NATIONAL NEWS

New York (LNS)—The Michigan Supreme Court reversed two lower court decisions January 17, and restored custody of 12-year-old Jillian Miller to her lesbian mother. It was the first time the Michigan' Supreme Court ruled in a lesbian parent's favor, establishing that lesbianism alone is not grounds for refusing custody.

Margareth Miller, divorced from Jillian's father since 1973, had had custody of her daughter until 1976 when the father filed for custody. He won it in 1977, with the judge ruling that the father could provide a more "stable" home life. The judge repeatedly referred to Miller's lesbianism as "sexual ambivalence". This view was a major consideration in his decision.

The January 17 reversal said, "The record does not present clear and convincing evidence that the change of custody is in the best interests of the child."

Child custody cases are supposed to take into account the "best interests of the children". According to New York lesbian activist Linda Guthrie, though, "that can be very nebulous. A judge could rule that...a child might be subjected to teasing and embarrassment because of her or his parent's sexual orientation, [and]...it would be in their best interests to live with the other parent.

In most cases, child custody is awarded to the heterosexual parent. Guthrie estimated that 98 percent of the cases involving a parent's sexuality are lost.

"When you go to court," Barbara Levy of Lambda Legal Defense told LNS, "you start from point zero. Custody cases are different from most other legal cases in that the judge has almost absolute discretion, and does a case-by-case determination. In other words, a precedent is never really set because each case is different. However, the winning of a case does have a cumulative effect.

"For example, until recently there was the assumption that because a parent was a lesbian or gay man, they were absolutely unfit as a parent. Due to education and publicity [about lesbian and gay men's lifestyles] a judge doesn't automatically say that anymore."

In the past few years, there have been nine documented cases of lesbian mothers receiving custody of their children.

In one case, the Washington Supreme Court ruled that lesbian mothers Sandra Schuster and Madeleine

Gays Win Anti-Bias Law

The Detroit City Council passed a city ordinance January 24 that prohibits discrimination against gay people and provides the city with strong enforcement powers.

The Omnibus Human Rights Ordinance, presented to the Council by the Human Rights Department, prohibits discrimination against various groups, including sexual minorities. The ordinance guarantees gay people equal access to educational opportunity, employment, housing rental, real estate purchases, medical care and places of resort and amusement. Detroit is now the largest U.S. city to outlaw anti-gay discrimination.

Don Mager, project facilitator of the Michigan Organization for Human Rights, explained the Council's support for human rights: "I think we have an unusually social-justice-minded City Council and they felt an urgency to register a strong check to efforts across the country to dismantle the civil rights gains of the 1960s."

No major opposition to the new ordinance has appeared.

The Guardian February 14, 1979

Lesbian Mother Wins Custody

Issacson could retain custody of their children. Despite extensive efforts by the former husbands, the court refused to change a lower court's custody order.

The women had originally won custody provided that they didn't live together. When they moved into separate apartments across the hall from each other, they were taken back to court.

According to Guthrie, "This is a common action. A case can always be taken back to court if there is a change of circumstance. For example, if you don't live with your lover, and you start to, or if you're not active in the lesbian community and you become active for instance by having your picture taken in a gay parade-then there is a change of circumstance and you can be taken back to court. In some sense you never have a victory, because the case can be challenged again and again until the child is 18." In what is perhaps one of the most remarkable rulings, a Colorado judge awarded custody of four

children to their lesbian mother and her lover in April, 1978. Noting that both Charlotte Peterson and her ex-husband Charles would be suitable parents, the judge nonetheless granted custody to Charlotte. Recommending that they work out a way for the children to visit with their father and his future wife, he stated, "The children hav[ing] the benefit of both the love and the affection they have observed between Charlotte and Nora on the one hand and between Charles and Mary on the other hand...will have a well-rounded up-bringing and be able to develop into wonderful citizens of our community."

He also recognized the limitation a woman faces when she has children to support and few skills that would enable her to earn a decent wage. He ordered that the children's father pay substantial support money, making it possible for the mother to continue her education so that "...she will be in a position to earn more money than she would as a clerk typist or a key punch operator."

Sears vs. Affirmative Action

Sears, Roebuck & Co. has filed a major class action suit against ten federal agencies claiming it is the government's fault that the retail company cannot comply with federal antidiscrimination laws.

The January 24 suit, filed in the federal district court in Washington, D.C., is Sears' method of taking the offensive in its struggle against the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) over its employment practices.

Sears is presently defending itself against a 1977 EEOC complaint that it discriminates in pay and advancement against minorities and women. The EEOC action is the most comprehensive complaint and largest back-pay claim lodged against an employer and could cost Sears millions of dollars. Sears is now charging that past government policy is responsible for creating an "unbalanced work force" dominated by white males. It is a clever and dangerous charge, which if upheld could result in the

IF YOU ASK FOR MORE MONEY I'LL GET A WOMAN) WIS WILL WORK FOR LESS THAN YOU....

RATHER THAN GIVE YOU MORE MONEY I WOULD PUT A MAN ON YOUR MACHINE!

most devastating blow to government antidiscrimination activity thus far.

Private employers cannot be blamed for having too few women or minority workers, according to Sears, when government actions since the Depression

Women Dribblers Thrive

(Her Say)-The Women's Professional Basketball League plans to expand to the West Coast and will field four new franchises for the 1979-1980 season. The League began playing in December and has eight teams in the East and Midwest. Despite the fact that many top women players are not playing professionally in order to preserve their amateur status for the 1980 Olympics, League President Bill Byrne says the League is thriving. Crowds, according to Byrne, are averaging around 3,000 per game, and both the Chicago and New York franchises have television contracts.

have given white men a head start in the race for jobs.

In particular, Sears points to a series of veterans' programs and the recently enacted change in the mandatory retirement age from 65 to 70. The company argues that with fewer workers retiring, there are fewer open slots for women and minorities.

Sears, however, has had a notoriously bad employment record since its founding in Chicago in 1886. A notorious union buster, it has been the object of more than 1,500 discrimination complaints filed with the EEOC since 1965. In almost all these cases, Sears has been found guilty,

The Guardian February 14, 1979

Women in TV: Same Old Story

(Her Say) The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, in its just-released report on the television industry, says that women and minorities continue to be stereotyped and under-represented on TV.

The Commission's report comes '17 months after an initial August 1977 report declaring that the TV industry was derelict in its portrayal of women and minorities.

The report, based on studies of TV dramas from 1975 to 1977, 1977 newscasts, and TV employment figures, says its findings are important because "Television is a dominant factor in American life...because of the medium's capacity for fixing an image in the public mind."

The Commission found, however, that while white males made up a mere 40 percent of the population, at least 62 percent of the characters that appeared on television were white and male. Minority males, on the other hand, were over-represented, making up nearly 10 percent of the television population, as compared to 9 percent in real life. Most of the characters played by minority males, however, were seen disproportionately as teenagers and in comedies. Women of every ethnic background were underrepresented, said the Commission.

The Commission also found that while males hold 65 percent of TV managerial positions, they constitute 57 percent of the total work force.

Moreover, the Commission found that since the 1977 report, virtually nothing has been done to represent women or minorities more adequately.

The Commission is calling on the Federal Communications Commission to launch an investigation into the situation.

Page 4/What She Wants/March, 1979