 |
This beautiful animation above was created especially for Bubbles of Love Day on behalf of Kids Aiding the PAAO (KAPAAO).
Thank you to the very talented Bronwyn Coveney, from the United kingdom for volunteering her time and talent on behalf of children around the world. Bronwyn is the original visual creator of the PAAO and KAPAAO's, mascot Panda Abuzz.
|
Dr.
Bill Bernet, lead a group of interested professionals in encouraging the DSM 5
editing group to include Parental Alienation Disorder. The new DSM %
was published on May 18, 2013 and is the reference book for
psychiatrists, psychologists and other mental health providers Here
is Dr. Bernet's unedited analysis of the result.
Finally, DSM-5 was published today. The DSM-5 Task Force
told us 2 or 3 years ago that they did not want parental alienation to be a
separate diagnosis in DSM-5, but they thought that parental alienation could be
considered an example of other diagnoses that are in DSM-5.
The
actual words "parental alienation" are not in DSM-5, but there are
several diagnoses that can be used in these cases. I would say the
"spirit" of parental alienation is in DSM-5, even if the words are
not.
Parent-child relational problem now has a discussion in DSM-5, not just a
label. The discussion explains that cognitive problems in parent-child
relational problem "may include negative attributions of the other's
intentions, hostility toward or scapegoating of the other, and unwarranted
feelings of estrangement." That is a pretty good description of a
child's view of the alienated parent, although it is an unfortunate use of the
word "estrangement."
Child psychological abuse is a new diagnosis in DSM-5. It is
defined as "nonaccidental verbal or symbolic acts by a child's parent or
caregiver that result, or have reasonable potential to result, in significant
psychological harm to the child." In many instances, the behavior of
the alienating parent constitutes child psychological abuse.
Child affected by parental relationship distress is another new diagnosis in DSM-5.
It should be used "when the focus of clinical attention if the negative
effects of parental relationship discord (e.g., high levels of conflict,
distress, or disparagement) on a child in the family, including effects on the
child's mental or other physical disorders." That is also a good
description of how parental alienation comes about.
Factitious disorder imposed on another is the DSM-5 terminology for factitious
disorder by proxy or Munchausen disorder by proxy. Its definition is
"falsification of physical or psychological signs or symptoms, or
induction of injury or disease, in another, associated with identified
deception." In some cases, that would describe the behavior of the
alienating parent.
Delusional symptoms in partner of individual with
delusional disorder is the DSM-5 terminology for shared psychotic disorder or
folie a deux. The definition is: "In the context of a relationship,
the delusional material from the dominant partner provides content for
delusional belief by the individual who may not otherwise entirely meet
criteria for delusional disorder."
In
discussing this topic, I would say that the concept of parental alienation is
clearly in DSM-5, although the actual words are not. This is a great
improvement over DSM-IV-TR, especially with the addition of the new diagnoses,
child psychological abuse and child affected by parental relationship distress.
Dr. Bernet is
currently working with PAAO to present a webinar on this subject in the next 2
- 3 weeks. We will notify you of the details shortly.
The next mental health
manual to be revised is the International Statistical Classification of
Diseases and Related Health Problems or the IDC-11. Watch for ways to have your say about Parental Alienation in
time for inclusion there as well.
| ||||||||
 | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
:
Prostitution Marriage
ReplyDeleteIn 2000 I met what I truly believed to be my soul mate. A woman from the Philippines, a devote Christian, with a firm belief in family values. She was my ideal. Although there is so much to tell I will keep it brief and to the main points. In 2002 we married there, in Davao City. After several visits and getting to know each other well. In 2004 she came to this country, we settled in to our new home there was love and laughter cuddles and conversation, and in 2005 we had a son John Michael, he was my greatest wish come true, and the biggest thrill in my life, I could not envisage a single day without him, and every day I could not wait to get home to be with him. From the first month we started sending money to the Philippines to support her family and invest in a future for ourselves, (A Palm Tree Plantation) this was the agreed deal that we will eventually go back there as a family to live. And that is a very good future for us. But all this went sour not long after she gained her UK citizenship, in 2009, she became demanding, threatening and even aggressive, and by using our son to manipulate me into sending increasing amounts of money to the Philippines, the arguments escalated to a point where I could no longer cope with the distress, it effected my job my life and my purpose. In 2008 she took a bank loan for £7,500, which made our own finances suffer, this went to the Philippines, (she says for our future). In February of 2011 she left the marital home and moved in with a black guy. Since then I have not seen my son due to her false allegations of unreasonable behaviour. I have recently gone through a PSYCHOLOGICAL THERAPY COURSE FOR MENTAL CRUELTY. I no longer see my son, and this hurts too much every day is the same I wake up crying I go to sleep crying. I know she never intended to stay married. Now all I do is grieve. I am 56 years old now. And although when we first met my age did not matter. But now she refers to me as THE GULLIBLE OLD GIT. The real purpose of this is for her to keep my investment in the land in the Philippines. And of course the benefit of her family. And by using false allegations of domestic violence. The main victim in all of this is a young boy who has been separated from his father, and all for the sake of a visa, and financial gain.
