Time Has Ended, Bye

Meandering and wandering around online this morning looking for something inspiring to blog I found the video below on YouTube.  It isn’t all that inspiring, so to speak, but it does go along with the theme of the post I did yesterday on exposing abusers for what they are. 

The main point I want you to take away from watching this video is this:  abusers manipulate every situation and will use their own kids to do so if that is how they can get the job done!!!  When the Family Courts are trying to decide which parent would be ‘in the best interest of the child’ to have physical custody they really should pay attention to this type of evidence.  It is a definite sign that a parent is abusive, and clearly does NOT hold their children’s best interest at heart. 

Don’t just listen to the words being said in this video.  Pay attention to the dates and times.  From what it looks like to me, this child is supposed to get to talk to their mom for 15 minutes on certain days and after 2 to 3 minutes each call for months the child is told to end the call by someone in the back ground.

Our hearts go out to this child and his mother!  If you happen to see this, know you are both in our prayers.

 

Do you have an abuser that needs to be exposed like Ray Knutsen?

New Study: Fathers do kill their kids just to hurt the moms

The article below covers a new study that gives us some data to refer to when stating what we have all known to be true for a few years:  Fathers who kill their kids do it out of revenge to the mom … usually for leaving them.  We have never argued that moms do NOT kill their kids, but have said that fewer of them do so and that they do so for different reasons than fathers that kill their children.  Finally someone completed a study on this and the below article gives the results.

 

Child killer study finds diverse motives for men and women

February 4, 2012

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/child-killer-study-finds-diverse-motives-for-men-and-women-20120203-1qxnz.html#ixzz1pCerEfRP

HE BECAME known as the Facebook killer because it was on the social networking site that he broadcast his intention to kill his daughter: ''Bout 2 kill ma kid,'' wrote Ramazan Acar shortly before he murdered two-year-old Yazmina in Melbourne in November 2010 by stabbing her repeatedly. But it was less the medium than the motive that defined his crime.

Soon after that message, he posted another intended for his ex-partner, Rachelle D'Argent: ''Pay bk u slut.''

A new study of child murders,

It’s All About the Power and Control, I Mean the Kids - Part Three

“If you want to change the culture, you will have to start by changing the organization.” ~ Mary Douglas (1921-2007)

Monday and Tuesday I gave you my opinion about the Father’s rights Movement, that I think it may have started out as some good fathers and men attempting to make their children’s lives better.  I said that I believe abusers have taken that over and ultimately made children’s lives worse through the Family Court System.

After all, it is abusers that want to maintain power and control of their victims and could care less about what is really best for their kid’s.  They will twist everything so that it appears to those they are manipulating that the victim is the one in the wrong or that the victim is the abuser.

Today, I felt it was only fair to discuss the various avenues that a truly good father can take to protect him and his children.  I’ve already stated that I don’t believe that just being a parent (whether mom or dad) makes a person a good parent.  There are men out there that are abused by women and there are kids out there that are abused by moms.

Most of the time men that abused will not seek help; mainly for the same reasons a woman won’t, but with the added social embarrassments that women don’t have.  What will their friends and family think about them ‘letting’ a woman abuse?  Men are most often not believed either; by friends, family, and professionals.

The reason for these two additional factors is because the way society as a whole thinks about gender.  A man doesn’t ‘let’ himself be abused anymore than a woman ‘lets’ herself be abused.  No abuse victim wants to be abused, in any way, regardless of what type of abuse it is.  An abuser can gain power and control of their victim in many different ways and the victim rarely sees this happening until it is too late.

When a man finds himself the victim of domestic violence or abuse and seek help they often find no services geared specifically for men.  The main reason for this is that most men (not all) are not abused to the point that they can no longer provide for themselves or that their lives are in physical danger.  The shelters that are set up to help women can’t house abused men in with abused women for many reasons, mainly because many abusers attempt to play themselves off as victims to gain entrance into a shelter to find their victims... horrifying!  But also because most shelters are not set up for co-habitation between males and females.

Organizations and shelters can however still help men that need that help.  The can help them by providing emergency assistance with vouchers for hotel for a couple nights for their safety, this is one of the things a man would have to know to ask for though... even most women don’t know to ask for a voucher when told the shelter is full.

Men can also call the National Domestic Violence Hotline for Men and Women at 1.888.743.5754 to ask for advice and help in their particular situation.  Online a man can go any of these sites (which I found here):

• Start with our list of Programs Closest to You
• Battered Husbands Support
• Battered Men.com
• Battered Men: Research Reveals A Secret Side To Domestic Violence (Originally published in The Pacific Sun, overview of research and stats related to female perpetrators)
• Domestic Violence Against Men (From Oregon Counseling)
• Domestic Violence Against Men in Colorado
• Domestic Violence - Another Perspective from MenStuff.org
• Male Depression.com
• S.A.F.E.: Stop Abuse for EVERYONE

I would suggest that any man who is a victim of domestic violence visit An Abuse, Rape and Domestic Violence Aid and Resource Collection:  http://www.aardvarc.org/dv/malevictims.shtml  There are a lot of good resources there that can help a man and their children.

There are good fathers out there, I just want them to be able to help themselves and their children without getting sucked into the FR Movement.  After all abusers can manipulate anyone, that is what makes them good at lying in court and getting their way, rather than the best interest of their child being protected by the court.

It’s All About the Power and Control, I Mean the Kids - Part Two

“Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self.” ~ Cyril Connolly (1903-1974)

Ok, so with that thought in mind I move on to part two of this topic, and oh yes there will be a part three... just don’t you worry. 

As I was saying in part one, the people who make up the Father’s Rights Movement may not have started out where they have ended up.  They originally may have been honestly good fathers and what they have morphed into is the result of many abusers jumping onboard and running away with the movement.

Along these lines the men in the FR Movement have touted and tried to throw in the face of all women (feminists, non-feminists, mothers and every one really) a quote from Gloria Steinem... attempting to ‘prove’ that even SHE sees their side of it, that fathers need to be equal in parenting...  FR’s go on with that thought regardless of whether or not the father is abusive.

The quote I’m referring to is:  “Women can't be equal outside the home until men are equal in it.”

As far as I can find Gloria Steinem actually said this sentence twice, once in an interview published in the NY Daily News and once in an article she wrote which was published in the Opinion Section of the LA Times.  The LA Times article is no longer available but I found the article copied here, so that I can still reference it.

In both cases the FR Movement refuses to take the quote in the context of what she was actually saying.  Taking shit out of context is one of my biggest pet peeves and in this case shows how totally twisted they have actually gotten it.

In the interview, which was for the occasion of her 75th birthday, she was speaking in a general sense of women’s equality.  What she actually said was: 

“We’ve demonstrated that women can do what men do, but not yet that men can do what women do. That’s why most women have two jobs — one inside the home and one outside it — which is impossible. The truth is that women can’t be equal outside the home until men are equal in it.”

In the article she wrote for the LA Times she was speaking about Sarah Palin running for VP.  What she actually said was: 

Being a hope-a-holic, however, I can see two long-term bipartisan gains from this contest.

Republicans may learn they can't appeal to right-wing patriarchs and most women at the same time. A loss in November could cause the centrist majority of Republicans to take back their party, which was the first to support the Equal Rights Amendment and should be the last to want to invite government into the wombs of women.

