"Time's Up!" - The Department of Justice Report

by Barry Goldstein 

An excerpt from the article ~

Clusters of Qualifying and Disqualifying Beliefs 

The heart of this study was to consider how the training, knowledge, experience and beliefs of evaluators and other court professionals affects their recommendations and decisions. The study found clusters of beliefs that appear to be connected to training, experience and biases rather than the facts and circumstances of the case. This tended to confirm the belief that evaluations often tell us more about the evaluator than the parties being evaluated. 

One cluster of beliefs by evaluators (and judges) included the mothers often make false allegations about dv and child abuse, survivors alienate children from the other parent, dv is not an important factor in making custody decisions, and children are hurt when survivors are reluctant to co-parent. These professionals tended to have less training in domestic violence and had personal beliefs supporting patriarchy and sexism. I will refer to these as unqualified professionals, but please understand that is my term. 

Evaluators with better training, more familiarity with domestic violence and an understanding that mothers rarely make false allegations of domestic violence or child abuse tended to recognize that dv is important in custody decisions; victims do not alienate the children; and victims do not hurt children when they resist co-parenting. I will refer to these as qualified professionals. 

We Are NOT Gonna Take It Anymore

Everyone loses when parental alienation gets nasty

Dear Readers: The ugly parental alienation issue blew up at Christmastime with many hurting and angry readers writing in. The spark was a letter from a separated man, Dad at the End of His Rope, whose heart was breaking because his ex had bad-mouthed him to his children (all over the age of 18) to the point they won’t talk to him anymore. During the marriage, he made big money working out of town. He was away three weeks a month and home one week. During his time at home he and his wife would fight often. He supported his wife and three kids then, and still does. He feels the kids have been taught to hate him and yet he pays and pays. He says he’s just the "bank machine." Here are some of the responses from other readers.

Dear Miss Lonelyhearts: You wanted to know why Dad at the End of His Rope is still paying child support for offspring 18 and older, asking if they are going to university? And, you asked if was planning to pay spousal support forever? The way you worded it, a potential deadbeat dad might take this to mean he doesn’t have to pay while they are in university.

As far as the spousal support, this woman raised his children to adulthood, and that was a job. He may have to pay her spousal support according to an agreement until she is 65, like another person I know who was a stay-at-home mom and wife. Why shouldn’t she deserve this? Should she be expected to live in a tiny studio apartment now that he has decided he wants out?

I don’t receive spousal support, but I do get child support, and it struck a sore point with me because I have to go to a lawyer in January because my crazy ex thinks he doesn’t have to pay child support while our son is in university and only gave me cheques to last until my son turns 18 next summer.

— Sore Point, Manitoba

Dear Sore Point: It’s understandable you’re upset. You need to see your lawyer and review your original agreement to see what you actually signed for. As for the woman who has been fully supported until now, yes, that was her job as her husband was away 75 per cent of every month, but he was far from being a deadbeat dad. Now these parents have split, the kids are legal adults and expectations of this man need to change. This newly separated woman, whether she likes it or not, needs to get training and get a job or start a business for her own independence, her self-esteem and her new social life. Why should she get a free ride from her ex-husband until she’s 65? She could be in her late 40s or early 50s at this point.

Everybody in that household should have been working at least part time by the time they were 18. It’s not good for grown kids, or even moms, to have no work experience of any kind to put on a resume. Maybe this well-heeled ex-husband would like to make a big one-time settlement offer that would cover his ex-wife’s education or start-up money for a small business, and then be free.

Money talks for this bitter lady. After she is paid off, maybe then she can stop bad-mouthing him and the kids can start having relationships with their father again. Couples counselling didn’t help before; it really sounds like the wife needs personal counselling on her own to get through her anger and bitterness. See the important letter below from a woman who alienated her children from their dad.

Dear Miss Lonelyhearts: Hopefully these children of his will come around, and maybe parental alienation will no longer be the dark side to this situation. This wife is a catalyst and needs therapy, and he should stop making all payments where lawfully possible. It’s so sad the children can only hear when money speaks. Parental alienation is about a parent and child’s love, not a bank account.

