Mom testified (with her lawyer from Greenberg, whatever, whatever law firm) to Honorable Judge Valarie Manno-Schurr, on November 4th, 2014, that Zoraya was scared of her Dad.
Does this look like a little girl that is scared of her Dad??
This matter is well documented and fills half of a banker’s box. There is evidence to prove police misconduct. The Father suffered and continues to suffer because of the trauma of this family court case.
The Father has known the Mother since 1990 when they started dating and there has NEVER been any incident of domestic violence. The Father filed a paternity suit for his Father’s rights to his daughter and the Mother was advised by her attorney to make the false allegations to the police to gain an upper hand in the family court case.
We can provide all the documents, police reports, and case numbers if your interested in pursuing this case. The Father also contacted State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundel on 3 occasions only to be referred back to the MDPD. The Father corresponded directly with the now retired Director of the MDPD Mr. Loftus who referred him to his subordinates, Major Shimminger and Major Herrera. The Father still battles these false allegations until today.
Children's Rights and Stand Up For Zoraya
Children's Rights:
CONTACT DENIAL IS CHILD ABUSE
All Donations will go directly and safely through GoFundMe to this single father and his 8 year old daughter. This will help pay for costs he has incurred fighting this battle while the courts place unrealistic and illegal restrictions on his life. In this legal system, the family courts in Miami-Dade County, Fla. Florida are biased and corrupt, It require him to obtain and pay costs to an attorney just to defend himself and more importantly protect his daughter from the Family court ; who are refusing to acknowledge the continued damaging psychological and emotional effects to the child. Thank you for your time reading this. Prayers are always welcomed.
Children's Rights:
CONTACT DENIAL IS CHILD ABUSE
CONTACT DENIAL IS CHILD ABUSE
All Donations will go directly and safely through GoFundMe to this single father and his 8 year old daughter. This will help pay for costs he has incurred fighting this battle while the courts place unrealistic and illegal restrictions on his life. In this legal system, the family courts in Miami-Dade County, Fla. Florida are biased and corrupt, It require him to obtain and pay costs to an attorney just to defend himself and more importantly protect his daughter from the Family court ; who are refusing to acknowledge the continued damaging psychological and emotional effects to the child. Thank you for your time reading this. Prayers are always welcomed.
On November 5th, 2013 Honorable Judge Manno-Schurr advised the Father in a hearing at the Family Courthouse of Miami-Dade County, Florida that 4 calls from "the police" were received by her office (Chambers) alleging that he was trying to remove his daughter from the school.
ONCE AGAIN the Mother has made "false police reports' violating Florida Statutes 741 and 837.
These allegations were proven false when Honorable Judge Manno-Schurr called and spoke (from the courtroom) with Principal Sandra Shipment who said that the Father NEVER tried and or even asked to remove his daughter from the School.
He just went there to visit her teacher and or counselor to review his daughter's records school registration.
The Father's information was omitted from the Broward County Public School Registration.
The counselor suggested to visit his daughter in the after school care program area and dad visited his daughter "supervised" in keeping with the "spirit" of the public policy (as stated in Chapter 61 of the Florida Statutes) of the State of Florida.
Everything you wished you didn't need to know about
The counselor suggested to visit his daughter in the after school care program area and dad visited his daughter "supervised" in keeping with the "spirit" of the public policy (as stated in Chapter 61 of the Florida Statutes) of the State of Florida.
Everything you wished you didn't need to know about
In 10 minutes, more or less.
Parental Alienation Syndrome and Hostile Aggressive Parenting
Also Info About School Records Below:
Federal Regulations
What The Regulations Mean To YouQuestions & AnswersSample Letter To Request School Records
Legal Abuse Syndrome (LAS), “A condition that develops in individuals assaulted by ethical violations, legal abuses, betrayals, and fraud” and that’s exacerbated by “abuse…
Corruption a Persistent Pursuit for Justice: Corrupt Lawyers and the Absurd Legal Decisions in the Fraternal Order of Matrimonial Law at Lawson E. Thomas Courthouse.Miami
Legal Abuse Syndrome (LAS), is a condition proposed by marriage andfamily therapist Karin P. Huffer “that develops in individuals assaulted by ethical violations, legal abuses, betrayals, and fraud” and that’s exacerbated by “abuse of power and authority and a profound lack of accountability in our courts.”
Pembroke Lakes Elementary's Principal
 |
It is the public policy of Florida to assure each minor child frequent and continuing contact with both parents after the parents have separated or divorced, and to encourage parents to share the rights and responsibilities of child rearing. The father is given the same consideration as the mother in determining time-sharing regardless of their child’s age, sex, or other factors.
 |
"Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan "press on" has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race." ~ Calvin Coolidge - 30th President of United States of America (1872 - 1933)
Cop Arrests Dad For Trying to Pick Kids Up From School
"Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan "press on" has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race." ~ Calvin Coolidge - 30th President of United States of America (1872 - 1933)
Cop Arrests Dad For Trying to Pick Kids Up From School
Is The Playing Field Level For Men In The Family Court System?
Why Do Moms Have All The Power In Family Court?