And American women, who suffer more because of having two full-time jobs than from any other single injustice, finally have support on a national stage from male leaders who know that women can't be equal outside the home until men are equal in it. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are campaigning on their belief that men should be, can be and want to be at home for their children.

She wasn’t saying that men should be equal in the home, thus supporting fathers being caregivers to young children then turning around and abusing them because they are not equipped to handle it.  What she is saying is that women have TWO jobs, which are impossible to juggle from a man’s point of view... but that women do it everyday.

Yes, she does state that Obama and Biden were campaigning on their belief that men should, can and want to be home for their kids.  She did NOT say she supports that... she specifically used the words “their belief”. 

So, Father’s Rights Activists.... I ask you this, where exactly does Gloria Steinem say you should be allowed to stay home and not work while your children’s mom does and pays you child support to abuse your kids?  I must have missed that.

I still stick to my opinion that most of those in the FR Movement are abusers trying to cram their ideological patriarchal power and control down everyone else’s throats.

It’s All About the Power and Control, I Mean the Kids

Everyday we all hear about or read about divorcing couples fighting over who gets the kids.  Fighting over their own children like they are some sort of property to be traded back and forth.  There are many people that believe ALL mothers should always have custody with very little to no visitation for fathers; and likewise there are those out there that believe the opposite, ALL fathers should get custody and mothers should get little to no visitation.

Personally I don’t see how so many people can see this issue in such black and white terms.  Not ALL mothers are good parents and not ALL fathers are good parents.  For the most part the daily news will show us that most child abuse and child murders are committed by fathers, and yes, occasionally by mothers.  This still doesn’t prove that ALL fathers are bad or good or that ALL mothers are bad or good.

In the last few years I have learned more about the Father’s Rights Movement, and I can say that I’m more than a little shocked at what I’ve learned.  The Father’s Rights Advocates would have everyone believe that they are just concerned for fathers as a whole having shared or joint custody.  They would have us believe that their number one concern is actually the children in divorces and custody cases.  On the surface if one doesn’t dig too much that sounds wonderful.

However, when looked at further it is easily seen what the real agenda is for the Father’s Rights Movement.  The further abuse and victimization of their ex-wives and children.  Before I go any further here, I’d like to point out that I fully believe that good fathers have

sought out the assistance of the Father’s Rights Movement and one of two things happens... they either leave, frustrated and still alone in their plight OR they become enmeshed in the bitterness which abounds.

What I see out of Father’s Rights Advocates around the internet appears to be mostly just a bunch of men (and a few women that will do anything to get the attention or have a little power for themselves) who have been abusive in one way or another to the mother of their children and now feel that comfy rug of power and control being ripped from under their feet. 

What better way to continue to abuse and control your victim when they walk away than to take possession of their children?

One main reason that I’ve formed the opinion that I have of the Father’s Rights Movement is because only abusers would look at the news we see of fathers murdering and abusing their kids and deny that it happens, or make excuses for it happening.  The strict adherence to the ‘ALL fathers should have custody’ line that they feed everyone is the basis of my opinion that the majority of those in the movement are abusers grasping at keeping the power and control they had.

Here is an example, mind you... this is only one search, but there are many like this.

VISITOR ANALYSIS

Referrer
http://www.google.com/m?q=do wifes come back after losing custody?&start=20&sa=N

Search Engine Phrase
do wifes come back after losing custody?

Search Engine Name
Google

Search Engine Host
www.google.com

Host Name
74-82-64-35.rdns.blackberry.net

IP Address
74.82.64.35 [Label IP Address]

Country
United States

Why would someone look for this?  Other than because they are contemplating attempting to gain custody through the Family Court just to get their ex-wife back under their power.  This doesn’t sound like a man who loves his kids and wants the best for them, this sounds like a man who loves control and will use whatever means available to him to maintain or re-gain his power and control.

I never meant for this to be this long, so I will wrap this up by saying... not ALL men should have access to their children regardless of what the FR Advocates say.  Likewise, I can admit that not ALL women that give birth are the best parent choice either.  The natural equipment that we are born with which enables us to create life does NOT dictate how a person will be as a parent.

Since it is obvious that I have much more to say about this... there will be other posts on this subject.

 

Press release: Protective Mothers march on Oct 1 in Washington DC

 

PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
                     Contact Connie Valentine 916-233-8381

A press conference will be held on Friday, October 1, 2010 from 11:00 am to noon in front of the  U.S. Department of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, D.C.   
On the first day of Domestic Violence Awareness month, advocates and protective mothers whose children have been ordered into the custody of batterers and molesters are gathering to call for an investigation by the DOJ into family court corruption. 

These mothers are deeply concerned about their children. Mildred Mohammad, former wife of Beltway Sniper John Mohammad, took part in the Mothers' Day vigil at the White House on May 9, 2010. "I was without my children for two years when they were kidnapped by John and the courts didn't listen to me," she told reporters.  

As in the Mohammad case, family courts across the nation ignore or minimize child safety.

Research shows that 70% of batterers who request custody receive it, leading to 58,000 children per year who are forced to live with their identified abusers.[1] Many are killed. Batterers are over 6 times more likely to sexually abuse their children.[2]

The social ramifications of this trend are frightening. Children who are abused are at a high risk in adulthood for problems such as addictions, obesity, suicide attempts, heart disease and cancer. [3]

After the press conference, the mothers and their supporters will march to the Senate to request Congressional hearings to investigate these violations of law and human rights.

The march will end at the Sewall Belmont House at 144 Constitution Ave NE, the suffragists' headquarters when, in 1910, they insisted that women receive the civil right to vote.

In 2010, mothers are insisting that children have the human right to physical and sexual safety.  Please visit www.mothers-of-lost-children.com for more information.

[1] www.leadershipcouncil.org

[2] Bancroft, Lundy and Silverman, Jay, The Batterer as Parent, Sage Publications, 2002

[3] www.acestudy.org

Every Little Girl has a Dream

Women, We Will be Victorious

I found this here: http://americanmotherspoliticalparty.blogspot.com/2010/06/women-we-will-be-victorious.html

What Divorce and Parenthood Should Look Like

I’m not talking about the bit where he won the lottery and is going to share it with his ex-wife.  I am talking about the bit where they have been separated all these years (but recently divorced) and they are still friends.  They are civil to each other and still enjoy hanging out together for their daughters well-being.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/queensland/a/-/world/6949836/man-divorces-wife-wins-lottery

 

Man divorces wife, wins lottery

A UK bus driver has won $3.8 million on the lottery but vowed to share his winnings with his ex-wife.

Kevin Halstead, 46, and his former wife Helen, 43, received their divorce papers four months before the lottery bonanza, the Daily Mail reports.

"This win will help my friends out and she is still my friend," Mr Halstead said.

The father-of-one is also aiming to help his current partner, Josephine Jones, obtain a passport so she can take her first ever trip overseas.

He's denied reports that he went out to celebrate divorcing his wife the night before he bought the winning lottery ticket.

"It is not true," he was quoted as saying.

"We split up 13 years ago but we did not bother divorcing until four months ago because of our daughter."

"She is a very good friend. I go round and have cups of tea with her and her new partner. We have had a giggle about that this morning."

Mr Halstead, from Lancashire, has driven a bus on the same route every day for the last 17 years but has vowed not to quit his job.

