Crisis In The Family Courts

THE FATHERS RIGHTS MOVEMENT

 

FILED IN: CHILD CUSTODY, CHILD CUSTODY BATTLE, CHILD CUSTODY FOR FATHERS, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE,FATHERS RIGHTS, PARENTAL ALIENATION AWARENESS DAY, PARENTAL ALIENATION DISORDER, PARENTAL ALIENATION DISORDERS, PROTECTIVE ORDERS, RESTRAINING ORDERS, PARENTAL ALIENATION

This is by Ana Ottman and Rebekah Lee for the “Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Violence ” (2008, SAGE Publications):

Fathers Rights Movement

The fathers’ rights movement advocates for fathers who feel deprived of their parental rights and subjected to systematic bias as men after divorce or separation. The term fathers’ rights is relevant to interpersonal violence primarily in custody and visitation cases involving domestic violence.

The fathers’ rights movement emerged in the 1970s as a loose social movement with a network of interest groups primarily active in Western countries. Established to campaign for equal treatment for men by the courts on issues such as child custody after divorce, child support, and paternity determinations, this network is also part of the broader men’s rights movement. While there is no written history of the movement, it is generally viewed as stemming from changes in both the law and societal attitudes. These changes include the introduction of no-fault divorce in 1969 and the attendant rise in divorce rates; the increasing entry of women into the workforce, upturning traditional gender roles; and the increasing social acceptance of single parents and their increased proportion of all families.

Fathers’ rights activists typically believe that the application of the law in family courts is biased against men. Because mothers have historically been seen as the primary caregivers for their children, they have often been granted custody of their children, causing some fathers to feel marginalized. Thus, one longstanding goal of fathers’ rights groups is obtaining “shared parenting,” asking that courts uphold a rebuttable presumption of joint custody after divorce or separation. Under a shared parenting arrangement, children would be required to live with each parent for the same amount of time, unless there were valid reasons not to do so.

Fathers’ rights advocates claim that women often falsify allegations of domestic violence to gain advantage in family law cases, and misuse protection orders to remove men from their homes or deny them contact with their children. Attorneys and advocates for abused women note that while it is not uncommon for family court proceedings to be accompanied by allegations of domestic violence and the use of protection orders, this is largely representative of the prevalence of domestic violence in our society, and of the fact that domestic violence often increases (or begins) at the time of separation or divorce. Many battered women seek protection orders as a last resort, after being subjected to continuous violence, because the orders can provide an effective means to gaining safety from the batterer.

While many mothers are awarded custody, there are many contested custody cases. In these contested cases, fathers often seek and win joint or full custody of the children. One way that a mother might lose custody is through the father’s use of a theory called parental alienation syndrome (PAS). Fathers’ rights groups see PAS as occurring when the mother has “poisoned” the minds of their children toward the other parent by brainwashing them into reporting abuse. When this legal tactic is used, the mother often loses custody or is forced to accept joint custody based on the father’s allegations of PAS.

While the fathers’ rights movement presents PAS as a credible theory, it is recognized as deeply flawed, based on extreme gender bias, and rooted in a disbelief of women and children who report abuse. Neither the American Psychological Association nor the American Psychiatric Association recognizes PAS as a credible theory, and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges has rejected the theory and recommended that it not be used when considering custody matters.

Women’s rights groups and profeminist men argue that fathers’ rights groups want to entrench patriarchy and undo the advances made by women in society. Those opposed to the fathers’ rights movement believe that the bias fathers’ rights members speak of in family courts either does not exist or is such that single mothers in particular are not advantaged as a class to the extent stated, especially in the face of sexism and male privilege and power.

—Ana Ottman and Rebekah Lee

Ottman, Ana, and Rebekah Lee. “Fathers’ Rights Movement.” Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Violence. 2008. SAGE Publications

Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Domestic Violence Divorce How Abusers Use the System to Invalidate Domestic Violence Survivors

 

Vodpod videos no longer available.

 

Domestic Violence Divorce How Abusers Use the System to Invalidate Domestic Violence Survivors

By : Dr. Jeanne King Ph.D.  

Submitted 2010-04-16 13:17:47

Victims of domestic abuse reach out to the system for help in stopping the abuse perpetrated upon them. This can involve both healthcare and law enforcement. Yet, what actually happens, more often than most people know, is that these so called “helpers” can be used to perpetuate domestic violence “legally” during divorce.

In healthcare, it’s the psychologists and psychiatrists. These healthcare providers are frequently manipulated by abusers to aid them in establishing false claims about the domestic abuse survivors that they batter and control.

Psychiatric Diagnosis as Batterer’s Club in Domestic Violence Divorce

Almost daily, I am sought out by a domestic violence survivor seeking help from being falsely accused of being mentally ill. In many of the cases, the mental healthcare diagnostics appear to be grossly improper.

But that doesn’t prevent a court from making determinations about the accused. In many of these cases, the battered mothers (and abused fathers) are faced with losing custody of and, in some cases, even the essential moments of simple human contact with their children.

Once judicial decisions are made, remedies can be added on and on…with no regard for the accuracy of the original foundation underlying the initial judicial decision. We have seen domestic violence victims prevented from having unsupervised or any access to their abused children because of a clinical psychiatric diagnosis.

The sad thing here is that those directly negatively impacted, like the protective parent and children, are unaware of this ploy during its set up and ultimate execution. Often they go along with certain procedures trusting in their sanity and hoping for justice to prevail. Then, the day comes when they awaken to the fact that they have been re victimized by their abuser’s manipulation of the psychologists and psychiatrists.

Psychiatric Re victimization To What End

Now you’d think that if the batterer is getting a divorce and seeking to move on with their lives, then the victim’s declared mental health status would be of no interest to him/her. Wrong…completely wrong!

By establishing for “the record” that the domestic violence survivor is “crazy,” the abuser leverages their ability to regain and maintain control over the family…and most importantly, control over themselves, or at least control over their public image. Many people will tell you that the legal psychiatrics of a case are nothing more than to save face for the batterer.

The abuser seeks to walk away looking good and certainly not being an abuser. To this end, they must make the victim to be “bad”…“wrong”…“crazy.” Essentially, the abuser enlists (directly or indirectly) the healthcare provider to discredit the victim in order to invalidate who she/he is and what she/he stands for with respect to being a domestic abuse survivor.

If you are a domestic violence survivor and have been threatened with losing custody of your children and the credibility of you mental health status, seek to understand how batterers manipulate healthcare providers to establish false claims. And as you learn about the reality of what’s before you, find a credible professional to help you prevent this life changing destructive legal psychiatric ploy. The sooner you become proactive in preventing the establishment of false claims, the easier you can prevent them from defining your life and limiting your liberties.

Author Resource:- For information about legal psychological abuse and domestic violence divorce, see http://www.preventabusiverelationships.com/crazy_making.php . Dr. Jeanne King, Ph.D. helps people nationwide recognize, end and heal from domestic abuse. Copyright 2010 Jeanne King Ph.D.

