Effects of Trauma on Family Court Cases:
What is Trauma and Why We Must Address It?
By Linda FieldstoneSupervisor Family Court Services 11th Jud. Cir. ~Although prevalence estimates vary, there is consensus that high percentages of justice-involved women and men have experienced serious trauma throughout their lifetime. The reverberating effect of trauma experiences can challenge a person’s capacity for recovery and pose significant barriers to maintaining healthy relationships, adjusting to life transitions and accessing services, often resulting in an increased risk of coming into contact with the criminal justice system and affecting their family court cases. Cindy A. Schwartz, MS, MBA, Consultant to SAMSHA’s National Center for Trauma Informed Care, will offer insights into how to interact with people in ways that help to engage them in services, keep them out of the criminal justice system, ease processing through the system, and avoid re-traumatizing. Justin Volpe, Certified Peer Specialist Consultant, will demonstrate how the application of effective practices can divert a trauma victim from self-destructive behavior to actions that can promote more productive responses when involved in family court actions.
at Lawson E. Thomas Courthouse.
 |
| Post by End Parental Alienation. |
Family Court Services and their presenters from SAMSHA failed to address how Family Court can cause a person severe emotional distress that LEADS to the Trauma (Physical and Psychological Injury). They did discuss how trauma leads to mental and physical illness. The big question of the afternoon: “Which came first the chicken or the egg?
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
The first case to recognize a non-custodial parent’s cause
of action based on the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress was
Sheltra V. Smith, 392 A. 2d 431 (Vt. 1978). In this case, the non-custodial
parent brought suit for damages alleging that:
“defendant willfully, maliciously, intentionally, and
outrageously inflicted extreme mental suffering and acute mental distress on
the plaintiff, by willfully, maliciously, and outrageously rendering it
impossible for any personal contact or other communication to take place
between the (plaintiff and child).”
The Superior Court, Caledonia County
Post Traumatic Stress (PTSD) causes a victim to re-experience the trauma–usually after they are triggered by a specific reminder. Not only does the trauma play in their mind but their body chemically responds, also going back to that place of trauma. The reminders can happen in the day during vivid flashbacks or, at night with nightmares or panic attacks. PTSD has a variety of symptoms including (but not limited to): feeling numb, becoming extra sensitive to stimuli (hyper arousal), outbursts of anger, avoiding the places or reminders of trauma, losing interest in things you once enjoyed, exaggerated startle response, feeling disconnected and depression.
How Does Masculinity Lead a Man to Depression?
Kurt Bird at The Good Men Project
Kurt Bird knows very well about the scars that name-calling and verbal abuse leave behind.
LEGAL TERRORISM Fighting war against terrorists in Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan is a diversion to keep the citizens of the United States distracted about the terrorist psychopaths in the American Legal System. I have discovered that there is no access to the United States legal system for the middle class and poor of the United States. I came to these courts asking for justice and I left further ...injured. When I asked the legislature and the administrative system that is set up to oversee the legal system, I was sent a curt response that no laws or ethics had been violated. These administrative personnel have condoned the use of terror in our court system. The administrative personnel and/ or pathology personalities have colluded with the crooks of the system and have become supporters of terror (tools of the psychopath). Our courts have become tools for the wealthy to oppress the poor. I have recently discovered that there are administrative laws on the books of each state. Although these laws are not available to the public, you must have access to the legal search engines to find these laws. You will need to go to a law library and use the legal search engines to find the laws of your state. This is another aspect of terrorism, keep the rules secret, and run by a secret organization that is not monitored by public citizens. I am not an attorney and after I have seen what attorneys do, I would never become a part of this terrorist organization which support techniques of abuse used by pathological personalities. You must adhere to the rules of the crime boss to continue to practice law and if you decide to “spill the beans to the public”, you will fear physical and financial death. The terror system that I faced was family court. This court claims to assist families in the state break the state contract of marriage. They actually post the motto: “Helping the families of Florida”. While in reality, they are torturing and committing Florida families to a life of torture and grave danger; financially, physically and emotionally. I am unable to afford an attorney and the system wants me to go away and accept the crimes they have committed. This court system has caused complex Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, an injury that many terrorist organizations skillfully employ to damage and keep the victim lifeless and quiet. The same occurs all over the nation. Our system of justice plays favorites; you are a favorite until the money runs out or if you have more money than the other spouse. Divorce to a personality disorder is war and there are disordered attorneys who also have no conscience. I hope that one day we will all be able to heal and join together to stop the legal torture of vulnerable citizens. Without a dispassionate and objective justice system based directly on the Constitution there can be no justice. Individuals must know they can have justice despite income or condition. Without these conditions being met no free market is possible. We provide tools for the accomplishment of this, the true justice, enacted by the people. As always: FOLLOW THE MONEY
Fathers Rights, Court System, Children and families in Florida, falsely accused, assault charges, etc. What the heck does all of this have to do with Tampa FL Homes anyway? Well, it all starts like this:
When a house goes up for sale, Did you ever wonder how the sign gets there for a new listing? The post man of coarse! Not the postal man, but the "sign-post" man. That's right it's a contract service, that we as Realtors, pay a third party to install for us. After all, can you imagine a chic in heels trying to drive a shovel in the ground for a post, then lugging that sucker around to stick in the ground, heck no!
