WELCOME TO MAYBERRY—- a.k.a. OCONTO COUNTY


Oconto County Strikes OUT again

Arrest Made in 15 Year Old Murder Case – www.nbc26.com.

Once again, Oconto County Sheriffs Dept. and Detective Darren Laskowski, needed outside help to solve a fifteen year “cold case” murder. Fifteen years to the day that Chad McLean’s body was found in the Pensaukee River.

According to the criminal complaint, Peter Hanson and Charles Mlados were investigated since 1998 when Chad McLean went missing on the night of February 22, 1998.  Hanson and Mlados were last seen with the victim, Chad McLean.

When you look at the evidence that they had fifteen years ago it would astound even a non criminal investigator could figure out that something was not right.  Both Hanson and his friend Mlados were the last ones seen with the victim, McLean’s body was found less than a mile from Hanson’s home in Abrams Wisconsin.  But it wasn’t law enforcement that brought this cold case to light in my opinion.  It was the voice of Hanson’s ex-wife, Kathy Hanson, who was interviewed by Laskowski on September 24, 2009.  Kathy had reported that her husband came home at 9:30pm on the evening of February 22, 1998 and noticed that her husband, Hanson, was “panicking and freaking out”.  She saw blood on Hanson’s hands and provided him with “bleach” to help clean up the blood.  Kathy Hanson will never see justice served as she is now also deceased.  A few months after she gave her interview with Laskowski she “ allegedly” committed suicide in 2009.  Not to mention that Hanson also “accidentally” shot and killed his brother long ago.  People seem to die haphazardly around Peter Hanson it would seem.   On May 12, 2008 Kathy Ann Hanson filed a temporary restraining order on then husband Peter Hanson in Oconto County.  On June 9, 2008 the restraining order was dismissed by Judge Michael Judge of  Oconto County.  By the winter of 2009 Kathy Hanson would be dead by an alleged “suicide”.

Oconto County would have you believe they worked tirelessly on this murder when that is exactly the opposite of what they do.  Not only did they place Kathy Hanson’s life in danger by re-interviewing her in 2009 they failed to protect her.  But that’s what Oconto County does, they give criminals a higher regard than victims.  There are several law enforcement agencies that finally brought this cold case to life and I immensely respect those that did.  The two agencies that I do not is Oconto County Sheriffs Department, Officer Laskoswski and Oconto Falls Police Department.  They couldn’t solve a solid colored Rubik’s Cube.  Even with surveillance video of a burglar in a persons home Oconto Falls PD couldnn’t figure out and refuse to.

The lesson here is once again that Oconto County is inept in any investigation they start or refuse to start.  Criminals and murderers run free for years.  It’s only and only when the Wisconsin Department of Justice gets involved that anything is solved.  Another lesson to learn is that Oconto County is dangerous to your health, safety and sanity.

My heart goes out to Chad McLean’s family and especially his mother, she deserved better than the fifteen years of shoddy police work.  My heart also goes out to the children of these alleged murderers who now are fatherless and Hanson’s who have lost both parents.  God bless the real investigators and do gooders in this case that had to come from outside of Oconto County’s little bubble of nepotism, corruption, collusion and cronyism to bring  justice to crime victims everywhere. May God have mercy on the souls of Oconto County and the bungling idiots that run amok there for my child and I will never have such mercy.

policesquad06

YOU MIGHT BE A PAS-HOLE


asshole2

If you abuse your intimate partner and then get mad when she leaves you and then use the family court system as an extension of your abuse

. . . YOU MIGHT BE A PAS-HOLE

If  your kids are afraid of you and don’t want to spend time with you becaus of your anger issues

. . . YOU MIGHT BE A PAS-HOLE

If you blame your ex for everything that’s bad that happened in their life since they left your abuse

. . . YOU MIGHT BE A PAS-HOLE

If you tell your kids that their “other parent” is a bitch, whore, slut, tramp, drug abuser, alcoholic, hooker, stripper

. . . YOU MIGHT BE A PAS-HOLE

If you tell the judge that your ex has made the kids not want to be around you

. . . YOU MIGHT BE A PAS-HOLE

If you are constantly trying to figure out ways of getting your kids to “hate” their own MOTHER for your own selfish gain and revenge. . . . YOU MIGHT BE A PAS-HOLE

WHEN all of your tactics from the above true stories backfires on you when your children are adults and no longer have to be influenced or forced into any relationship with their mother’s abuser, their father, don’t blame anyone else but yourself ASSHOLE.

 

WHAT IS PAS???

 

PAS (Parental Alianation Syndrome) is a psuedo-scientific theory invented by the late, pro-pedophile, Dr. Richard Gardner in the late 1990′s.  It is not recognized by any mental health provider worth their salt and is often labeled as JUNK SCIENCE.  PAS was originally invented to use as the “abuse excuse” for pedophiles and pedophilia.  Through much unsuccessful attempts by the father’s right’s lobby to have PAS put this “mental health disorder” into the DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-5). 

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/science-isnt-golden/201106/parental-alienation-syndrome-another-alarming-dsm-5-proposal

http://www.nomas.org/node/168 

http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/pas/DVP.html

http://www.cincinnatipas.com/

http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/SocialWork/?view=usa&ci=9780195384048

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAednTCJAlo&list=PL59468FB3CED63D7C&index=1

My Letter to Michelle Obama

Reblogged from My letter to Michelle Obama:

Dear Mrs. Obama:

I am writing to you today because I respect you very much, and I know how important both the issues of Domestic Violence and the right of everyone to have Affordable Health Care are to you.