I have been victimised by this woman and the courts, since February of 2011. I have suffered imprisonment for my emails begging her to tell the truth, but she will not speak up, for fear of reprisals by the court system. How many more years must I wait for a remedy? How many petitions must I continue to sign? How many more internet sites must I join to make my voice heard? How many letters must I write to my MP? How many voices does it take for the British Government to take up this cause?
The courts took her words (on paper) as gospel, they erred on the side of caution, imposed a non-molestation order , and refused to accept my argument about fake marriage and my protests at her lies, and non-evidenced allegations.
Fraud is a crime……………. Marriage is not an immigration deal………………A child should never be used as a weapon.
John Brookes. Walsall, West Midlands. UK
It's human nature to seek out a partner in life, and to possibly marry and have children. Unfortunately the matrimonial establishment, as we are all aware, is being methodically torn down by a demoralized society. Sadly the divorce rate is still on the rise and the foundation of marriage is being devalued and is crumbling. As adults we learn to adapt and move on when divorce attacks our lives but for children this is another story. They are the real victims of divorce and unfortunately they will suffer dearly from our selfishness and in most cases follow the same path of destruction if not worse.
DeleteAs a nation we have been granted certain civil rights by our constitution. Through the years it has been amended to better the lives of many Americans. The two most notable changes have come to Women in the 1920s and with African Americans in the 1960s. These rights were long overdue for both segments of our nation but thankfully we realized our mistakes and corrected them. This was not an easy journey for either of these crusades but through dedication and perseverance the bells of liberty rang loudly and victory was achieved.
Unfortunately we have reached yet another fork in the road and with that comes another challenge to the American people. "We've worked hard for women's rights, but we have to watch out that the pendulum doesn't swing the other way" says Ruthie J. of the Reach FM. Ironically the pendulum has already swung far to one side and this time the male gender is being demonized by erroneous and fraudulent information. Males are being portrayed as callus, uncaring, and without emotion. We are being taught that men represent 95% of abuse in this nation against women. These and many other false statistics are being recklessly strewn throughout society and none of it is true. Yes, women are being abused by men that is a fact. striking a woman is abhorrent to the highest degree and should be dealt with appropriately but men are abused at an equal rate and they are being ignored. According to a study by the Center for Disease Control men represent 38% of domestic violence related injuries. Compound that with the fact that only 0.9% of men report abuse verses 8.5% of women and I think we have a pretty equal degree of violence between partners.
The cornerstone of this "abuse" is VAWA the Violence Against Women Act. It was passed into law by Bill Clinton in 1994 and has been extended by every subsequent President. This law funnels Billions of dollars into discriminatory education and propaganda that violates men's civil rights. Many times DVIs or Domestic Violence Injunctions are used as a tool in divorce, child custody or just vengeance against a partner, most often against males. This is because the system of acquiring a DVI is simple and requires no evidence, witnesses or prior police reports. Just the word of an alleged victim making a claim of abuse. The repercussions of these orders are devastating and many times result in a violation, arrest and complete destruction of one's life. Even in cases when they are dismissed, a serious blemish remains on the falsely accused forever; how does that look to potential employers who almost always perform background checks prior to employment? This must be stopped and a better system of protecting all victims of domestic violence should be put in place.
I hope to help bring awareness to gender discrimination and help provide support for men who are abused. There are programs to help women of abuse but nothing for men. My website will provide more information on the facts, my personal experiences and the stories of those who have been victims of this heinous tactic of relationship vengeance. Men and women should truly have equal rights and currently the scales are unjustly tilted. Let's work together to end domestic violence and not vilify one gender as inherently abusive. "United we stand, divided we fall" A powerful statement that we must never forget.