I too have first-hand experience. Many years ago I went through a terrible divorce and convinced my children their father was a horrible person and they went years not communicating with him because of me. A couple years ago, he suddenly passed away, and now I’m left with broken children who are in counselling, full of regrets and blaming me.

I know of many other nasty divorces in which children have being manipulated and convinced into taking sides. I know a 10-year-old, a 20-year-old and even someone in their 30s who is in this situation. Too many parents like myself become selfish and want everyone, including their children, to hate their ex. That benefits no one, especially the children. Parents need to keep the kids out of all the details pertaining to a divorce and stop bad-mouthing their exes. This just screws up their children’s heads and doesn’t enable them to have healthy relationships in the future. You can’t erase regrets.

— Many Regrets, Winnipeg

Dear Many Regrets: Your kids need to hear about your regrets, and you need to correct the exaggerations you made and tell them how sorry you are. Don’t try to justify the nasty things you said, instead help to rebuild a realistic picture of their deceased father with all his good points. They may be furious with you at first, but if you can restore a better image of their father it will help them heal, and after some time, they will heal towards you.

It’s hard to face up to the fact that you loved this man you ended up divorcing. You loved him enough to choose him above all others, to marry him and have children with him. You might start by writing him a letter, which of course you can’t send, thanking him for the love you had in the beginning, the children and remembering some of the good times. Someday you might want to show that letter to your children, or you may not. Either way, it will help to melt some of the bitterness away for you, and perhaps for your children.

By: Miss Lonelyhearts

Please send your questions and comments to lovecoach@hotmail.com or Miss Lonelyhearts

Tort Remedies For Interference With Parenting Time (Visitation)

Family court is the greatest fraud

ever perpetrated on the American 

Public.  Family Court / Family Law 

is a made-up business of 

consumer fraud and racketeering



Divorce is rarely easy. Occasionally there will be a tale of couples who amicably splits their assets, share their children, and are successful in co-parenting and raising children who are psychologically sound and happy. They might even vacation together, or be friends. They might share holidays.

What happens when that doesn’t happen — when the opposite occurs? Perhaps there is mental illness, substance abuse, unresolved anger, conflicting beliefs regarding ethics and religion, financial woes, and square in the middle are one or more little people. When divorce that involves child custody turns ugly, is that all there is to it? A divorce that just went very wrong, like the marriage before it?

According to echo.net, clinical psychologist Dr. Craig Childress says it is a situation in which one parent consciously or subconsciously turns their shared children against the other parent, through various means of manipulation. It often involves the premise that one parent falsely accuses the other of abuse and indoctrinates the child into believing that abuse took place, whether it be mental, physical, sexual, or a combination. While there are true cases of abuse, and even times when either parent may have behaved in a way that was not appropriate, what is key is to look at the childrens’ behavior, says Dr. Childress.

Eventually, children can become so indoctrinated and eager to please who they view as the “powerful parent,” they may start hating, harassing, or abusing the targeted parent themselves.

What drives a parental alienator? Most commonly, some type of narcissistic personality features, says Dr. Childress. According to Dr. Childress, parents who indoctrinate children into alienating the other parent are linked to narcissist borderline pathogenic parenting.

The symptoms of narcissism include: grandiosity, entitlement, absence of empathy, haughty, arrogant behavior and delusional belief systems. Although narcissistic personality disorder is listed in the DSM-5, which is considered to be the “Bible” of Psychiatric Disorders, so far Parental Alienation Disorder is not listed. Researchers expect that to soon change.

The late author and child psychiatrist Richard A. Gardner coined the term Parental Alienation Syndrome more than 20 years ago. He characterized the breakdown of previously normal, healthy parent-child relationships during divorce and child custody cases. His definition of parental alienation is simple — one parent deliberately damages, and in many cases destroys, the previously healthy loving relationship between the child and the child’s other parent.