I want to introduce you to an amazing woman and advocate Susan Murphy- Milano. Susan is currently dying of Cancer due to the lack of Health Insurance.

Read more… 988 more words

“No legacy is so rich as honesty.” -William Shakespeare 
Earth lost a warrior this week and heaven has gained an angel.  Our hearts are heavy with the news of the passing of our friend and sister in arms, Susan Murphy-Milano. I remember the first time I spoke to Susan on the phone when I was in the midst of my family court nightmare.  Here was a very busy woman who had taken time out of her day to speak to me about her experiences with losing her son to an abuser.  She never minced words, she told it how it is, I loved that about her.  It was a long hard road for me during that time for my family and I but they will all tell you that her phone call to me was and is the most important for me.  I will tell you that there is no better inspiration than to listen to Susan talk of her childhood filled with violence and then ultimately finding her mother killed by her police officer father in a murder-suicide.  There is little to feel sorry about yourself or to think that you cannot change the world, she did. I know I have thanked her for being my soul sister many times, but I want to say again and on behalf of all children and mothers that live the nightmare Susan has had to.  Thank Susan, you inspired, empowered and never cease to amaze many of us who will continue to fight and carry on your legacy.  Susan was the most humble of creatures and right now I can hear her say in her commanding voice that she is no hero.  But she is and I hope that she can let them know up there we could use a little help down here, then again, I'm sure  she has already.  

STARVING FOR JUSTICE


For decades now, mothers that have survived domestic violence and family court have continued to scream for justice, now they’re starving for it, literally.  This week in Arizona a mother has made the ultimate sacrifice not only her body but for all mothers that are used and abused by the family court system, she has begun a hunger strike.

In Arizona a judge ordered that a mother be placed in jail for arrears in child support.  Now mind you this mother does not get to see her children in a normal setting to begin with.  This mother, like the thousands of others, is a “non-custodial” mother.  She’s not just a “non-custodial” she is also a domestic abuse survivor, for whatever that’s worth these days anyways.  A domestic violence survivor or victim will receive the worst treatment from the family court system than any other judicial “branch” (besides a rape victim).  But it’s the same if you were raped it was YOUR fault, if you were abused it was YOUR fault.  After 100 years of women in the early 19th century fighting for the right to vote we are still at a place where women are oppressed.  We make less than men, work more and get our children taken away.   Now if all that’s not bad enough at insult to injury when you are thrown into the family court arena.  Now you are “forced” to “co-parent” with your abuser.  That’s right, not only does he have access still to your life he then does everything in his powers (by way of his attorney who is the judges golfing buddy, oh and didn’t I tell ya…the judge knows the abusers dad…they go waaaay back, and the GAL oh yeah he’s golfing buddies with them all too).  Once the abuser becomes the master manipulator that he is and gets by with a  lot of help from his dads friends, soon gets custody.  Then after that it continues with supervised visits (because you are a bad mother in whatever fictitious label they can pin on you) and soon after comes the child support because even though he makes more than you do with working two or three jobs… he can’t do it ALL BY HIMSELF.  My mother did.

Family Court Judges, lawyers, psychologists and other supporters of female victims to interpret the effects and impacts of abuse as equivalent to passivity, incompetence, and poor mental health. So what can women and their supporters do to combat this social problem? http://www.speakoutloud.net/helping-women/language-of-resistance-in-family-court/

Mothers that have been abused should AVOID family court at all costs.  They should run as fast as they can away, far far away from the abuser, because IF there isn’t “placement order” in place at the time of escape your chances are better than him tracking you down and THEN trying to get the children. ALWAYS have your children in YOUR care and custody. Even IF the abuser just wants to take the kids for “one night”.  Do not fall for the trickery. Many mothers have lost their children this way. Either by the abuser claiming HE had custody (just as mine did) or running off with them or even worse, murder.

So with all this in mind you should also be “aware” that these travesties are not something “new” the courts are doing.  This has been going on for decades.  This started in the 1980′s when more mothers returned to work and became more independent and decided they didn’t need a “Mr. Mom”.  When they began the child support system that spurned the phrase “dead beat dad” for the era that’s when the men folk starting fighting back and then abusers caught on that this system could work to their advantage since we wanted equality after all…didn’t we?

We did and we still do, but even in the year 2011 it is far off.  The right to vote, 19 th amendment was the last and only rights that women have in the constitution.  But if you want to count the 14th amendment which states,

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Then again that would mean WE (as in women) have equality in this nation right?  Not really.  With the recent political atmosphere with state governments and their power grabs and war on women’s reproductive rights, we are losing “rights” every day. The women of the 1970′s that started a revolution of women yearning for the Equal Rights Amendment, here we are in the new millennium with only 38 states out of 50 that have “ratified” the ERA.  How much longer?

Now, at this very moment an Arizona mother has taken all she can.  Not unlike the women’s suffragists who went on hunger strikes for the right to place a ballot, she is too.  This mother works two jobs and has limited contact, if any, to her children.  Her abuser has hidden assets and comes from a very “well off” family.  He’s not doing it because he’s starving, he’s doing it because he can.  Years of family court conflicts, collusion and cronyism have taken its toll on this mothers soul.  This woman has decided that she would rather starve and be hospitalized because it matters not what the courts can do to her, THIS is a politicized statement that the family court system is corrupt and we’re not taking it anymore.  We’ve signed petitions, played the niceties with government officials who’ve gave us lip service, we’ve sacrificed our children and our savings accounts, we’ve marched the streets of Washington DC on Mother’s Day, we are done trying to get your attention, we DEMAND it now.