Thank you,
Tom Lemons
Founder, www.falsedvireports.com
HOW DID CHILDREN OF DIVORCE GET STUCK WITH THE VISITATION PLAN THAT AFFORDS THEM ACCESS TO THEIR NON-RESIDENTIAL PARENT ONLY ONE NIGHT DURING THE WEEK AND EVERY OTHER WEEK-END?
ReplyDeleteWhat is the research that supports such a schedule? Where is the data that confirms that such a plan is in the best interest of the child?
Well, reader, you can spend your time from now until eternity researching the literature, and YOU WILL NOT DISCOVER ANY SUPPORTING DATA for the typical visitation arrangement with the non-residential parent! The reality is that this arrangement is based solely on custom. And just like the short story, "The Lottery," in which the prizewinner is stoned to death, the message is that deeds and judgments are frequently arrived at based on nothing more than habit, fantasy, prejudice, and yes, on "junk science."
This family therapist upholds the importance of both parents playing an active and substantial role in their children's lives----especially in situations when the parents are apart. In order to support the goal for each parent to provide a meaningfully and considerable involvement in the lives of their children, I affirm that the resolution to custody requires an arrangement for joint legal custody and physical custody that maximizes the time with the non-residential----with the optimal arrangement being 50-50, whenever practical. It is my professional opinion that the customary visitation arrangement for non-residential parents to visit every other weekend and one night during the week is not sufficient to maintain a consequential relationship with their children. Although I have heard matrimonial attorneys, children's attorneys, and judges assert that the child needs the consistency of the same residence, I deem this assumption to be nonsense. I cannot be convinced that the consistency with one's bed trumps consistency with a parent!
Should the reader question how such an arrangement can be judiciously implemented which maximizes the child's time---even in a 50-50 arrangement----with the non-residential parent, I direct the reader to the book, Mom's House, Dads House, by the Isolina Ricci, PhD.
Indeed, the research that we do have supports the serious consequences to children when the father, who is generally the non-residential parent, does not play a meaningful role in lives of his children. The book, Fatherneed, (2000) by Dr. Kyle Pruitt, summarizes the research at Yale University about the importance of fathers to their children. And another post on this page summarizes an extensive list of other research.
Children of divorce or separation of their parents previously had each parent 100% of the time and obviously cannot have the same arrangement subsequent to their parents' separation. But it makes no sense to this family therapist that the result of parental separation is that the child is accorded only 20% time with one parent and 80% with the other. What rational person could possibly justify this?
PRO SE RIGHTS:
ReplyDeleteSims v. Aherns, 271 SW 720 (1925) ~ "The practice of law is an occupation of common right."
Brotherhood of Trainmen v. Virginia ex rel. Virginia State Bar, 377 U.S. 1; v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335; Argersinger v. Hamlin, Sheriff 407 U.S. 425 ~ Litigants can be assisted by unlicensed laymen during judicial proceedings.
Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957) ~ "Following the simple guide of rule 8(f) that all pleadings shall be so construed as to do substantial justice"... "The federal rules reject the approach that pleading is a game of skill in which one misstep by counsel may be decisive to the outcome and accept the principle that the purpose of pleading is to facilitate a proper decision on the merits." The court also cited Rule 8(f) FRCP, which holds that all pleadings shall be construed to do substantial justice.
Davis v. Wechler, 263 U.S. 22, 24; Stromberb v. California, 283 U.S. 359; NAACP v. Alabama, 375 U.S. 449 ~ "The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, are not to be defeated under the name of local practice."
Elmore v. McCammon (1986) 640 F. Supp. 905 ~ "... the right to file a lawsuit pro se is one of the most important rights under the constitution and laws."
Federal Rules of Civil Procedures, Rule 17, 28 USCA "Next Friend" ~ A next friend is a person who represents someone who is unable to tend to his or her own interest.
Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972) ~ "Allegations such as those asserted by petitioner, however inartfully pleaded, are sufficient"... "which we hold to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers."
Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1959); Picking v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 151 Fed 2nd 240; Pucket v. Cox, 456 2nd 233 ~ Pro se pleadings are to be considered without regard to technicality; pro se litigants' pleadings are not to be held to the same high standards of perfection as lawyers.