This can be very difficult to prove, although it has been successfully used in the United States to win child custody cases, with custody going to the targeted parent. The reason it is difficult to prove is that one symptom is the child steadfastly refuses they are being indoctrinated by the other parent, and claims their hatred of the other parent is of their own will.

Researcher Amy Baker says that parents who try to alienate their child from the other parent subtlety, or not so subtletly gives a three-part message to the child.

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/1730517/parental-alienation-syndrome-researchers-say-the-struggle-is-real/#TgdDgt1EIOGUpF3q.99

Tort Remedies For Interference With Parenting Time (Visitation) | Parental Alienation Syndrome Awareness | causes.com

Courts generally grant non-custodial parents reasonable Parenting Time rights so that they can maintain and develop their relationship with their children after the marriage has dissolved. The custodial parent, however, may interfere with the Parenting Time forcing the non-custodial parent to seek alternative ways to maintain the parent-child relationship. The traditional remedies are to seek a contempt order, modification of the custody decree, or withhold support payments. The new tort remedies are for intentional infliction of emotional distress and interference with Parenting Time.

A. Traditional Remedies

Traditionally, the following three options existed for the non-custodial parent whose Parenting Time rights have been violated: 1) institute an action for civil contempt; 2) seek a modification of the custody decree; 3) withhold child support. These options have proven inadequate for compelling the custodial parent to comply with a court-decreed Parenting Time schedule.

1. Contempt Order

The most familiar remedy used to prevent a violation of Parenting Time rights is to institute a contempt action to compel the parent acting wrongfully to comply with the court ordered Parenting Time schedule. While this is a relatively simple procedure, it does not always prove to be an effective deterrent of future violations and also will not compensate a parent for the injury already realized from the deprivation of their Parenting Time with the child.

2. Modification of Custody Decree

Another remedy that a non-custodial parent may use to prevent interference with child Parenting Time is to ask the court to modify the custody decree and grant them joint or sole custody of the children. Courts have been reluctant to modify custody decrees reasoning that the modification would disrupt the children’s lives and in effect punish them for the custodial parent’s wrongful conduct.

3. Withholding Child Support

When a custodial parent continuously prevents the non-custodial parent from exercising his Parenting Time rights, the Court may allow the non-custodial parent to withhold child support payments as a means of compelling the custodial parent to cooperate with the Parenting Time schedule. This is not the optimal remedy, however, and courts are reluctant to grant this remedy. The primary rationale for this reluctance is the existence of a potential catch-22 situation: child support is withheld because of Parenting Time violations, and Parenting Time is violated because child support is being withheld. The ultimate loser in this situation is the child(ren), therefore courts generally hold that Parenting Time rights are independent of child support payments.

B. Tort Remedies

The traditional alternatives available have been ineffective in preventing the recurrence of Parenting Time violations. Non-custodial parents therefore have turned tort theories to recover damages from the custodial parent and to accomplish uninterrupted Parenting Time. The current trend suggests that the threat of financial liability will discourage a custodial parent from interfering with Parenting Time rights.

1. 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).”

Id. at 433.

The Superior Court, Caledonia County, dismissed the complaint for failure to state of cause of action on which relief could be granted. The Supreme Court of Vermont, however, found that the plaintiff stated a prima facie case for outrageous conduct causing severe...

Related articles

• Kelly Rutherford's appeal to win back child custody denied
• The parental rights of unwed fathers
• The DSM 5 will drug America to death
• We must stop turning children against divorced fathers
• Can you tell your story one more time? - 100's of true Parental Alienation stories
• Caseloads leap as judges retire, forcing long wait for family court cases
• Child Custody for Fathers
• U.S. senators say federal action may be needed to curb 're-homing'
• Difficulties in the Family Courtroom ~ Disparities in State Family Courts
• Respect the right of the child who is separated from one or both parents to maintain personal relations and direct contact with both parents on a regular basis.