Yesterday was “Day One” of the hunger strike, we are now on “Day Two”.  This mother says she must come up with $2,000 in 60 days or she will be put in jail, per judges orders.  This mother is more deteremined than ever to get out of the circle jerk of family court.  She’s lost everything but her free will.  Perhaps this will be the one thing that she can conrol in her life since her abuser and his colluders continue their rage against her.

So Day Two is sliding into Day Three and I know with all my heart that the tenacity of this mother she is not giving up and we need to stand by her.  I cannot with any good conscience not sound the trumpets for the triumphant return of the suffragists spirits to rise again with us and guide us to freedom of enlslavement of the patriarchy  My prayer and mantra is that we begin our first voyage into the unknown world  non-violent protest.  I beg all victims of the family court system  and their allies align their voices and let the world know we will not ignored.  In the same vane as our Foremothers did and their daughters of the 70′s ERA movement. But this time we really DO get equal rights.

Stay tuned as this blog is about to expose EVERY one of the corrupt family court officials from Arizona

A Mother’s Love


 

 

 

The following you about to read is heart wrenching as the adult daughter of Caroline Halonen-Rice ,who was jailed this week by the corrupt system that failed her and her children, tells the tale of abuse, control and a childs neverending love for their Mother.  It is our continued hope that ALL that read of the corruption, collusion and cronyism that exists in the family court system be exposed to the fullest extent.

Please watch the video at the link at the bottom!

 

My mom, Caroline Marie Rice, was arrested on Monday. This was the third time she had been arrested. I watched the arrest, trying to hold back my tears. I failed, but I stopped crying sooner than the last time she was arrested. It was probably because I saw her being arrested this time. She was calm, like it was something that happened regularly. She told me she could be calm, because she knows she has done nothing wrong. I was not calm, because in Carver County I have not seen any justice for my family.
Prior to her arrest, my mom and I were moving from place to place, running from the people who were supposed to protect us. We were running from the cops and social workers, because an attorney my mom tried to retain advised her to run if she was required to see a psychologist selected by the petitioner’s side (Brent Rice, my biological father, is the petitioner on the order for protection). The attorney said she represented two other women who were perfectly normal who were sent to a mental institute, because of the psychologist’s recommendations. The attorney said that those women are still there today.  My mom already had three normal psychological evaluations when the court asked her to do another one, this time with a special psychologist. When my mom was informed of this requirement, we ran.
My name is Lauren Elizabeth Rice. I am the nineteen-year-old daughter of Caroline. I am the second oldest of five children. In order from oldest to youngest; Kristina Marie (22), me, Brent Thomas (18), Jayson Douglas (15), and Annelise Claire (13). I attended Holy Family Catholic High School and went on to run division one cross-country and track at North Dakota State University and then at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. I withdrew from school (leaving behind my scholarship, my friends, and some of my eligibility as a college athlete) when my little sister (Annelise Claire) ran away from my abusive father (Brent Rice). I wanted to be with her and my mother, if it meant going to a different country, it would be worth it. With an order for protection in place that was supposed to keep my mother from contacting my sister, we headed to Canada with hopes of receiving refugee status. Because of the immense stress, our plan was not well thought out. In order to receive refugee status we would have been separated during the court proceedings. They recommended that we go to another country during the court proceedings so that we could stay together. When we were re-entering the US, my mom was arrested, for the second time. We learned later that there weren’t any warrants at the time of her arrest, so whoever put handcuffs on her should be in trouble. It wasn’t until she had been in jail for several days that warrants were produced. Her charges were for deprivation of parental rights, for failing to appear in court, and for violating the order for protection.
My mom was in jail for twenty-three days in Port Huron, Michigan. She was treated horribly and has not yet explained to me all of the details, because it is still a sensitive topic for her. My mom was held in a special cell for six days, which is used to observe the new inmates. Generally, people are held in this type of cell for a maximum of seventy-two hours. In that cell the lights were on twenty-four seven and everyone could see her as they walked in and out of the jail. The entire time she was in Port Huron jail, she watched other inmates withdrawing from drugs and listened to cops screaming all hours of the day.
The first time she was arrested, I was not with her, so I do not know so many of the details. I do know that she was in the driveway of the place she was living, about to head out for a run. Two unmarked police cars pulled up, nearly hitting her to keep her from running. Detective Patrick Barry was one of the men who arrested her. Neither of the men who were there to arrest her wore a uniform.
The first time she was arrested and bailed out, we fled. The second time she was arrested and bailed out, we fled again. So, the high bail is no surprise to my mom or me. I guess this is when we stop running.
While my mom and I were running from the corrupt orders of the court and the shady policemen enforcing them, my three younger siblings were living with my dad and going downhill.
Jayson, who is fifteen, broke his arm on two separate occasions. The first time, he was skiing. He knew it hurt badly enough to be broken so he called my father, who picked him up and brought him home. He told my brother that his friend is a doctor and that his friend would look at his arm. His friend looked at Jayson’s arm and told him that it wasn’t broken. Three weeks later, when my brother was still in pain, he went to the doctor who said his arm was broken.  This same brother broke his hand again by punching a wall in the dugout when he struck out during a baseball game. Before the divorce, I had seen Jayson upset, but never violent.
My youngest sister had many issues while living with my dad. The issue that stands out the most in my mind is when she needed an emergency root canal and my dad refused to bring her to the dentist. So did the social worker. Annelise had a sinus infection, a headache, and was extremely dizzy. All of those symptoms are signs of a serious infection getting close to the brain. My older sister pleaded with my dad to bring Annelise to the dentist and when he refused, my sister met my mom and brought my younger sister to the dentist herself.  My older sister, Kristina, became too nervous to drive. So my mom began driving with the cops and social workers following them to the dentist. They were rushed inside and the endodontist did an emergency procedure. He explained to the social worker that Annelise could not be brought back to school no matter what the court order said. This was an emergency. He locked the door and allowed my mom to hold Annelise’s hand during the entire procedure. That contact between my mom and Annelise violated the court order and may have saved her life. http://opentopossibility.blogspot.com/

