When the disastrous Burgess decision was handed down by the California Supreme Court in 1996, it gave custodial parents the almost unlimited right to move children hundreds or thousands of miles away from their fathers. Nationally-syndicated radio talk show host Dr. Laura Schlesinger opposed Burgess. Below are excerpts from her broadcast of April 17, 1996:

"The California Supreme Court decreed a major shift in family law, ruling Monday that a divorced parent who has child custody can move to a new city or a new state, even if the other parent objects. The parent with primary physical custody, the court held need not show - NEED NOT SHOW - that the relocation is essential for a new job or any other reason. If the other parent wishes to change the custody arrangement because of the move he or she must prove that the relocation would SEVERELY INJURE the child.

...The parent can up and move, and not demonstrate anything. But the one being left has to fight a losing battle. What does SEVERELY INJURE the child mean? How could you prove that? I mean, all of you who grew up feeling abandoned, or cheated out of a parent who died or walked out or your - your other parent moved away, did you not feel you were injured? Did you not feel that was a serious injury to lose the other parent?...

...By refusing to place ANY burden on such parents the Supreme Court has made it extremely difficult for a divorced parent to fight relocation by an ex-spouse with primary custody. Previously, custodial parents, usually the mother, had to go to court to obtain permission to move....

...The courts have now said a woman can pick up and RIP the father out of the kids lives for NO reason, other than she feels like it, and this is WOMEN'S RIGHTS. This is not what I was all hepped about in the '60's for women's rights. I don't want any rights that carry with it no responsibilities."