The Truth Behind Who "WINS" A Custody Case

THE TRUTH BEHIND WHO "WINS" A CUSTODY CASE

by Wendy Archer

Written by Wendy Archer

Organizer & Host of Bubbles of LOVE Day DFW

contact information: wendyarcher@rocketmail.com

The truth about litigation and the conduct of family court judges is not pretty. In fact the truth is so downright ugly that it is literally unbelievable to most people who have not experienced it firsthand. Most of us were raised to believe that our justice system ensures that in the end justice is served. Of course we know that there is misconduct and even corruption in some situations but surely that would not be true in cases involving child abuse, so we assume. Everyone knows that child abusers are considered to be on the on the lowest rung of the ladder in any and all social groups and surely no judge would knowingly and intentionally put a child into the hands of an abuser, right? Wrong. In fact, grossly wrong.

The truth is that child abusers are awarded full custody of the children they abuse on a regular basis and in many situations the family court judges KNOW they are putting these children into the hands of their abusers.

Unbelievable? YES. True? YES. But HOW and WHY can this possibly be true you must be wondering if you are one of the lucky few who has not witnessed this very sick operation of our family court system.

The HOW and WHY can usually be boiled down to a few simple factors. FINANCIAL AND POLITICAL MOTIVATIONS.

One very common scenario is as follows...

There is a couple who has been divorced for several years. They share exactly equal parenting time per court orders, an exact 50/50 split of time. One parent is extremely narcissistic, very emotionally abusive and unusually wealthy. The other parent is mild mannered, compliant and very financially poor. The extremes between the two parents' personality traits and financial situations make the conditions right for a contentious custody issue to surface at any time, especially if the differences become more and more extreme over time. 

Narcissist personalities have an unbridled sense of entitlement. If they want it, they feel entitled to it. Period. Narcissistic personalities also lack any fear of consequences, including consequences as serious as jail time. When these traits are combined with unlimited financial resources, the results can be horrifying. For example, if a narcissistic and wealthy parent decides they want to violate court orders and withhold a child from the other parent they will do so with bold entitlement and without fear of any consequences. In fact they will probably even act proud of their illegal and unethical actions. This happens all too frequently. It seems the remedy would be simple in that the victim parent would seek legal assistance and the parent in violation of court orders would be swiftly corrected and punished by a family court judge.

Shockingly and sadly, that is not the reality of what most often happens. After attempting to beg, plead and reason with the narcissistic parent to stop violating court orders, the victim parent usually does hire an attorney and naively assumes that a family court judge will act swiftly with integrity. After all, that's what the family court judges are there for. Little does the victim parent know that the outcome of the case might very well have nothing at all to do with laws or ethics or what is in "the best interest of the children." With the "right attorneys" and unlimited financial resources, the narcissistic parent can and very often does ultimately purchase custody of the children.

Even in situations where it is 100% documented and 100% indisputable that the children have been abused by this person AND that the victim parent is the only mentally healthy and safe parent...even confirmed by the unbiased and objective expert opinions of doctors who have evaluated the children and even confirmed by the abuser's own admission... it is not only possible but likely the narcissistic wealthy abusive parent will obtain full custody of the children. The narcissistic parent will use their most coveted skills and weapons; charming people and money. The abusive parent's narcissistic skills combined with the legal tactic of financially and emotionally destroying the victim parent during litigation is very effective. With their financial resources, the narcissistic parent can hire a literal army of attorneys and you can be certain that they will hire attorneys who have very close relationships with the judge and are most likely some of the judge's top campaign contributors (yes, they really can do that.) This alone will almost assure the narcissistic parent of purchasing custody of their children.

However, narcissists derive intense pleasure out of harming their victims. Therefore, they usually take full advantage of their attorneys' strategy of draining the victim parent of every single penny they have until the victim parent simply has no choice to but sign a "settlement" under extreme duress.

Remember, the victim parent had little or no money to begin with. With the help of their "judge friendly" attorneys and the judge it's only a matter of time before the narcissistic parent has the victim parent financially devastated to the point where they literally can't provide food, clothing or shelter for the children. Many of these victim parents lose everything, every cent they ever saved and even their homes. Their credit is destroyed. They literally can't buy food or clothing for the children and must resort to assistance from various organizations to survive.

