Comeback Dads: Family courts rob children of their dads. The Shared Parenting Bill can restore fairness. [Paperback]

James Dunn (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: October 1, 2005

Comeback Dads has a clear, positive purpose: help children of divorced families obtain more time with their dads. Family courts award custody to mothers in more than 85 percent of cases. Fathers become mere visitors in their children's lives. Comeback Dads proposes new legislation—the Shared Parenting Bill—to provide joint custody and nearly equal parenting time for fit parents. The book draws on experience from veteran family law attorneys and psychotherapists, and on real stories from divorced dads who want more time with their children.

Editorial Reviews

About the Author

James Dunn earned a bachelor's degree in writing with studies in psychology, philosophy and mathematics from the University of Colorado, Boulder. He holds a master's degree in organizational psychology. Mr. Dunn researched and wrote this book during three years of divorce proceedings in Sonoma County, California—training that took longer than a master's degree. Mr. Dunn worked four years in the California State Bar Court coordinating a statewide arbitration program to resolve disputes between attorneys and their clients. He wrote administratively for the state bar's Board of Legal Specialization, staffing its board of directors and committees, including a committee on certifying Family Law Specialists. He volunteered as mediator and mediation skills trainer for Community Boards in San Francisco, and was leader for one of the most challenged neighborhoods in the city. He wrote for a weekly newspaper and worked stints as copy editor and correspondent for The Press Democrat, a New York Times publication. He went on to become editor and owner of a regional business magazine—Sonoma Business. After a decade as editor, including eight years as owner-publisher, he sold the magazine in year 2000 to pursue in-depth writing projects. Mr. Dunn is a proud father of one.

Product Details

• Paperback: 264 pages
• Publisher: Trillion Publishing, LLC (October 1, 2005)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0977248003
• ISBN-13: 978-0977248001
• Product Dimensions: 8.3 x 5.3 x 0.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 11.2 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #3,627,315 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

5 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars I suspect this to be a self-published book or vanity press item, April 23, 2007

By 

Jean Heather Akins (Martinez, CA United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Comeback Dads: Family courts rob children of their dads. The Shared Parenting Bill can restore fairness. (Paperback)

Last week my workplace received a copy of this book from Trillion Publishing, but no one here had ordered it. Today we received an invoice for it. Customers who receive unordered merchandise are legally entitled to treat the merchandise as a gift. The committee here who reviewed the book deemed it to be poorly written, a polemic, and non-objective.

0 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent Summary of Why the MisInformed do Not Want Shared Parenting, October 19, 2007

By 

Bookman "BookMan" (New York) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Comeback Dads: Family courts rob children of their dads. The Shared Parenting Bill can restore fairness. (Paperback)

There is no logic reason why this country has not moved to a Presumption of shared parenting for fit parents. The only reasons is useless hyperbole fully aimed at ensuring that divorcing Mothers continue to recieve outrageuously large child support checks and full control of their children. If the true best interest of the child was used (it clearly never is) then shared parenting is an obvious choice. Reduced Litigation costs (Child's best interest), Fast Track through the courts (Child's Best interest), Parents equally respected by the law (Child's best interest), Fewer transitions between households as compared to visitation wed. and every other w/e (Child's best interest), Financially supported by both parents (Child's best interest), lower relitigation (Child's best interest), reduced animosity over time (Child's best interest), and finally, virtually all academic and scientific studies support that children fare better in shared parenting arrangements (Child's best interest).

Those who argue these points are selfish and do so for their own best interest not the chidren's best interest. They are either greedy, oir brainwahsed by a system totally out of control.