VIDEO:http://www.mincava.umn.edu/documents/digitalstories/Caroline.mov

 

JUSTICE DENIED


Press Release 02/08/11

World’s Most Famous Beach….World’s Most Scandalous Case

Florida Mother DENIED justice when Presiding Judge Torphy, Judge Evander and Judge Cohen REFUSED  to Review Ruling En banc, Write Written Opinion, and Certify Questions to the Florida Supreme Court on  02/07/11

Constitutional and Human Rights Violations in Family Court Cases Rampant in the U.S.

In the “World’s Most Famous Beach”…Daytona Beach, Florida…………they also have the most scandalous case involving a wealthy millionaire, his power, money, and connections to the community that has most experts involved in the national crisis in the family courts regarding “custody visitation scandal cases” asking when will justice prevail for these Florida  children and their Mother.

National advocates and organization’s  are asking for federal investigations into the crisis in the family courts and have documented  violations of litigants constitutional rights and are advocating for America’s children. The Leadership Counsel and Interpersonal Violence (www.leadershipcounsel.org) research shows that US family courts order about 58,000 children a year into unsupervised contact with physically or sexually abusive parents following divorce in the US.

Dr. Phil in April 2010 had the very 1st show regarding the family courts failure to protect abused children, and family court judges dismissing documented evidence of abuse, and taking away loving, caring Mothers.

Linda Marie Sacks, a “Squeaky Clean Mom”, is headed to the Florida Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington D.C. in her continued efforts to be re-united with her children, and is speaking  out about this injustice to her children, and the national crisis in the family courts. Her daughter’s teacher said..if you can lose custody, America better wake up, because if you can, anyone can. Her case is a Justice for Children case,(www.justiceforchildren.org)

and they are a national organization who advocate for children in abusive situations when “official avenues” judges, police, Dept of Children and Family,  have failed to protect them.

On 12/21/10 she  filed 3 pro se Motions asking the Fifth District Court of Appeals reconsider their 12/7/10 (Case 5D09-3752) ruling that has violated  her constitutional rights to be a parent to her children. On 02/07/11, the Fifth District Court of Appeals, with Presiding Judge Torphy, Judge Evander and Judge Cohen, DENIED all of her Motions, and affirmed the erroneous ruling by the trial court of Judge Shawn L. Briese.

This is her second appeal before the court of appeals. In her first appeal, (Case 5D07-1682) the ruling on custody of her children was REVERSED AND REMANDED due to violations of this Mothers constitutional rights to due process and the opportunity to be heard. In their ruling they stated that Mothers hand written Motion for Continuance was legally sufficient, and should not  have been denied by Judge Briese, and the hearing to decide custody of the minor children should NEVER have taken place. This rare reversal by an appeals court provided NO relief to Mother and her children as the trial court of Judge Shawn L. Briese refused to be disqualified from her case, or VACATE the unjust supervised visitation ruling.

Mother appealed to the Fifth District Court of Appeals in a Writ of Prohibition, (Case 5D08-3668) and provided documented evidence of judicial misconduct by Judge Briese, and the attorneys of record for the Father, James L. Rose of Rice and Rose, and Leonard R. Ross of Ross and Burden. The documented evidence of judicial misconduct included violations of Judges Canon #3, Fl. Ad Code 2.330, ex parte communication with the attorneys of record and violations of her constitutional rights. The Fifth District Court of Appeals DENIED her Writ and Judge Briese was allowed to hear the “Rehearing of the Custody of Minor Children” in April 2009.

In this hearing, (Case 2004-30312 FMCI) Judge Briese refused to allow Mothers witnesses to testify and refused to allow her exhibits. In his oral ruling he stated that mother did not buy greeting cards for children to give to the father, and mother did a Channel 9 news interview in New York and this was a concern to the court, and so she MUST continue to stay on Supervised Visitation. It WAS NOT a concern that Father admitted to an altercation with his daughter at 8 years old and this resulted in her getting a split lip and blood. This matched Mothers Domestic Violence Injunction of Protection, Police Reports and DCF reports. Father also admitted to “wiping down the vaginas” of his school age children, which also matched the Domestic Violence Injunction of Protection, Police and DCF reports. This credible evidence was DISMISSED, IGNORED and SUPRESSED by the trial court of Judge Shawn L. Breise, and now, DISMISSED, IGNORED and SUPRRESSED by the Fifth District Court of Appeals, as they have just AFFIRMED the trial court’s ruling.

With only 79 hours of contact in 3 years and 10 months…under Supervised Visitation at the local Family visitation center, for two hours a month……..this “squeaky clean” class Mom, soccer Mom, community volunteer, with no drugs, no alcohol, no abuse, nothing……just a loving, caring Mother lost custody of her children… will have to continue on with the Supervised Visitation, with NO case plan or reunification plan provided by the trial court. This Mother is the LONGEST family law referral in the history of the Daytona Beach supervised visitation center….now at 3 years and 10 months.