Again, this destruction of the victim parent is an INTENTIONAL ACT by the narcissistic parent.

The narcissistic parent WANTS to make the victim parent unable to provide food and clothing and shelter for their own children. 

The narcissistic parent has the power to stop this cruelty against their own children at any time. 

When the situation reaches this point of crisis, the victim parent simply has no choice but to face the fact that if they continue with litigation that they WILL end up homeless and unable to provide ANYTHING for their children including food. It is at this well-timed point of the planned attack that the narcissistic parent will present a "settlement offer" to the victim parent, knowing that the victim parent literally has no choice but to sign what in truth is a cruel and abusive ultimatum. 

The narcissistic parent will take full advantage of the situation to ensure that the new modified orders will solidify their ability to abuse the children with provisions such as giving the abusive parent "exclusive psychological control of the children" and "exclusive educational decision making." 

The abusive parent realizes that this is their opportunity to have it "ordered" that they can abuse their children, even going so far as to make it clear that they want it ordered that they can have 'full mind control' over their children.

NOTHING Justifies the Minimization or Removal of a FIT and LOVING Parent. NOTHING!

The bill will:
1. Design a “three strikes” for custodial parents who intend to subvert visitation with the non custodial parent and the child.
2. Visitation exchanges will occur at a location in the local police department. Each parent will identify themselves using a fingerprint scanner. Name, date will be recorded into a database.
3. Strike one. Custodial or non custodial parent does not show for the visitation exchange.
4. Strike two. Custodial parent does not show up for the visitation exchange. Child support obligations for the non custodial parent are relieved that month, and will resume the following month.
5. Strike three. Custodial parent does not show up for the visitation exchange, triggering a third degree felony for T.I.C.K – Tortious Interference Child Kidnapping. The State Attorney or Prosecutor will file charges on the custodial parent for T.I.C.K.
6. Exceptions will be made as necessary for health emergencies.
7. Immunity for State Attorneys, Attorneys and Judges will be removed if those parties fail to enforce T.I.C.K. Complaints for violations by any party including Judges and attorneys will be maintained in the T.I.C.K database, available as public information for no charge.
8. Non custodial parents who do not appear for parenting time at the exchange will trigger a 50% increase in child support for that month, since the burden of support will be on the custodial parent.

“He will turn the hearts of the fathers to their children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers; or else I will come and strike the land with a curse.” ~ Malachi 4:6 (NIV)

IT IS TIME

Post by Stop Mental Child Abuse.

Washington D.C. Family Preservation Civil Rights Movement Rally To Be Biggest Yet

Washington D.C. Family Preservation Civil Rights Movement Rally To Be Biggest Yet

April 19, 2012 to April 22, 2012 promises to be bigger than past years for family rights activist, advocates, families, and leaders to come together in Washington, D.C.

From Leon Koziol.com ~ All the major work and sacrifice have already been made, everything is legal, no arrests are needed. There is a site permit, an open mike for public statements (west lawn, Senate Park at 2pm) and lobbying efforts throughout the weekend.

How much more carnage and Thomas Ball incidents will it take before victimized fathers, concerned mothers and their families become finally recognized as American citizens entitled to justice, due process and equal protection under the law? http://freekeene.com/2011/06/16/thomas-james-ball-self-immolated-in-protest-of-the-justice-system/

Get viral, make your own commitment today, visit us at Parenting Rights Institute and Leon Koziol.com (Dr. Leon Koziol, founder of the march).

Momentum is building. Help us contact actors like Alec Baldwin and our representatives in Congress to join us next month for a long overdue statement of reform! http://www.parentingrightsinstitute.com

So Meanwhile, indigent fathers continue to be incarcerated right here at home while our veterans are taking their own lives in response to oppressive domestic relations laws. If people of stature can make this kind of commitment to a foreign cause, why is it that victims of divorce and Family Court find excuses to avoid a similar stand? It’s not going to happen by relying upon your neighbor or an event sponsor to exercise basic rights guaranteed to each and every one of us under the American Constitution.