So that's where this story begins.
Going back to my very first listing, I have worked with Petruska's Post, a third party 'post man' named James and his wife (we'll just call her EXWIFE) to help me get that sign up. James and EXWIFE were like any other American owned small family business, worked hard, had a child, paid taxes, attended Jury Duty, the whole "model citizen" bit. One day, after several requests to install a new sign post, James didn't respond, EXWIFE wasn't in the office, very unlike themand the many transactions we've previously had. A little later, with tremor in his voice, I asked James what was wrong, and where he and EXWIFE had been.
This started the beginning of a new life for this whole family. James painfully explained the whole story, with tears in eyes and his voice, how EXWIFE his wife of 14 years had falsely accused him of assault, child endangerment, had made many false reports seeking Injunction for Protection, all for spite, and to keep James away from their daughter and start a new life (excluding him), leaving him without any contact, any photos, anything but memories of his daughter. As if the heart break of a painfully quick divorce was not enough, the accusations (later proving false), he later realized these arrest records, would haunt him forever.
He was later told by Rhonda Storms and other people in the judicial system, that there is nothing they can do to help him because there is nothing in the FL statues that specifically addresses false DCF (Children and families in Florida) reports. It seems as though the fair thing to do would have been to expunge those records where James Petruska was falsely accused, and punish those whom make false reports.
Can you imagine how you would feel if you had not seen your daughter (or child) in over 2 years? As a mother of 3, I would be devastated and heartbroken. Well this is how James feels. Listening as a friend, for many many months now, he's gotten tougher! He went from feeling helpless and heartbroken, to wanting justice! Fathers should have some rights too, should they not?
I wrote this post for James, to post his public court hearing video, so that he can share it with the world. James you know I'm behind you in all of your future endeavors, your heart is there, your soul is good, and your good karma will stay! Hang in there my friend, and stay strong! I know that you WILL get to see your daughter soon, I'm just so sorry that you've had to miss so much of her life.
Katrina Madewell
For more information on other resources please go to http://www.falsedvireports.com click on post your story link to see other stories, videos, etc.
************
DVI Documentary Trailer from Andrew Marinari on Vimeo.
Causes.com
Is The Playing Field Level For Men In The Family Court System?
Corazón de padre
CUSTODIA PATERNAMartes, 17 de Septiembre, 2013 El modo masculino de educar Sinopsis: ¿Tienen lo padres un estilo educativo propio? ¿Es diferente la sensibilidad educativa paterna de la materna? ¿Es necesario recuperar el modo masculino de educar y su valor para la educación de los hijos? En la sociedad actual se constata que existe un "déficit de padres". La ausencia del padre es ya un tópico o lugar común de la literatura, del cine y de la cultura. Existen numerosas obras que explican las claves de esta situación, pero sin indicar cómo debe recuperarse esa pérdida. Según el autor, es necesario rede... more »
WHY IS THIS A CRITICAL ISSUE?
CUSTODIA PATERNAMartes, 17 de Septiembre, 2013 El modo masculino de educar Sinopsis: ¿Tienen lo padres un estilo educativo propio? ¿Es diferente la sensibilidad educativa paterna de la materna? ¿Es necesario recuperar el modo masculino de educar y su valor para la educación de los hijos? En la sociedad actual se constata que existe un "déficit de padres". La ausencia del padre es ya un tópico o lugar común de la literatura, del cine y de la cultura. Existen numerosas obras que explican las claves de esta situación, pero sin indicar cómo debe recuperarse esa pérdida. Según el autor, es necesario rede... more »
WHY IS THIS A CRITICAL ISSUE?
WHY IS THIS A CRITICAL ISSUE?