Article From Article Arty

Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Anonymoms; We are Everywhere

Posted in : PAAO, Parent Alienation, Parental Alienation and Hostile Aggressive Parenting Awareness Day, Parental Alienation Awareness Day, Parental Alienation Awareness Organization, Abusers Denier, Amy Castillo, Maryland legislatures Kill Domestic Violence Bill,, Angry fathers, Battered Mothers Custody Conference, Breaking The Silence; Children's Stories, child abuse, Child Custody, Child found, Childrens Rights, corrupt bastards, Curtis S. Anderson (D-Baltimore), Benjamin S. Barnes (D-Prince George's), Jill P. Carter (D-Baltimore), Frank M. Conaway Jr. (D-Baltimore), Donald H. Dwyer Jr. (R-Anne Arundel), William J. Frank, Custody Hell, domestic law, don hoffman jill dykes judge david debenham Dr. rodeheffer, Dr Richard Warshak, Dr. Richard Gardner, Father of Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) Committed Suicide May 25, 2003, family court corruption, Fathers & Families, Glenn Sacks, ACFC, RADAR, ANCPR, fathers murdering, Fathers Rights, FRANK M. CONAWAY, JR FRANK M. CONAWAY, JR. FRANK M. CONAWAY, JR. FRANK M. CONAWAY, JR., Getting screwed by the Family Courts, Getting screwed by the politicians, JUDGE KEVIN CRONIN, Karin Huffer"Legal Abuse Syndrome" FAMILY LAW JUDGE SENTENCES DISABLED MOTHER TO 21 DAYS IN JAIL, Maria's ex-husband broke her back during a rage of anger. Maria Mel, Judge Richard Anderson Shawnee County Courts Topeka Kansas, Judge Robert Lemkau Katie Tagle Wyatt Garcia Stephen Garcia Victorville CA., Kansas House Representive Melvin Neufeld . Ks Wefare Summit, Kansas State House, SRS, CPS, Kansas Joint Committee on Children’s Issues on Nov 30, 2009 in Topeka, Kansas Legislature, Covenant Marriages, Domestic Violence, BULLSHIT LAWS, Katie Tagle, Dr. Phill, Steven Garcia, Pinnion Hills, CA,, Maryland Legislature Frank Conway Jr, BATTERER Democrat, District 40, Baltimore City, Maternal Deprivation, Domestic Violence By Proxy, Message to My Child . ., Motherhood, Mothers Rights, Murder-Suicide, Parental Alienation (PAS), Parental Alienation (PAS), Parental Alienation (PAS), Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), PAS is a Scam, Speak Out, Susan Murphy Milano, Times Up, Defending Our Lives, by abatteredmother on April 25, 2010

 

 

 

 

 

JUDGE SHAWN L. BRIESE GOES INTO ASSMUNCH MODE, REFUSES HEARING FOR FLORIDA MOTHER LINDA MARIE SACKS

Rights For Mothers

FILED IN: CHILD CUSTODY BATTLE, CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE, CHILD CUSTODY FOR FATHERS, CORRUPT JUDGES,CORRUPT BASTARDS, FATHERS RIGHTS, FLORIDA, GETTING SCREWED BY THE FAMILY COURTS, JUDGE SHAWN L. BRIESE, LEGAL ABUSE, LINDA MARIE SACKS, MOTHERLESS CHILDREN, NONCUSTODIAL MOTHERS

Press Release

April 19, 2010

Judge Holds Mother in Contempt; Refuses to Hold Scheduled Custody Hearing

Daytona Beach – A mother who has been separated from her children for more than three years was denied a hearing today to reunite with them and instead was held in contempt by a Volusia County judge.

Linda Marie Sacks, an Ormond Beach mother, arrived this morning at the City Island Courthouse in Daytona Beach for a scheduled hearing (Case 2004-30312 FMCI) asking for unsupervised visitations and total contact with her daughters, ages 13 and 15. But Volusia County Family Court Judge Shawn L. Briese declined to hold the hearing, which had been on the trial court schedule for six months, and demanded instead that Sacks submit to a deposition by the opposing counsel during the scheduled hearing time.

Sacks filed for divorce in 2004 after her daughters began acting out sexually. The eldest daughter, at age 8, drew a picture of the father as an erect penis during a therapy session and made an outcry during Sunday School that she had performed a sex act on her father. Sacks has spent six years in the family court trying unsuccessfully to protect her daughters.

Justice for Children, a Houston-based national child advocacy organization, has written a letter to Volusia County law enforcement authorities, including Department of Children and Family Administrator Reggie Williams, expressing concern that the allegations of sexual and physical abuse of  Sacks’ daughters was never properly investigated.

In April 2007 Judge Briese (Case 2004-30312-FMCI) ruled that the child lied, gave the father sole physical custody of the daughters and placed the mother on supervised visitation. In the last three years, Sacks has had only 63 hours with her daughters at the The Family Tree House Visitation Center in Daytona Beach.

In 2008 the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeals in Daytona Beach reversed that decision,(Case 5D07-1682) and ruled that Judge Briese had abused his trial court discretion, violated the mother’s due process rights and ordered the custody case be retried in the lower court. Despite the appeals court ruling and numerous motions to have him removed from the case, Judge Briese has continued to deny Sacks full-contact with her children.

Instead, just a few months after the Fifth District Court of Appeals ruling, Judge Briese quickly set another custody hearing, denied to admit any of the mother’s evidence or witnesses and again ruled that Sacks be allowed only supervised visits with her daughters.

Sacks, this time as a pro se litigant, has again filed an appeal with the Fifth District Court (Case 5D09-3752).  Recently, the appeals court denied the father’s attorney’s motion to strike the mother’s appeal brief. Within days the father’s attorneys, James L. Rose and Leonard R. Ross of Daytona Beach, filed a subpoena in the lower court demanding Sacks appear for a lengthy deposition and filed a motion to end the mother’s two-hour a month supervised visit with her children.

Florida Rules of Civil Procedures Rule 1.310 (d) dictates that a deposition being used to harass a party can be terminated. Rule 1.290 (2) also states that a party cannot be forced into a deposition 20 days before a hearing. Sacks was found to be in contempt of court after she refused to take part in the deposition and only asked that she be able to have her hearing time.

During the hearing today, Judge Briese at first agreed with the mother’s filed objection to the deposition saying the Ross has had years to take the deposition. But when the Ross complained that the mother is speaking to national organizations about the case, Judge Briese changed his mind and demanded Sacks submit to the deposition.

Judge Briese said today that the mother will not be heard about being reunited with her children until she does submit. The hearing to see her children was scheduled for three days.

The mother will be back at the courthouse at 1:00 P.M. in hopes that hearing will be allowed to begin, but has already been told by the trial court judge, if you don’t allow the deposition, you will not get your scheduled hearing time.

Today Sacks filed an emergency motion to request a hearing before the Seventh Judicial Circuit Chief Judge J. David Walsh to ask that Judge Briese be disqualified from the case but was denied by Judge Briese.

Read more about Sacks’ battle to protect her children in the January 2010 MomLogic magazine article.

For More information please contact: KATHLEEN RUSSELL | KATHLEEN RUSSELL CONSULTING

1346 4th Street | San Rafael, CA | 94901 Cell 415.250.1180 | Main

415.459.9211 | Fax 415.459.9210

Telling Stories, Moving Mountains

www.kathleenrussell.com

or

Linda Marie Sacks

386-453-3017

Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

(KS) Women Receive Overwhelming Response For Child Abuse Yard Signs

 

http://www.kake.com/news/headlines/91150889.html?ref=889

Women Receive Overwhelming Response For Child Abuse Yard Signs

Two local women are taking action following the recent abuse deaths of two children.

Reporter: Jared Cerullo
Email Address: jared.cerullo@kake.com


Child Abuse Yard Signs

Friday, April 16, 2010

Two local women are taking action following the recent abuse deaths of two children. The women are giving away yard signs asking people to call 911 if they suspect a child is being abused and they’re getting an overwhelming response.