Stop Emotional Child Abuse
The Equal Parent Presumption: Social Justice in the Legal Determination of Parenting After Divorce
"Most state laws require that courts treat mothers and fathers equally when it comes to matters of child custody. When I presided as a judge in Manhattan family court, that was the law, and that's how I treated each custody case. Families, especially children, suffer when this law is not followed. Unfortunately, I've seen this happen all too often. What has been your experience with this difficult subject? I look forward to your stories." ~ Judge Judy
"Most state laws require that courts treat mothers and fathers equally when it comes to matters of child custody. When I presided as a judge in Manhattan family court, that was the law, and that's how I treated each custody case. Families, especially children, suffer when this law is not followed. Unfortunately, I've seen this happen all too often. What has been your experience with this difficult subject? I look forward to your stories." ~ Judge Judy
The father's rights movement isn't an anti-mom or anti-woman movement; it's an anti-unfairness movement. It just so happens that moms have most of the power in the family court system in America.
Family Court Demonstration in Miami Florida www.slideshare.net PLEASE LET US KNOW WHAT DATES WOULD BE BEST FOR ALL TO PARTICIPATE. THANK YOU
6 YEARS (12-4-2008)- 5 FAMILY COURT JUDGES AND A MAGISTRATE - OVER 500 DOCKET ENTRIES IN 08-29595(FC17) 11TH JUD CIR-FL
NO EVIDENCE PRESENTED (EVER) TO JUDGES THAT DAD IS UNFIT ~ NO EVIDENCE EVER PRESENTED THAT DAD HAS BEEN OR IS A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER ~ HOWEVER, EVIDENCE WAS PRESENTED TO JUDGES THAT DAD'S OTHER CHILD FROM HIS 2004 DIVORCE (BROWARD COUNTY) HAS/IS IN HIS CUSTODY 50% OF THE TIME SINCE ISSUANCE OF FINAL JUDGMENT
DAD PROVEN, WITHOUT ANY DOUBT, THAT HE IS A FIT, CAPABLE, INVOLVED, AND LOVING PARENT ~ DAD HAS PROVEN TO BE EXCEPTIONAL PARENT RAISING SON SINCE BIRTH. ~ SON'S MOTHER (DAD'S EX-WIFE) HAS WRITTEN AND SENT PRESIDING FAMILY COURT JUDGES NOTARIZED REFERENCE LETTERS OF SUPPORT FOR DAD AND WILLINGNESS TO TESTIFY TO SAME
THIS DETERMINED DAD IS STABLE, SECURE, EDUCATED, EMPLOYED, AND PAYING CHILD SUPPORT FOR BOTH (SON AND DAUGHTER) WITHOUT ANY INCONSISTENCY
zxzxzx
Cop Arrests Dad For Trying to Pick Kids Up From School
The Broward County Public Schools (BCPS) State Legislative Program, and to access additional legislative resources, please visit:
Also, you can review and follow bills that may be of interest to you during this session. Please visit the links to the Florida Senate and House, which are listed below:
Dear Custody Judge:
I am writing this letter in support of a joint legal custody arrangement with physical custody of 50-50 whenever feasible and practical. Of course, this recommendation assumes that there is no child protective supervision of one of the parents or that a parent has been evaluated to be socially deviant or mentally impaired to the degree that parenting will be compromised.
I am making this recommendation based upon my 43 years of professional experience working with families and children, my initial 24 years as a social worker and then as an administrator in New York's foster care system and subsequently for 19 years as a family therapist currently in private practice. In my professional career, I have worked with several thousand children who had been placed in foster care and, in my practice as a family therapist, with more than 500 children who have experienced their parent’s high conflict divorce.
Based on my experiences with these populations, I have arrived at the conclusion that both parents must remain substantially and meaningfully involved with their child for the child to obtain optimal development and functioning and likely to escape serious mental health and behavioral symptoms. This conclusion has been validated by extensive research, including but not limited to, the research that was offered in support of Arizona's recently enacted shared parenting law. Additionally, I have further determined that when the residential parent marginalizes the nonresidential parent with decreased parenting time, it is frequently an alienating maneuver----the goal being to eradicate the nonresidential parent from the child's life. Any effort, therefore, by the residential parent to object to equal, or at least substantial, parenting time for the other parent should at least raise a question as to the residential parent’s recognition of the importance of the other parent to the child.
In further support of my shared parenting recommendation, let me state emphatically that the customary visitation arrangement for the nonresidential parent to have every other weekend and one night during the week in parenting time garners absolutely no evidence-based or anecdotal support and no scientific research for serving the best interests of the child. It is unclear how this customary arrangement has gained such wide acceptance other than to hypothesize that it developed from the contention that children need stability. I would question, however, that stability with one’s bed would trump the stability of the relationship with the nonresidential parent. After all, the child indeed had had a relationship with this parent on daily basis prior to the parents’ separation. It is therefore logical to conclude that the child would be harmed by only marginal participation of and input from this parent. Furthermore, children do not perceive their parents’ separation as an issue confined to the marital relationship. They do perceive it, more pertinently, as abandonment of them by their nonresidential parent. The child’s object constancy is consequently undermined thereby creating issues with trust. Moreover, the customary visitation/parenting arrangement conveys to children that the residential parent is more vital and important to them, possesses more authority, and is probably entitled to garner more respect. The self-esteem of the child of the same gender as the nonresidential parent will likely be diminished as a result. And the child of the same gender as the residential parent will likely develop a sense of superiority over the other gender. In fact, it has been my experience that residential parents become empowered by the imbalance in time with their children in their favor because this justifies their sense of entitlement to make unilateral decisions regarding their children's education, medical care, and social activities. As a family therapist who was trained by the world-renowned and highly respected child psychiatrist, Salvador Minuchin, I have accepted his determination that the best outcome for children usually results from decisions made with equal input by each parent.
