and could see the "big picture" of how those rules would have real impact on real lives. Now, rather than having one of the most brillian jurists on the bench, the man who appeared on television as the attorney for his accusers is on the bench. How much and what has he published? Wow! The article specifically did not say where Judge Chionopoulos is now or what he is doing. Judge Chionopoulos, if you read these comments please know that your knowledge is sorely missed from the bench. Your acceptional knowledge of both evidence and procedure actually made "justice" more than a mere word.

Julie, Oklahoma City - Mar 24, 2008 3:59 PM
____________________________________
As an attorney who has advised divorce clients, I agree that HB 1026 is a train wreck in disguise. Lt Col (Ret) Chionopoulos has written a most articulate and helpful article that will hopefully open the eyes of the Oklahoma legislature and citizenry. This poignant article is indicative of Judge Chionopoulos’ common sense and statute-driven approach to the judiciary. What a loss to Oklahoma! Oklahoma "Good Ole Boy" politics drove out one of the most honest, professional, hard-working jurists to have graced the Bench!

Concerned, Oklahoma City - Mar 24, 2008 2:28 PM
_____________________________________
Judge Chionopoulos makes an excelent point - divorcing people have enough opportunity to say ugly things about each other. Why structure the legal system so that the ugliness is institutionally required? I always believed, no offense to the other judges there, that he was the most significant legal scholar on that floor. It is truely a loss to Oklahoma that he was victimized. I understand that two investigations revealed no evidence of wrong-doing, yet we lost the Judge that was most aggressively collecting child support. At the same time, the man who appeared on television for the accusers is now a judge. Things that make you go "Hmmmmmm?"

George, Oklahoma City - Mar 24, 2008 1:06 PM
______________________________________
Mr. Chionopoulos has a good point about educating people before they get married, but doesn't this bill seem like a drive to make every marriage in Oklahoma one of Keating's cherished 'covenant' marriages?

Concerned, Central Oklahoma - Mar 24, 2008 12:22 PM

Oklahoma House Bill 1026 - Family Law

The Daily Oklahoman published my article on March 22, 2008 regarding Oklahoma House Bill 1026. There is an electronic link on the left side of this page so that you can view the article (on the left side of this page under "The Oklahoman" heading, it is the article on "Statutory Divorce Grounds"). Please feel free to leave your comments with The Oklahoman. The HB, as proposed, could impact a significant number of Oklahomans. If you feel strongly enough about the issues raised, you should contact your Oklahoma Representative or Oklahoma Senator.

CHIME- China India and the Middle East

The News Press, in Fort Myers, printed an article that I wrote on China, India and the Middle East. The article focuses on the economic possibilities that exist between those, and perhaps other, countries. Ultimately, if the United States fails to pay close attention to world economic strategies we could find ourselves paying $5.00/gallon at the pump. As it stands now the price of oil is settled at the highest in history. What are we doing to lower the price and/or develop alternative fuel sources? What should we be doing to lower the price and/or develop alternative fuel sources? Obviously, our foreign policy has much to do with the current price-per-barrel. Moreover, the new administration - democratic or republican - will need to deal with foreign policy from a fresh perspective. Please comment with your thoughts and ideas ... please read the article, there is a link on the left if you are so inclined ... if you read the article, feel free to comment as provided by the News Press ... and please feel free to comment here and send me thoughts for other articles that you would like to see. Thank you!

Injustice of Justice - Spiritual vignette

The toughest part about being a "fighter" is knowing when *NOT* to fight! So, as a fighter (with a name like Chionopoulos, I *had* to be tough), faith becomes the most important weapon. This is being discussed in "The Injustice of Justice" - which is a book and a work in progress.

Commit your way to the LORD; trust in him and he will do this: 6 He will make your righteousness shine like the dawn, the justice of your cause like the noonday sun. 7 Be still before the LORD and wait patiently for him; do not fret when men succeed in their ways, when they carry out their wicked schemes. 8 Refrain from anger and turn from wrath; do not fret—it leads only to evil. 9 For evil men will be cut off, but those who hope in the LORD will inherit the land (emphasis added). Psalm 37

Perhaps we can all learn something from this - the wicked and the righteous alike!

Ocean Training!

Ocean training is some of the most interesting training in the world. Of course, temperature is always an issue. The human body, on average, looses heat 25 times faster in water than in air .... brrrrh! So, it all depends on where you train. Here are a couple of playful pictures ... once the real work was done. Taking off my mask and regulator at 60' was fun ... the nearby barracuda (not pictured here), not so much fun. Can you tell by the reef where this was taken? Hint ... not in the US! Who knows where I'll be next! Life is an adventure ... live, laugh, swim, bike, run and have fun! Life is just too short to let the little things stop you from getting all you want out of it!!

Divorce and The First Amendment

I am pleased to announce that The News Press published my article - a link to it can be found on the left hand side of this page - regarding divorce and the First Amendment. Domestic Judges have a tough job. They constantly seek to balance time honored, sacred constitutional rights against the best interest of children. We should all thank them for their service.