Client used the phrase "sleazy backdoor maneuver" discussing a tactic used by opposing counseling in his filing against my client Got the judges attention when client said this in court. The judge put down the paperwork he was looking at, and started focusing on every word that my client said. Client is Pro Per pending an attorney. Judge liked the phrasing so much he used it himself several times in that hearing. Client won in court and has been smiling ever since. May just have to get a bumper sticker for this. What do you think? Bumper sticker or not?
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?
“Relationship Estrangement and Interference is a form of Domestic Violence using Psychological abuse.”
Delete~ Joan Kloth-Zanard of PAS Intervention.
http://www.pas-intervention.com
PAS Intervention stands for Parental Alienation Support and Intervention. It is an International Non-profit organization to End Child Abuse and Parental Alienation.
In the other hand, there are some any interesting facts that are usually not considered when domestic violence is discussed. Women are seen as victims of domestic violence by large majority (between 85% and 95% of reports showing female victims) over men because men do not call the police; however, if we would consider all the men that do not file a report, for one or another reason, we would not only find out that women are responsible for 70% of domestic violence cases, but also that a large percentage of the women’s reports are either false allegations or that the woman was the initiator of aggression but also who called the police when the man responded to the aggressions. How many times have we heard or even seen of a woman vandalizing a man’s car by scratching it with keys as a result of jealousy or after discovering adultery? Or threaten with committing suicide if the relationship was ended? Or throwing personal belongings out an apartment window or against a wall? Men do not file reports under these circumstances, but they happen every day and more often than not the perpetrator is a woman.
DeleteFalse accusations of domestic violence are, sadly enough, utilized as a tool to obtain legal advantages over a divorce/custody case. In many instances a divorcing parent, mostly women, will make a false accusation of domestic violence against the man to gain custody rights over their children and ruining the other parent's life in many ways. The alleged "aggressor" will be put in jail and have public records of domestic violence, potentially loosing custody of a child, losing a job, professional licenses, etc. In many cases Judges are reluctant to dismiss a restraining order risking that the accusation was rightful and thus leaving the accuser exposed to further abuse. Sometimes Judges not even allow the accusers to explain themselves and simply make a ruling by reading the "victim's" statement. Victims of "false accusations of domestic violence" have changed their life becoming miserably, in many cases, by losing their jobs, thus not being able to not only pay their bills, but also a court order child support, bringing them back to jail and into a cycle that is emotionally devastating to both the victim and his/her children.
In conclusion, domestic violence is a very serious problem that needs to be treated in a case by case situation with an in depth investigation and consequences to both the victim and the abuser, whether is a real case or a false allegation. Everyone involved in the investigation, from the victim to the Judge ruling on a restraining order, should take into consideration the facts and the overall situation of the couple in dispute (divorcing, disputing custody of children, etc). Education and support are essential to understanding, preventing and treating this problem.
Mediator and Founding Director, The Toby Center for Family Transitions
ReplyDeleteI read your comment and agree that all parties are affected when parents divorce. The degree to which they will be affected will depend upon the support they receive during that process. It will depend, too, on the nature of the advocacy in representation. Given the adversity in litigation, divorce without counsel is best for most. Attorneys are trained to litigate, to oppose. Collaborative attorneys pose a modest improvement, but do not offer what most need, they need to be heard, to be acknowledged, they need guidance for coparenting. The courts in general fail miserably here.
I provuded counseling, supervised visitation services at URI with the initial support of family chief judge Jeremiah Jeremiah in 2003-6. Until your fellow family attorneys realized they could charge hundreds of dollars for visitation services themselves.
It was an outrage, as my organisation, the Childrens Rights council provided these services for a nominal fee and provided through trained students from URI.
Today, the Toby Center provides auxilliary court services, psychotherapy, family therapy and parenting education. We have found that our approach has reduced high conflict among many client families.
I recommend for you two things, 1) stop blaming the parents, 2) create a unified court for marital dissolution, 3) create opportunities for intervention when it becomes clear a parent is brainwashing a child, and blocking visitation, and 4) require that only those trained in child development be assigned GAL positions as well as parenting coordinators.
Stop blaming the parents.
Begin to look at supporting them through their unexpected nightmares.
Dr. Mark Roseman
Certified Family Mediator (FL)
Certified Family Life Educator
Director, The Toby Center
Delray Beach and Pompano
Intimidation of Pro-Se Litigants
DeleteThe attitude of court officers toward pro-se litigants ranges from condescending to openly hostile, and when pro se's oppose an experienced attorney, they are often dispatched before having the opportunity to properly present their case. In the following article, investigative reporter Sherman Skolnick describes a scenario he has witnessed.