Having thus expressed these concerns for the marginalization of the nonresidential parent, what parenting arrangement does this therapist instead recommend? I will first offer the opinions of my professional mental health colleagues whom I had interviewed for my book, The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Family Therapy and Collaborative Systems Approach to Amelioration.
Raymond Havlicek, PhD., is one of these esteemed experts. He is a forensic and clinical psychologist who is a Diplomat of the American Board of Professional Psychology and a Fellow at the American Academy of Clinical Psychology. He is a founding member of the Parent Coordinator Association of New York. Dr. Havlicek has completed hundreds of child custody evaluations for Supreme and Family Courts throughout New York State. He is currently developing an educational program for upstate New York judges concerning issues of child custody and parental alienation. In response to my request for his opinion regarding the importance of both parents providing meaningful input and involvement in the child's life, he asserted, “The trust that children place in both parents is to their mental health what the foundation is to a building. If you undermine that trust, there is no stability.”
Amy Baker holds a Ph.D. in developmental psychology with a specialization in early social and emotional development. She is the Director of Research at the Vincent J. Fontana Center for Child Protection at the New York Foundling. Dr. Baker maintained in her interview for my book that children really want and need a meaningful relationship with both parents. In her book, Adult Children of Parental Alienation Syndrome, she summarized her research on the devastating effects to children when a parent is eradicated from their lives resulting from high-conflict divorce. Briefly summarized for purposes of this letter, Dr. Baker's research concluded that these children suffer from serious bouts with depression, problems with low self-esteem, substance abuse, issues with trust and intimacy, and poor interpersonal relationships----all in much higher rates than the general population.
Barbara Burkhard, Ph.D., co-founded Child and Family Psychological Services, P.C., Smithtown, New York, with Jane Albertson-Kelly, Ph.D. This agency provides research-informed therapy for children and families. It has a contract with Suffolk County Department of Social Services to provide therapeutic child/parent visits and evaluations of parents who have been accused of abuse and neglect. They also receive referrals from Suffolk County Supreme and Family Courts for custody evaluations, therapeutic visitation, reunification therapy, and forensic mental health evaluations and risk assessments. Both Dr. Burkhard and Dr. Kelly affirmed, “Children generally benefit from a relationship with each parent with respect to the attainment of healthy long-term relationships and for their optimal social, psychological, and cognitive development.”
As a family therapist, I could not agree more with these respected doctors regarding the importance of both parents playing an active role in their children's lives. All the recent research indicates that children who have a parent either absent from their lives or only marginally involved develop very poor outcomes. And I suggest referring to the book, Fatherneed, by child psychiatrist, Kyle Pruitt, in which he summarizes the alarming research by Yale University when a father is only minimally involved in his children's lives or were completely eradicated from his children's lives. Pruitt conveys that when fathers are absent, children have a significantly high vulnerability to acting out behaviors, dropping out of school, suicidal ideation and other serious mental disorders, engaging in sexually inappropriate activities, and other serious issues. Other research indicates the following alarming statistics to children resulting from father-deprivation: 72% of all teenage murders, 60% of rapists, 70% of kids incarcerated, twice as likely to quit school, 11 times more likely to be violent, 3 our of 4 suicides, 80% of adolescents in psychiatric hospitals, 90% of runaways. The conclusion is that “Father-deprivation is a more reliable predictor of criminal activity than race, environment or poverty.” (National Fatherhood Initiative, US Bureau of Census, FBI)
I am unequivocal----as are my colleagues who specialize in children of high-conflict divorce----that the same findings would apply to the eradication or minimization of a mother from a child’s life. We are already beginning to develop this research about mothers now that more fathers are receiving residential custody.
And the research that supported Arizona’s recently enacted shared parenting law validates that children of divorce have the best outcomes when there is shared parenting, with physical custody as close as possible to 50/50. This research further revealed that children of divorce would have expressed their desire for equal time with their nonresidential parent had they felt free to express their feelings and opinions. (Finley; McIntosh & Chisholm; Tippins & Wittmann; Michael Lamb; Braver, Fabricus & Ellman; Fabricus & Luecken; Schwartz & Finley; Fabricus & Hall; Finley & Schwartz.)
The child of a high-conflict divorce is like a rope in a tug of war between her/his parents. And just like the rope, the child will also unravel. Children of high-conflict divorce feel a loyalty to the residential parent due to their utter dependency on that parent. Taking their cue from their residential parent, who is hostile to their other parent, these children will not likely express their instinctual yearning and need for a relationship with their nonresidential parent. Asking these children to decide about their relationship with their nonresidential parent exacerbates this impossible and detrimental situation and leaves them with no good options: it is a double-bind situation in which they cannot have both parents because they know that seeking a relationship with their nonresidential parent will be perceived as an act of betrayal by their residential parent. When this dynamic had been first observed by the child psychiatrists who later founded the family therapy movement, they documented it on the psychiatric ward when observing their psychotic child patients during family visits. In the extreme situation, this family dynamic, labeled by these psychiatrists as the “pathological triangle,” as per Murray Bowen, does indeed lead to serious mental disorders in the child. I have seen the serious detrimental effects to children in my own practice as a result of the triangulation. Unfortunately, due to the influences that technology has now afforded the younger population, I am seeing socio-pathology instead of psychosis in this population. We have an obligation to help these children by extricating them from having to chose and express their desire for meaningful time with their nonresidential parent.
