Crisis In The Family Courts

Shared Custody Issues in the Context of Domestic Violence

Posted in Uncategorized by abatteredmother on August 25, 2013

Written by Barry Goldstein

Sunday, 25 August 2013 08:52

THIS IS what  MANDATORY SHARED Parenting does. KILLS

source: NOMAS

In a Queens New York custody case, the court appointed a prominent psychologist to evaluate a young couple. The psychologist was frequently used as an expert in the New York courts despite a fathers’ rights bias that included a quotation in a New York Times article supporting shared parenting. Throughout his testimony supporting the abusive father, the evaluator could not respond to any of my questions asking for research to support any of his claims. Finally I asked him if there was any research to support his belief that children benefit from a 50-50 division as compared to 70-30. He cited Judith Wallerstein, but could not cite a particular book or article. A colleague put me in touch with Ms. Wallerstein who sent me an email for my continued cross-examination of the evaluator. She said that earlier research had indicated shared parenting might be beneficial in cases where the parents are able to cooperate, but more recent research has demonstrated that shared parenting is in fact harmful to children. One of the problems in our custody courts is that this psychologist, like most experts relied on by the courts does not have the knowledge of up-to-date research or the ability to apply it to custody cases.

Shared custody, sometimes referred to as joint custody involves joint decision making by the parents and sometimes also requires something close to a 50-50 division of time with each parent. The equal time division is often important to parents wishing to avoid paying child support. Proponents of shared parenting say it is only fair that parents have the same rights to parenting time with their children and courts claim that they must treat each parent that comes to court equally. This seems fair unless we understand the unstated part that parents should be treated the same regardless of the quantity and quality of time each parent spent with the child before the separation. Research about primary attachment is not controversial and demonstrates that a child’s primary attachment figure is more important to the well being of a child than the other parent. Furthermore, although research supports the belief that children benefit from having both parents in their lives, this is not true if one of the parents is abusive. Nevertheless many courts think it is their obligation to treat each parent the same even when one is much more valuable to the child.

Custody When Neither Parent is Abusive

The concept of shared parenting was supported by an initial study that found a favorable response. Courts were delighted to support shared parenting because it served as a way to compromise a difficult issue and could remove many cases from an already crowded calendar. Abusive fathers who had little involvement with the children during the relationship strongly supported shared parenting as a way to avoid child support and maintain access and control over their victims.

The initial study was based on a very limited population and most favorable circumstances that included parents who enthusiastically supported the use of shared parenting, were able to cooperate and lived close together. Later studies that included larger populations and more long term effects of the arrangement demonstrated shared custody to be harmful to children, but these studies failed to dampen the enthusiasm for shared custody in the legal system and by abusers.

The studies found that children with two homes in reality had no homes. Children forced to bounce back and forth between their parents’ homes were denied a sense of security and continuity. They could not spend the time with friends that they wanted and often could not participate in a variety of activities because they had to be with the other parent when some of the events occurred. Children were often embarrassed when articles they needed for school or other activities were left in the wrong home. In other words, even when parents were able to cooperate, the shared custody arrangement placed added pressure on the children and made their lives more difficult. Their success in academic studies and social interaction was negatively impacted by the shared custody arrangement.

Shared Custody in Domestic Violence Cases

Many of the laws and proposed legislation seeking to promote shared custody purport to contain language to create an exception for domestic violence cases and sometimes for other cases in which the parties are unable to cooperate. There is a good reason to treat domestic violence cases differently as shared custody is particularly harmful to children when one of the parents is an abuser. A parent cannot co-parent with an abuser because it is unsafe to challenge him and compromise is impossible when there is unequal power. The fundamental problem, too often missed by courts is that abusers are willing to see their children harmed in order to maintain what they believe is their right to control or punish their partner. Most contested custody cases that courts mistakenly label “high conflict” are in reality domestic violence cases in which fathers use the common abuser tactic of seeking custody to maintain control of their partner or punish her for leaving. Children who witness domestic violence (including non-physical abuse) are more likely to engage in dysfunctional behavior when they are older. Depending on their age when they witness his abuse, their stage of development is disrupted. All batterers have been found to engage in harmful parenting practices including undermining the relationship with the other parent, teaching bad values (sexism) and providing a bad example. In other words, up-to-date research establishes that abusers are not appropriate candidates for custody or shared custody.