"That’s our Vincent’s prayer," said Lily Hill as she looked at the bright yellow sign that says ‘Be aware. Child abuse can be anywhere. Call 911.’

That’s the message Hill and Beverly Van Es want posted on every city block. Their actions were prompted by the brutal abuse deaths of Karsyn Young and Vincent Hill.

"Maybe even abusers will think ‘Oh dear, somebody might be watching me and somebody might be listening and I could get in trouble. Maybe I won’t do that."’

These grandmother’s are getting an overwhelming response from people wanting a sign to put in their own yard. Even as we were interviewing them, someone knocked on the door to pick one up. Hill and Van Es have spent $600 of their own money for the first batch of signs and all of them are spoken for.

"One person can make a difference. One person has many friends. Two grandmas can really make a difference," said Van Es.

"We want people thinking about this," Hill explained. "We want people to think about the horrors that are going on. World War II prisoners of war weren’t treated and tortured the way baby Vincent was."

These grandmas have loaded up a suburban with hundreds of signs to give away this weekend. They’ll be giving them out at Asbury Church at 15th and St. Paul from 10-noon on Saturday. They’ve already given away 100 of them and have 200 more more on order. One by one they say, with help from above, they will cover the city with Vincent’s prayer.

"We’re just a couple grandmas that care," said Van Es. "And we got signs."

If you would like a sign for your yard you can contact Beverly Van Es at 316-838-8601 or Lily Hill at 316-946-1437. They say they will buy as many signs as they can, but would appreciate any donations to help offset the costs.

http://www.kake.com/news/headlines/89653847.html

March 31, 2010

Abuse Hotline Call Dismissed Months Before Baby’s Death

The Harvey County Sheriff’s Department says an abuse hotline call regarding 19-month-old Vincent Hill was dismissed two months prior to his death.

Reporter: Stephanie Diffin
Email Address: stephanie.diffin@kake.com

width:320 and height: 240 and picwidth: 213 and pciheight: 159

The Harvey County Sheriff’s Department confirms someone called an SRS abuse hotline more than two months before 19-month-old Vincent Hill was allegedly beaten to death. But Newton SRS and Harvey County law enforcement say they were never informed of the call.

The call came in from a couple who lived in the same duplex as Hill, his mother, Katheryn Nycole Dale, and her boyfriend, Chadd Carr. Dale and Carr are both charged in the case.

"Nothing ever gets done until it’s too late, and unfortunately, it’s too late," said Jason Monarez, the victim’s neighbor.

Vincent Hill’s father describes the little boy as happy and always smiling.

"He’s never going to be able to play catch with me, I’m never going to teach him how to learn how to fish," said Ricky Hill, Vincent’s father. "I”m not going to get to see him do anything."

Now, Ricky Hill wonders if he would have gotten the chance to see those things if social services had further investigated a call it received on January 20th, two months before Vincent’s death.

"We tried to stop it, we tried… me and my girlfriend both," said Monarez. "You could just hear through the wall, the child screaming."

So Monarez’ girlfriend called an SRS abuse hotline. But the center dismissed the call saying it didn’t indicate there was any harm taking place to the child. The last sentence of the report reads, "This completes the initial assessment with no further action needed."

"It just makes me angry, really, to know that i tried and it wasn’t taken seriously," said Jessica Link, who placed the call.

Since the call stopped at the call center, Newton SRS says it never got word of the suspected abuse.

"If they would have had the report, they probably would have notified us, and something would have gotten done," said Harvey County Sheriff T. Walton.

SRS will not comment about specific cases, but did release this statement on the process of investigating calls to its hotline;

"SRS receives reports of alleged abuse and neglect through our Kansas Protection Report Center, 1-800-922-5330. In State fiscal year 2009 SRS received 56,207 reports of alleged abuse or neglect. Of those, 49% or 27,340, cases were assigned for further investigation."

"Intake workers receive protective services training to elicit specific information about the situation. Information requested is focused on the extent of the situation, circumstances of the situation, child’s functioning, parenting practices and caregiver function, in addition to information regarding the child’s age, person alleged to have caused harm to the child, where the child is located, other individuals or agencies who may have information regarding the incident and the availability of a non-abusing adult to protect the child from further harm."

"The information gathered through the intake process is then provided to a licensed social worker to review and determine whether the incident requires further investigation. This decision is based on specific safety and risk factors, including but not limited to: seriousness of the incident, prior agency involvement with the family, and seriousness of injury to child."

"All reports assigned for further investigation involving allegations of maltreatment of child must be investigated within either a 24 hour or 72 hour timeframe, depending on the nature of the allegation. Situations requiring a 24 hour response include, but are not limited to: life threatening situation, sexual abuse with the alleged perpetrator in the home, child in protective custody, or a child with current visible injuries."

"Certain reports, not alleging maltreatment, may be investigated within 20 working days. An example of this type of case would be truancy."

http://www.thekansan.com/highlights/x1838117985/Charges-filed-in-toddler-s-death

Charges filed in toddler’s death

By Cristina Janney

The Newton Kansan

Posted Mar 31, 2010 @ 12:07 PM

NORTH NEWTON —

Chad Carr

Charges were filed in Harvey County District Court Tuesday in the suspicious death of a 19-month-old boy Saturday in North Newton.

Chad Carr, 26, 115 W. 24th St. in North Newton, is charged with two counts of aggravated battery and two counts of abuse of a child in the death of Vincent James Hill.

Carr allegedly was the boyfriend of the child’s mother, Katheryn Nycole Dale, who was not home at the time of the child’s death.

Carr allegedly was home alone with the child when he called 911 to report the child was not breathing. Carr allegedly tried to revive the child, but the child was taken to Newton Medical Center by Newton Fire/EMS where he was pronounced dead.

Law enforcement officials said Monday the child was bruised from head to toe and showed signs of previous injuries.

Further investigation found a concern had been called into the Social and Rehabilitation Services abuse center on Jan. 20.

The report did indicate a neighbor had heard yelling and screaming between the child and an adult male, a news release from the Harvey County Sheriff’s department stated.

The report was screened out by SRS because SRS said the report did not indicate the child was being physically harmed, the news release stated.

The report was never forwarded to any law enforcement agency for follow up.

Carr was booked on suspicion of murder, but County Attorney David Yoder said he is waiting for an autopsy report before deciding whether to file more serious charges.

On a search of Carr’s residence, police found marijuana and drug paraphernalia. Carr has not been charged on the drug offenses.

Yoder said he wants to further review the evidence gathered by police to determine if he will file any charges on those offenses.

Carr is being held in the Harvey County Detention Center on a $150,000 bond.

A funeral service for the child will be at 1 p.m. Saturday at Peabody United Methodist Church.

Copyright 2010 The Newton Kansan. Some rights reserved

http://www.kansas.com/2010/03/30/1247216/neighbor-had-called-hotline-about.html

Posted on Tue, Mar. 30, 2010

Neighbor had called hotline about Newton child who died

Comments (0)

BY TIM POTTER
The Wichita Eagle

    NORTH NEWTON — A 19-month-old boy had a broken collarbone, a broken lower leg and bruises from head to toe.

    But no one directly told local authorities that something was wrong in the child’s life until after he died, local law enforcement officials said Monday.