In my professional opinion, the child of high-conflict divorce needs to be extricated from this triangulation, which is exacerbated by the burden to decide about what relationship to have or not with the nonresidential parent. The professionals who intervene in child custody and visitation must make these decisions for them in favor of shared parenting and substantial parenting time with the nonresidential parent as close as practical to 50/50 physical custody. This is the responsibility with which we are charged as professionals who intervene in child custody and visitation.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda Gottlieb, LMFT, LCSW-r
End Parental Alienation - Denial of reasonable access to your own kids is child abuse Stand Up For Zoraya Stop Emotional Child Abuse
The Purple Keyboard & World4FamilyJustice Reform : Cyber Protest Campaign in 2016! -- Come Together America and Vote4Justice -- Protest Florida Child Support System - Support or Extortion? --www.facebook.com/events/1549456922005774 -- Invite 500 contacts: Stop legalized child trafficking nationwide day -- Please invite 500 contacts in Miami-Dade -- Children's Rights Childrens Rights Florida Child Protection Reform Worldwide Children's Rights 2017 : International Year of Co-parenting Children's Rights American Fathers Liberation Army American Fathers Liberation Army (AFLA) American Fathers Liberation Army
JUDGES MUST DO MORE TO PROTECT FATHER-CHILD RELATIONSHIPS
by Shawna Thompson
Over the past few decades, research has shown the importance of fathers to their children’s well-being. These studies show children in father-absent environments are almost four times more likely to live in poverty, are more likely to use drugs and alcohol, have significantly lower educational attainment, and are more likely to be sexually active.
...
Continue Reading
The father's rights movement isn't an anti-mom or anti-woman movement; it's an anti-unfairness movement. It just so happens that moms have most of the power in the family court system in America.
Family Court Demonstration in Miami Florida www.slideshare.net PLEASE LET US KNOW WHAT DATES WOULD BE BEST FOR ALL TO PARTICIPATE. THANK YOU
6 YEARS (12-4-2008)- 5 FAMILY COURT JUDGES AND A MAGISTRATE - OVER 500 DOCKET ENTRIES IN 08-29595(FC17) 11TH JUD CIR-FL
NO EVIDENCE PRESENTED (EVER) TO JUDGES THAT DAD IS UNFIT ~ NO EVIDENCE EVER PRESENTED THAT DAD HAS BEEN OR IS A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER ~ HOWEVER, EVIDENCE WAS PRESENTED TO JUDGES THAT DAD'S OTHER CHILD FROM HIS 2004 DIVORCE (BROWARD COUNTY) HAS/IS IN HIS CUSTODY 50% OF THE TIME SINCE ISSUANCE OF FINAL JUDGMENT
DAD PROVEN, WITHOUT ANY DOUBT, THAT HE IS A FIT, CAPABLE, INVOLVED, AND LOVING PARENT ~ DAD HAS PROVEN TO BE EXCEPTIONAL PARENT RAISING SON SINCE BIRTH. ~ SON'S MOTHER (DAD'S EX-WIFE) HAS WRITTEN AND SENT PRESIDING FAMILY COURT JUDGES NOTARIZED REFERENCE LETTERS OF SUPPORT FOR DAD AND WILLINGNESS TO TESTIFY TO SAME
THIS DETERMINED DAD IS STABLE, SECURE, EDUCATED, EMPLOYED, AND PAYING CHILD SUPPORT FOR BOTH (SON AND DAUGHTER) WITHOUT ANY INCONSISTENCY
zxzxzx
Cop Arrests Dad For Trying to Pick Kids Up From SchoolThe Broward County Public Schools (BCPS) State Legislative Program, and to access additional legislative resources, please visit:Also, you can review and follow bills that may be of interest to you during this session. Please visit the links to the Florida Senate and House, which are listed below:
Dear Custody Judge:
I am writing this letter in support of a joint legal custody arrangement with physical custody of 50-50 whenever feasible and practical. Of course, this recommendation assumes that there is no child protective supervision of one of the parents or that a parent has been evaluated to be socially deviant or mentally impaired to the degree that parenting will be compromised.
I am making this recommendation based upon my 43 years of professional experience working with families and children, my initial 24 years as a social worker and then as an administrator in New York's foster care system and subsequently for 19 years as a family therapist currently in private practice. In my professional career, I have worked with several thousand children who had been placed in foster care and, in my practice as a family therapist, with more than 500 children who have experienced their parent’s high conflict divorce.
Based on my experiences with these populations, I have arrived at the conclusion that both parents must remain substantially and meaningfully involved with their child for the child to obtain optimal development and functioning and likely to escape serious mental health and behavioral symptoms. This conclusion has been validated by extensive research, including but not limited to, the research that was offered in support of Arizona's recently enacted shared parenting law. Additionally, I have further determined that when the residential parent marginalizes the nonresidential parent with decreased parenting time, it is frequently an alienating maneuver----the goal being to eradicate the nonresidential parent from the child's life. Any effort, therefore, by the residential parent to object to equal, or at least substantial, parenting time for the other parent should at least raise a question as to the residential parent’s recognition of the importance of the other parent to the child.