He told the Daily Mail: "I don't want to pack my job in. I asked my boss for time off, a month maybe two, but I don't want to cut myself off from my friends and I really enjoy my job."

The avid Liverpool supporter has also promised his daughter, Jessica, 14, a pony.

Children Have A Right to A Relationship with Their Father

While attempting to write up something coherent on this news article I found a post on RandiJames.com that I’d like to share with you.  I am still currently too mad...and worried for these little girls to say anything useful here!  But Randi James put it very well:

Original Post here:  http://www.randijames.com/2010/03/children-have-right-to-relationship.html

UPDATED!! AGAIN
Does watching child porn match you a bad father? Maybe, maybe not. But who'd like to bet their own children on it? Any volunteers?
No, seriously.
A father was convicted of child pornography offenses a couple of years ago.
His wife left him.
Subsequently, the father has been trying to get access to his children.
The court previously found that he had behaved inappropriately in bed with one of the children.
But JUDGE ROBERT BENJAMIN ordered that the two children, who are girls aged 8 and 10, spend weekends with their father.
Eldest daughter is afraid.
To facilitate the father's rights, JUDGE ROBERT BENJAMIN orders that:
1. the girls sleep in the same bedroom (to "support" each other), and
2. the father place a lock on the bedroom door for the girls
3. the father have an adult friend stay overnight when the girls are present
Additionally, some UNNAMED Family Court counselor has stated that the girls don't pose a risk to the father, at their current ages, when they are awake, clothed, and together.
How considerate.
Think I'm kidding? See article here.

A summary of the rights under the Convention on the Rights of the Child
Article 3 (Best interests of the child): The best interests of children must be the primary concern in making decisions that may affect them. All adults should do what is best for children. When adults make decisions, they should think about how their decisions will affect children. This particularly applies to budget, policy and law makers.
Article 4 (Protection of rights): Governments have a responsibility to take all available measures to make sure children’s rights are respected, protected and fulfilled. When countries ratify the Convention, they agree to review their laws relating to children. This involves assessing their social services, legal, health and educational systems, as well as levels of funding for these services. Governments are then obliged to take all necessary steps to ensure that the minimum standards set by the Convention in these areas are being met. They must help families protect children’s rights and create an environment where they can grow and reach their potential. In some instances, this may involve changing existing laws or creating new ones. Such legislative changes are not imposed, but come about through the same process by which any law is created or reformed within a country. Article 41 of the Convention points out the when a country already has higher legal standards than those seen in the Convention, the higher standards always prevail.
Article 5 (Parental guidance): Governments should respect the rights and responsibilities of families to direct and guide their children so that, as they grow, they learn to use their rights properly. Helping children to understand their rights does not mean pushing them to make choices with consequences that they are too young to handle. Article 5 encourages parents to deal with rights issues "in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child". The Convention does not take responsibility for children away from their parents and give more authority to governments. It does place on governments the responsibility to protect and assist families in fulfilling their essential role as nurturers of children.
Article 6 (Survival and development): Children have the right to live. Governments should ensure that children survive and develop healthily.
Article 9 (Separation from parents): Children have the right to live with their parent(s), unless it is bad for them. Children whose parents do not live together have the right to stay in contact with both parents, unless this might hurt the child.
Article 12 (Respect for the views of the child): When adults are making decisions that affect children, children have the right to say what they think should happen and have their opinions taken into account. This does not mean that children can now tell their parents what to do. This Convention encourages adults to listen to the opinions of children and involve them in decision-making -- not give children authority over adults. Article 12 does not interfere with parents' right and responsibility to express their views on matters affecting their children. Moreover, the Convention recognizes that the level of a child’s participation in decisions must be appropriate to the child's level of maturity. Children's ability to form and express their opinions develops with age and most adults will naturally give the views of teenagers greater weight than those of a preschooler, whether in family, legal or administrative decisions.
Article 19 (Protection from all forms of violence): Children have the right to be protected from being hurt and mistreated, physically or mentally. Governments should ensure that children are properly cared for and protect them from violence, abuse and neglect by their parents, or anyone else who looks after them. In terms of discipline, the Convention does not specify what forms of punishment parents should use. However any form of discipline involving violence is unacceptable. There are ways to discipline children that are effective in helping children learn about family and social expectations for their behaviour – ones that are non-violent, are appropriate to the child's level of development and take the best interests of the child into consideration. In most countries, laws already define what sorts of punishments are considered excessive or abusive. It is up to each government to review these laws in light of the Convention.
Article 34 (Sexual exploitation): Governments should protect children from all forms of sexual exploitation and abuse. This provision in the Convention is augmented by the Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.
Article 36 (Other forms of exploitation): Children should be protected from any activity that takes advantage of them or could harm their welfare and development.
Contact us
Our mission is to enable journalists and media producers to tell the stories of the world's children, while creating greater public awareness, emotional involvement and social participation. Through our video products and partnerships we advocate for the protection of children's rights, mobilise political will and material resources, respond in emergencies and promote the equal rights of women and girls.
We encourage you to browse our website. Become informed on new issues, inspired by what you learn and then take whatever steps you can to make a difference in building a better world for children. Please contact us if you have any further questions. Email Tanya Turkovich: tturkovich@unicef.org

This case is one of many, internationally, involving fathers' rights to their children. We can't all be lying.

In the words of Judge Robert Lemkau (California):
And you have an ex parte request calendared for tomorrow which I am advancing today. One of you is lying, and I am very concerned...
...I am inclined to deny you ex parte request. I feel that, if you're lying, there's going to be adverse consequences...
...I'm denying your request, ma'am. I think— there's insufficient evidence in my mind...
...Well, ma'am, there's a real dispute about whether that's even true or not...
...I'm going to deny it, ma'am. My suspicion is that you're lying, but I'm going to keep the custody orders in full force and effect...
...I reviewed it and that's why I'm -- my supposition, ma'am, is that you're lying, but if I'm incorrect, you can always bring another ex parte motion but don't misrepresent the situation. If you're lying about this, there's going to be adverse consequences. My supposition is that you are lying...

Randi James: Children Have A Right to A Relationship with Their Father. I'd Like to Thank Judge Robert Benjamin on Behalf of the U.N.

Domestic Violence Survivor had Parental Rights Terminated Now Faces Felony Warrant

I stumbled across part of this story and went looking for the rest of it.  The below is what I found.  I copied the below from http://angelzfury.wordpress.com/ .  I also located the original article at Kansas Watchdog.  I urge you to leave comments on the original article so that those in Kansas can see what the rest of the world thinks of them doing this to a mother.

Kansas: Domestic Violence Survivor & Mother who Testified Against the State has Felony Warrant Issued Against her for Wanting To see Her Babies!!