Big Court Fix
Part 1: Introduction to what you need to know
SHERMAN H. SKOLNICK
Here is the start of what you need to know about the courts. This applies primarily to state and federal civil cases in bigger communities and cities. And please note, not EVERY court case is corrupt. Maybe one out of twenty, or one out of forty. But after you study this series, you might become more skilled in telling which is which.
In civil cases, judges usually designate a certain day at a certain time when they have "Motion Call." That means they put on the docket for that day a list of cases where motions (parts of cases) are to be heard.
So suppose you are a plaintiff, representing yourself against a defendant corporation or a politician or other important personality. You check the computer-generated Motion Call list taped to the wall outside the courtroom door.
You notice that you are among the first cases to be heard that morning. The judge is not yet on the bench. The defendant's attorney is at the desk, next to the bench, whispering to the deputy clerk.
The judge comes in, gets on the bench, and your case is among the first called. The clerk, or the judge himself, announces that your case will be heard "at the end of the call," which means you will have to wait in the courtroom for several hours, perhaps close to lunch-time.
Non-lawyers tend to call the other side, "the enemy." So your enemy's attorney goes out into the hallway with his cell phone. You follow him and ask, "You were whispering to the clerk before the Motion Call started. And when the judge got on the bench, my case was pushed to the end. What is going on?"
The enemy's "mouthpiece" does not respond. So you raise your voice and repeat the question. Suddenly, the deputy sheriff (state court) or deputy U.S. marshal (federal court) stationed in the courtroom comes out and comes up to you.
"If you don't stop threatening counsel, I am going to have to arrest you," he warns. Outraged at being falsely accused, you raise your voice to who in past years was called the court bailiff. He barks at you, "Get away from counsel, or I will arrest you."
You reluctantly walk away from the "counsel" and the "bailiff". You begin thinking to yourself, "Hey, what's going on here anyway?"
You go back into the courtroom and wait. Before the clerk calls your case, all the other motions have been heard and the court has been cleared out.
Suddenly, the bailiff goes to the courtroom door and locks it. If you are savvy, you look at the judge's face now. It is not more or less relaxed as you saw it during the Motion Call. After all, the judge often hobnobs socially with some of the same lawyers who were there during the Motion Call. He goes to golfing events with them from time to time. The judge sees many of the same attorneys at Bar Association luncheons and pep-talk meetings, where they pat themselves on the back for the great system of justice they are in. You think, "It is the wonderfully corrupt bench and the bar." And YOU are no part of it.
So now it is just you, your enemy's counsel, the judge, the clerk, and the bailiff. If you have been around the courts before, you know to notice that the judge's face is now a little red. Although judges practice to show no expression about which way they are going to rule, they are still human and it sometimes does show in their face when a particularly difficult or clout-heavy case is to be heard.
7 Steps for Managing Awful Opposing Counsel -
Delete“Honestly, based on the dealings I’ve had so far, I dislike the other attorneys more than the opposing spouse! Why do attorneys have to make everything so personal?”
The guy who said that practices family law in Florida, and I couldn’t agree more.
You’ve had the same experience. The opposing counsel is making you miserable. You are not alone.
My friend in Florida asked, “How do you deal with attorneys like that?”
I’ll attempt to answer. However, I’ll warn you now that there isn’t a secret formula for these situations. There isn’t a perfect solution for dealing with these difficult humans.
When I’m dealing with one of these lawyers, I assume that we’re in for the long haul. These folks typically drag out every element of the case.
How to Never Let Your Clients (Or Opposing Counsel) See You Sweat
Here’s my advice:
1. Accept it. Accept that they are who they are and that you can’t change that reality.
2. Be normal. Make every effort to resolve your cases as amicably as usual. Be yourself. Don’t let their anger, hostility, and bad behavior change you. Don’t spend any special time or effort coming up with some magic plan of action because it’s not likely to work, and it only raises your clients’ expectations.
3. Explain the increased expense. Tell your clients that you’re likely to go to trial. Explain to the clients how this sort of behavior works in these cases. Explain that it drives up the costs and that they’re in for a long, expensive battle unless they want to concede now and be done by taking a grossly unfair deal. Help your clients understand that a bad deal is a choice some people prefer when compared to letting opposing counsel drag things on forever. Do a cost/benefit analysis with your clients.