In further support of my shared parenting recommendation, let me state emphatically that the customary visitation arrangement for the nonresidential parent to have every other weekend and one night during the week in parenting time garners absolutely no evidence-based or anecdotal support and no scientific research for serving the best interests of the child. It is unclear how this customary arrangement has gained such wide acceptance other than to hypothesize that it developed from the contention that children need stability. I would question, however, that stability with one’s bed would trump the stability of the relationship with the nonresidential parent. After all, the child indeed had had a relationship with this parent on daily basis prior to the parents’ separation. It is therefore logical to conclude that the child would be harmed by only marginal participation of and input from this parent. Furthermore, children do not perceive their parents’ separation as an issue confined to the marital relationship. They do perceive it, more pertinently, as abandonment of them by their nonresidential parent. The child’s object constancy is consequently undermined thereby creating issues with trust. Moreover, the customary visitation/parenting arrangement conveys to children that the residential parent is more vital and important to them, possesses more authority, and is probably entitled to garner more respect. The self-esteem of the child of the same gender as the nonresidential parent will likely be diminished as a result. And the child of the same gender as the residential parent will likely develop a sense of superiority over the other gender. In fact, it has been my experience that residential parents become empowered by the imbalance in time with their children in their favor because this justifies their sense of entitlement to make unilateral decisions regarding their children's education, medical care, and social activities. As a family therapist who was trained by the world-renowned and highly respected child psychiatrist, Salvador Minuchin, I have accepted his determination that the best outcome for children usually results from decisions made with equal input by each parent.
Having thus expressed these concerns for the marginalization of the nonresidential parent, what parenting arrangement does this therapist instead recommend? I will first offer the opinions of my professional mental health colleagues whom I had interviewed for my book, The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Family Therapy and Collaborative Systems Approach to Amelioration.
Raymond Havlicek, PhD., is one of these esteemed experts. He is a forensic and clinical psychologist who is a Diplomat of the American Board of Professional Psychology and a Fellow at the American Academy of Clinical Psychology. He is a founding member of the Parent Coordinator Association of New York. Dr. Havlicek has completed hundreds of child custody evaluations for Supreme and Family Courts throughout New York State. He is currently developing an educational program for upstate New York judges concerning issues of child custody and parental alienation. In response to my request for his opinion regarding the importance of both parents providing meaningful input and involvement in the child's life, he asserted, “The trust that children place in both parents is to their mental health what the foundation is to a building. If you undermine that trust, there is no stability.”
Amy Baker holds a Ph.D. in developmental psychology with a specialization in early social and emotional development. She is the Director of Research at the Vincent J. Fontana Center for Child Protection at the New York Foundling. Dr. Baker maintained in her interview for my book that children really want and need a meaningful relationship with both parents. In her book, Adult Children of Parental Alienation Syndrome, she summarized her research on the devastating effects to children when a parent is eradicated from their lives resulting from high-conflict divorce. Briefly summarized for purposes of this letter, Dr. Baker's research concluded that these children suffer from serious bouts with depression, problems with low self-esteem, substance abuse, issues with trust and intimacy, and poor interpersonal relationships----all in much higher rates than the general population.
Barbara Burkhard, Ph.D., co-founded Child and Family Psychological Services, P.C., Smithtown, New York, with Jane Albertson-Kelly, Ph.D. This agency provides research-informed therapy for children and families. It has a contract with Suffolk County Department of Social Services to provide therapeutic child/parent visits and evaluations of parents who have been accused of abuse and neglect. They also receive referrals from Suffolk County Supreme and Family Courts for custody evaluations, therapeutic visitation, reunification therapy, and forensic mental health evaluations and risk assessments. Both Dr. Burkhard and Dr. Kelly affirmed, “Children generally benefit from a relationship with each parent with respect to the attainment of healthy long-term relationships and for their optimal social, psychological, and cognitive development.”
As a family therapist, I could not agree more with these respected doctors regarding the importance of both parents playing an active role in their children's lives. All the recent research indicates that children who have a parent either absent from their lives or only marginally involved develop very poor outcomes. And I suggest referring to the book, Fatherneed, by child psychiatrist, Kyle Pruitt, in which he summarizes the alarming research by Yale University when a father is only minimally involved in his children's lives or were completely eradicated from his children's lives. Pruitt conveys that when fathers are absent, children have a significantly high vulnerability to acting out behaviors, dropping out of school, suicidal ideation and other serious mental disorders, engaging in sexually inappropriate activities, and other serious issues. Other research indicates the following alarming statistics to children resulting from father-deprivation: 72% of all teenage murders, 60% of rapists, 70% of kids incarcerated, twice as likely to quit school, 11 times more likely to be violent, 3 our of 4 suicides, 80% of adolescents in psychiatric hospitals, 90% of runaways. The conclusion is that “Father-deprivation is a more reliable predictor of criminal activity than race, environment or poverty.” (National Fatherhood Initiative, US Bureau of Census, FBI)
I am unequivocal----as are my colleagues who specialize in children of high-conflict divorce----that the same findings would apply to the eradication or minimization of a mother from a child’s life. We are already beginning to develop this research about mothers now that more fathers are receiving residential custody.
And the research that supported Arizona’s recently enacted shared parenting law validates that children of divorce have the best outcomes when there is shared parenting, with physical custody as close as possible to 50/50. This research further revealed that children of divorce would have expressed their desire for equal time with their nonresidential parent had they felt free to express their feelings and opinions. (Finley; McIntosh & Chisholm; Tippins & Wittmann; Michael Lamb; Braver, Fabricus & Ellman; Fabricus & Luecken; Schwartz & Finley; Fabricus & Hall; Finley & Schwartz.)