In domestic law on February 28, 2010 at 11:37 pm

1. KansasWatchdog Warrant out in Wichita for arrest of Cecelia Arnold for trying to see her kids. Reform badly needed. VIDEO: http://tinyurl.com/yj4y2ltabout 2 hours
2. KansasWatchdog

   Warrant out in Wichita for arrest of Cecelia Arnold for trying to see her kids. Reform badly needed. AUDIO:http://tinyurl.com/ygksbyx

How can wanting to see your child whom the mother has never physically harmed be a felony, but yet, domestic violence, battery on another person (a physical crime, potentially fatal, bond $2,500.00)  is only a misdemeanor?????????  $10,000.00 bond

Listen to Cecillia Arnold:http://tinyurl.com/ygksbyx

Warrant Details 

ARNOLD , CECELLIA L
Race: B Sex: F Age: 24
Height: 506 Weight: 150
Hair: BLK Eyes: BRO

Warrant Id: 92696
Court Case No.: 2009CR003679
Type: ARREST WARRANT
Charge: INTERFERENCE W/PARENTAL CUSTODY; OTHER THAN JOINT CUSTODY
Felony/Misdemeanor: F
Bond: $10,000.00

Compelling stories from parents and grandparents about problems with placement and removal of children

By Earl Glynn On December 4, 2009

Abused mom Cecillia Arnold lost her parental rights. She wants her kids back.

“I did all court orders and my girls were placed back home with me”

“The case workers changed many times. I couldn’t get through to them sometimes.”

“The reintegration itself … was going well”

“I had stability. I had a home. I had a job. I had everything that they would ask someone to do for reintegration to occur.”

“My abuser … was going to jail at the time at the time the girls were removed from home. He was incarcerated for, I think, it was two years for the crime he committed against me.”

“The girls were removed from home for the second time.”

“The assistant [Sedgwick County] DA … filed a petition for termination [of parental rights], and after … the trial termination was granted.”

“As of now I have not seen my children since March of this year”

“During the trial I had testimony from different people — the foster care parents … — their testimony was overlooked.”

“… bad experiences with DCCA …”

“They said the reason for termination was … me not following the reintegration plan. That was not true.”

“… the ball got dropped on me from the Agency that was contracted through the courts … They didn’t do the job that they were supposed to do, which resulted in my girls being removed from home”

Senator Oletha Faust-Goudeau: “Her parents are in the audience … They have been denied custody of their grandchildren, too, and told there were too old; they were too sick.”

State Rep Bill Otto (R-LeRoy): “Your rights are severed?”

Arnold: “My rights have been terminated … I have no rights to my children. I have not seen them since March. I filed an appeal that didn’t go anywhere. I’m here today because I want my children back.” …

Otto: “Where was your lawyer?” …

Arnold: “I had court-appointed attorneys … I feel I could have done a better job representing myself” ..

Otto: “This should not happen to anybody … I’m so sorry.” …

Chair Kiegerl: “Your problem mainly is with the courts, although, I’m sure, the agency’s testimony was instrumental in the decision. … My heart goes out to you …I wish there were a magic wand that … we could use to solve your problem.”

Arnold left in tears.

Listen to Cecillia Arnold:http://tinyurl.com/ygksbyx

Watch this Kansas Watchdog YouTube Video of Arnold explaining her case.

Technorati Tags:Kansas,Domestic,Violence,Victim,Mother,Against,State,Felony,Warrant,Babies,KansasWatchdog,Wichita,Cecelia,Arnold,kids,Reform,VIDEO,AUDIO,battery,person,crime,misdemeanor,Details,CECELLIA,Race,Hair,Court,Case,Type,ARREST,Charge,INTERFERENCE,PARENTAL,CUSTODY,JOINT,Bond,problems,placement,removal,children,Earl,Glynn,December,Cecillia,rights,orders,workers,times,abuser,Sedgwick,termination,March,testimony,DCCA,ball,Agency,courts,Senator,Oletha,Faust,Goudeau,audience,Bill,Otto,LeRoy,Where,lawyer,Chair,Kiegerl,decision,heart,wand,tears,Listen,Watch,Watchdog,YouTube,tinyurl,ygksbyx,parents,girls,reintegration,didn

Court Sanctioned Child Abuse

I found the transcription below while doing some research about parental alienation and child abuse.  I do not know any of the individuals involved in this meeting, so I have taken the liberty of x’ing out the names to protect their identities.  This meeting was several years ago, so I doubt attempting contact for permission to use this would be fruitful.  For the same reason I am not providing a link to the original document in which this segment is located.

I chose the below to highlight that protective parents have been fighting this battle for several years.  This is not something new.  Family Courts have been sentencing young children to lives of hell for far too long and nothing seems to be being done to put a stop to this.

Ordinary, everyday, citizen’s (for the most part) are not even aware that such atrocities are taking place in the judicial buildings that we as a society pay for with our tax dollars.  Most people never realize that child are being handed over to abusive criminals; until it happens in their small sphere of being.  Then it is an outrage for a time and they resume life eventually, never to think of it again.

Protective parents don’t get that luxury, if you will, to go on about life as if their children were not ripped away from them and handed to the very person that has abused them.  Those children don’t get the luxury of going on about their lives in a safe, loving and well cared for existence.

I ask you to read the below testimony and think about it.  What would you do in this situation?  What are you going to do now that you know this is happening to children around the world?  Will this be one more piece of information that you will half-way process and go back to life as usual; not to think of again...until it happens to you or someone you know?

 

Ms. XXXX XXXX (Nemesis Network): Good afternoon.

This committee has a wondrous responsibility and a magnificent possibility to relieve the silent agony of millions of Canadians. I wish you tremendous success.

I was savagely attacked and viciously beaten by my husband. He sodomized my baby girls. He cruelly and severely abused my son. He blew up pets with rifles in front of my tiny children. He shot at my son and pets and farm animals with an air pellet gun. He attacked men, got into fights, took drugs, smoked marijuana, and entered and stole from cottages.

The Joint Chair (Senator XXXX XXXX): Is all that material in a case report? It's in the context under which we meet. Can you give us that reference?

Ms. XXXX XXXX: Yes. I have to finish the paragraph.

The Joint Chair (Senator XXXX XXXX): It's better to give the reference and then you can finish the paragraph.

Ms. XXXX XXXX: This is my case.

The Joint Chair (Senator XXXX XXXX): Have you the name of the case and the jurisdiction in which it took place?

Ms. XXXX XXXX: The judicial jurisdiction is Terrebonne. I don't have the number of the case with me.

Committee Member 1 XXXX XXXX: It's just for the record.

Ms. XXXX XXXX: The divorce judgment?

Committee Member 1 XXXX XXXX: No, your case. So-and-so versus whom?

Ms. XXXX XXX: XXXX v. XXXXX. Sorry about that.

The Joint Chair (Senator XXXX XXXX): That's fine. When you make this kind of statement, we need to know that it's on the record.

Ms. XXXX XXXX: I understand.

Committee Member 2 XXXX XXXX: Is what you have just stated on the court record?

Ms. XXXX XXXX: Some of it.

Committee Member 2 XXXX XXXX: Please limit your comments to what was on the court record.

Ms. XXXX XXXX: Okay. I will eliminate anything that is not on the court record.

I made my first call to the police in early 1979. We subsisted with a cruel terrorist. I don't know why we didn't all die. But here I am, and what I need you to understand is that my story is the story of millions of muted mothers and silent children. Because I didn't die, I have an awesome responsibility to make audible our souls' silent screams.

The majority of even minimally decent and responsible parents recognize the crucial importance of nurturing the young. It is the child abusers and wife beaters who most frequently sue for and often receive custody of or generous access to their small victims.