4. Inoculate yourself with your clients. Tell your clients they’re going to have doubts about the quality of your representation and the fairness of the process. Help the clients understand that opposing counsel is acting in an effort to have that impact. Explain that opposing counsel’s bad behavior undermines confidence in you, and that’s the intent. Explain that it makes clients feel out of control. Predict the future for your clients—a future filled with ugly comments, unpleasant interactions, and protracted litigation. Help your clients understand that ultimately, the outcome will still be fair and reasonable.
5. Avoid emotional counterpunching. Make no effort to psych out opposing counsel. Tell your clients why you aren’t going to bother. Don’t attempt to be a bigger jerk than they’re being. Try not to engage in the crazy behavior. Moving forward with the process is the only agenda.
6. Get ready for trial. Keep moving your cases forward. Always have an event on the calendar. Assume you’re going to try these cases, and don’t get sucked into the endless insanity of unproductive settlement discussions.
7. Get it over with. Try the cases. Your clients need finality. They need it to be over. You’ve prepared them for the inevitability of a long, hard slog, and they know it ends with the judgment of the court. Push it forward and get it finished. That way, neither you nor your clients will have to deal with these difficult humans any longer than necessary.
As I said earlier, there isn’t an easy solution for these most difficult lawyers. Just do the job and accept that they make the process inefficient, expensive, and unpleasant. By pushing forward and disconnecting from the aggravating insanity, you’ll survive this case and be ready for the next one. Unfortunately, you’ll likely have another case with these same lawyers and have to deal with their negative behavior again down the road.
If knowing that you’ll have to deal with these people over and over is something you can’t tolerate, then sadly, this work may not be for you.
By Darby Jay @ Target Children Parents Relatives Society
ReplyDelete"I am a father...Not a deadbeat...Not a coward...Not a man that runs away from being a father, or a deserter of my own flesh and blood. Not a sperm donor or a court appointed ATM, but a Father in the purest form of the word. And while choosy “Moms choose Jif”; I sit, at 3:05 am holding the hot hands of a sick 7 year old princess. But that’s my job. Because...I am a Father.
I would speak to my daughter while she was in utero. She would respond with little kicks and from the womb...we interacted, and hadn’t even seen each other yet. When you immediately accept that, even before your child takes its first breath, you are already a Father; you immediately begin to bond with your child. (I am a Father)
The Family Law Court System as a whole, and it’s Judges, destroy the lives of children and in turn entire families by violating a Father’s right to "Due Process" and "Equal Protection" under the law. But we’ve known that for decades. Anyone that thinks or believes that there is "Due Process" for Fathers in the Family Law Court System should be placed in a padded room and heavily sedated. Why is it ok for Fathers to miss their children? Why is it ok for a Father to be sick and wrapped in worry? Why is it permissible for “Non Custodial” parents to start legal proceedings at an immediate disadvantage? Why is there no legislation in place to safeguard Fathers that are being swept in amid the men that make us all look bad? We are judged before the first hearing? It physically hurts on days (that) I don’t have my daughter with me. “DEPRESSION HURTS!” as the commercial for anti-depressants says...right? (It hurts because...I am a Father.)
Ask yourself, what parent wouldn’t be stressed sleepless concerned about their child? Therefore forcing time away from a parent and child would reasonably cause a great deal of stress and worry.. .to truly say the least. But the Family Law Court (and) its Judges are far from reasonable. Now, just imagine that you’re sitting at your desk at work, and two armed Sheriffs approach the receptionist’s desk, then your intercom buzzes, and you are then summoned to the front desk The Sheriff asks you for your name. And then politely informs you that you have been served with child support papers. And that’s just the beginning. Keep in mind that you are the same father that went through the entire pregnancy, CPR classes, ultrasounds, the Birth...ya know Dad stuff. For the record, (a sidebar really); Any man that has stood side by side, each day and night for nine months with a hormonal, morning, noon and night vomiting, habitual mood swinger knows that Fathers don’t exactly have it easy during a nine month pregnancy either. Weather you are an amazing Father, or a deadbeat looser, Family Law Court will filter your life through Hell all the same. I am a Father.
With no criminal record, never been arrested, no history of violence, domestic or other; At what point did I ask to be Non-Custodial.? There is nothing “Non-Custodial” about me! I have never needed a Court's Order to care for my Daughter. Since when have I not been a Father? I clinch my fist and grit my teeth while, the very system set in place to protect our families not only fatally fails, but spits in my face and violates my rights." (I AM A FATHER!)