The child of a high-conflict divorce is like a rope in a tug of war between her/his parents. And just like the rope, the child will also unravel. Children of high-conflict divorce feel a loyalty to the residential parent due to their utter dependency on that parent. Taking their cue from their residential parent, who is hostile to their other parent, these children will not likely express their instinctual yearning and need for a relationship with their nonresidential parent. Asking these children to decide about their relationship with their nonresidential parent exacerbates this impossible and detrimental situation and leaves them with no good options: it is a double-bind situation in which they cannot have both parents because they know that seeking a relationship with their nonresidential parent will be perceived as an act of betrayal by their residential parent. When this dynamic had been first observed by the child psychiatrists who later founded the family therapy movement, they documented it on the psychiatric ward when observing their psychotic child patients during family visits. In the extreme situation, this family dynamic, labeled by these psychiatrists as the “pathological triangle,” as per Murray Bowen, does indeed lead to serious mental disorders in the child. I have seen the serious detrimental effects to children in my own practice as a result of the triangulation. Unfortunately, due to the influences that technology has now afforded the younger population, I am seeing socio-pathology instead of psychosis in this population. We have an obligation to help these children by extricating them from having to chose and express their desire for meaningful time with their nonresidential parent.
In my professional opinion, the child of high-conflict divorce needs to be extricated from this triangulation, which is exacerbated by the burden to decide about what relationship to have or not with the nonresidential parent. The professionals who intervene in child custody and visitation must make these decisions for them in favor of shared parenting and substantial parenting time with the nonresidential parent as close as practical to 50/50 physical custody. This is the responsibility with which we are charged as professionals who intervene in child custody and visitation.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda Gottlieb, LMFT, LCSW-r
End Parental Alienation - Denial of reasonable access to your own kids is child abuse Stand Up For Zoraya Stop Emotional Child Abuse
The Purple Keyboard & World4FamilyJustice Reform : Cyber Protest Campaign in 2016! -- Come Together America and Vote4Justice -- Protest Florida Child Support System - Support or Extortion? --www.facebook.com/events/1549456922005774 -- Invite 500 contacts: Stop legalized child trafficking nationwide day -- Please invite 500 contacts in Miami-Dade -- Children's Rights Childrens Rights Florida Child Protection Reform Worldwide Children's Rights 2017 : International Year of Co-parenting Children's Rights American Fathers Liberation Army American Fathers Liberation Army (AFLA) American Fathers Liberation Army
| |
JUDGES MUST DO MORE TO PROTECT FATHER-CHILD RELATIONSHIPS
by Shawna Thompson
Over the past few decades, research has shown the importance of fathers to their children’s well-being. These studies show children in father-absent environments are almost four times more likely to live in poverty, are more likely to use drugs and alcohol, have significantly lower educational attainment, and are more likely to be sexually active.
...
Continue Reading |
“Relationship Estrangement and Interference is a form of Domestic Violence using Psychological abuse.”
ReplyDelete~ Joan Kloth-Zanard of PAS Intervention.
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.
Parental collaboration almost always facilitates the child’s optimal development and achieves the desired results. The post-divorce situation most assuredly requires the same parental collaboration so that the child continues to benefit from the strengths that had been provided by the parent who becomes the nonresidential parent.
DeleteRegrettably, however, this collaboration is undermined by our adversarial approach to the resolution of child custody.
Custody and Visitation Interference: Alternative Remedies
DeleteAAML Journal, Winter 1994, Volume 12, Number 2, p 271-284, publication of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, By Joy M. Feinberg and Lori S. Loeb
The potential for psychological and physical damage to children of divorce and the parental relationship looms as a potential harbinger of doom over every divorce case. This specter becomes reality when one parent interferes with the rights of custody or visitation of the other parent by preventing the child from visiting the other parent, or by kidnapping or secreting the child from the parent who has the right to custody or visitation. This article will discuss the visitation and custody interferences that occur during divorce and alert practitioners and judges to the psychological damage to the children. This article will review the alternative remedies available to circumvent custody and visitation interference and address the problems associated with enforcing these remedies. This examination will reveal that the available remedies lose effectiveness proportionate to the severity of the interference with custody and visitation rights. There are numerous types of visitation and custody interferences that courts must address: modest abuses related to timeliness and access for telephone contact and visitation; issues of child protection when allegations of physical and sexual abuse occur, such as eliminating or limiting contact with the other parent; and in the most severe cases, loss of a relationship due to actions characterized as kidnapping. In addition to these described interferences, more subtle actions occur which create problems. Parents involved in serious custody and visitation disputes frequently engage in programming and brainwashing techniques directed at the child to the detriment of the other parent, thereby interfering subtly or overtly with the parent/child relationship.
This behavior is frequently referred to as the Parental Alienation Syndrome. Although such behavior is a common occurrence, what is clear is that a dilemma exists in cases involving brainwashing: risk to the child when a change of custody is imposed for parental alienation syndrome or programming cases may not be in the best interest of the child; yet the court may be powerless to stop the offending contact from occurring.
Programming behaviors range from the simple to the complex. They often begin with ignoring any discussion of the other parent; speaking negatively about the parent in front of the child; criticizing or attacking the parent's lifestyle or character; not informing the other parent of dates for the child's school activities, plays, conferences and sporting events; ignoring the other parent in front of the child; destroying or desecrating photographs of the other parent or refusing to allow the child to have a photograph of the parent in his/her room; speaking to the child about issues that should be first discussed with the other parent; and using the child as a messenger. More severe techniques include attempting to get the child to side with one parent against the other; instilling in the child the belief that the other parent does not genuinely care for the child; and communicating to the child he or she will suffer rejection or loss of love from a parent if the child expresses love or the desire to be with the other parent. The child, either implicitly or explicitly, understands that to be loved by one parent the child must turn against the other parent.
http://www.canadiancrc.com/Parental_Alienation_Syndrome_Canada/Custody_Visitation_Interference-Alternative%20Remedies_AAML_Journal_1994.aspx#FN73
Hey Bio-Mom,
DeleteI see you have found our little club here and you've decided to troll around for a bit. I first would like to say "welcome" on behalf of the men and women who suffer daily inside and outside these pages. We are glad you are here.