The most brutal abusers live in families scared to death of their terrorists. No one tells. It would be worth their lives or that of their protective parents. Often the most severe abusers become known only after the death of the protective parent and/or the children. The rest and those who report are silenced and live a noxious existence, for the destruction pervades every aspect and detail of a lifetime. This is the legacy of sanctioned abuse under our present laws.

Of course, I lost custody. My xxx tiny hurt girls were wrenched from their protective parent and sent to live with their abuser. He subsequently disappeared with them. They are registered in the Canadian registry of disappeared children.

I cannot imagine a surer way to destroy children and their mothers. I cannot imagine a greater cruelty or a more unnatural behaviour than to destroy the young of a species and the mothers who bear them. This is a tactic of war.

Protective parents who stay alive exist in society-imposed exile and poverty, trying to comprehend the incomprehensible and attempting to survive the horrendous agony of knowing what their children are enduring. It is hard for decent people—and most of us are—to imagine that a human could so choose to destroy and dehumanize their own children and their mothers. Many if not most of us naturally recoil and choose to believe more comfortable and frequently dangerous theories. The mind cannot accept what the soul cannot imagine. In our inability to confront ugly realities, we actually promote and sanction reprehensible child exploitation and abuse.

I have used an example to explain a point I want to make. Do I need to refer also...?

The Joint Chair (Senator XXXX XXXX): What point do you want to...?

Ms. XXXX XXXX: At one point, having once again managed to get an appointment with the head of the local youth protection team, the man accusingly and acidly spat at me, “You are obsessed”. At the time, I did not take it as a compliment but rather as evidence of his madness and hatred for children. Now I also see his comment as a compliment, for his statement placed me firmly in the camp of the civilized and he solidly with the savages.

Abused children and their protective parents in custody and access wars are forced to deal with the savagery of ignorance as well as the continued and escalated terrorism of the abuser. Although one cannot ensure an acceptable level of evolution in all who are in contact with children, one can mandate careful selection and appropriate ongoing training for all those who are and will be involved in deciding the fate of children in custody and access cases. Solutions are there, but one cannot begin to implement solutions unless a problem is perceived.

Inform the public with media presentations, for example, as they are doing now in the United States. There must be an immediate way to exclude those who are suffering from criminal ignorance and vested interests that have to do with exploitation and not nurture. They must be removed so as not to continue their contribution to the carnage.

Government must accelerate this evolutionary process by immediately instigating leadership in law-making and mandatory policy regulation that responds to the reality of desperate need and provides redress for those victims who never lost all hope.

Without retroactivity and accountability, the revictimization is lifelong and the perpetrators escalate and continue their reign of terror with the unwitting sanction of much of society.

Ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, signed by Canada in 1989. Mandate the selection of those who can learn with their soul's mind. Provide mandatory ongoing training and education for those who have been chosen. Create ethics codes and protocols and write them into nationwide laws. Make all laws and policies subject to scrutiny and accountability. Do all this and more retroactively and swiftly. Then Canada may begin to slow the heinous destruction and redress some incomprehensible wrongs.

Facilitate and accelerate the process by adapting programs already used in other countries. Inform the public of all changes and services available. Change existing laws and change the words. “Custody” and “access” are property law terms. The terms “best interests of children” and “friendly parent” are problematic. A protective parent, usually a mother, is most reasonably unwilling to send her traumatized children to spend weekends and more with their rapist/terrorist/abuser. Judges, lawyers, psychologists, social workers and others frequently interpret this sane reticence as unwillingness to cooperate and a desire to hurt the man, and so judges give children in custody cases to the perpetrators of terrible crimes.

Examine related laws. Privacy acts maintain the secret of abuse. Streamline and coordinate the fragmented and often fractious systems, courts and agencies. Increase and implement sanctions. Perpetrators abuse and continue because they can.

Expedite all changes. Speed is essential. Traumatized babies become lost children, tormented teens and agonized adults in the wink of an eye. Why not create a parallel system using existing resources, and the second there is even a hint of abuse this system swings into action?

Without laws there can be no justice—

The Joint Chair (Senator XXXX XXXX): Are you just about at the end?

Ms. XXXX XXXX: Yes.

Without laws there can be no justice, but if there is no justice, can we say we have laws? When the laws of society do not allow justice and even promote injustice, the law of the jungle fills the void.

It has often been suggested that if one is not able to face one's own past one will be consumed by it. This is the responsibility that Canada must immediately assume. Confront and acknowledge our reprehensible past record concerning children, for our society is already being consumed, as evidenced by the violence rumbling and erupting across our nation.

Allow Canada to join other nations and greet the next century with a modicum of morality and some hope of evolution in human rights ethics.

I welcome your questions.

The Joint Chair (Senator XXXX XXXX): Thank you very much.

Questioner: I just want to ask Ms. XXXX a question. What's very worrying in this pursuit of justice is when somebody with a story such as yours says, “Of course, he got custody”. The “of course” is something that's very upsetting. I'd like it if you could put on the record how that ends up as “of course”.

Ms. XXXX XXXX: I put the words “of course” in on purpose. Over the years it grew like Topsy. I started to receive phone calls from women, and I discovered to my horror—and it still horrifies me and always will—that my case is not, as I said at the beginning, unusual.

I'm still getting phone calls from women who have gone to court, naively, as I did, and said this is not really good for the children and myself; I want out—and they lost custody. I think it's almost automatic. We have a sort of black humour in the different conversations that sustain us, and it's like this is automatic. You're accused of wanting to hurt a nice man.

I have problems with the parental alienation syndrome. I have a lot of problems with that, and it feeds into this. I don't have a problem with the fact that what our grandmothers called brainwashing exists; it does exist that people do this. Where I have a problem is when one reads Dr. Gardner's works, when one actually reads them and analyses them, they are his theories, ideas, opinions. They grew out of Dr. Ralph Underwager's theories, opinions. There's no research. It's not scientific. In the psychologists' manual there are already syndromes listed on a continuum, and what some people call parental alienation syndrome fits into that already. It's already known.

The problem with the parental alienation syndrome is that when one reads Gardner's works, and one just has to read one book of his, he refers to mothers as causing it to the children. He does not use the word “parent”. It's very highly slanted when you actually read it and analyse it. But it's a comforting theory. It's comfortable, and it fits in with Freud's theories when he reneged on the sexual abuse part and said that these women are all hysterical. It fits into all of that, and it's comfortable and it works. And the books are available; they're sent free.

The word passes, word of mouth, if you're going for a divorce and you're from an abusive situation.... I must clarify: only abusive situations. I'm not talking about the majority of decent people here. The word is don't report it; don't report it or you'll lose everything. You'll probably lose everything anyway, but if you report sexual abuse, you will surely lose everything. That's the reality.

Questioner: Do you have any suggestions as to how we in this committee can change that and make sure that isn't the case?

Ms. XXXX XXXX: I'm not a lawyer. Maybe because I'm an educator—no, not only because of that.... People I speak with, and I mean people who have doctorates and big degrees and fancy people, which I'm not, are all saying the same thing: educate, educate, educate.

I personally believe, and I'm not alone, that most people know that sexual abuse breeds on secrecy. I think it also breeds on ignorance, like many other things. So I think one of the keys is, as I think I mentioned, mandate training and a media blitz. The United States has short advertisements now on television and radio; it's a blitz right across the country. And it's known that there is a very high statistical correlation between men who beat women and those same men who abuse their children. The correlation is very high. The States has begun this. It's been going for a while.