The benefit of an exception for domestic violence is limited because of the widespread failure of courts to recognize domestic violence in custody cases. Thirty plus years ago when domestic violence first became a public issue there was no research available. Courts, like other bodies developed practices and approaches to consider domestic violence without knowing what worked. At the time domestic violence was mostly focused on physical abuse. The assumption was that mental problems and substance abuse caused domestic violence and that women’s behavior contributed to their partner’s abuse. Courts therefore chose to use mental health professionals as experts although they had no training in the dynamics of domestic violence. Courts assumed that children were not harmed by domestic violence unless they were directly assaulted and his abuse would end once the parties separated. Up-to-date research demonstrates that all of this and many other assumptions still relied on by many professionals in the custody court system are wrong.

There is now a specialized body of knowledge about domestic violence, but too often judges and the professionals they rely on are overconfident in their own understanding of domestic violence and fail to consider up-to-date research. Judge Mike Brigner wrote in his chapter for DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ABUSE and CHILD CUSTODY that when he trains judges they often ask him what to do about women who are lying. When asked what they mean, they cite women who return to their abusers, fail to pursue petitions for protective orders, don’t have police reports or hospital records and the myth that women frequently make false allegations of abuse to gain an advantage in litigation (in reality this occurs only one-two percent of the time). None of these behaviors indicates the women are lying and in fact this is often the safest response they can make particularly when still living with their abuser. Similarly inadequately trained professionals often cite the fact that the children did not seem afraid of the alleged abuser when they observed them as proof the allegations are false. The children understand what the “experts” don’t that the abuser is not going to hurt them in front of others and in fact they could be punished if they demonstrated fear in public. Many professionals in the court system believe they have the ability to determine who is lying just from observation. In fact research shows that aside from a very few elite CIA and FBI agents, no one has been shown to possess this skill. Accordingly these professionals through this belief become more susceptible to abusers who are skilled manipulators. While the unqualified professionals often discredit allegations of abuse for these and other invalid reasons, they fail to look at the pattern of controlling and coercive behaviors that would help them see the pattern of abusive behavior.

The result of this and many other mistakes by professionals in the custody court system is that thousands of children are being forced to live with abusers and many protective mothers, who are wrongly dismissed as disgruntled litigants and denied any meaningful role in their children’s lives. Legislatures and courts should be focusing on using the available up-to-date research to protect the safety and secure the potential of children caught up in domestic violence custody cases. Today, shockingly, courts are getting a majority of domestic violence custody cases wrong. This is one of the reasons we recommend that all professionals receive not just general domestic violence training, but specific training in Recognizing Domestic Violence, Gender Bias and The Effects of Domestic Violence on Children. Until courts have and apply this information, our children will not be safe when courts decide their fate.

In domestic violence custody cases, the use of shared parenting does not save court time and resources, but rather only postpones extensive litigation at great expense to the parties and harm to the children. Abusers eventually contrive incidents as an excuse to seek sole custody or protective mothers are forced to seek custody because the abusers are hurting the children. Abusive parents with limited parenting skills use shared parenting to get their foot in the door while continuing to harass and abuse their former partners. Court professionals often pressure protective mothers to accept shared custody with their abusers and punish them for trying to protect themselves and their children. Over forty states and many other court districts have sponsored gender bias commissions that have found widespread gender bias. Gender bias is particularly hard to overcome because judges and other professionals engage in gender bias without realizing they are doing so. The studies have shown that in custody cases, mothers are given higher standards of proof, less credibility and are blamed for their abuser’s behavior.

When mothers seek to limit contact between their children and their abuser for safety reasons and courts routinely treat this as if she is trying to interfere with the relationship between the children and abusive father, this is an example of blaming mothers for the father’s behavior. Instead of courts pressuring the abuser to stop his controlling and threatening behavior, protective mothers often face retaliation and punishment for trying to protect their children. This is particularly common when courts fail to recognize domestic violence and then punish mothers who continue to believe their abuse allegations. Provisions in shared custody laws that purport to make an exception for domestic violence will continue to be ineffective as long as there is widespread failure to recognize domestic violence and to take it seriously. Accordingly shared custody laws are not beneficial in cases where the parties can voluntarily cooperate and create serious danger to children in domestic violence cases

 

See more at: http://americanmotherspoliticalparty.org/ampp-article-library-family-court-custody-abuse-dv/5-family-criminal-law-and-research-abuse-dv-child-custody/94-batterers-revenge-punishment-and-continued-abuse-via-court#sthash.OhT2CBag.dpuf

Maternal Deprivation Inflicted on Battered Women and Abused Children – This is the Father Rights Movement

Posted in Uncategorized by abatteredmother on July 20, 2010

American Mothers Political Party

"Maternal Deprivation Abuse is featured on BMLCTA Blog in an effort to wipe out this heinous crime against mothers and children."