National Advocates, experts, and Mothers were in Albany, New York on  Jan.7, 8,and 9th, 2011  for the Annual Battered Mothers Custody Conference,( www.batteredmotherscustodyconference.org) to address this national crisis of  Mothers losing custody with documented evidence of abuse to their children, and safe, protective parents  having all of their contact with their children either terminated  by the family courts or are being place on supervised visitation for years without a case plan or reunification plan.

The trend documented by the latest research is that judges routinely dismiss, ignore and suppress documented evidence of abuse to the children in the “custody-visitation scandal cases”, and batterers are asking for Sole Physical Custody and are successful 70% of the time. www.apa.org/pi/viol&fam.hmtl and  www.aja.ncsc.dni.us/domviol/pages5.html

The Florida NOW, National Organization for Women Ad Hoc Family Law Committee has published a brochure a “Crisis for Women in Family Court: What to Expect and How to Fight Back”. (www.nowfoundation.org/issues/family)

Numerous national organizations are demanding  federal investigations into the crisis in the family courts and asking for congressional hearings to address these human rights violations to America’s children and their Mothers.

The latest research on this issue is in the book Domestic Violence, Abuse, and Child Custody Legal Strategies and Policy Issues Edited by Barry Goldstein, J.D. and Dr. Mo Therese Hannah. And can be found at www.civicresearchinstitute.com/dvac.html

Linda Marie’s daughters said “Mommy fight for us and do something every day to get us back and don’t ever stop. So after 3 years and 9 months, this Florida Mother is now more determined than ever, and is headed to the Florida Supreme Court and then on to the U.S. Supreme Court. She has kept her promise to her daughter’s and now she is speaking up for her children and all of America’s children.

For more information  on this crisis in the family courts please contact:

Center for Judicial Excellence www.centerforjudicailexcellence.com

California Protective Parent Association www.protectiveparent.com

Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project www.dvleap.org

Stop Family Violence www.stopfamilyviolence.org

Randi James www.randijames.com

Court Whores www.courtwhores.com

American Mothers Political Party www.AmericanMothersPoliticalParty.org

Family Court in America www.juliafletcher.wordpress.com

Talia Carner  www.taliacarner.com

Protective Parents for Children’s Rights www.protectiveparent.ning.com

Liz Notes www.lizlibrary.org

Many thanks to all who are part of the solution to the crisis in the family courts. You are all true American heroes.

For contact information re: this press release please contact:

Linda Marie Sacks

386-453-3017

Lindamariesacks@aol.com

BLOGGERS AGAINST DEPRIVATION ALIENATION SYNDROMES and junk SCIENCE HAS AX TO GRIND WITH BAD AXE MI CHIEF JUDGE M. RICHARD KNOBLOCK


31.1.11

American Mothers Political Party stands Behind Kim Damrow– (MI) Judge M. Richard Knoblock being investigated for jailing mom without ‘cause’ now, AMPP believes JUDGE ‘faked’ his own death threat to FBI. AMPP is calling him out this Thursday on BTR

·

American Mothers Political Party stands Behind Kim Damrow of Michigan

American Mothers Political Party BTR Show: This Thursday February 2, 2011 at 5 PM CST- 6 PM EST Call-in Number: (347) 205-9977

American Mothers Political Party will have special guest Kim Damrow the mother recently sentenced to 12 hours in jail for custodial interference in Michigan. She is also the current wife of a state representative 84th District State Rep. Kurt E. Damrow  for Michigan .  Apparently now M. Richard Knoblock allowed her now to wait until Monday to serve the time as her child was hospitalized (so nice of him!)

The FBI received a complaint that “someone” (AMPP believes the Judge himself) that went to courthouse for the protest on Thurs or Friday in her support —-that the judge’s life was threatened. So now all her supporters are jumping ship…scared that the feds are coming in.

Anyone will to help out with blogging story and/or promoting Thurs show is much appreciated.

“I think that the feds should investigate and I also think that the judge reported it himself. fishy…”

    • She files complaint:
    • Judge then says he was threatened- after a large protest at courthouse and the complaint filed.(what a crock)

=====

See articles below:

Breaking news: Attorney reports violation of code of conduct

Published: Saturday, January 29, 2011 2:41 PM EST

BAD AXE – On Saturday, the attorney for Kim Damrow told the Tribune there has been information released that violates the code of conduct of professional responsibility imposed upon all judicial officials, attorneys and courthouse personnel.

“It’s not the press that violated the code,” said Nicole Saady, of Grosse Pointe.

Of the information that has been released, Saady said,  she has not verified all of it.

At this time, in the interest of protecting the safety, privacy and personal feelings of the Damrow family, all press inquiries are to go through Saady, she said.

Look to the Huron Daily Tribune as more details become available.

Editor’s note: Due to the high number of libelous comments posted under related articles, comments have been disabled on this article.

================

Hanson: Threat made against judge

By Kate Hessling

Tribune Staff Writer

Published: Saturday, January 29, 2011 2:40 PM EST

BAD AXE — Police are investigating an alleged threat made earlier this week against Huron County Circuit Court Judge M. Richard Knoblock.

“We’ve received information of a threat against the judge and we’re looking into it, along with contacting the FBI,” Huron County Sheriff Kelly J. Hanson told the Tribune after being asked about the situation Friday.

Hanson stressed the investigation still is in the early stages.

“We don’t know how far along we’ll go with it, and I can’t comment about it other than it involves the formation of this rally,” Hanson said, referring to a rally supporters held for Kim Damrow.

Damrow was sentenced Monday to 12 hours in jail for violating a court order allowing the father of her 4-year-old son visitation. She said she did so in an effort to protect her son, as she said her ex-husband has a violent past and she does not believe he has reformed.