I think education.... Judges are supposed to know about the law and how to apply it. They don't know about child development and child abuse. The average decent person doesn't know about this. When it happens to you....

Questioner: I guess that's why there's been a suggestion to go to...maybe we wouldn't call them a mediator, but we'd call them early judicial intervention or somebody with the expertise you've referred to. That is the first stop before people get to the judge. Lots of them only want to judge; they don't actually want to do this other....

Ms. XXXX XXXX: Yes, and that's okay.

Questioner: I guess I'm worried that.... Are you seeing that even in people where the perpetrator has been in the criminal justice system, or is it only the ones where it's secret?

Ms. XXXX XXXX: The ones where it's secret. Those are frequently the worst cases.

Questioner: And where it's secret it's not safe to tell the truth because of the climate that everybody knows about.

Ms. XXXX XXXX: Exactly.

Questioner: And if this were done in a different milieu, in a clinic kind of setting rather than the judge's chambers or the courtroom, do you think maybe it would be safer for people to tell what's really going on?

Ms. XXXX XXXX: That is my personal opinion. I think Canada does have already some judges, some lawyers, some psychologists, some everything who are already informed and who are tough enough to take it. I guess “tough” is the right word, because it's not a pleasant task. It must be excruciating for you people to listen to this, but you have to. I think if you could take those people and say okay, we're going to have a separate cadre corps, and you're all lawyers and you're psychologists and everybody that's used anyway.... We have obligatory mediation in Quebec. The minute there's a hint of abuse, conjugal violence or other, a hint, you go to this parallel—

Questioner: Special place.

Ms. XXXX XXXX: —using the existing facilities and the people who are already there, except they have indicated a willingness to take training and go with it at least for a while.

In Montreal they have a special sex crimes unit. They're all crown prosecutors, everybody. It's all the same courts, the same rooms, the same buildings, the same people; but they have special training, which is ongoing, and they deal with it. It just shifts kind of to the left and works.

What is Best for the Kids

 

Dads 'not entitled to shared parenting'

Caroline Overington

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/dads-not-entitled-to-shared-parenting/story-e6frf7jx-1225824407249

From:The Australian

January 28, 2010 4:23PM

SEPARATED fathers are not entitled to a 50-50 time split with their children, and legislation introduced by the Howard government in 2006 should be amended to make that clear, a report says.

A 300-report by retired family court judge Richard Chisholm recommends five changes to the so-called "shared parenting" law, which he described as a "tangle" that had taken the focus off "what is best for the children," The Australian reports.

The hotly anticipated Chisholm report, which was ordered by Attorney-General Robert McClelland after the shocking death of Melbourne girl Darcey Freeman, who was thrown to her death from the West Gate Bridge last year, says the shared parenting law has made it difficult for women to raise allegations of violence in the Family Court system.

A separate, 1000-page report by the Australian Institute of Family Studies, also released this afternoon, says the majority of lawyers now believe that the 2006 reforms favour fathers over mothers, and parents over children.

The two reports into shared parenting - plus a third report, by the Family Law Council - were released simultaneously by Mr McClelland this afternoon.

Mr McClelland said the Government would review all reports before making changes but agreed that a false idea had taken hold in the community that fathers were entitled to a 50-50 time split.

“How we address that is what we've now got to decide,” he said.

Read more about the released reports at The Australian.

The Mothers Not Found in the Media- (the author/mother was silenced) « A Human Rights Issue-Custodial Justice

I found the below on A Human Rights Issue-Custodial Justice

 

Looks like she’s still silenced. The page is gone and her blog is empty. (but we have the article) Hang in there Julie- they CAN’T Silence us all!

The Mothers Not Found in the Media

by JULIE LEVINE

Mrs. Tiger Woods, Mrs. Aaron Spelling, Ms. Britney Spears, even our first lady, Mrs. Obama ….all mothers that you can read about on an almost weekly basis. The media loves to cover them and to expose them. Whether they like it or not.

The media does not cover the women who have lost custody battles to perpetrators of domestic violence. Their abusers are almost never exposed. The children in these cases are damaged, their lives stained forever. Over and over again, these children are torn from the arms of a loving parent-their mothers.

When will you read of Debbie, Rachel, Susan, Maria, and hundreds of others who have lost their children in a court system that enables such injustice? Probably never. And the silence is breaking them.

In our judicial system of today, powerful men, dominating men, are able to use the court system as a weapon. Tragically, they are able to use their children as ammunition. The media doesn’t know the women that have fallen victims to our courts. We should read about the personal enfolding of celebrity moms, professional athletes’ spouses, and other characters that are deemed of high interest to the public. Or so they say. When do we read of the other mothers?

No one wants to report on the woman whose husband repeatedly raped his 5 year old daughter. That man was then given sole custody of the young girl, as the woman could not fight the court battle laid out before her. Who would want to read of the woman whose husband broke every bone in her face, over a period of years? He was then given custody of the children who witnessed this horror.

In another case, a forensic psychologist stated that he was of the professional opinion that two boys had observed their father being psychologically and physically abusive towards their mother. Documentation regarding physical abuse of the mother was evidenced. Then the judge deciding this particular custody dispute awarded sole custody of the two boys to the father.

When this woman sought safety prior to the divorce dispute, her husband warned her that she would never see her children again. After custody was "awarded" to this male perpetrator, the mother never had a relationship with her sons again. A judge looked her in the eye and told her that just because her husband had raped and beaten her, it did not mean he couldn’t be a good father.

Not understanding any of the court’s instructions, she contacted newspapers, radio stations, and magazines. In our wonderful United States of America, there was not a single reporter that would come to her aid. No one wanted to speak of her story, her life….It was her own, never to be shared.

Until now.

It happened to me.

In our country that promises protection and justice, judges are awarding custody to men with violent histories. Women that have made their children a priority, are left childless. Many times, these women turn to the media for assistance…only to be turned away.

These are the mothers not found in the media. Reporters refuse to reply to coverage requests, as judges are never held accountable for their poor and damaging decisions. If these cases are told to the public, how are they remedied? Perhaps this is why reporters run from such stories. Rather than ignore such tragedies, it seems that finding an answer would be a much better conclusion.

In order for there to be a solution to many of these horror stories, the stories themselves must be told. Bullied and emotionally battered by judicial figureheads, the mothers not mentioned in the media must be heard. They need a voice. We need a voice.

If you are reading these words, that proves there is hope. It says things can get a little bit better. This is all being told from a mother who lost her children in a court of law to the abuser; from a mother not found in the media.

Technorati Tags: Found,author,article,Hang,Julie,Silence,LEVINE,Tiger,Woods,Aaron,Britney,lady,Obama,basis,expose,Whether,custody,violence,children,cases,Over,parent,Debbie,Rachel,Susan,Maria,system,injustice,weapon,ammunition,victims,courts,characters,woman,husband,daughter,girl,period,horror,opinion,father,Documentation,male,perpetrator,relationship,newspapers,radio,America,reporter,life,protection,justice,judges,Women,Many,times,assistance,Reporters,coverage,requests,Rather,conclusion,solution,words,abuser,athletes,spouses,magazines,histories,decisions,tragedies

The Mothers Not Found in the Media- (the author/mother was silenced) « A Human Rights Issue-Custodial Justice

Why Are Moms Punished in Court?

