Fathers' Rights Victory in Massachusetts

By Brian Vargo

Published on July 22, 2005

Dr. Henry Fassler contested the law after he was denied access to his 17-year-old daughter's academic records.

Dr. Fassler's daughter Lindsay asked for his help planning her school schedule. But when Dr. Fassler requested a list of Lindsay's academic classes, the school denied his request. Even though Henry Fassler is on amicable terms with his ex-wife and has no history of violent behavior, the school resolutely insisted he present a court certification. Dr. Fassler took action.

The problem with the law is that it assumes non-custodial parents, most of whom are fathers, are guilty until proven innocent. The original draft of the law did not contain this inherently unconstitutional principle. In fact, it was promoted by father's rights advocates as a way to clarify parental rights to school records. However, when Joe Doe, Inc. (JDI), a non-profit organization aimed at helping battered women and children, took an active interest in the law, the law quickly became an anti-abuse measure.

JDI receives generous tax funding to implement training and programs designed to enforce anti-abuse measures in Massachusetts. The organization wielded its influence over lawmakers with whom it has a longstanding remunerative relationship. Lawmakers amended the bill to make a distinction between custodial and non-custodial parents, discriminating the law against the very people who initially pushed the measure. Nancy Scannell of JDI assisted lawmakers in drafting the new bill.

Comment on this article →