"There is no system ever devised by mankind that is guaranteed to rip husband and wife or father, mother and child apart so bitterly than our present Family Court System." -Judge Brian Lindsay Retired Supreme Court Judge, New York, New York
"What Social Services is good at is removing "Power" from people. When this is accomplished, then there go choices." -Mr. Sharles Johnson
Thank you so much for your comment! I know exactly how you feel as what you have described is what is happening to me. I decided to fight for my rights as a father but more importantly my daughter's right to be with her dad. It was a tough decision to decide to fight in court especially when my daughter's mother and her attorney unethically decided to gain an upper hand in the paternity case that I filed by comitting perjury, deceiveing the Court and Judge and by making false allegations of domestic violence against me. I spent a great deal of money (but 3 x less than my daughter's mother spent on legal fees) and time in this case and so I can understand your reluctance to fight in court for your daughter's rights. Up to now I still have not gained access to my daughter but I have all the proof that I need that I've fought for her and I have proof that her mother is wrong in all the actions that she has taken to keep her from me. You see my daughter's mother was raised without a father and was led to believe by her her own mother (my daughter's grandmother) that she didn't need her father. Although it was very admirable that her mother (my daughter's maternal grandmother) was able to raise three kids without their dad she is also to blame for what is called "generational shame." Look up the topic "generational shame. I have not given up and my intention is on breaking this horrible history because I don't want my own daughter to grow up to be like her mother and grandmother. You'd think that a child that was raised without a father (my daughter's mother) would like to break the "generational" chains that bind her and make sure that her own child/ren don't suffer as she and her siblings did by not having a father around. And that is exactly what my daughter's mother told me before we broke-up..."that she didn't want to raise our daughter alone." However she has received very bad advise both from her own family and her lawyer Another important factor is that I was there when my daughter was born and for the first 2 1/2 years of her life and therefore my daughter knows who I am and knows that I love her very much. So you can go either way and fight or not but just make sure that you do everything possible to be in your daughter's life. This will help your daughter with her own future relationships. Please see the article and videos below called "Dear Daddy" and notice that these women admit that they needed their fathers. The psychological damage that you're referring too is inevitable whether you fight for your daughter or not. Do all you can to remain in your daughter's life regardless of what the mother wants. Your daughter will appreciate that in the future.
ReplyDeleteIt'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.
ReplyDeleteAs 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
I'm.a mom who is depressed from the worst legal trap by expensive lawyers because my ex hates me and is a multi millionaire. 5 years of no relationship because of bureaucracy. I'm tired from hate. Tired. I want to be a part of my child life. But hate clouds a persons concern for a child.
ReplyDelete“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…”
ReplyDelete~ Juli T. Star-Alexander – Executive Director, Redress, Inc.
Redress, 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
PRO SE RIGHTS:
ReplyDeleteBrotherhood 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."
Sims v. Aherns, 271 SW 720 (1925) ~ "The practice of law is an occupation of common right."
The Violence Against Women Act Ignores Half the Problem ~ By Anna Rittgers
ReplyDeleteThe 2011 Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act (VAWA), if passed, will provide funding for programs to address domestic violence and will expand the act’s provisions to include services for gays and lesbians. Theoretically, male victims of violence are eligible for help, too. But did you know that? I thought not.
The problem with reauthorizing VAWA is that doing so would perpetuate the notion that domestic violence is something that happens only to women. While it is true that VAWA has evolved over time and now ensures that male victims of partner violence can avail themselves of VAWA benefits and services, the very name of the act implies otherwise. It is quite likely that a male victim would not know he can seek help, given the name of the act.
The image of the abuser is almost always a guy. But this simply isn’t the case. One of the pioneers of the study of family violence was sociologist Richard J. Gelles. Gelles wrote a seminal 1999 article for the old Women’s Quarterly, then a publication of the Independent Women’s Forum, on the “hidden victims” of violence.[i] Gelles admitted that 25 years earlier he had overlooked something important when, in the course of doing research, he meet a couple he called Faith and Alan. Faith had been beaten by boyfriends, her ex-husband, and her husband. Faith’s troubles became the focus of Gelles’s article. Gelles barely noted Faith’s violence towards men, which included breaking Alan’s bones and stabbing a man while he read the newspaper. Faith’s violence merited a mere footnote.
We know more about intimate violence directed at men than we did when Gelles wrote his article. But for cultural reasons, it is very difficult for male victims of domestic violence to seek help. Men are seen to be physically stronger than women, and so he should be able to just “take it.” Furthermore, domestic violence awareness campaigns are horribly one-sided, and almost always portray males as the aggressor and females as victim. Police are often hardwired to view men as the perpetrator. If a man calls 911 for help when he’s being attacked by his spouse or partner, he is often subject to arrest, even if he is the only one with physical injuries.