    They announced that a man who had been living at the 19-month-old’

    Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    The Secrecy Law Scandal; John Aster Exposed

     

    The Secrecy Law Scandal

    Often when challenged about why the secrecy law is in place, the explanation from Australian Family Courts is to protect children’s privacy. Australian Law, based upon English law often mirrors UK in legal matters. Naturally, Australian law mimicking UK law, will also mimic the adverse legal avenue where the Council of Europe found UK law to err on the side of bias when they ordered secrecy. UK wasfound to maintain secrecy, not to protect the children’s identity, but to protect the evidence where they violated human rights from the public. This led to media reporting on UK Family Court proceeding including the revelation that a mother wasordered by the court to return to UK where she was murdered by her ex husband whom had made previous threats to kill.

    Australian journalists have even spoken out on how the Australian Family Court has stopped journalists from reporting on cases even where children are dead:

    Today Tonight producer stated that he had received jail threats over reporting cases where all members where anonymized.

    So why do we see media reports on the family court?

    In the case of Darcey Freeman, the reporting was so viral that it was reported in the UK and in US, which stretched out of the Family Courts jurisdiction and made such a lawsuit very expensive and ambiguous. Since the release of the above video, other journalists have been able to make anonymized reports on family violence cases without needing to seek the courts permission.

    Beforehand, only stories that supported mens groups ideology where provided and reports that involved family violence were required to obtain permission from the courts. In fact three media reporters from three Australian leading newspapers who provided reports from the mens groups ideology where in fact mens rights advocates. It is therefore no wonder why the community attitudes on violence against women and children provided poor results. The belief that women raise violence in the family court to obtain custody is widely held:

    Half of all respondents (49 percent)

    believed that ‘women going through

    custody battles often make up or

    exaggerate claims of domestic

    violence in order to improve their

    case’, and only 28 percent disagreed. – page 8, Changing Attitudes Changing Cultures A National Survey on Community Attitudes to Violence against Women

    It is a mystery as to why such a document is able to identify the members and explicit details of a family court case:

    Draft)

    It is a mystery as to why the details of the mother were revealed on the fathers facebook profile page whom has 672 friends with access to all of the court files that compliment his version of events.

    He also identifies the child by providing the photos and the case information underneath. 672 friends can clearly identify the mother and the child, know who judged the case and the details of the case he believes supports his reason for custody. Where he is not identified, he proceeds to identify himself in the case:

    It is also important to note that John appeals for his case as an injustice because(according to his account) he had not viewed child pornography for nine years:

    The question remains unanswered to the public as to the other remaining years and what police reports was he referring to that he claimed to be untrue?

    Then there are the abduction cases where the family court has a high number of fathers looking for mothers whom have absconded with the children. Research has noted that a high number of abduction cases are due to escaping domestic violence and the negligence of protection related to that area. Most abduction cases therefore produce a mens group style promotion, neglecting to add the part where child abuse was raised and not dealt properly dealt with. An excellent example is the case of Melinda Stratton and Ken Thompson. In the court orderedpublication it warned anyone who recognized Melinda Stratton, "not to approach her as she might prove a danger to herself or her son". Unlike other family court releases, it did not specify a criminal or diagnosed mental health history. An aspect that would clearly be important to add when compelling the public to turn a mother and child into the police. It was later revealed that Melinda had run because of her concerns for Andrew Thompson and the courts inability to investigate child abuse. The court of course restrained the Australian from publishing most of the mothers accounts including the allegations that were made.

    Posted by Samantha at 4:55 PM

    Labels: Australian Family Law, Australian Family Law Act, Harold James Johnson, James Johnson, John Astor, Melinda Stratton, Secrecy, Section 121

    Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    (KS) Father keeps Child’s Coffin in Living Room where child lives

    Courts Have Continued Abuse Of Manhattan Woman

    By Jon A. Brake
    Manhattan Free Press

    MANHATTAN, KS – To some this could be considered beautiful. Solid mahogany is beautiful when given a high finish and it does have a high finish. It is about four to four and a half feet long, a foot and a half high; with shinny brass handles at the foot and head. A child’s coffin, in this home has been turned into a coffee table.