It’s time to act, to organize your friends, wives, moms, dads and supporters, and join us for the Founding Fathers March in Washington on April 20th, 2012
http://leonkozioljd.wordpress.com/2012/03/16/will-george-clooney-join-the-founding-fathers-march

The event is scheduled to hold an annual In The Best Interest Of The Child Congressional Education Panel, a Founding Fathers March, Capitol Tour and rally on the west lawn of the Capitol.

Concluding each night of this event is an annual purple light vigil. The vigil consist of a purple tree being lite, purple glow sticks, a bell toll for each child whose life has been lost with their names read a loud.

This event is sponsored in part by a Ohio based non-profit organization We The People Family Preservation, Inc.

The Founding Fathers March is facilitated by Leon Koziol J.D of New York. For those interested in participating Leon may be contacted at:
Email: admin@LeonKoziol.Com

Telephone: (315) 796-4000

For those wishing to speak on the west lawn of our Capitol please contact Robert James Patterson at this number (614) 987-5714

Accommodations for this event can be found at http://www.officialdcrallyfest.org

Also additional information for this event may be obtained from the office of We The People Family Preservation, Inc main office (740) 622- 0168. Ask for Ms. L. Wilson

Post by Children's Rights.

Psychologists acting as expert witnesses for the family courts not qualified ~ Channel 4 News

Post by Stop Mental Child Abuse.

Around 20 per cent of psychologists acting as expert witnesses for the family courts are not qualified, according to a Channel 4 News investigation broadcast tonight, writes producer Phil Carter.

http://bcove.me/ewstd4vv 

The findings are based on research published on Wednesday for the Family Justice Council (FJC). It was led by Professor Jane Ireland, a forensic psychologist at the University of Central Lancashire.

Prof Ireland and her team were given unprecedented access to psychologists' expert witness reports from three undisclosed courts across England by the FJC, an arm's length body of the Ministry of Justice.

Experts play a critical role in family court cases: research suggests that at least one expert is used in 90 per cent of public law children's proceedings and many cases involve three or more experts.

The majority of these experts are psychiatrists and psychologists, employed to provide expert opinion on a range of matters in these cases, typically including questions as to whether parents have the ability to care for their children, display personality disorders or other psychological issues and whether any such diagnoses are treatable within a timescale suitable for the children involved.

Channel 4 News spoke to families across the country involved in court proceedings and heard time and again concerns about the experts used by the courts to determine whether children are at risk and should be removed from their birth parents.

Secrecy

But because of the secrecy of the family courts - designed to protect the identity of the children at the heart of proceedings - the experts used have largely been beyond scrutiny.

This research is the first time these concerns have been to some degree independently substantiated. The research found serious concerns across a range of issues beyond the startling finding that around a fifth of so-called psychologist expert witnesses are not qualified.

The assessments of the expert reports found that some 20 per cent of the psychologists were working beyond their area of knowledge; around a third had no experience of mental health assessments; and some 90 per cent of experts were not in current practice.

The net result was that the research concluded that around 65 per cent of expert reports in the study were of either 'poor' or 'very poor' quality.

Professor Ireland told Channel 4 News: "I think we were very concerned and perturbed by some of the reports that we read, not just in terms of qualification but also the quality of the reports that we read ..."

'Draconian'

Nigel Priestley, a lawyer closely involved in family proceedings, told Channel 4 News of the gravity of the research's findings. "After the death penalty the most draconian act that the state can do is remove a family's child," he said. "What is at stake for many carers is the loss of their children and on the basis of a report which might or indeed might not be questionable."

He regularly deals with cases where parents feel the expert evidence is flawed. But it is the scale of the problem revealed by the new research which has surprised him.

He said: "If the statistics are that 20 per cent are unqualified that is not just a mess, that is staggering, wrong ... this is not just about making money, this is about removing children very often or, more importantly, protecting children ..."

Disturbing

One of the more surprising findings of the research was that some psychologists were recorded as assessing parents without ever meeting or seeing them.

