Family Preservation Foundation Supports Parental Rights

Up to 83% of all investigations are ultimately concluded to have involved no abuse or neglect.
ONLY INNOCENT FAMILIES! 
(https://www.acf.hhs.gov/cb/research-data-technology/statistics-research/child-maltreatment)

We believe that parents have the fundamental right to the care, custody and control of their children so long as the child is not harmed. The liberty interest is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by Courts. This includes, but is not limited to home schooling, educational material, religious freedom, vaccination choice, medical decisions and discipline. Parental rights are essential to a healthy, happy productive free society.

The Constitution of the United States does not create rights. Rather, the U.S. Constitution recognizes that human beings have “certain inalienable rights” to which they are entitled which arise as a matter of natural right. The most important of these rights are called “Fundamental Rights.” Fundamental Rights are rights that are so “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty” that “neither liberty nor justice would exist if they were sacrificed.” Palko v. Connecticut, The Supreme Court has recognized that fundamental rights include those guaranteed by the Bill of Rights as well as certain liberty, associational and privacy interests implicit in the due process clause and the penumbra of constitutional rights. Paul v. Davis. These special “liberty” interests include “the rights to marry, to have children, to direct the education and upbringing of one’s children, to marital privacy, and to bodily integrity.” Washington v. Glucksberg.

A parent’s right to the preservation of his relationship with his child derives from the fact that the parent’s achievement of a rich and rewarding life is likely to depend significantly on his ability to participate in the rearing of his children. A child’s corresponding right to protection from interference in the relationship derives from the psychic importance to him of being raised by a loving, responsible, reliable adult. Franz v. U.S

While all of this sounds great in theory if taken at face value, but as some of us know, and have experienced, law and court procedures that are “fair on their faces” but administered “with an evil eye or a heavy hand” was discriminatory and violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US 356, (1886)

The purpose of the judiciary is to protect existing constitutional rights to remain faithful and to the original intent. Judges who impose their own views on society, under the guise of law, undermine the rule of law and impose the rule of men. The separation of powers and the process of changing our Constitution by amendment must be honored. Loss of Parental Rights, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes grievous loss, and irreparable injury. Though Parental Rights are not absolute, they may be curtailed only by interests of vital importance, the burden of proving which rests on the government with substantiated unrefutably evidence.

We believe parents know their own children better than anyone else, are the best protectors of children, and have the natural right to the care, custody and control of their children. We believe the government is encroachment on parental rights and seek to protect these fundamental rights. We oppose the evolution of children’s “rights,” which undermine parental rights and allow outsiders to usurp the natural and fundamental rights of parents. It is absolutely essential that Court’s begin to look at parental rights matters as questions implicating “fundamental rights” and the evidence impacting on the reasonableness of the Court’s intrusion into that fundamental right. This requires a new strategy and a paradigm shift in the way things are currently done.