    coffin

    To Claudine Dombrowski it is not beautiful, that is her daughter, six-year-old Rikki on the couch behind the threatening coffee table. If a coffin coffee table is not enough, a hunting rifle hangs on the wall above the couch.
    Claudine, a Manhattan resident, was divorced from Hal Richardson in Shawnee County District Count in 1997. She had been a repeat victim of Domestic Violence and a repeat victim of the State Court System.
    What does the Court System think of the coffin coffee table? In a letter to Shawnee County District Court Division Two Judge Richard D. Anderson, Harry Moore, with the Court Services stated: "When I was at the house, I did not recognize anything which in my experience resembled a child’s coffin. After looking at the picture and speaking with Mr. Richardson, I have come to find out that it is indeed a coffin and that it was an antique which he purchased in Mexico several years ago and uses as a coffee or end table of sorts."
    What about the rifle? Mr. Moore said, "There is also a secured hunting weapon hanging on Mr. Richardson’s wall. The thing which is striking about this specific issue is that it contains a remarkable leap of logic. For instance, I am the owner of a 7.9 mm Mauser rifle which was the standard issue firearm for the German soldier in World War II. This weapon was procured by my father who served in Europe during the war. This weapon also hangs on the wall in  my rec room. Does my ownership and display of this firearm lead one to the conclusion that I am a Nazi?"
    The question Mr. Moore failed to answer is: "Is it a leap of logic for an abused woman to see the child’s coffin and the rifle as more than furniture? Is there a message to the mother? The Shawnee District Court has missed many messages when it comes to the violence in this case.
    When reading Court documents it is clear that attorneys have intentionally muddied the waters. It was a nasty divorce, those things happen. Eight or more attorneys, three different Judges and several Court Service workers have filed motion after motion. In the end a Judge wants to compel a dysfunctional family to be normal. It can’t be done.
    Halleck (Hal) Richardson and Claudine Dombrowske lived together for several months before they were married on November 22, 1995. Divorce papers were filed four month later. By this time records show Hal Richardson had abused Claudine and he had Domestic Battery and Criminal Damage to property convictions.
    Hal had seven other convictions before 1995. The convictions were for Battery, Attempted Battery, Battery of a Law Enforcement Officer, Obstruction of Legal Process, Possession of Marijuana and an Open Container conviction.
    Most of the Probation Conditions were never followed up on by court officials. After the Domestic Battery conviction, Hal was ordered to attend an "Alternatives to Battering Program" put on by the Battered Women Task Force in Topeka. A few of the comments made on Hal’s report were: "Client rude and disrespectful to female co-facilitator as evidenced by his combative stance, his repeated interruptions, his sexist language and his refusal to accept any responsibility."
    Another report stated: "Client very disruptive during group, this was evidenced by the fact that he interrupted the facilitator repeatedly by making rude comments, laughing and telling inappropriate sexist jokes."
    And finally: "Called PO (probation officer) and client to tell them that he had graduated as far as I was concerned. He only has 17 sessions, but is causing too much trouble with his mouth. Terminated, with cause. Will not be accepted back."
    The divorce proceedings were extended for eighteen months. Throughout the proceedings Claudine’s attorneys filed numerous reports claiming violations of the restraining order and requesting an order to sever contact between Hal, Claudine and daughter Rikki.
    The first involved an incident that both parties agreed in court happened, they just could not agree what happened. Claudine said she was hit in the head with a crow bar and Hal said it was a piece of wood. What ever he hit her with it took 24 stitches to close the head wounds.
    At a hearing on June 17, 1996 Shawnee County District Court Judge Jan W. Leuenberger signed order giving custody of Rikki to Claudine and authorizing her to move to the Great Bend area so that "Ms. Dombrowski could avoid the history of physical and verbal abuse she had suffered from Mr. Richardson."
    Hal was given supervised visitation.
    As in many divorce cases the Judge on November 5, 1996 appointed Mr. Scott McKenzie, Attorney at Law, to serve as Guardian ad Litem to appear on behalf of Rikki. Mr. McKenzie was very experienced in juvenile court proceedings with more than 1,000 cases but this was only his sixth Guardian ad Litem. Under Mr. McKenzie direction visitation terms were worked out to where Claudine would keep Rikki for three weeks and then Hal would have her for a week.
    Before the Divorce Trial started a new Judge took over. Judge James P. Buchele replaced Judge Leuenberger.
    It is about this time the Court and Court appointed case workers attitued changed. Judge Buchele saw that fifty people were being called as witnesses for the trial. He placed a limit of five for each side. This can be done but it can cause problems. Court documents state: "These limits made it difficult or impossible for Ms. Dombrowski to bring in all of the witnesses to corroborate here clams." During the trial the Judge would not allow hearsay evidence but the proper witness was not there to testify.
    At trial Mr. McKenzie indicated, "after reading the police reports of the violence, and the doctor’s reports, he was not able to validate any of the truth of any of the accusations of violence made by Ms. Dombrowski."
    When asked about Mr. Richardson’s criminal history Mr. McKenzie recalled only a single offense for driving under the influence of alcohol, and was unaware of the misdemeanor convictions including the domestic violence battery against Claudine. He was unaware of a misdemeanor battery for a bar fight and the battery of a law enforcement officer.
    Records of the Battered Women’s Task Force had never been reviewed by Mr. McKenzie. Even thou Claudine had received support from the facility. In a report to the court Mr. McKenzie had recommended anger management therapy for Claudine but not for Hal.
    In Judge Buchele’s Orders after the trial he made it clear that he wanted more from this couple than what was possible. Here is what he wrote: "Mutual parental involvement with this child has been made worse by Ms. Dombrowski’s unilateral decision to move to Larned, Kansas in May of 1996. The distance between Topeka and Larned makes it virtually impossible for an individual treater to work with the family; for Mr. Richardson to have regular and frequent contact with this child; to establish any reasonable dialogue between the parents toward resolving their conflicts. The move from Topeka to Larned, due to the proximity of the parties, has lessened the physical
    violence. It has, however, done violence to the relationship of Rikki and her father. If long distance visitation is continued, in the Court’s view, will take its toll not only on Rikki but each of the parties. The Court specifically finds that separation of the child from either parent for long periods of time is harmful for a child of about three years of age."
    He then went on to require Claudine to move back to the Topeka area.
    And then Judge Buchele made a judgment that some Manhattan attorneys say is not legal. Judge Buchele ordered: "Further, respondent (Claudine) is directed to not call law enforcement authorities to investigate the petitioner (Hal) without first consulting with the case manager."
    On December 14, 2000 after returning her daughter to her fathers home Claudine alleges that she was battered and raped by Hal. Under order not to call law enforcement authorities and with bleeding that would not stop, she drove to St. Marys, Kansas to get treatment. Claudine knew that if she had gone to a Topeka Hospital they would have called the police.
    In St. Marys hospital officials did contact the Pottawatomie Sheriff and a report was made. She was advised that because the alleged event occurred in Shawnee County she would have to file there. Claudine said that because of the battery and rape she picked up Rikki the next day and did not return her. The Shawnee County Sheriff’s Department was called and took Rikki back to Topeka. The court gave Hal custody and orders for her to attend Topeka schools.
    As it stands now, Rikki is with her father in Topeka. Claudine gets two one-hour visits per week. The child will go to school in Topeka unless a new motion, which will be filed this week, is granted. The motion will request that Claudine be given custody and Rikki be allowed to attend school in Manhattan.
    This case has received national attention by the National Organization for Women; the Judicial Initiative Commission Hearing by the Citizens for Good Judges and it was told to the Kansas Justice Commission in 1997.
    A new Judge will be hearing the motion. Judge Richard D. Anderson took over the case on the retirement of Judge Buchele. But, unless Claudine receives help from Kansas citizens, the abuse will continue. In July of 2000 Judge Anderson reaffirmed all of Judge Buchele’s previous orders. Evan the order to not call law enforcement authorities

    Webmaster Note:  You can contact Judge Richard D. Anderson at (785) 233-8200 ext. 4350

    Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,facilitator,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    This is your brain on PAS/PA/PAD

    PAS is a Scam     Parental Alienation Syndrome

    From: Glenn’s Cult

    Remember those scare tactic videos about your brain on drugs? Don’t know about you but they worked for me. Now lets take this on a new spin. What is someone who believes PA/PAS/PAD doing to their brains? Why are women the only ones ever accused of alienation or gatekeeping? We have a case here which to my eye appears to have the ever present gatekeeping and alienation tactics happening.

    So quick run down on this story. Mom "allegedly" kidnaps child and returns to her native country amid accusations by her of violence in the marriage. Mother remarries after divorce has another child and dies in childbirth. Father to older child goes on rampage in order to secure custody of older child – even amid allegations of violence by mother’s family in foreign country and mother’s widowed current spouse. Father eventually uses American politicians and television news stations in order to carry child out of mother’s native country. Now grandparents want to see child, want child to have a relationship with half sibling and father refuses.

    What do you mean – father refuses? I thought all family should be allowed a relationship with children? Even with mother deceased shouldn’t siblings and extended family of mother’s be allowed continuing contact with child?

    Apparently not and apparently the well known father’s rights blogger, Glenn Sacks, REFUSES to run any stories on this "gatekeeping" of the child by FATHER. Even Ken Walker (kc9bdr@yahoo.com) agrees that Father should be allowed to keep child from maternal family – in fact he even quotes: "The maternal grandparents take the grandson to Brazil for 5 years, (mother dies) then complain when they don’t get placement. Give it time!". Mother does this and it is automatically a given that mother is gatekeeping and engaging in PA/PAS/PAD. So why is this not true for FATHER? Is FATHER not gatekeeping and possibly engaging in PA/PAS/PAD? The child in question has been around the maternal relatives for years now. Are we punishing another innocent young child by denying that child the RIGHT to have a relationship with the older sibling?

    Well, let me explain this so you get it really good, okay? Just as in this commercial about heroin use, PA/PAS/PAD has some rules too.

    Women are the only ones who can gatekeep a child. Ladies, ladies. Here’s how it works. It’s only PAS/PA when we accuse you of doing it. When WE do the exact thing we just accused you of doing ("gatekeeping," obstructing visitation, etc.) it doesn’t count. WE are the ONLY ones who can protect our children. These children are not your children, they are only our children. Just like that nice new car we fought for in the divorce, just like the house. Oh and forget about any equitable split, that is all ours too. Any questions?

    So go back and watch the video again.

    Frying pan is PAS/PA/PAD.

    Egg is your brain.

    And the violence you see portrayed is what COULD happen if PA/PAS/PAD is bought hook, line, and sinker. Our children, our future will be destroyed if abusers are allowed to continue to use JUNK SCIENCE in order to remove protective parents from a child’s life and place children with an alleged abuser. Do we want to place these children with potential alleged abusers? Don’t know about you but I do not. And now a young child is being denied a relationship with a sibling by a father and Glenn Sacks, Ken Walker, and who knows who else in the FATHER’S RIGHT MOVEMENT think this father is completely justified. Ken by his own words, and Sacks by his lack of words. Or is it just that as long as it is a father who is being allegedly denied this is a travesty that must (MUST!!!) be rectified, but when it is a mother or maternal relatives – ahhh who cares? One need only look at the case of Jean Paul Lacombe Diaz in Texas to see this is true. Where are the Ken Walker’s, the Glenn Sacks for this mom who has proof of abuse, has court orders granting her custody of this child? The courts were TRICKED into turning the boy over to father. He did this ILLEGALLY yet we see nobody in the Father’s Rights Movement speaking to the tragedy of this court’s actions.