Maternal Deprivation, or Motherlessness, is occurring with alarming frequency due to the unethical treatment of women and children in family court. Maternal Deprivation is inflicting abuse by severing the mother-child bond. It is a form of abuse that men inflict on both the mother and children, especially men who claim they are “parentally alienated” from their children when there are complaints of abusive treatment by the father.

Maternal Deprivation occurs when men seek to keep their children from being raised by their mothers who are the children’s natural caretakers. Some men murder the mothers of their own children. Others seek to sever the maternal bonds by making false allegations of fictitious psychological syndromes in a deliberate effort to change custody and/or keep the child from having contact with their mother when there are legal proceedings. A twisted form of Maternal Deprivation is to kill the children, so that the mother will be left to suffer. Sometimes there are family annihilation murders where the father kills the children and himself (or dies by cop), but the mother is not killed because she has received protective orders and her children have not as in the case of Jessica Gonzales.

In seeking to define this form of abuse certain common elements are found in the Maternal Deprivation scenario as follows:

  • History of domestic abuse that could be physical, psychological, sexual, and/or social abuse occurring on or off again, occasionally, or chronically which could be mild, moderate, or severe, including homicidal and/or suicidal threats.
  • Legal proceedings relating to abuse
  • Hiring of “Fathers Rights” attorney
  • Use of “Hired Gun” mental health professionals to make accusations of psychological disorder against the mother and children in deliberate effort to excuse abuse and change custody or grant visitation that is contrary to safety concerns. Another name for these unethical professionals are “Whores of the Courts“
  • Raising claims of “psychological disorders” against the mother such as “Parental Alienation Syndrome” (PAS),Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome, Malicious Mother Syndrome, Lying Litigant Syndrome, Hostile Aggressive Parenting or any other mother-blaming psychological disorder that can be used by the unethical professional to re-victimize the victims.
  • Infliction of “Legal Abuse” by continually and excessively filing motions so that the mother continually has to defend herself and her child(ren) causing financial and emotional devastation.
  • Can occur in response to child support legal proceedings as retaliation.

The intent of “Maternal Deprivation” is to punish the mother and the child for revealing the abuse and to falsely claim that they are not abusive. This very commonly occurs as there are more and more “abuse-excuse”parental alienation accusing professionals who use this scientifically invalid theory over and over to achieve specific goals of the person paying them. Maternal Deprivation can also occur in response to child support legal proceedings. When occurring in this manner, Maternal Deprivation is a response to the financial demands as retaliation. Suddenly the father who had little prior involvement wants to take the kids half the time to avoid child support obligations, etc. When the men are really abusive, they ask for sole custody and demand the mother of the child pay them.

Although some people call this “Maternal Alienation”, a distinction needs to be made as the pro-pedophilia “Parental Alienation Syndrome” and the use of the word “Alienation” are most often used AGAINST battered women and abused children. There needs to be a distinction between the phony psychological syndrome and the intentional infliction of abuse on a mother and child by intentionally severing their natural bond. This distinction can best be made by NOT using the label of “Alienation” which will always be associated with the pro-pedophilia monster Doctor Richard Gardner.

Some of the characteristics of the especially heinous abusers who inflict Maternal Deprivation include but are not limited to the following:

  • Angry
  • Abusive
  • Violent
  • Coercive
  • Controlling
  • Threatening
  • Intimidating
  • Demanding
  • Domineering
  • Harassing
  • Stalking
  • Tyrannical
  • Oppressive
  • Forceful
  • Manipulative
  • Deceptive
  • Unethical
  • Un-empathetic (Lacks Empathy)
  • Entitled
  • Immature
  • Self-centered
  • Neglectful
  • Guilt inducing
  • Pushy
  • Intentionally tries to humiliate mother and/or child
  • Harsh, rigid and punitive parenting style
  • Outrage at child’s challenge of authority
  • May use force to reassert parental position
  • Dismissive of child’s feelings and negative attitudes
  • Vents rage, blames mother for “brainwashing” child and takes no responsibility
  • Challenges child’s beliefs and/or attitudes and tries to convince them otherwise
  • Inept and unempathic pursuit of child, pushes calls and letters, unannounced or embarrassing visits