New Articles

The Fort Myers Press has reviewed two of my articles... one on constitutional law and divorce and one on CHIME -China, India and the Middle East and has decided to publish both of them in the future. I will let you, those who are interested, know when they will be published and I will do my best to create a blog discussion regarding the issues. I will look forward to your comments and critiques. Thank you.

COMING SOON - An Article on CHIME

What is CHIME? It is an acronym for China-India-Middle-East. Essentially, some think that China is trying to re-weave the "silk road" along which goods flowed in the 13th Century. The article will discuss potential socio-economics of such a policy/plan. It has been accepted for publication and, once published, a link will be posted here.

The Injustice of Justice - Opening

Now, in consideration of this new project, the opening should go something like:

First, I would like to thank all of those who supported me.
There are too few to name. Second, this story is NOT based
upon the truth. Indeed, great literary care has been taken
to avoid shocking the moral conscience of the reader by telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God.

I have completed most of the initial character development and a couple of chapters. There are also several publishers already interested in the story! I may show a few "teasers" here as this project develops!

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year to all! I hope the New Year brings to each person (yes, I really mean "everyone") good health and unprecedented prosperity!

The unscientific and imperfect survey taken on this page regarding interest in reading a book on the Injustice of Justice revealed that 88% of those who responded were interested in reading it. Thus, it is now a "work in progress."

Distribution of Military Retirement in Divorce

This is one of the least understood and commonly misapplied areas of family law - by lawyers and Judges alike. There seems to be this common misperception that if a non-military spouse is married to the military member for less than 10 years of his/her career then the non-military spouse is entitled to no portion of the military retirement. I have also heard the converse zelously asserted. NEITHER IS TRUE!! 10 USC 1408 made clear that it was leaving the question of whether or not "disposable retired pay" is divisible as a marital asset to each state! Oklahoma has published several opinions- at least one from the Oklahoma Supreme Court and several from the OK CIV APP regarding this issue - and the sub-issue of what to do when some or all of the military member's pay has been converted to VA disability benefits.

I will soon be submitted an article explaining these points of law to the OBJ. In the meantime, please feel free to comment with your thougts and whether or not you think such an article would be helpful. Thank you.

Divorce and the Constitution

Often times, the staples of law are overlooked in domestic court. As a former domestic judge, I know that sometimes, although unintentional, in an effort to reach a practical, amicable and uncomplicated result, United States Constitutional issues can be overlooked. Indeed, such issues are often so mired in the myriad of acromonious issues, vitriolic conduct of the parties and concerns for the interests of any involved children that they are difficult to spot. Many citizens do not fully appreciate the glorious constitutional rights bestowed upon each of us individually. Moreover, many lawyers do not fully understand, or do not bother to think about, them. Worse yet, even judges fail to recognize constitutional issues mired in the myriad of acrimonious positions asserted before them.

First, a little history is in order. The First Amendment is part of "The Bill of Rights" (the first Ten Amendments collectively constitute The Bill of Rights), which was passed in 1891. The First Amendment states, in its entirety:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of
the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
Government for a redress of grievances.

While many legal issues have arisen under the First Amendment, this article is going to focus on the right to free association and will be discussed in the context of family law. So, you are asking: “I just read the First Amendment. Where does it say I have a right to freely associate with others?” (This is a real question, which was actually asked by a real lawyer!). The United States Supreme Court has held “The First Amendment … restricts the ability of the State to impose liability on an individual solely because of his association with another” (N.A.A.C.P. v. Claiborne Hardware Company, 458 US 886, 919, 102 S.Ct. 3409 (US 1982)). “Thus, the First Amendment protects freedom of association because it makes the right to express one’s views meaningful” (Minnesota State Board for Community Colleges v. Knight, 465 US 271, 308, 104 S.Ct. 1058, 1070 (US 1984).

There are, of course, limitations on one’s First Amendment right to freedom of association (see Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 US 609, 104 S.Ct. 3244, 3260 (US 1984)) that held infringements on freedom of association “may be justified by regulations adopted to serve compelling state interests, unrelated to the suppression of ideas, that cannot be achieved through means significantly less restrictive of associational freedoms”). For instance, if one could show that the opposing parents' significant other was a danger to the children, i.e. a convicted sex offender, habitual drug user, physically abused the children etc., then "the best interest of the child(ren)" would override any First Amendment privilege the parent may have in hosting his/her significant other while the children are present.

So, given the law enumerated above, is it correct for a nisi prius domestic court to enter a "be good" order requiring that neither parent have an overnight visitor with whom he/she is involved spend the night while in posessions or custody of the children - without a showing that the 3rd party is a danger to the child(ren)? Does it make a difference if the nisi prius order is enterered on a temporary basis pending divorce or in a final decree/post decree modification? Please comment!

Comment on Articles

As you can see, a list of articles I have written is down the left hand side of this page. If you have any comments on the most recent article, published in the News Press, please feel free to share those comments by commenting on this post. I will hope to hear from you. THANK YOU!