    Oh gee I keep forgetting. That is because the parent who is being denied the child is MOM. Who cares about moms right? After all, the only thing moms are good for is carrying the child, giving birth to the child, feeding the child life supporting breast milk. When the child can walk and talk, the mother should be gone. Fathers are the only important ones now.

    ANY QUESTIONS?

    Posted by Glenn’s Cult?at 6:56 AM

    Labels: Glenn Sacks, Ken Walker, PA, PAD, Parental Alienation, Parental Alienation Disorders, Parental Alienation Syndrome, PAS

    Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    Remember those scare tactic videos about your brain on drugs? Don’t know about you but they worked for me. Now lets take this on a new spin. What is someone who believes PA/PAS/PAD doing to their brains? Why are women the only ones ever accused of alienation or gatekeeping? We have a case here which to my eye appears to have the ever present gatekeeping and alienation tactics happening.

    So quick run down on this story. Mom "allegedly" kidnaps child and returns to her native country amid accusations by her of violence in the marriage. Mother remarries after divorce has another child and dies in childbirth. Father to older child goes on rampage in order to secure custody of older child – even amid allegations of violence by mother’s family in foreign country and mother’s widowed current spouse. Father eventually uses American politicians and television news stations in order to carry child out of mother’s native country. Now grandparents want to see child, want child to have a relationship with half sibling and father refuses.

    What do you mean – father refuses? I thought all family should be allowed a relationship with children? Even with mother deceased shouldn’t siblings and extended family of mother’s be allowed continuing contact with child?

    Apparently not and apparently the well known father’s rights blogger, Glenn Sacks, REFUSES to run any stories on this "gatekeeping" of the child by FATHER. Even Ken Walker (kc9bdr@yahoo.com) agrees that Father should be allowed to keep child from maternal family – in fact he even quotes: "The maternal grandparents take the grandson to Brazil for 5 years, (mother dies) then complain when they don’t get placement. Give it time!". Mother does this and it is automatically a given that mother is gatekeeping and engaging in PA/PAS/PAD. So why is this not true for FATHER? Is FATHER not gatekeeping and possibly engaging in PA/PAS/PAD? The child in question has been around the maternal relatives for years now. Are we punishing another innocent young child by denying that child the RIGHT to have a relationship with the older sibling?

    Well, let me explain this so you get it really good, okay? Just as in this commercial about heroin use, PA/PAS/PAD has some rules too.

    Women are the only ones who can gatekeep a child. Ladies, ladies. Here’s how it works. It’s only PAS/PA when we accuse you of doing it. When WE do the exact thing we just accused you of doing ("gatekeeping," obstructing visitation, etc.) it doesn’t count. WE are the ONLY ones who can protect our children. These children are not your children, they are only our children. Just like that nice new car we fought for in the divorce, just like the house. Oh and forget about any equitable split, that is all ours too. Any questions?

    So go back and watch the video again.

    Frying pan is PAS/PA/PAD.

    Egg is your brain.

    And the violence you see portrayed is what COULD happen if PA/PAS/PAD is bought hook, line, and sinker. Our children, our future will be destroyed if abusers are allowed to continue to use JUNK SCIENCE in order to remove protective parents from a child’s life and place children with an alleged abuser. Do we want to place these children with potential alleged abusers? Don’t know about you but I do not. And now a young child is being denied a relationship with a sibling by a father and Glenn Sacks, Ken Walker, and who knows who else in the FATHER’S RIGHT MOVEMENT think this father is completely justified. Ken by his own words, and Sacks by his lack of words. Or is it just that as long as it is a father who is being allegedly denied this is a travesty that must (MUST!!!) be rectified, but when it is a mother or maternal relatives – ahhh who cares? One need only look at the case of Jean Paul Lacombe Diaz in Texas to see this is true. Where are the Ken Walker’s, the Glenn Sacks for this mom who has proof of abuse, has court orders granting her custody of this child? The courts were TRICKED into turning the boy over to father. He did this ILLEGALLY yet we see nobody in the Father’s Rights Movement speaking to the tragedy of this court’s actions.

    Oh gee I keep forgetting. That is because the parent who is being denied the child is MOM. Who cares about moms right? After all, the only thing moms are good for is carrying the child, giving birth to the child, feeding the child life supporting breast milk. When the child can walk and talk, the mother should be gone. Fathers are the only important ones now.

    ANY QUESTIONS?

    Posted by Glenn’s Cult?at 6:56 AM

    Labels: Glenn Sacks, Ken Walker, PA, PAD, Parental Alienation, Parental Alienation Disorders, Parental Alienation Syndrome, PAS

    Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    Remember those scare tactic videos about your brain on drugs? Don’t know about you but they worked for me. Now lets take this on a new spin. What is someone who believes PA/PAS/PAD doing to their brains? Why are women the only ones ever accused of alienation or gatekeeping? We have a case here which to my eye appears to have the ever present gatekeeping and alienation tactics happening.

    So quick run down on this story. Mom "allegedly" kidnaps child and returns to her native country amid accusations by her of violence in the marriage. Mother remarries after divorce has another child and dies in childbirth. Father to older child goes on rampage in order to secure custody of older child – even amid allegations of violence by mother’s family in foreign country and mother’s widowed current spouse. Father eventually uses American politicians and television news stations in order to carry child out of mother’s native country. Now grandparents want to see child, want child to have a relationship with half sibling and father refuses.

    What do you mean – father refuses? I thought all family should be allowed a relationship with children? Even with mother deceased shouldn’t siblings and extended family of mother’s be allowed continuing contact with child?

    Apparently not and apparently the well known father’s rights blogger, Glenn Sacks, REFUSES to run any stories on this "gatekeeping" of the child by FATHER. Even Ken Walker (kc9bdr@yahoo.com) agrees that Father should be allowed to keep child from maternal family – in fact he even quotes: "The maternal grandparents take the grandson to Brazil for 5 years, (mother dies) then complain when they don’t get placement. Give it time!". Mother does this and it is automatically a given that mother is gatekeeping and engaging in PA/PAS/PAD. So why is this not true for FATHER? Is FATHER not gatekeeping and possibly engaging in PA/PAS/PAD? The child in question has been around the maternal relatives for years now. Are we punishing another innocent young child by denying that child the RIGHT to have a relationship with the older sibling?

    Well, let me explain this so you get it really good, okay? Just as in this commercial about heroin use, PA/PAS/PAD has some rules too.

    Women are the only ones who can gatekeep a child. Ladies, ladies. Here’s how it works. It’s only PAS/PA when we accuse you of doing it. When WE do the exact thing we just accused you of doing ("gatekeeping," obstructing visitation, etc.) it doesn’t count. WE are the ONLY ones who can protect our children. These children are not your children, they are only our children. Just like that nice new car we fought for in the divorce, just like the house. Oh and forget about any equitable split, that is all ours too. Any questions?

    So go back and watch the video again.

    Frying pan is PAS/PA/PAD.

    Egg is your brain.