There is a distinct overlap of the intimate terrorist type domestic violence abuser with the Maternal Deprivation abusers as follows:

  • Coercion and threats
  • Intimidation
  • Emotional abuse
  • Isolation
  • Minimizing, denying and blaming (Hallmarks of PAS)
  • Using children
  • Economic abuse
  • Male privilege

The people who most often engage in Maternal Deprivation Abuse are most often:

  • Abusive men
  • Vindictive second wives who don’t want to deal with the real mother of the children
  • Paternal grandparents who raised dysfunctional children (abusers)

The effects of Maternal Deprivation often cause the children to become psychotic, depressed, and sometimes suicidal or to have suicidal ideations. Another terrible reaction is when the child retaliates against the parent who accusesParental Alienation Syndrome as in a Texas case where the child killed his father. Other times when the Maternal Deprivation abuser completely takes over the will of the child by using brainwashing techniques similar to those used in prison camps where deprivation and isolation are used to force ideological changes in captives, these children often have a sort of trauma-bonding with the abuser and model their behavior. Sometimes these children will also abuse the mother in the same manner as the father. Another generation is created to carry on the abuse, and will likely do the same to their own spouse and children.

For more articles involving Maternal Deprivation:

WordPress Tags: Maternal,Deprivation,Women,Children,American,Political,Abuse,BMLCTA,Blog,effort,crime,frequency,treatment,father,Some,custody,proceedings,Sometimes,annihilation,orders,Jessica,Gonzales,scenario,History,threats,Legal,Rights,attorney,health,disorder,Another,Whores,Courts,Parental,Alienation,Syndrome,Munchausen,Proxy,Malicious,Mother,Litigant,Hostile,Aggressive,victims,Infliction,devastation,response,retaliation,theory,person,manner,demands,involvement,kids,Although,distinction,needs,word,AGAINST,Doctor,Richard,Gardner,characteristics,Angry,Abusive,Violent,Coercive,Tyrannical,Oppressive,Forceful,Manipulative,Deceptive,Unethical,Empathy,Immature,Self,Neglectful,Guilt,Pushy,Harsh,Outrage,Dismissive,feelings,beliefs,Inept,pursuit,terrorist,violence,abuser,Coercion,Intimidation,Emotional,Isolation,Economic,Male,Vindictive,Paternal,reaction,parent,Texas,times,prison,trauma,behavior,generation,spouse,Report,Failure,Protect,Crisis,Court,System,Death,Monster,Child,fraud,Cincinatti,VAWnet,Joan,Meier,Research,complaints,caretakers,allegations,syndromes,Fathers,accusations,disorders,goals,obligations,attitudes,Hallmarks,techniques,articles,pedophilia,abusers

THE parents of the man convicted of trying to kill his own baby want Custody of injured child from mom WTF?

Posted in Uncategorized by abatteredmother on July 13, 2010

Breed Woman Breed—but you will never have your offspring, every one else has their rights above yours. RUN MOTHERS RUN!

THEY take her injured son from her because HE Tries to kill her son WTF? Vulnerable? You bet killer dads dont just beat their children—they TORTURE the mother of their children. GIVE HER BACK her child!!!

Custody battle over tot battered by dad

THE parents of the man convicted of trying to kill his own baby will try and get custody for the injured child in a legal battle that starts next week.

The child is likely to experience learning and mobility problems for the rest of his life after his skull was cracked in a brutal attack on January 6.

A family court hearing is due to start next week as the parents of the convicted man battle with the tot’s mum’s family for custody of the child, now aged seven months.

His dad is starting a 17-year jail term for attempted murder.

The baby is currently in the care of Doncaster Council after being taken away from his 17-year-old mum in the wake of the terrible attack.

Lawyers acting for Doncaster Council said the "emotional temperature" of the case was running hot as both parties waited "in the wings" for a verdict in the criminal trial of the baby’s dad.

The teenage mum has a history of violence and depression and has been known to Doncaster Council social services since March 2008.

She was labelled a ‘vulnerable parent’ when visited by health workers after her baby’s birth.

Sheffield Crown Court heard she was a ‘loner’ who had dropped out of school and lived in a crowded household with money problems.

Chris Pratt, director of children’s services in Doncaster, said: "Doncaster Council’s children’s services were involved historically with the family but not at the time of the injury.

"Following the incident the council has been working in partnership with the police and continues to support the family."

In February a council statement said a serious case review would not be required.

Seven children died in the Doncaster area over five years as a result of abuse or neglect, leading to a takeover of Doncaster’s children’s services in March 2009.