For seventeen years, there has been unequal treatment before the law. Female aggressors are keenly aware of this unequal justice, and a 2010 study on men who sustain abuse at the hands of their female partners discovered that 67.2% reported their female aggressors made false allegations of spousal abuse. [ii] Of those with children, 48.9% of the men reported that their partners made false allegations of child abuse.[iii] In other words, VAWA’s myopic view of who perpetrates domestic violence gives female abusers an additional avenue to torment their spouses.
The name of the Act itself makes it clear that the law’s focus is to address violence against women in particular, not the general problem of domestic violence. The specialized training that judges and law enforcement officers receive ignores the reality that women are as likely as men to be perpetrators of violence. This creates a justice system that treats male aggressors more harshly than female aggressors of the same crime.
A Support and Advocacy blog for Protective Parents and innocent Children harmed by wrongdoing under the color of law, the Family Law and CPS Industries. We investigate where the media can't or won't go.
ReplyDeleteThe people "have the right to instruct their representatives, petition government for redress of grievances, and assemble freely to consult for the common good." In Keeping with the Constitution, Blind Bulldog is committed to serving the common good in Shasta County.
The following, brilliant take is from a Blind Bulldog affiliate from Southern Cal:
"The untethered aggression of family courts is due to a vacuum of institutional client advocacy--unlike criminal courts, which have firmly-established constitutional rights, strict state and federal oversight of state court judges, and a dedicated “criminal defense bar” to thwart government aggression, or civil courts that have “plaintiffs'” and “defense” bars to balance one another’s private agendas, family court has no “litigant bar.” The divorce attorneys themselves favor aggression for the simple reason identified in the movie--follow the money. Attorneys have not filled that vacuum to defend their own clients, leaving them vulnerable to the natural tendency of government to intrude. Family court litigants are, sad to say, woefully unaware of what they’re up against, and the body count shows results that are entirely predictable--but we think preventable.
Family court was created by lawyers and judges--literally--rather than the citizens it should be protecting. We’ve located the history through testimony and other documentation showing something like a Jekyll Island series of “off the record” meetings between California judges, attorneys, and bureaucrats in the 90’s to “set up” family court to their liking, then seeking what became essentially a rubber stamp granting unheard of discretion from the California legislature. This system is now unfortunately the model or trend for many states--hence our nationwide membership and approach. Citizens had virtually no input and maintain no control.
Federal courts have observed unusually broad adaptations of “federalism,” “comity,” “standing,” and “abstention” legal doctrines to leave the vacuum unoccupied by otherwise ordinary protections of federal rights for individual citizens and legal consumers. Litigants themselves are outmatched in organization--they’re a revolving door commodity. No one wants to stick around long enough to enforce reform. Hence rampant abuse in a lop-sided system of foxes guarding the henhouse, and you and I are on the ever-expanding menu."
Presumptive Best Interest of Child and Equal Time-Sharing
ReplyDeleteThere is no question that our family law statutes need to be reformed and that there is a great deal of "judicial discretion" in family law matters. Often times, the outcome of your case depends more on the judge that you have been assigned than the facts of your particular case. If you were to have your case in front of one judge, the outcome may be very different if you were to have your case in front of a different judge. The legislature is trying to change that, in particular when it comes to time-sharing with children. There are changes to alimony as well that I will address in a later blog, but I wanted my readers to be aware of the changes that are being proposed for time-sharing because it is substantial. If the Bill passes, there will now be a presumption that equal (50/50) time-sharing is in a child's best interest, with very limited exceptions. The exceptions would be in the nature of real harm to a child that a parent is incarcerated, a parent is unfit, or the parent's geographical distance would hinder the ability for a 50/50 time-sharing schedule to work. If this passes and is signed into law, most families would be automatically forced into a 50/50 timesharing arrangement if one party were to want that. I have had plenty of cases in the past and some cases right now where one parent does not want an equal time-sharing schedule for a variety of different reasons. Some reasons are valid; some reasons are not valid enough to take the issue before the Court. With this new law, if it is passed, every family will be forced into a 50/50 schedule provided that one parent is requesting it. We do a lot of 50/50 time-sharing arrangements and have had a Judge rule many times that 50/50 is what a couple is going to have, but there are many families who want to alter or adjust this schedule after the final hearing because the schedule is simply not working. Absent a substantial and permanent change of circumstances, couples are going to be stuck with these schedules, regardless of whether or not it’s "working". I agree with the idea that if we have a presumption that 50/50 is in the children's best interest, there will be less room for argument and people would have to acquiesce on this issue. Taking any argument off the table that 50/50 is not good because a parent simply doesn't want it will help insure that less litigation ensues over "best interest of the children". However, what I don't agree with is that we should take the approach of "one size fits all" when it comes to dealing with children. It'll be interesting to see how this develops and if you have issue with this potential law, I urge you to contact your representative. By Christine Bauer - A Florida Family Law Attorney
Posted FRIDAY, MARCH 22, 2013
FLORIDA TODAY - OPINION
ReplyDeleteWritten by Gordon E. Finley, Ph.D., Miami
While I applaud columnist Paul Flemming for a sound review of the issues in Saturday’s “Alimony bill will be great — for lawyers,” his bottom-line conclusion is dead wrong.