    And the violence you see portrayed is what COULD happen if PA/PAS/PAD is bought hook, line, and sinker. Our children, our future will be destroyed if abusers are allowed to continue to use JUNK SCIENCE in order to remove protective parents from a child’s life and place children with an alleged abuser. Do we want to place these children with potential alleged abusers? Don’t know about you but I do not. And now a young child is being denied a relationship with a sibling by a father and Glenn Sacks, Ken Walker, and who knows who else in the FATHER’S RIGHT MOVEMENT think this father is completely justified. Ken by his own words, and Sacks by his lack of words. Or is it just that as long as it is a father who is being allegedly denied this is a travesty that must (MUST!!!) be rectified, but when it is a mother or maternal relatives – ahhh who cares? One need only look at the case of Jean Paul Lacombe Diaz in Texas to see this is true. Where are the Ken Walker’s, the Glenn Sacks for this mom who has proof of abuse, has court orders granting her custody of this child? The courts were TRICKED into turning the boy over to father. He did this ILLEGALLY yet we see nobody in the Fa
    ther’s Rights Movement speaking to the tragedy of this court’s actions.

    Oh gee I keep forgetting. That is because the parent who is being denied the child is MOM. Who cares about moms right? After all, the only thing moms are good for is carrying the child, giving birth to the child, feeding the child life supporting breast milk. When the child can walk and talk, the mother should be gone. Fathers are the only important ones now.

    ANY QUESTIONS?

    Posted by Glenn’s Cult?at 6:56 AM

    Labels: Glenn Sacks, Ken Walker, PA, PAD, Parental Alienation, Parental Alienation Disorders, Parental Alienation Syndrome, PAS

    Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    Remember those scare tactic videos about your brain on drugs? Don’t know about you but they worked for me. Now lets take this on a new spin. What is someone who believes PA/PAS/PAD doing to their brains? Why are women the only ones ever accused of alienation or gatekeeping? We have a case here which to my eye appears to have the ever present gatekeeping and alienation tactics happening.

    So quick run down on this story. Mom "allegedly" kidnaps child and returns to her native country amid accusations by her of violence in the marriage. Mother remarries after divorce has another child and dies in childbirth. Father to older child goes on rampage in order to secure custody of older child – even amid allegations of violence by mother’s family in foreign country and mother’s widowed current spouse. Father eventually uses American politicians and television news stations in order to carry child out of mother’s native country. Now grandparents want to see child, want child to have a relationship with half sibling and father refuses.

    What do you mean – father refuses? I thought all family should be allowed a relationship with children? Even with mother deceased shouldn’t siblings and extended family of mother’s be allowed continuing contact with child?

    Apparently not and apparently the well known father’s rights blogger, Glenn Sacks, REFUSES to run any stories on this "gatekeeping" of the child by FATHER. Even Ken Walker (kc9bdr@yahoo.com) agrees that Father should be allowed to keep child from maternal family – in fact he even quotes: "The maternal grandparents take the grandson to Brazil for 5 years, (mother dies) then complain when they don’t get placement. Give it time!". Mother does this and it is automatically a given that mother is gatekeeping and engaging in PA/PAS/PAD. So why is this not true for FATHER? Is FATHER not gatekeeping and possibly engaging in PA/PAS/PAD? The child in question has been around the maternal relatives for years now. Are we punishing another innocent young child by denying that child the RIGHT to have a relationship with the older sibling?

    Well, let me explain this so you get it really good, okay? Just as in this commercial about heroin use, PA/PAS/PAD has some rules too.

    Women are the only ones who can gatekeep a child. Ladies, ladies. Here’s how it works. It’s only PAS/PA when we accuse you of doing it. When WE do the exact thing we just accused you of doing (
    "gatekeeping," obstructing visitation, etc.) it doesn’t count. WE are the ONLY ones who can protect our children. These children are not your children, they are only our children. Just like that nice new car we fought for in the divorce, just like the house. Oh and forget about any equitable split, that is all ours too. Any questions?

    So go back and watch the video again.

    Frying pan is PAS/PA/PAD.

    Egg is your brain.

    And the violence you see portrayed is what COULD happen if PA/PAS/PAD is bought hook, line, and sinker. Our children, our future will be destroyed if abusers are allowed to continue to use JUNK SCIENCE in order to remove protective parents from a child’s life and place children with an alleged abuser. Do we want to place these children with potential alleged abusers? Don’t know about you but I do not. And now a young child is being denied a relationship with a sibling by a father and Glenn Sacks, Ken Walker, and who knows who else in the FATHER’S RIGHT MOVEMENT think this father is completely justified. Ken by his own words, and Sacks by his lack of words. Or is it just that as long as it is a father who is being allegedly denied this is a travesty that must (MUST!!!) be rectified, but when it is a mother or maternal relatives – ahhh who cares? One need only look at the case of Jean Paul Lacombe Diaz in Texas to see this is true. Where are the Ken Walker’s, the Glenn Sacks for this mom who has proof of abuse, has court orders granting her custody of this child? The courts were TRICKED into turning the boy over to father. He did this ILLEGALLY yet we see nobody in the Father’s Rights Movement speaking to the tragedy of this court’s actions.

    Oh gee I keep forgetting. That is because the parent who is being denied the child is MOM. Who cares about moms right? After all, the only thing moms are good for is carrying the child, giving birth to the child, feeding the child life supporting breast milk. When the child can walk and talk, the mother should be gone. Fathers are the only important ones now.

    ANY QUESTIONS?

    Posted by Glenn’s Cult?at 6:56 AM

    Labels: Glenn Sacks, Ken Walker, PA, PAD, Parental Alienation, Parental Alienation Disorders, Parental Alienation Syndrome, PAS

    Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    Once Again, So-Called Parental Alienation Syndrome is Used to Excuse Alleged Child Sexual Abuse

     

    PAS is a Scam

    In DSM-V, Dr. Richard Gardner, Ernie Allen, NCMEC, Parental Alienation, Parental Alienation Disorder, Parental Alienation Disorders, Parental Alienation Syndrome on March 27, 2010 at 3:33 pm

    Her mother, Wendy Hill, sits in jail….gee, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that nobody wants to be “reunited” with a parent who stuck your mother in jail. Especially when she was trying to protect you from CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE. Again, the father’s rights folks are marching out “parental alienation syndrome” as an excuse to cover up the allegations and stop the girl from having a voice.  Ernie Allen of NCMEC brings money to his organization with each claim explaining child separation (even wrongly so).  This is why the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges warned judges again accepting claims of so-called “parental alienation syndrome” and “parental alienation.” From ABC News:Exclusive: Jessica Click-Hill, Found after 14 Years, Says She Is Still Hiding From Dad

    Jessica Click-Hill Denies She Was Brainwashed By Mom, Accuses Dad of Molesting Her

    By MARY KATHRYN BURKE, March 26, 2010

    The 22-year-old woman who refuses to see her father after hiding from him since the age of 8 says she is still in hiding, afraid that her father “is going to find me and show up on my doorstep.”

    Jessica Click-Hill, Missing for 14 Years, Found 'Alive and Well'

    After a 14-year search for his daughter, Dean Click finally knows that she is alive and safe. That her mother, Wendy Hill, is the sole suspect in their daughter’s alleged abduction came as little surprise to Click.

    (Courtesy Dean Click)

    Jessica Click-Hill was found last month and her mother Wendy Hill was arrested after 14 years of moving frequently and living under aliases.

    She and her mother went on the lam after Jessica’s father, Dean Click, won a court battle to share custody of the then little girl.