Feel free to take your time and peruse the stories of men and women who have lost everything. Take in the agony and the pain, read the horror stories of men who havn't seen their children in 6 weeks, 6 months or 6 years. You will notice that all the stories share a familiar tone. The pain is real. The disbelief is palpable. The constant barrage of men ready to give up is unfortunately true. They may give up and stop fighting vindictive exes for their children and just move on, only to be later called a deadbeat loser from the same woman that deprived him of his children. They may give up and eat a bullet, jump from a bridge or tie a noose around their neck and say their final goodbye. You win, they lose. You are now an accessory to murder.
Stick around and look at the pictures of the children that are left behind. These are the other victims. The victims without a voice in all of this. Had they had a choice they would almost always choose to have a loving caring father by their side. You deprive them of that. Not only do you assist in the murdering of fathers, but you're also a child abuser. Congratulations.
Be sure to keep coming back to our little club here. Make jokes about how we are all domestic abusers who feel we have some ghastly privilege of fathering our children. Keep your kids close to you, be sure you cash that child support check and keep the children from Daddy if he misses a payment. It's only a fair punishment for him. Make him suffer. Make him hurt so bad he stays awake at night crying because he misses his kids so badly. Make him out to be the deadbeat you just know he is. Make his feel the depths of depression and despair by keeping his kids from him. Threaten to have him arrested and thrown in jail for inability to pay child support. You're cruising now bio-mom. You show them who is boss. Don't allow him to talk to his kids on the phone. Don't allow him to have one extra minute of "visitation". Marginalize him and make him feel what a scumbag he truly is. Don't tell him of your children's accomplishment or how they are doing in school. Keep any and all medical records from him. Keep him guessing who is with his children and where they are living. Keep doing what you are doing bio-mom. Now we all know who the boss is. It was never the judges or lawyers who caused all this. It was you. Now look down at your children and realize everything you have done to your ex has also been done to them. See, you are a child abuser after all.
Sleep tight,
Joe Makem
A case for establishing complicated grief as a distinct mental disorder in DSM-V - SCIENCE DIRECT - http://www.sciencedirect.com/.../pii/S0272735804000790
DeleteUnderstand that having your kids taken from you is not something the courts should be doing lightly. We all know that, but how does one push the issue before a court headed by entrenched child trafficking corruption?
My opinion is that no one should be bothering with that. Instead, it seems clear to mine eyes that "child separation anxiety" and subsequent "grief" are together "distinct mental disorder" clearly qualifying individual sufferers as "disabled".
The right of access to LEGITIMATE court services is discussed in Tennssee v. Lane.
"Title II (of the ADA) is aimed at the enforcement of a variety of basic rights, including the right of access to the courts at issue in this case, that call for a standard of judicial review at least as searching, and in some cases more searching, than the standard that applies to sexbased classifications."
In my opinion, and what I am currently working on, is not something so intimidating (at its genesis) as a full lawsuit against court officials (which almost assuredly would be doomed under the current unlawful doctrines the federal courts maintain toward snuffing out such suits), but rather something so simple that everyone reading this -- with or without much legal knowledge -- can accomplish it simply.
If diagnosed with any type of child separation anxiety (be honest) by a psychologist (or psychiatrist I guess, but I'd go with the psychologist on this one), then arguably such an evaluation would demonstrate "qualification" as a disabled person under the ADA. Legitimately based on excessive removal of one's own children.
A request for disability accommodation asking for the correction of this disability-causing problem would surpass reasonable into necessary. "Court, you are disabling me by the severity of your removal of my children. Here's the medical evidence. Here's my request that you fix your proceedings/process to knock the shit off." ~ www.facebook.com/StandupforZoraya - #StandupforZoraya
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case... http://www.ILoveAndNeedMyDaughter.blogspot.com http://www.Causes.com/ChildrensRights Stop Emotional Child Abuse — at Lawson E. Thomas Courthouse.
http://iloveandneedmydaughter.blogspot.com/2012/04/how-can-guy-do-all-that-and-yet-court.html
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?
Presumptive Best Interest of Child and Equal Time-Sharing
DeleteThere 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
Tort Remedies
ReplyDeleteThe 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...
1. Right to a copy of the order to show cause alleging facts supporting the contempt charge.
2. Right to an explanation of the nature and the consequences of the proceedings.
3. Right to legal counsel and the right to have legal counsel appointed by the court if the individual is indigent.
4. Right to confront witnesses.
5. Right to present witnesses.
6. Right to have a transcript or record of the proceeding.
7. Right to appeal to an appropriate court.
Constitutional Right to Be a Parent
DeleteBelow are excerpts of caselaw from state appellate and federal district courts and up to the U.S. Supreme Court, all of which affirm, from one perspective or another, the absolute Constitutional right of parents to actually BE parents to their children.
No case authoritative within this circuit, however, had held that the state had a comparable obligation to protect children from their own parents, and we now know that the obligation does not exist in constitutional law.” K.H. Through Murphy v. Morgan, 914 F.2d 846 (C.A.7 (Ill.), 1990.