Maty v. Grasselli Chemical Co., 303 U.S. 197 (1938) ~ "Pleadings are intended to serve as a means of arriving at fair and just settlements of controversies between litigants. They should not raise barriers which prevent the achievement of that end. Proper pleading is important, but its importance consists in its effectiveness as a means to accomplish the end of a just judgment."
NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415); United Mineworkers of America v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715; and Johnson v. Avery, 89 S. Ct. 747 (1969) ~ Members of groups who are competent nonlawyers can assist other members of the group achieve the goals of the group in court without being charged with "unauthorized practice of law."
Picking v. Pennsylvania Railway, 151 F.2d. 240, Third Circuit Court of Appeals ~ The plaintiff's civil rights pleading was 150 pages and described by a federal judge as "inept". Nevertheless, it was held "Where a plaintiff pleads pro se in a suit for protection of civil rights, the Court should endeavor to construe Plaintiff's Pleadings without regard to technicalities."
Puckett v. Cox, 456 F. 2d 233 (1972) (6th Cir. USCA) ~ It was held that a pro se complaint requires a less stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer per Justice Black in Conley v. Gibson (see case listed above, Pro Se Rights Section).
Roadway Express v. Pipe, 447 U.S. 752 at 757 (1982) ~ "Due to sloth, inattention or desire to seize tactical advantage, lawyers have long engaged in dilatory practices... the glacial pace of much litigation breeds frustration with the Federal Courts and ultimately, disrespect for the law."
Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 2d 946 (1973) ~ "There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of Constitutional Rights."
Schware v. Board of Examiners, United State Reports 353 U.S. pages 238, 239. ~ "The practice of law cannot be licensed by any state/State."
“Justice is a part of the human makeup. And if you deprive a person of Justice on a continuous basis, it’s really an attack (and not to get religious or anything) but it’s an attack on the human soul. We have, as societies, evolved ideas of Justice and we have done that because human nature needs Justice and it needs resolution. And if you deprive somebody of that long enough they’re going to have reactions…” ~ Juli T. Star-Alexander – Executive Director, Redress, Inc.
ReplyDeleteRedress, Inc. 501c3 nonprofit corporation, created to combat corruption. Our purpose is to provide real assistance and solutions for citizens suffering from injustices. We operate as a formal business, with a Board of Directors guiding us. We take the following actions to seek redress: Competently organize as citizens working for the enforcement of our legal rights. Form a coalition so large and so effective that the authorities can no longer ignore us. We support and align with other civil rights groups and get our collective voices heard. Work to pass laws that benefit us and give us the means to fight against corruption, as is our legal right, and we work to repeal laws that are in violation of our legal rights. Become proactive in the election process, by screening of political candidates. As individuals, we support those who are striving to achieve excellence, and show how to remove from office those who have failed to get the job done. Make our presence known through every legal means. We monitor our courts and judges. We petition our government representatives for the assistance they are bound to provide us. We publicize our cases and demand redress. Create a flow of income that enables us to fight back in court, and to assist our members impoverished by the abuses inflicted on us. Create the means to relieve the stresses on us, as we share information and support each other. We become legal advocates for each other; we become an emotional support network for each other; we problem solve for individuals on a group basis! Educate our judges, lawyers, court personnel, law enforcement personnel and elected leaders about our rights as citizens! Actively work to eliminate incompetence, bias/prejudice, special relationships and corruption at all levels of government! Work actively with all media sources, to shed light on our efforts. It is reasonable to expect that if the authorities know we are watching and documenting, that their behaviors will improve. IT'S A HUGE TASK! Accountability will not happen overnight. But we believe that through supporting each other, we support ourselves. This results in a voice for justice and redress that cannot be ignored. Please become familiar with our web site, and feel free to call. We need each other - help us to help you! Although we are beginning operations in Nevada, we intend to extend into each state in a competent fashion. We are NOT attorneys, unless individual attorneys join us as members. We are simply people helping people. For those interested, we do not engage in the practice of law. You might be interested in this article Unauthorized Practice of Law on the Net. Call Redress, Inc. at 702.597.2982 or e-mail us at Redress@redressinc.com. WORKING TOGETHER TO ATTAIN FAIRNESS