Collaborative Divorce Process

There is a new movement afoot in divorce law. As everyone knows, divorce is costly - both economically and emotionally. One alternative approach that seems to be taking hold around the country is the "Collaborative Process." Essentially, both parties have lawyers (but not always). They enter into a contract, one clause of which requires that each party agrees not to file suit (a divorce) unless or until the process fails. The approach includes, depending on the parties, mental health professionals and a neutral party, arbitrator most times and can even include clergy, again depending on the parties' preference. The basic idea is to be parsimonious rather than acrimonious. The goal(s) of the process is tailor made for the parties involved.

Of those who voted on this page, 2/3 stated they would engage in the Collaborative Divorce Process. This is a significant number. While the CDP is not about to antiquate traditional divorce trial lawyers, hopefully it will help insulate some children from the maladies born of matrimonial acrimony.

Open Ocean Triathlon

Well ... I participated in my first "open ocean" triathlon. Unlike pool swims, or even lake swims, the open ocean is much more challenging and much more fun! The weather was perfect, the water beautiful and my time SLOW! I need to get back in shape ... as you can see by the photo on the left part of the page where I am gasping for air after climbing a hill. Remember, training the mind means also training the body!

Iranian President -Amadnejad

WOW - an amazing 78% of those who voted on this page said that The Iranian President speaking at Columbia University was "free speech" and supported it! Of course, 22% of those who responded said that it was an inappropriate forum. It seems that even when people are saying things with which we disagree, Americans still favor the right of that person to say it! An overwhelming majority seems to still believe in the basic constitutional rights of our representative democracy!

Andrew Meyer, Florida Student, "tased" - necessary or excessive force? By Michael E. Chionopoulos

The main video, and some alternative videos of Andrew Meyer being tased at the University of Florida can be found at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJbh2MlNHug&mode=related&search There was an in depth discussion of the issues involved here on this page. Moreover, you were asked to vote. 87% of those that voted stated that the University Police used "necessary", as opposed to excessive, force! While it is true that immediately following the incident some media sensationalists made ludicrious statements comparing the University Police actions to the human rights violation of Sadaam Hussain's reighn of terror, once people had the "facts" (and not media, objective-driven, spin) 87% determined for themselves that the force used was reasonable and necessary.

WELCOME HOME 1-180th INFANTRY

The 1-180 Infantry Battalion, Oklahoma Army National Guard, is returning from Afghanistan. These men and women are indeed some of the most special people in the entire world - I know this because I had the honor of serving in that Battalion as a young Captain. Currently lead by Lieutenant Colonel Bobby Yandell, the Battalion is returning from a "combat tour." For most of the soldiers it is their 2nd or 3rd tour in the Middle East within the last few years.

Starting in June 2002, the Battalion trained for a "Peace Keeping" mission in Egypt. From January 2003-July 2004, lead by now Colonel Kevin McNeely, the Battalion flexed American military muscle between the border of Egypt and Israel - maintaining a delicate peace agreement between the two nations governing rules within the Sinai desert. Some soldiers of the Battalion went with other units to Iraq; the entire Battalion went to Afghanistan with the 45th Separate Infantry Brigade; and then was tasked to go right back as a Battalion.

The sacrifices made by these men and women and their family members is so under appreciated - not for want of thankfulness, but for want of understanding with regard to the training, family hardships, professional (civilian career) hardships and employer hardships necessary to make these deployments successful.

TRUE PATRIOTS - these men and women deserve our most deep respect. Unlike an "active duty" soldier, there is no retirement rainbow at 40 or so years old. Rather, many of these men and women will serve more than 25 years and still not collect a penny of retirement if and until they live to 60 years of age. They get no health care benefits once released from their deployment; no re-employment assistance (accept the ability to hire a lawyer on their own dime if an employer violates USERRA); no mental health screening before discharge; and about 1/2 of the retirement at 60 that an active duty soldier gets 20 years earlier. These men and women do not do what they do for money - they do it for love of nation and love of freedom and they do not complain. Rather, they embrace the opportunity to serve. So the next time you see one of them ... or any soldier, sailor, airmen or marine ... say "THANK YOU!"

As we continue to go to the mall and the movies and on vacation, it is difficult to remember that the sons and daughters of America remain quietly in harm's way. Please try to remember to thank them for their sacrifices - even if you do not agree with the war. What is the saying? "Hate the game, not the player!"

Domestic Violence Survey - Michael E. Chionopoulos

I am moving sites ... from http://www.okiejudge.blogspot.com/ to this new site. Of course, you can still visit the old site with the link provided here. At least for now, I will leave the domestic violence survey on the old site.

I also intend to start a new survey on this site, with some refinement due to my learning experience in phrasing questions from the first research. This will be an ongoing project, from which I hope to obtain data that will allow me to write work(s) that will draw attention to the growing problem of domestic violence and, hopefully, will cause new resources and inovative interventions to be created for victims.