An independent review found childcare provision was "seriously weak".

The latest case comes a year after the Edlington disaster, when two young boys were tortured by two brothers, aged 11 and 12.

A serious case review found the Edlington attacks had been "preventable".

Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) Stuart Showalter Neo Nazi-Fathers Rights Advocate-Abusers Rights Advocate Glenn Sacks-Abusers Advocate,Right Wing Terrorist- Fathers Rights. Warren Farrell, Mike J Murphy, Jeremy Swanson, Mark K Godbey, Donald Tenn, Stan Rains, Richard A. Gardner coined the term Parental Alienation Syndrome

WordPress Tags: Custody,Woman,rights,Vulnerable,killer,children,TORTURE,GIVE,BACK,problems,life,skull,January,Doncaster,Council,temperature,verdict,history,violence,depression,services,March,parent,health,workers,Sheffield,Crown,Court,loner,money,Chris,Pratt,director,injury,incident,partnership,February,statement,Seven,area,result,takeover,provision,Edlington,disaster,Parental,Alienation,Syndrome,Stuart,Showalter,Nazi,Advocate,Abusers,Glenn,Terror,Warren,Farrell,Mike,Murphy,Jeremy,Swanson,Mark,Godbey,Donald,Tenn,Stan,Richard,Gardner,Lawyers,Fathers,parents,week

Amber Huggins, Lauren McConniel’s mother, spent six months trying to find daughters- Father was given Custody and killed her

Posted in Uncategorized by abatteredmother on June 24, 2010

 

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Here is more details, (Arkansas):

http://www.thestarp ress.com/ article/20100618 /NEWS01/6180307/ Amber-Huggins- Lauren-McConniel -s-mother- spent-six- months-trying- to-find-daughter s

Amber Huggins, Lauren McConniel’s mother, spent six months trying to find daughters

MUNCIE — The biological mother of Lauren McConniel says she lost custody of the girl because she couldn’t afford an attorney.

She also says she pleaded unsuccessfully with the girl’s father and stepmother — via e-mail — to tell her where they were living in the months before Lauren’s death.

"I was kept from my daughter for six months," said Amber Huggins, a Marion native now living in Knoxville, Tenn. "I looked everywhere for them (Lauren and her 9-year-old sister) for six months."

Five-year-old Lauren’s father, Ryan McConniel, and stepmother, Brittany McConniel, have been charged with felony neglect of a dependent resulting in Lauren’s death on March 9.

Related

Amber and Ryan’s divorce decree in White County, Ark., granted Ryan custody of both girls in 2007.

"I did not have the financial resources to have an attorney," Amber said this week in a telephone interview. "Ryan had an attorney and I did not. There was no other reason he got custody. I was not an unfit mother. I never hurt my children."

Ryan kept the older daughter, but let Amber have Lauren starting at Christmas of 2008 after Amber filed a complaint of child abuse.

"She had bruises on her," Amber said. "I asked her what happened and she said she didn’t know. I took pictures of the bruises but they were old and not good quality pictures. Child protective services in White County said it was not enough."

Amber had Lauren until August 2009 when Ryan took her back. He gave Knoxville police an address in Winchester where he said he would be living.

But Amber later traveled to Winchester, and, accompanied by the police, went to the address Ryan had provided to Knoxville police.

Nobody had lived at the address in a long time.

"I sent numerous e-mails begging them to give me their address," Amber said. "I was told they were living in Winchester. I heard they were living in Farmland. I heard Fort Wayne. I heard Muncie. I heard everything."

Amber said Ryan and Brittany responded by e-mail that she could see the girls when they got old enough to decide for themselves if they wanted to see her.

http://www.thestarp ress.com/ section/videonet work?bctid= 96669528001# /Woman%20plans% 20vigil%20for% 20deceased% 20girl%20% 2806.16.10% 29/96669528001

This is the little girl that died in Muncie.  The mother couldn’t find her, dad and stepmom kept her from her.  Mom couldn’t afford lawyer, mom lost custody.

WordPress Tags: Amber,Huggins,Lauren,McConniel,Video,Here,Arkansas,article,daughter,MUNCIE,custody,girl,attorney,father,death,Marion,Knoxville,Tenn,Five,Ryan,Brittany,felony,March,woman,plans,White,children,Christmas,complaint,pictures,Child,services,August,Winchester,Nobody,Farmland,Fort,Wayne,lawyer,months,daughters,thestarp,couldn,stepmother,girls