Damrow’s sentencing on Monday was followed by a number of events, specifically a large swelling of support organized on Facebook.

State Rep. Kurt E. Damrow, Kim Damrow’s husband, said he was appalled when learning of the threat.

“I’m appalled at a public figure being threatened — just as appalled as I am at a child being threatened,” he said.

Kurt Damrow said there should be no type of physical threats.

“This is a matter of compassion and love for children,” he said. “It just goes against everything that we’re presenting. … Any threat of violence of any type like this has no business on either side — either for or against.”

Hanson said given the recent shootings in Arizona, the threat has to be taken seriously.

“We don’t have any choice but to look at it,” he said. “ … We’re going to take it serious and look into it.”

Editor’s note: Due to the high number of libelous comments posted, comments have been disabled on this article.

===========================

Damrow released early

Allowed to be with sick son, but has to report back to jail next week

BAD AXE — Within hours after being booked in the Huron County Jail to serve a 12-hour sentence for contempt of court for not allowing the father of her youngest son visitation, Kim Damrow walked out of the courthouse a free woman —for the time being.

While picketers outside the Huron County Building were glad to see her free, the freedom didn’t come as a result of the court changing its mind: It was because her 4-year-old son was in the hospital.

Damrow, who is married to 84th District State Rep. Kurt E. Damrow, said her son, Boden, was running a very high temperature and Kurt Damrow took him to the hospital about 4 – 4:30 a.m. Friday. Kim Damrow said she could not go to the hospital because she had to be in Bad Axe to check in at the jail at 7 a.m. that morning.

The Damrows said Boden had a 103 degree temperature, was diagnosed with having influenza A, and the child was being held at Scheurer Hospital for observation.

Following a conference with attorneys involved in the case, Huron County Circuit Court Judge M. Richard Knoblock ordered Kim Damrow could leave the jail Saturday to be with her son, though she would have to return to the jail at 9 a.m. Saturday, Feb. 5 to complete the remainder of her sentence.

Kim Damrow was sentenced to spend 12 hours in jail and pay $1,000 in fines/costs during a contempt hearing Monday. The hearing was one of many that have been held in a custody battle for 4-year-old Boden Noworyta, the son of Kim Damrow and Dustin J. Noworyta.

The parents

Noworyta married Kimberly S. (Dufty) Langley Sept. 23, 2005 by a Justice of Peace in Monroe County, according to the complaint of divorce.

Kimberly S. Noworyta filed the complaint for divorce in the family division of the Huron County Circuit Court May 22, 2008. The couple had lived together as husband and wife until on or about May 19, 2008, records state.

Kimberly and Dustin Noworyta had one child during their marriage, Boden J. Noworyta. Kimberly Noworyta had a second son from a previous marriage, and Dustin Noworyta had two daughters from two different relationships.

Since the divorce, Dustin Noworyta has reconciled with the mother of one of the two prior relationships, and he currently lives with her and her daughter. The other mother has full custody of Noworyta’s other daughter.

Following the divorce, Kimberly Noworyta’s prior name, Kimberly S. Dufty, was restored. The divorce order awarded Dufty full custody of Boden, and Dustin Noworyta was allowed supervised parenting time with the child, and that time was to be arranged by Dufty, the plaintiff. Noworyta, the defendant, also was ordered to pay $241 a month in child support.

Dufty lived in the Upper Thumb area with her two sons since the judgment of divorce was order and filed Jan. 1, 2009.

Court records indicate Noworyta had three visits with Boden prior to May 2010, and there was a 15-month period when there were no father-son visits.

May 2010

On May 5, 2010, Noworyta filed a motion in Huron County Circuit Court, alleging Dufty denied him parenting time and it is in the best interest of the child to establish parenting time.

“During the past year, every attempt to spend time with my son has been met with last minute cancellations, refusing to show and not providing an address for me to visit my son,” he states in that motion regarding parenting time. “The last time I have been allowed to see my son was over one year ago.”

Noworyta stated he had been refused phone calls with his son.

“I am trying to stay connected with my son to the best of my abilities being over three hours away, and would at least love to hear his voice between visits,” his motion states.

In her response to Noworyta’s motion, Damrow disputes the claims in his motion, stating she has not disobeyed the parenting order. It also outlined the circumstances of the three visits that took place since the divorce and her willingness to allow Noworyta to see Boden, so long as it’s in a safe place.

“I explained to him that if he wants to see Boden, he would have to come to Huron County and give me ample time to find a safe place to meet,” she said in her response, filed May 13, 2010. “I would not feel comfortable, nor would I feel safe, taking my son out of the county to an area that I am not knowledgeable of and meeting him with my son.”

She asked the court to not issue or establish parenting time because it would not be in the best interest of her son.

“I greatly fear that there is a likelihood of abuse during even supervised visitation, both mentally and physically,” Dufty stated.

Dufty said she tried to discuss adoption with Dustin because he begged one of the mothers of his other daughter’s to put that child up for adoption in the past, and had gone as long as four years without seeing that child, even though the daughter lived just 5 miles away from him.

Secondly, she said Kurt Damrow is the only father figure that Boden has known.

“At some point, I admit, it is my hope that Kurt will be allowed to adopt Boden, as he is a loving and constant man in Boden’s life,” Dufty stated.

Kimberly S. Dufty and Kurt Damrow were married May 22, 2010. Her legal name then changed to Kimberly (Kim) S. Damrow.