The below was written by Gina Kaysen Fernandes, posted on Mom Logic.  I am reposting here because I know Lorraine Tipton and have posted about her case here prior to this:  A Nightmare in Oconto County, UPDATE: Nightmare in Oconto County, UPDATE 2: A Nightmare in Oconto County

Custody Crisis: Why Moms Are Punished in Court

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

filed under: divorce logic

Talk to mothers, divorce lawyers, and child advocates and you'll hear tales of a family court system that's badly broken.

Gina Kaysen Fernandes: To an outsider, Linda Marie Sacks had the perfect life. Her husband was rich, and they lived in a huge home in Daytona Beach, FL, where she spent her days shuttling her girls to school and various activities. Linda Marie describes herself as a "squeaky clean soccer mom" who "lived my life for my children." Behind that façade, Linda Marie says she married a monster -- a man who verbally and emotionally attacked her for years and sexually abused their two young daughters.

When she finally left him and tried to take her girls with her, she encountered a new monster -- family court. Rather than protecting Linda Marie and her two young daughters from a sexual predator, a family court judge denied Linda Marie custody and put her daughters into the hands of their sexually abusive father.

Talk to mothers, divorce lawyers, and child advocates and you'll hear tales of a family court system that's badly broken. It's one that routinely punishes women for coming forward with allegations of abuse by denying them custody of their children. Instead of protecting children from abusers and predators, the court often gives sole custody to the abusive parent, say child advocates. Mothers who tell judges their children are being molested or beaten are accused of lying and are punished for trying to intervene. Some are thrown in jail for trying to keep their kids from seeing an abusive parent. Women, many of whom have few financial resources at their disposal, are often at the mercy of a court system that is not designed to handle domestic violence.

Linda Marie first suspected something was wrong in 2002 when she received a shocking phone call from a school administrator. Her 7-year-old daughter was acting out sexually, with knowledge beyond her years. A short time later, the Sunday school teacher reported overhearing Linda Marie's daughter saying, "I suck my dad's penis." She received more phone calls from school about her little girl using Barbie dolls to simulate oral sex with a boy in her class. "I was very concerned, these are alarming red flags," said Linda Marie.

She consulted family therapists who also expressed alarm and concern, but failed to report these claims to an abuse hotline. In one of the therapy sessions, the oldest daughter drew a picture that depicted her father as an erect penis on legs. Linda Marie says she once walked in on her husband wiping her daughters' vaginas in the bathroom before school, "because he told me he wanted them to be fresh." When Linda Marie confronted her husband, he ignored and dismissed the allegations.

After 11 years of marriage, Linda Marie filed for divorce in 2004. Armed with detailed documentation, she believed the judge would grant her sole custody of her two daughters for their protection. "I was sheltered. I didn't know I had stepped into a national crisis in the courts," said Linda Marie, who spent tens of thousands of dollars in a legal battle that ended in the loss of her parental rights. Linda Marie has only seen her children during supervised visits for a total of 54 hours over the past two and a half years. "I'm one of the lucky moms," she said, choking back tears. "Some bonds are severed forever. I'm thankful for my two hours a month."

Some mothers like Lorraine Tipton of Oconto Falls, WI, have served jail time as the result of contentious custody arraignments. In November, a judge sentenced Lorraine to 30 days behind bars because she didn't force her 11-year-old daughter to follow the court's order to live every other week with her abusive father. "She's terrified of going; she has night terrors and severe anxiety," said Lorraine.

Her ex, Craig Hensberger, was arrested three times for domestic violence and once for child abuse. His criminal record also includes two DUI arrests, one of which happened while driving with his daughter. The court ordered Hensberger into rehab and demanded "absolute sobriety," but his daughter claims he still drinks excessively when she visits.

Hensberger admitted in court that he still continues to drink, but the judge punished Lorraine instead for trying to protect her child. "My abuser is continuing his abuse of me and my daughter with the help of the court," said Lorraine, who spent three days locked up until her daughter made the heart-wrenching decision to return to her father's home so her mother could be released from jail. "He can't get to me physically. The only way he knows how to hurt me is to take my child away."

"What we are seeing amounts to a civil rights crisis," says attorney and legal writer Michael Lesher, who co-authored the book From Madness To Mutiny: Why Mothers Are Running from the Family Courts -- and What Can Be Done about It. Many judges and court-appointed guardians act above the law with apparent impunity, he argues.

"There's no hearing, no evidence, no notice -- they can take your child away from you," Lesher tells momlogic. If a mother raises concerns or openly discusses child abuse in court, she typically ends up being the one under investigation. "Mom is guilty until proven innocent," he says.

A family court judge with the Los Angeles Superior Court refused momlogic's request for an interview to respond to these allegations.

Unlike criminal court, family court does not rely on criminal investigators to gather evidence in an alleged child abuse case. Instead, the court appoints family advocates known as "guardian ad litem," or GAL, who are expected to investigate the abuse allegations and make their recommendation in the best interest of the child. GALs are sometimes licensed psychologists, social workers, or attorneys who are not necessarily trained in evaluating sexual abuse or domestic violence. They have the judge's ear, and their opinions can alter a child's future. There are no juries and there's no mandate for legal representation. In fact, most women end up representing themselves because they can't afford the attorney fees.

Most moms don't want to take the case to criminal court because they prefer to keep the matter private. Legal experts contend the evidence in sexual abuse cases isn't typically strong enough to hold up in criminal court to overcome the threshold of "beyond a reasonable doubt." While the bar is set much lower for proving evidence in family court, advocates argue Child Protective Services frequently doesn't want to get involved. "If there's a custody battle going on, CPS won't touch it," says Irene Weiser of the advocacy group StopFamilyViolence.org.

There's no doubt fathers play a critical role in a child's life, and in most cases, are equally loving and capable parents who deserve custody. However, studies find when a wife accuses her husband of abuse, more than half the time, she faces a counter-accusation of "parental alienation syndrome," or PAS. Although PAS is not a medically recognized disorder, divorce attorneys often successfully argue that it emerges when a parent brainwashes a child into thinking the other parent is the enemy.

The psychiatrist Richard Gardner, who first coined the phrase "parental alienation syndrome" in 1987, has written more than one hundred articles on the subject, but has offered no scientific data to support his theory. While it's not considered a certifiable medical condition, PAS is widely accepted in the legal community.

"Parental Alienation unequivocally, categorically exists, and it's a form of child abuse," says author and forensic consultant Dean Tong. While he believes more studies need to be done to validate PAS, "it does exist, anecdotally speaking," he says. As an expert witness, Tong has been called a "fathers' rights prostitute" for his work in court clashes. But he also testifies for mothers who are fighting to appeal unfavorable rulings. For Tong, it's about using forensics to find the truth. "I'm not here to protect guys who are guilty," he says.

In years past, mothers were typically considered the "protective parent" in custody decisions when courts relied on the "Tender Years Doctrine," which states that children under the age of 13 should live with their mothers. Recently, several courts have ruled that doctrine violated the Equal Protection Clause in the 14th amendment, and replaced it with the "Best Interests of the Children" doctrine. It's a huge victory for the increasingly powerful Fatherhood Movement that contends dads are systematically alienated from their children after a divorce.

