The following outline addresses some of the areas where Texas has utterly failed to support Families and protect Children. Our State agencies and judiciary has not only failed to protect and strengthen Families and Children, but has been one of the greatest promotors of Familial destruction and Fatherlessness, turning the act of abusing Children into a multi-billion dollar a year business in Texas.

The Texas judiciary, Texas Family Code, and State agencies who are tasked with protecting Children have utterly failed to follow their mandates. Instead, these bodies have run wild (due to perceived Immunity) and monetized the Abuse of Children and Families for decades. The frequent and very open violations of Constitutional Rights, Federal and State laws, and the utter lack of any governing body to actually hold these entities accountable has led to the destruction of the Nuclear Family, a great increase in Fatherlessness, minor Children subjected to gender-modification and pornography in schools, and is simply State sanctioned Child Abuse:

Child Abuse is defined by the Texas Family Code 261.001(1)(A) and (B) as:

(1) “Abuse” includes the following acts or omissions by a person:

(A) mental or emotional injury to a Child that results in an observable and material impairment in the Child’s growth, development, or psychological functioning;

(B) causing or permitting the Child to be in a situation in which the Child sustains a mental or emotional injury that results in an observable and material impairment in the Child’s growth, development, or psychological functioning;

Divorce in Texas #

1. By the legal definition of the State of Texas, Divorce with Children is Child Abuse, except under the most extremely rare and egregious of circumstances (please note the words “extremely rare…egregious”).
2. According to the Texas Office of the Attorney General Statistics:
   1. Mothers have Primary Custody >90% of cases
   2. Fathers have Primary Custody <10% of cases
3. When the OAG data is analyzed using t-test and/or Z Scores, the probability of this being due to chance for a single year is less than 1 in 100,000.
4. Repeatedly, empirical peer-reviewed research has found that Divorce is extremely damaging to Children and Fatherlessness exacerbates this damage.
   1. These harmful effects last across the life-span.
   2. These effects are often trans-generational, perpetuating the cycle.

Effects of Fatherlessness: #

1. Alcohol & Drug Abuse (e.g., Hoffman 2002; USDHHS, 1993, 2009)
   1. 10X more likely to abuse Alcohol/Drugs
   2. 71% of adolescent substance abusers
2. Physical & Emotional (e.g., Block, Block & Gjerde, 1988; Hofferth, S. L., 2006)
   1. 80% of Children admitted for Psychiatric Hospitalizations
   2. 2X more likely to commit Suicide
3. Education (e.g., Tillman, 2007; see also Kruk, 2012)
   1. Score lower and achieve less (p = .01)
   2. 9X more likely to Drop out of School
4. Criminal System (e.g., Demuth & Brown, 2004; Knoester & Hayne, 2005)
   1. 70% Children in Juvenile Detention
   2. 60% of ALL Rapists
   3. 11X more likely to exhibit Violent Behavior
   4. 20X more likely to be Incarcerated
5. Sexuality (e.g., Hendricks  et al., 2005; Turner, Finkelhor, & Ormrod, 2006)
   1. 9X more likely to be Raped/Abused
   2. 70% of Teen Pregnancies
6. Significantly more likely to have difficulties in relationships, learning/cognition, behavior, homelessness, physical/Auto-Immune disease, etc. ad infinitum.
7. Similar results are found for all Children of Divorce, but they are significantly greater for Children without a biological Father in the home (e.g., Clarke-Stewart & Hayward, 1996).

Costs Societal/State (Money) #

1. $210,012 per Child in 2010 dollars ($285,380 in 2022 dollars)
   1. This is the estimated average lifetime cost per Child who is maltreated, which by definition, includes Children of Divorce and/or separation from a fit parent (Fang, et al., 2012).
   2. Does not account for ancillary costs associated with Divorce, the Family Law business model, related programs/State agencies, etc. that are common in Texas.
2. Including the astronomical costs associated with the above 1(b), the societal costs per Child is likely much higher than Feng and colleagues estimated.

Child Abuse #

1. Child Abuse is Defined by the Texas Family Code 261.001(1)(A) and (B) as:

(1) “Abuse” includes the following acts or omissions by a person:

(A) mental or emotional injury to a Child that results in an observable and material impairment in the Child’s growth, development, or psychological functioning;

(B) causing or permitting the Child to be in a situation in which the Child sustains a mental or emotional injury that results in an observable and material impairment in the Child’s growth, development, or psychological functioning;

2. This Abuse is exacerbated by courts who routinely remove a fit parent from a Child’s life, causing irreparable life-long harm to that Child.
3. This Abuse is also evident in the very well-documented failures of DFPS over the decades, ergo the ongoing Federal Lawsuit in Corpus Christi.
4. Over 5 decades of peer-reviewed empirical research has clearly and repeatedly defined the observable and material impairment in the Child’s growth, development, or psychological functioning as a direct result of Divorce, Fatherlessness, Foster-Care, etc.
   1. There is no argument ever, by any competent researcher ever, that these events do not harm Children across the life-span.
   2. By failing to prosecute the judiciary, DFPS, and other court actors, the State of Texas is sanctioning Child Abuse.

References #

Clarke-Stewart, K. A., & Hayward, C. (1996). Advantages of father custody and contact for the psychological well-being of school-age Children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 17(2), 239-270.

Demuth, S., & Brown, S. L. (2004). Family structure, Family processes, and adolescent delinquency: The significance of parental absence versus parental gender. Journal of research in crime and delinquency, 41(1), 58-81.

Fang, X., Brown, D. S., Florence, C. S., & Mercy, J. A. (2012). The economic burden of Child maltreatment in the United States and implications for prevention. Child Abuse & Neglect, 36(2), 156-165. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2011.10.006

Hendricks, C. S., Cesario, S. K., Murdaugh, C., & Gibbons, M. E. (2005). The Influence of Father Absence on the Self-Esteem and Self-Reported Sexual Activity of Rural Southern Adolescents. ABNF Journal, 16(6), 124.

Hofferth, S.L. Residential father Family type and Child well-being: Investment versus selection. Demography 43,53–77 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1353/dem.2006.0006

Hoffmann, J. P. (2002). The community context of Family structure and adolescent drug use. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64(2), 314-330.

Knoester, C., & Hayne, D.A. (2005). “Community context, social integration into Family, and youth violence.” Journal of Marriage and Family 67, 767-780.

Kruk, E. (2012). Father absence, father deficit, father hunger the vital importance of paternal presence in Children’s lives. Psychology Today, 20-28.

Tillman, K.H. (2007), Family Structure Pathways and Academic Disadvantage among Adolescents in StepFamilies. Sociological Inquiry, 77: 383-424. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.2007.00198.x

Turner, H. A., Finkelhor, D., & Ormrod, R. (2006). The effect of lifetime victimization on the mental health of Children and adolescents. Social science & medicine, 62(1), 13-27.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS; 1993). National Center for Health Statistics. Survey on Child Health. Washington, DC, 1993.

US Department of Health and Human Services. (UDDHHS; 2009). Risk and protective factors for mental, emotional and behavioral disorders across the life cycle.