June/July 2010

On June 18, 2010, Noworyta filed a motion regarding parenting time and other relief, asking the court to require Kim Damrow to comply with the parenting time provisions in the judgment of divorce and to provide make-up time for her denial of parenting time.

On July 1, Knoblock ruled Noworyta could have supervised parenting for four hours on a select number of Sundays, through and including Aug. 22, 2010. The order stated the parties were to meet at the McDonald’s restaurant in Frankenmuth, and Noworyta then would have parenting time with Boden in the Frankenmuth area. Each party was allowed to bring an observer with them.

The order also required both parents, along with Boden, had to have psychologicals done by a psychologist as agreed to between the parties, at the expense of the plaintiff, Kim Damrow (because she asked the court to order the evaluations).

August 2010

On Aug. 17, 2010, Noworyta filed a motion for contempt and expanded parenting time, alleging Kim Damrow denied him parenting time July 25, 2010. The motion also states Kim Damrow was refusing to tell Boden Noworyta is his father; threatened to cut short or deny visits if Noworyta were to tell Boden he is his son.”

The motion states Kim Damrow repeatedly frustrated Noworyta’s efforts to call Boden, and Noworyta rarely had a normal conversation with Boden without interruption from Kim Damrow.

“ … It appears (Kim Damrow) is uncontrollable by anyone and will do what she pleases, even if it is in direct violation of the court’s order; (and) that she continues to obstruct any attempt of (Noworyta) to establish a personal relationship with his soon, going even so far as objecting to Boden being told (Noworyta) is his father.”

Noworyta’s motion states unless Kim Damrow’s held in contempt by the court for failing to abide by a stipulated court order, it will continue to be a struggle for Noworyta to have a normal relationship with his son.

The motion also states while appointments for the psychologicals had been scheduled to the satisfaction of both parties, Kim Damrow canceled them without notice to Noworyta or her attorney.

In her Aug. 19, 2010 response to the motion, Kim Damrow explained she had a change in attorneys since the previous hearing, and she was in contact with the individual who was to do the evaluation, and she asked the judge to postpone her evaluation. Also, her response states, the clinic was the one to cancel Noworyta’s appointment because they were unable to reach him by telephone.

As for the claims she denied him parenting time, Kim Damrow explained she was very ill on July 25, 2010 and tried numerous times to reach Noworyta, however, he did not have a phone so she could called the numerous phone numbers he makes calls from. She said she also sent e-mails to his partner and sister-in-law hours before he had to leave Dundee to go to Frankenmuth that day.

“I did tell Dustin that we should bring him back into Boden’s life slowly and that as sensitive as Boden is, let’s try to feel him out the best we can before we explain who (Noworyta) is,” she stated in her response. Her response claims when Noworyta first brought up the subject with Boden, Noworyta grabbed Boden and sat him on his lap very hard, shouting “Do you know who I am? I am your father.” And he broke out in tears, she said.

Regarding the difficulty of having phone conversations, Kim Damrow’s statement notes Boden rarely talks on the phone to anyone because he was 3 years old.

First contempt hearing

During the contempt hearing on Aug. 30, 2010, the accounts of the previous visitations and Noworyta’s mental stability were as different as black and white.

Noworyta’s Bad Axe attorney, Duane Cubitt, said the visitations went fine, and Boden and Noworyta got along fine, according to transcripts from the hearing.

“My time with Boden went great,” Noworyta said. “Kim spent a lot of time in the background trying to make it miserable, but that was about it …”

Cubitt painted Kim Damrow as being uncooperative, and said his client believes Kim Damrow intentionally did not show up for the July 25 parenting time.

He said she was being difficult as to the visitation’s venue, not allowing Noworyta to take Boden outside of the McDonald’s restaurant to go to a museum or park.

During her testimony, Kim Damrow said Boden was a different child before she divorced Noworyta.

“When Dustin was with us … all my family, they thought something was wrong with us. He was 21 months (old), he quit smiling, he was sullen, he was sad … you could tell he was fearful,” she said in the hearing transcripts. “It took a long time to bring him back to where he is today.”

That’s why Kim Damrow said she asked the court that if he wants visitation, it’s his obligation to prove his circumstances have changed. She testified he should be responsible for paying for his own evaluation, then following the psychologist’s orders and get treatment and take parenting classes

During cross examination, Kim Damrow told the court she was going to wait to tell Boden that Noworyta is his father.

“We were going to counseling as soon as possible to deal with it …,” she said. “I don’t want to mess him up any more than he’s been messed up. I don’t know the answers completely, I’m not claiming to be the best mother, I do my best.”

When asked if she doesn’t think Boden’s entitled to know who his dad is, Kim Damrow said yes — if Noworyta sticks around and gets mentally healthy.

Cubitt argued Noworyta is not unstable and he’s very capable of parenting children.

“So I don’t know where Kim comes up with this idea that somehow or other he’s a violent person and that her child is somehow endangered if he is around Boden without her being present,” Cubitt said.

With regard to her testimony about the child negatively reacting to the previous visitations, Cubitt said, “I mean, what 3-year-old wouldn’t be based on what the mother is putting this kid through. She won’t even acknowledge that Dustin, my client, is the child’s father. And that kind of gives you an insight into what kind of person she really is.”

But Kim Damrow’s stance has been that the safety of her child comes first, and she is doing what she can to protect — not harm — him.

Knoblock ordered the visitations take place for six hours in Huron County on alternate weekends, and the parties meet at the McDonald’s restaurant in Bad Axe. The judge ordered Noworyta’s mother or grandmother be present during all parenting times. He also ordered the psychological evaluations be scheduled and done.