Prof Ireland told Channel 4 News: "You should never be in a position where you diagnose somebody, or make judgements on them, if you haven't seen them. It goes completely against code of conduct and ethics and it is impossible. You can’t do a paper assessment on a human being, you have to meet that person, understand their interactions, build a rapport and then take your judgement on the basis of that."

But Channel 4 News has learnt that this is not just a problem confined to psychologists. One mother who spoke on condition of anonymity recently left England after a private law family court case over custody of her children.

This case involved some eight expert witnesses. One, a psychiatrist, provided the court with an assessment of a potential change of residence for the children without meeting the mother or the children. The mother described the family court system and the repeated use of experts as barbaric.

The day after the psychiatrist completed the report on the mother he was suspended by the GMC for a separate offence. Yet, despite the concerns over assessing people without ever actually seeing them, it seems that courts are willing to accept such reports.

The research is the first of its kind and clearly has limitations, which the report itself acknowledges. The sample size was relatively small at 126 reports and the methodology to objectively quantify quality is likely to need further refinement.

Concern

But the range and scale of the problems identified suggest that this is unlikely to be explained solely by methodological shortcomings.

Intriguingly, the research also suggests that the problems may extend well beyond psychologists. Indeed, in the course of the investigation, Channel 4 News uncovered serious areas of concern with both psychiatrists and paediatricians as well as play therapists and others providing expert services to the family courts.

"I think the results from the research are enough to suggest that we do need an urgent review across the range of expert witnesses that the courts are employing," said Professor Ireland.

"After the death penalty the most draconian act that the state can do is remove a family's child." ~ Nigel Priestly, Lawyer

"I think the results from the research are enough to suggest that we do need an urgent review across the range of expert witnesses that the courts are employing." ~ Prof Jane Ireland, University of Central Lancashire

More from the UK:

"LETS HEAR IT FOR THE CHILD; RESTORING THE AUTHORITY OF THE FAMILY COURT, BLUE SKIES AND SACRED COWS"
MR JUSTICE COLERIDGE  - ASSOCIATION OF LAWYERS FOR CHILDREN: 21^{ST ANNUAL CONFERENCE, SOUTHAMPTO}

Top judge says legal aid in family cases may disappear ~
Update The president of the family courts, Sir Nicholas Wall, has given a wide-ranging speech to Families Needs Fathers. In it he outlined his own vision for change and also sounded a warning that legal aid in family cases may soon be abolished.
Speech: http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Speeches/pfd-speech-families-need-fathers-19092010.pdf

Mr Justice Coleridge: family judges should express themselves forcefully and publicly ~
Family law judges have been unusually vocal recently in sharing their ideas for family justice reform. The latest to put his case is the High Court judge Mr Justice Coleridge, in a speech entitled Lets hear it for the Child; Restoring the Authority of the Family Court, Blue Skies and Sacred Cows given at the Association of Lawyers for Children’s 21st Annual Conference last week.
The traditional role of judges is to speak out in court and stay silent outside of it. But the relatively new head of the family courts, Sir Nicolas Wall, has set a strong example of judicial outspokenness, and it appears that the other judges are following suit in the face of large cuts to the family justice budget. That being said, Mr Justice Coleridge has been a vocal advocate for family justice reform for a number of years.
Speech: http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Speeches/speech-coleridge-j-assoc-lawyers-for-children.pdf

A MUST SEE~
He really needs his father video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmerFuzRNZ4
A short scene with Will Smith from the Fresh Prince of Bel-Air (Episode 424).
In the story Will Smith lives with his uncle and his family. In this episode his (biogical) father comes to visit after 14 years. They deside to go on a trip together for the summer but his father sneaks back before the trip to tell his brother (Will's uncle) that Will cannot go...then this comes.
It's one of the best display of acting I've ever seen and it really moved me.

Rocket Surgery? Designating Court Experts. »

Expert witnesses are routinely used in Divorce cases. Expert testimony covers a wide gamut of topics, including; Financial, such as appraisals or accounting, Counseling, regarding fault grounds o.....

Post by Children's Rights.