The proposed state alimony reform bill will reduce litigation, not increase litigation. A bit of history: For years, the divorce vultures (a.k.a., the Family Law Section of the Florida Bar) have conned the Florida Legislature into writing divorce legislation that maximizes litigation and thus maximizes their income. In part, they have accomplished this by maximizing judicial discretion, which in practice means endless conflict and, of course, endless paid litigation.
No matter what they may say, the divorce vultures are interested only in one thing — maximizing their income.
I can irrefutably demonstrate this point with Flemming’s own words: “Thomas Duggar, an attorney in Tallahassee and a member of the Florida Bar’s Family Law Section, said last week at a Tallahassee Bar Association meeting that the section has a $100,000 war chest to sway public opinion against the legislation.”
Do your readers honestly believe they are spending all this money so they will lose income? The divorce vultures get the message in terms of what alimony reform will cost them — and save the children, fathers and mothers of divorce. I regret Mr. Flemming did not do the same.
Full Disclosure: I am an alimony-paying divorced father of two young adult daughters and retired university divorce researcher with multiple research and scholarly publications on this topic.
"In the investigation of a neurotic style of life, we must always suspect an opponent, and note who suffers most because of the patient's condition. Usually this is a member of the family." ~
ReplyDeleteAlfred Adler
"CHILDREN OF DIVORCE DESERVE FULL ACCESS TO BOTH PARENTS, WHENEVER POSSIBLE."
ReplyDeletePersonally, I can’t find anyone willing to reject that statement publicly. It’s a fundamental truth. We now have a wealth of evidence demonstrating children are better off, in most situations, when they have something near equal time with each parent. So why are shared-parenting bills are being rejected throughout the country?
Do legislators believe mothers are more important to children than fathers? For the most part, I don’t think so. Politicians are, however, under quite a bit of pressure from some very powerful anti-shared parenting special interests. Recently, we’ve seen these opponents contribute to shared-parenting bills failing to pass in South Dakota and Minnesota.
Some would argue disappointments like those are clear signs that shared parenting legislation will not happen anytime soon. The opposite is true. The near victories in these states and others is an enormous indication politicians are beginning to understand the vast majority of American citizens believe children of divorce deserve equal access to both parents, whenever possible.
In fact, South Dakota’s bill lost in a 21-13 Senate vote. That’s a swing of 5 senators. If merely 5 senators felt more pressure from South Dakotans than they did from special interests, South Dakota would have a shared parenting statute. We should commend the remaining politicians in South Dakota’s Senate for doing the right thing.
In Minnesota … well, Minnesota is a travesty. That bill passed, and on May 24, 2012 Governor Mark Dayton vetoed it. Governor Dayton claimed that both sides made “compelling arguments,” but because the “ramifications” of the legislation were “uncertain,” he decided to single-handedly overrule the will of his constituents and their representatives. Mr. Governor, unless you are ending slavery or beginning women’s suffrage, you will likely never have the benefit of “certainty” in your political career. Again, we should praise the Minnesotan politicians who voted for the bill.
Six people. Six people stopped two states from enacting shared parenting. Six people do not indicate shared parenting is a distant hope – they indicate profoundly that it is an imminent inevitability.
Mike Haskell is a divorced dad, shared parenting supporter and practicing family law attorney in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
ACFC is America's Shared Parenting Organization
"CHILDREN NEED BOTH PARENTS"
The members of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children dedicate ourselves to the creation of a family law system and public awareness which promotes equal rights for ALL parties affected by issues of the modern family.
ACFC is challenging the current system of American family law and policy. Through a national system of local affiliates and in alliance with other pro-family and civil liberties groups, ACFC is shifting the public debate to the real causes of family dissolution.