“Rights to marry, have children and maintain relationship with children are fundamental rights protected by the Fourteenth Amendment and thus, strict scrutiny is required of any statutes that directly and substantially impair those rights.” P.O.P.S. v. Gardner, 998 F2d 764 (9th Cir. 1993)
“Parents right to rear children without undue governmental interference is a fundamental component of due process.”
Nunez by Nunez v. City of San Diego, 114 F3d 935 (9th Cir. 1997)
The rights of parents to the care, custody and nurture of their children is of such character that it cannot be denied without violating those fundamental principles of liberty and justice which lie at the base of all our civil and political institutions, and such right is a fundamental right protected by this amendment (First) and Amendments 5, 9, and 14. Doe v. Irwin, 441 F Supp 1247; U.S. D.C. of Michigan, (1985).
The several states have no greater power to restrain individual freedoms protected by the First Amendment than does the Congress of the United States. Wallace v. Jaffree, 105 S Ct 2479; 472 US 38, (1985).
The United States Supreme Court has stated: “There is a presumption that fit parents act in their children’s best interests, Parham v. J. R., 442 U. S. 584, 602; there is normally no reason or compelling interest for the State to inject itself into the private realm of the family to further question fit parents’ ability to make the best decisions regarding their children. Reno v. Flores, 507 U. S. 292, 304. The state may not interfere in child rearing decisions when a fit parent is available. Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000).
Loss of First Amendment Freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury. Though First Amendment rights are not absolute, they may be curtailed only by interests of vital importance, the burden of proving which rests on their government. Elrod v. Burns, 96 S Ct 2673; 427 US 347, (1976).
Law and court procedures that are “fair on their faces” but administered “with an evil eye or a heavy hand” was discriminatory and violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US 356, (1886).
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.
DeleteThe 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."
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.
ReplyDeleteI would say the "spirit" of parental alienation is in DSM-5, even if the words are not.
DeleteParent-child relational problem now has a discussion in DSM-5, not just a label. The discussion explains that cognitive problems in parent-child relational problem "may include negative attributions of the other's intentions, hostility toward or scapegoating of the other, and unwarranted feelings of estrangement." That is a pretty good description of a child's view of the alienated parent, although it is an unfortunate use of the word "estrangement."
Child psychological abuse is a new diagnosis in DSM-5. It is defined as "nonaccidental verbal or symbolic acts by a child's parent or caregiver that result, or have reasonable potential to result, in significant psychological harm to the child." In many instances, the behavior of the alienating parent constitutes child psychological abuse.
Child affected by parental relationship distress is another new diagnosis in DSM-5. It should be used "when the focus of clinical attention if the negative effects of parental relationship discord (e.g., high levels of conflict, distress, or disparagement) on a child in the family, including effects on the child's mental or other physical disorders." That is also a good description of how parental alienation comes about.
Factitious disorder imposed on another is the DSM-5 terminology for factitious disorder by proxy or Munchausen disorder by proxy. Its definition is "falsification of physical or psychological signs or symptoms, or induction of injury or disease, in another, associated with identified deception." In some cases, that would describe the behavior of the alienating parent.
Delusional symptoms in partner of individual with delusional disorder is the DSM-5 terminology for shared psychotic disorder or folie a deux. The definition is: "In the context of a relationship, the delusional material from the dominant partner provides content for delusional belief by the individual who may not otherwise entirely meet criteria for delusional disorder."
It's human nature to seek out a partner in life, and to possibly marry and have children. Unfortunately the matrimonial establishment, as we are all aware, is being methodically torn down by a demoralized society. Sadly the divorce rate is still on the rise and the foundation of marriage is being devalued and is crumbling. As adults we learn to adapt and move on when divorce attacks our lives but for children this is another story. They are the real victims of divorce and unfortunately they will suffer dearly from our selfishness and in most cases follow the same path of destruction if not worse.
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
The Violence Against Women Act Ignores Half the Problem ~ By Anna Rittgers
DeleteThe 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.
It is the public policy of this state (Florida) that each minor child has frequent and continuing contact with both parents after the parents separate or the marriage of the parties is dissolved and to encourage parents to share the rights and responsibilities, and joys, of childrearing.
ReplyDelete"There is no presumption for or against the father or mother of the child or for or against any specific time-sharing schedule when creating or modifying the parenting plan of the child." ~ 2012 Florida Statutes
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
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."
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.
"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.
ReplyDeleteAmerican FathersAugust 22, 2014 at 11:18 PM
Can Parental Alienation Cause Trauma?
Post by Parental Alienation Awareness Organization - PAAO . " Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is not just a word or ...http://iloveandneedmydaughter.blogspot.com/2013/04/can-parental-alienation-cause-ptsd.html
Parental Alienation, Estrangement, Crappy Parenting?
Everything you wished you didn't need to know about Parental Alienation Syndrome & Hostile Aggressive Parenting . In 10 minutes, m...http://iloveandneedmydaughter.blogspot.com/2013/09/parental-alienation-syndrome-hostile.html
Alienating A Child From A "FIT" And "WILLING" Parent Is A Form Of Child Abuse?
"Parental Alienation: How It Affects Your Kids (It's Worse Than You Think)" http://iloveandneedmydaughter.blogspot.com/2011/08/register-today-for-dr-childress-webinar.html
"Reckless Disregard" ~ Another Story Of A Fit Father's Fight For His Daughter In Family Court
What IS family legal abuse? How do we, as its victims, define it? Post by Children's Rights . #StandUpForZoraya #ILoveA...http://iloveandneedmydaughter.blogspot.com/2013/04/reckless-disregard-true-and-compelling.html