A self-censored chronicle of family court dramas, lived by parents who lost all or some visitation with or custody of a child or children based on perjury and/or other false courtroom evidence
Nearly half of all marriages end in divorce. When they do dads are being made increasingly irrelevant in the life of their kids, often as a result of spite or malice, with tragic consequences on children, families and communities.
When my son Domenic was born I'd never thought about Family Rights. I had a two-parent family. None of my friends had been in a custody battle. I assumed I'd be able to share the same love and attention on my son as my parents did with me. The painful experience of a divorce taught me that I was very wrong.
I discovered, as have many parents, that if my relationship with my child is challenged by a former spouse or even a social worker, my child and I have no right to family. A trial may occur, but there will be no jury of my peers. A lone judge will decide what's in the "best interest" of my child. This could include limited or no contact with a loving parent for an entire childhood.
I've come to believe we have a Civil Right to be presumed FIT & EQUAL parents to our children, unless you are convicted in a criminal court of being a demonstrated threat to your kids.
Good, average, and poor parents are all FIT & EQUAL parents.
Why? Because one foundation of morality is the supremacy of individual conscience - what many know as "let your conscience be your guide." What more natural obligation does any parent have than to care for their own kids? To be present in their lives in the many roles that only a parent can fill.
1778. Conscience is a judgment of reason whereby the human person recognizes the moral quality of a concrete act that he is going to perform, is in the process of performing, or has already completed. In all he says and does, man is obliged to follow faithfully what he knows to be just and right....
1782. Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. "He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience...."
I am a children's rights activist. I have watched my stepson go through torture from his own mother before the courts actually did anything about it.
His mother had TWO evaluations done that said exactly what kind of person she is, yet the judges refused to even look into this and continue to give her unsupervised visitations
Now, a new judge has taken the place of the other judge due to the old judge getting a promotion. This new judge has given the biological motherway more than what she deserves and has even stated that she has not done her homework on the case, but gives into this narcissistic persons demands.
If you were elected president, how would you fix the corruption in child custody areas?
Please remember our children are our future. If our children are mentally, psychologically, emotionally, etc. abused, how are they suppose to lead future generations?
In all indications of the talk out of the legislative bodies, 2017 will be the year of reform of the social programs of Child Welfare Divisions. Although funded by the Federal Government, each State and county will have their own policies and procedures drafted around the new legislative actions in 2017. The new bills could be the means for some states to adopt a 'family friendly' policy of helping families to remain together, and some states will cling to their standard practice of seizing kids for federal dollars. The only way to end the incentivized profit gain off children is to end ASFAct. We encourage all writers to demand this end to ASFA.
In the year of 2017, the group will decide how to restructure our efforts to change the current justice system of Family law/dissolution and custody. As family law in relation to child custody, child support, is a federal justice problem, our need to write legislative bodys will end our refocus will be on addressing the justice system and the avenues available to bring a change, whereas prior change to the Child welfare divisions focused on a social program and policy change and not a justice system change.
Divorce and family law cases sometimes get ugly. And, in ugly
cases, it is not uncommon for one or both of the parties to have a personality
disorder or other mental health condition. Under certain circumstances, a
party's mental health is legitimately relevant to a proper determination
of child custody or alimony. Many times, however, there are
improper motivations for seeking confidential mental health records and
information. Your family law attorneyshould know when this
evidence is subject to discovery.
A party to a divorce or family law proceeding normally has the right to
prevent disclosure of communications or records made for the purpose of
diagnosis or treatment of a mental or emotional condition, including alcoholism
and other drug addiction. See Fla. Stat.
§ 90.503(2). This privilege applies to communications between
a patient and a psychotherapist, or persons who are participating in the
diagnosis or treatment under the direction of the psychotherapist. Id. The term
"psychotherapist" is broadly defined, and includes doctors,
psychologists, therapists, social workers, drug and alcohol abuse counselors,
and nurse practitioners who are engaged primarily in the diagnosis or treatment
of a mental or emotional condition. See Fla. Stat.
§ 90.503(1)(a).
In extreme circumstances, evidence concerning the party's mental health is so
vital to a proper determination of custody that a patient-litigant exception to
the privilege is justified. Id. The rationale for this
exception is that a litigant waives the psychotherapist-patient privilege by
proceeding on a claim for custody where the party's mental condition is an
essential element.
If evidence of mental health is still necessary in a custody case, the
more appropriate method of securing the information is to require an
independent psychological or psychiatric examination of the parent or
parents. Schouw v. Schouw,
593 So. 2d 1200, 1201 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). In this way, the trial
court balances the need to determine the parents' mental health as it relates
to the best interest of the child, and the need to maintain the confidentiality
between a treating psychotherapist and the patient. Id.
In Attorney ad Litem for DK, the court explained its
reasoning:
We recognize the tension apparent in the law between the rights and
responsibilities of parents and the rights of children. Certainly, to promote
strong families, parents should be involved and active in the lives of their
children, including their health care, for which the parents are held
responsible. Unfortunately, sometimes the parents are the cause of abuse, both
emotional and physical, of their children. Allowing parents complete access to
their children's health care records under all circumstances may inhibit the
child from seeking or succeeding in treatment. The tension between the child's
need for confidentiality and privacy to promote healing may conflict with the
need of the court for information to inform its judgment as to the child's best
interest.
See Attorney ad Litem for D.K., 780 So. 2d at 308. Courts have also
held that even a court appointed guardian ad litem for the
child may be excluded from accessing the child's confidential mental health
records.
If you have questions about how mental health issues might affect your
rights in a family law case, contact an experienced Florida family law attorney.
Attorney David Schorr slapped a court-appointed shrink with a
defamation lawsuit for telling the judge deciding a custody battle with
his estranged wife that he was an unfit parent — for refusing to take his son
to the fast food joint for dinner.