Tong argues the current legal climate continues to put fathers on the receiving end of false allegations. "It's handcuffs first, speak later," said Tong, who experienced that firsthand. In 1985, Tong's ex-wife falsely accused him of sexually abusing his 3-year-old daughter. He spent time in jail and went through "a year of hell" trying to prove his innocence. While Tong was eventually cleared of any wrongdoing, he never regained custody of his kids, and remained under supervised visitation for years. Tong became a self-taught expert on the subject of family rights and abuse accusations. He has written three books, including Elusive Innocence: Survival Guide for the Falsely Accused.
"There's an assumption that maintaining a child's relationship with the father is a good idea -- even if the father is abusive," says Stop Family Violence's Weiser, who believes when the overburdened court system is unable to sort out a custody conflict, it relies on misogyny. She argues there are many judges, GALs, and evaluators who believe that women are inherently vindictive and will lie to get a leg up in a custody battle. "We see it over and over again in family court, where judges or professionals don't believe the violence is occurring," Weiser says.

"All we have is 'he said, she said.' Who's telling the truth? That's up to the judge," says Tong, who believes the justice system isn't working for either side. "The system is not doing a good job interviewing kids, we're still in the dark ages there," says Tong, who thinks there needs to be more formal education and training for the professionals, including judges who are hearing child custody cases.

According to the American Bar Association, child abuse allegations in custody disputes are rare -- occurring in only six percent of cases. The majority of those accusations are substantiated. In terms of false allegations, fathers are more likely than mothers to intentionally lie (21 percent, compared to 1.3 percent). In fact, abusive parents are more likely to seek sole custody than nonviolent ones, and are successful about 70 percent of the time.

After three years of litigation, Linda Marie Sacks says she was no match for her ex-husband's financial resources and powerful connections. "He was buying his way through the courtroom." Despite 10 calls into the abuse hotline by licensed professionals, Linda Marie's ex-husband still claimed she was making false allegations of abuse to alienate his children, and the judge believed him. Linda Marie was kicked out of her home and put on supervised visitation with her two daughters, who are now ages 10 and 12. "The judge legally kidnapped my daughters and won't give them back," she said.

In some extreme cases, a custody decision will be reversed, which is what happened to Joyce Murphy. The San Diego mother was charged with kidnapping after she took her daughter out of state, away from the girl's father, because she believed he was a child molester. The father, Henry Parson, accused Joyce of parental alienation and she lost custody. "Despite my pleas for protection to the police and the DA and the family court representatives, and even psychologists, Mr. Parson was able to convince them and the community at large that he was the victim, and I was just an angry, embittered, divorced woman," explained Joyce.

Six years later, Parson was caught in the act and pleaded guilty to six counts of child abuse, which included oral sex with a child, molestation, possessing child porn, and using a child to make porn. After Parson received a six-year prison sentence, Joyce told reporters that family court's only good decision in her case was granting her full permanent custody of her daughter after her ex-husband was jailed.

Lorraine, the Wisconsin mom who was jailed for protecting her daughter, knows her daughter's nightmare will continue for the rest of her childhood. "He's never going to stop, it's never going to end until she's 18." Linda Marie says she's putting every penny towards her legal efforts to win back custody of her daughters. "I will never stop fighting for my girls. I know one day justice will prevail."

Critics argue that not only is the family court system broken, it was never designed to deal with issues like child custody. The goal is to develop solutions that are in the best interest of the child. "Unfortunately when judges and guardians start thinking of themselves as super government, all sorts of abuses will occur," says attorney and author Lesher.

Activists are working towards making reforms through legislation. "The heartbreaking challenge is that there's not one quick fix," says Stop Family Violence's Weiser. "This is a war -- it's very ugly, it's bloody, and very bitter," concludes Tong.

Linda Marie and Children

Gina Kaysen Fernandes is an award winning documentary producer and a former TV news producer/writer. She lives in Los Angeles with her husband and son.

Custody Crisis: Why Moms Are Punished in Court | momlogic.com

“If I Killed You, I’d Get The Kids”: Women’s Survival, Child Custody, and Abuse « RightsForMothers.com

From:  http://justice4mothers.wordpress.com/2009/08/28/if-i-killed-you-id-get-the-kids-womens-survival-child-custody-and-abuse-by-men/

August 28, 2009

“If I Killed You, I’d Get The Kids”: Women’s Survival, Child Custody, and Abuse

Filed under: Child Custody, Child Custody Battle, Domestic Abuse, Domestic Relations, Domestic Violence, Family Court Reform, Family Courts, Family Rights, Human Rights, Husbands who murder wives, Intimate Partner Assault, Murdered Mothers, Parental Alienation Syndrome, parental alienation — justice4mothers @ 11:16 am

Here is an important paper by Colleen Varcoe and Lori G. Irwin titled “If I Killed You, I’d Get the Kids”: Women’s Survival and Protection Work with Child Custody and Access in the Context of Woman Abuse.” I am constantly amazed by men’s rights advocates, father’s rights folks and shared parenting people that “claims” of abuse by women in a relationship are generally false when so there so many women and children dying. They want to make it a “women’s” or “feminist” issue, when it is really a human rights issue. They try and draw the attention away from all the abusive fathers getting custody of children from moms with claims of so-called “parental alienation syndrome” and claim that it is the “radical” women’s groups that are debunking it. I find that interesting and their credibility lacking if they call the American Judge’s Association, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, and the National District Attorney’s Association “radical women’s groups.” They have all discredited claims of “parental alienation” and “parental alienation syndrome.”

Here is an except of Varcoe’s and Irwins’s paper:

Child custody and access was the central concern for women with children who participated in Project Violence Free (PVF), a three-year study of formal systems’ (criminal justice, social assistance, and health care) responses to abuse by intimate partners. Although we proposed to study women’s experience with these specific “systems,” the women saw their experiences as similar across services, and talked about “the system” as a monolithic entity. The overarching theme identified through analysis of interview and documentary evidence from the women was that women struggle continuously to limit the violence in their lives and to “make the system work.” We identified four critical sites in which women did most of this work.

For all the women, economic survival was a central part of their struggle. For most women, seeking protection, particularly, but not exclusively, from the justice system, was part of their experience. For women new to Canada, working with issues of immigration overshadowed their other efforts. For the women with children, issues of child custody and access dominated and shaped their experiences.

This article focuses on child custody and access as one of the sites of women’s work in dealing with intimate partner violence. It is based on interview data from the women who were mothers and focus group data from service providers who work with such women as background. The interviews revealed a pervasive tension between obligations to maintain contact between children and their fathers, and obligations to protect children from harm. The purpose of this article is to describe how women work to negotiate formal systems in relation to child custody and access in the context of woman abuse, and how aspects of such systems are problematic. Our argument is that child custody and access processes provide opportunities for abusive partners to exert power and control over their partners and children, and that these opportunities are often supported by policies and practices of service providers.

To read the rest of “If I Killed You, I’d Get the Kids”: Women’s Survival and Protection Work with Child Custody and Access in the Context of Woman Abuse” by Colleen Varcoe and Lori G. Irwin, please click here.

“If I Killed You, I’d Get The Kids”: Women’s Survival, Child Custody, and Abuse « RightsForMothers.com