    Since her discovery early this month, Jessica has refused to meet her father, prompting him to claim that Jessica has been brainwashed by her mother.

    Jessica, who has changed her name to elude any attempt by her father to find her, talked exclusively to ABC News denying her father’s claims.

    “I have woken up screaming a couple times,” Jessica stated. “I’ve not been brainwashed. I was there for everything that happened. I could go into vivid detail. They were nauseating and horrific acts.

    “I am truly scared of him. I don’t want him in my life. I don’t want his letters. I am scared he is going to find me and show up on my doorstep,” she told ABC News in an email statement following several conversations.

    Jessica admitted that the constant moves to stay underground were difficult on a young girl, but said she felt the justice system was not doing enough to keep her father away from her.

    “My childhood was happy, despite moving quite a bit,” Jessica said. “I attended one high school. I’m now 22 and was married last year. I would describe myself as a geek, because I love video games. I would love to go to an art institute to study video-game art and design.”

    “I tried to tell people. No one other than my family would listen to me that this was going on,” she said.

    Jessica Click-Hill claims her father began molesting her at the age of 2.

    Jessica is hoping to tell her version of what happened to her. “I’ve spent all these years hoping that my story could be told. Now that I’m an adult, I can stop feeling like a child no one cared to listen to,” she said.

    Jessica said she will continue to stand by her mother. “It saddens me that my mother… is being portrayed as a kidnapper. She had nothing else in mind than to keep me from the monster that is my father,” she said.

    Pam Davis, Dean Click’s lawyer, told ABC News that he is “saddened” not to see his daughter. Davis added that at the time of the allegations, there was never enough evidence to charge Click. She said that he took a voluntary polygraph indicating he was not guilty of any abuse.

    “His only concern is not about himself but about the possibility of meeting his daughter someday,” Davis said. “He really loves his daughter.”

    Enormously Complicated

    Ernie Allen, of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, declined to speak specifically about Jessica’s case. He said, however, the group often encounters situations where a young person has been lied to by a parent.

    “It is enormously complicated,” Allen said. “A lot of these reunification scenarios are not ‘happily ever after’ and a lot of the time the child wants nothing to do with the other parent for a host of reasons.”

    “It’s been referred to as ‘Parental Alienation Syndrome,’” Allen added. “The premise from the abducting parent is ‘I am doing this for you – to save you – to protect you.’ The children in these scenarios are very young and you have to believe in the rule of law. We pursued the search for Jessica for all these years because there was a felony warrant out for her mother’s arrest.”

    Allen said that although Jessica does not want to see her father, the NCMEC succeeded in that it gave her father the information he had been seeking, the knowledge that Jessica was alive and well.

    “Her father now knows she is ok and where she is,” Allen said. “Reunification in parental abduction cases is a very difficult challenge. In 80 percent of these cases the motivation for the abduction is anger or revenge for the other spouse. That doesn’t mean that in some cases the abduction parent doesn’t have real concern or sometimes feel they have no other choice. But judges every day in cases like this one are asked to play Solomon. Obviously, the judge in this case did not find any proof of the allegation. Our focus is on finding the child.”

    Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    Gender Biased and Punitive: Why Abusers Get Away With Claiming “Parental Alienation”

    PAS is a Scam

    In DSM-V, Dr. Richard Gardner, Parental Alienation, Parental Alienation Disorder, Parental Alienation Disorders, Parental Alienation Syndrome on April 6, 2010 at 2:19 am

    The late Richard Gardner developed the theory of parental alienation syndrome (PAS) after claiming that one parent alienated the children from the other parent in 90% of his divorcing patients. Though claiming that the “disorder” was not sex specific, he used it almost exclusively against mothers, maintaining that mothers falsely raise domestic violence and incest during custody disputes for tactical gain. Even Gardner admitted PAS was not an actual syndrome; some call it parental alienation (PA), but the concept is identical.

    Acceptance

    Gardner claimed to have testified in 400 custody cases in 25 states. Although no state has codified PAS, at least 31 states have adopted Gardner’s friendly parent concept (FPC) in which courts are encouraged to give custody to the parent who will foster a better relationship between the children and the other parent. Even where not codified, many judges and custody evaluators base decisions or recommendations on PAS, PA, or the FPC.

    Problems

    There are problems associated with PAS, PA, and the FPC. They may deflect investigation from the validity of abuse accusations to the protective parent’s behavior. In addition, PAS, PA, and the FPC may deflect courts from noticing that men’s alienation allegations may themselves be alienating behaviors raised for tactical gain.

    False Premises

    Gardner incorrectly assumed that women need a tactical ploy to not lose custody under the best interest of the child standard. Gardner evidently was unaware that once a child passed its tender years, roughly at age 7, fathers were presumptively entitled to reclaim custody, and that most mothers still win custody under the best interest of the child standard.

    Gardner also wrongfully assumed that women often make false incest accusations in custody cases and that they gain advantage from doing so. Incest is raised in only about 6% of custody cases, and only a very small fraction (2%-3%) of this 6% are false. Investigated incest allegations are substantiated as often during custody disputes as at other times, but many child protection agencies do not investigate when a case is in court. Men have been found to make 16 times as many false incest allegations as women (21% vs. 1.3%).

    Gardner’s Motivations

    Gardner, who had no hospital admitting privileges for his last 25 years and fraudulently claimed to be a clinical professor of child psychiatry, derived his theories to discredit mothers who complained that their partners were abusing them or their children. Gardner, who often testified on behalf of pedophiles, admitted that probably over 95% of all sex abuse allegations are legitimate, but claimed incest and many other deviant sexual practices are normal and not harmful.

    Gender Biased and Punitive

    PAS, PA, and the FPC may discourage battered women and mothers in incest cases from complaining. Gardner advocated removing custody and if the behaviors continue, denying visitation to the alienating parent. These concepts may not be in the best interest of children as they generally deprive them of their protective parents and place them in the custody of abusive parents. They also may prevent protective parents and children from realizing the wrongfulness of the abuse or from venting their anger, thus exacerbating their pain and inhibiting healing.

    These concepts can be considered gender biased since their definitions exclude alienating behaviors most commonly committed by fathers: domestic violence, nonpayment of child support, and raising alienation allegations. They can be used only against custodial parents and impose no penalty on alienating noncustodial parents. An attempt to rename PAS as malicious mother syndrome confirms the bias.

    Inadmissible Evidence

    Gardner promoted PAS in self-published books. PAS has never been subjected to peer review or been recognized by any professional associations, including the American Psychiatric Association. The Report of the American Psychological Association Presidential Task Force on Violence and the Family characterizes PAS and PA as having no validity. With no validity within the scientific community, neither PAS nor PA is considered admissible in evidence.

    —Joan Zorza

    Further Readings

    Bruch C. Parental alienation syndrome and parental alienation: Getting it wrong in child custody cases. Family Law Quarterly vol. 35 (2001). no. (3), pp. 527–552.

    Dallam S. J. Dr. Richard Gardner: A review of his theories and opinions on atypical sexuality, pedophilia, and treatment issues. Treating Abuse Today vol. 8 (1998). no. (1), pp. 15–22.

    Dore M. K. The “friendly parent” concept: A flawed factor for child custody. Loyola Journal of Public Interest Law vol. 6 (2004). no. (1), pp. 41–56.

    Smith R. and Coukos P. Fairness and accuracy in evaluations of domestic violence and child abuse in custody determinations. The Judges’ Journal vol. 36 (1997). no. (4), pp. 38–42, 54–56.

    Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,