He did not hold Kim Damrow in contempt.

“But if there’s further problems, I won’t hesitate to do that,” Knoblock warned. “But I’m not going to at this time.

November 2010

On Nov. 12, 2010, Kim Damrow entered an emergency motion asking the court to modify it’s Aug. 30, 2010 decision. Among the reasons, was an Oct. 31, 2010 incident where she says Noworyta acted in a violent manner. Also, she said it is not in the best interest of the child to participate in overnight visitation with Noworyta until his psychological records are produced by Huron Behavioral Health for evaluation and the psychological evaluations of are performed.

In Noworyta’s response, which Cubitt filed Nov. 19, 2010, Noworyta denies it is not in the child’s best interest to delay overnight visitation; claims Kim Damrow has had several months to complete the psychologicals; the parenting time has gone well; and the father and son enjoy each other’s company.

“Boden is a normal child when with (Noworyta),” the response reads. “He laughs, plays and is very interactive; Boden is full of life.”

Also on Nov. 19, 2010, Cubitt filed a motion for clarification, asking the court to, among other things, to expand the amount of parenting time to include all time provided for in the Huron County Friend of the Court parenting time guidelines, including extended summer parenting time.

In her answer to that motion, Kim Damrow asked the court deny the request.

December 2010

On Dec. 3, 2010, Knoblock ordered the psychological testing of all the parties be done in Bad Axe, as requested by Kim Damrow, and that there had to be make-up time scheduled because Kim Damrow failed to deliver Boden to the parenting time exchange location in Frankenmuth on Nov. 26.

On Dec. 4, 2010, Noworyta filed a motion asking the court to hold Kim Damrow in contempt because, among other complaints, she did not allow him visitation on Dec. 10, 2010.

Second contempt hearing

During a Dec. 16, 2010 public hearing, the court heard arguments and reviewed a doctor’s note stating Boden had been sick. The note didn’t specifically state he was too sick for visitation, and Kim Damrow was told future doctor notes would have to include that in order to suffice in court.

Knoblock did order to hold Kim Damrow in contempt of court for failing to providing parenting time the court previously ordered. However, he held the punishment in abeyance, pending her further compliance with the court’s parenting time orders.

The court also ordered arrangements be made for psychologicals and set Christmas parenting times.

The assessments

Tammy L. McPherson, licensed professional counselor of Bad Axe, conducted the psychological assessments on Kim Damrow and Noworyta pursuant to the Dec. 16, 2010 order.

According to the assessment, Kim Damrow reported no medical or mental health history.

“She is not prescribed any medications, however, does report high levels of stress, no appetite, difficulty sleeping and chest pains. She believes these symptoms are due to her fear about her son Boden’s safety while in care of (Noworyta),” McPherson’s letter states. “(Kim Damrow) believes her marriage to (Noworyta) to be one of physical and emotional abuse.”

McPherson reported that after further discussion regarding Kim Damrow’s fears, it is apparent (Kim Damrow) is concerned Boden could be emotionally abused by his father.

McPherson’s letter states Noworyta has no medical or legal history.

“He reports receiving mental health services for a short period of time in 2008, through Huron Behavioral Health,” she said, noting he signed a release to give her his records, and also released records from the Department of Human Services in order for the therapist to confirm he does not have an open case with any DHS agency, and no open case in any county was confirmed.

“After reviewing his records from HBH, it is apparent (Noworyta) was struggling with depression and utilizing alcohol as a coping mechanism,” McPherson’s letter reads. “He reports to not continuing the prescribed medication for depression, as he felt it wasn’t needed after he moved back to his hometown and was divorced. He reports being sober for the last three years. He denies any mood swings or depression currently.”

In her recommendations, McPherson said both parties would benefit from counseling (together) to resolve the conflicts that are preventing them from working as a parental team. She said it would be helpful for both parties to learn healthy communication skills and conflict resolution techniques.

January 2011

The defense filed a motion Jan. 18 asking the court to hold Kim Damrow in contempt for failing to allow parenting time previously ordered by the court for Jan. 14.

The motion states Boden enjoyed his Christmas parenting time with his father and step siblings, but did go home a half day early because Boden indicated he missed his mother and wanted to be returned to her. When it was time for the next visitation on Jan. 14, Kim Damrow failed to deliver Boden, the motion states.

Kim Damrow told the Tribune when she picked Boden up from the last visitation Noworyta was acting very suspicious, repeatedly stating she couldn’t call the cops. When she met him to pick up Boden, she said the child was screaming and crying, clinging to her and he would not look at Noworyta. She said Noworyta “just kept apologizing.”

She said she was concerned and took Boden to his pediatrician, Dr. Kala Reddy, to get a physical Jan. 3. According to a report submitted to the court from that doctor’s visit, it was stated that Boden was complaining of neck pain, had not eaten very well and had a temperature of 101. It also was noted Boden was fearful in the car, refusing to go to even a friend’s/relative’s house.

Reddy recommended the mother continue counseling, and she reassured Kim Damrow that she did not see any evidence of trauma to Boden’s neck.

Kim Damrow was able to take Boden back to the pediatrician Jan. 6. The reason for the visit was because the child had not been sleeping, and was in pain in his mouth because he was chewing the insides of his cheeks.

In her observation, Reddy reported Boden “is rather too quiet for his age and looks worried and pretty anxious. … He does not appear to be acutely physically ill, though.”

After a detailed physical, Reddy diagnosed the child’s condition as acute separation anxiety. In a Jan. 14 letter, she states she does not recommend he be removed from his mother at this time without the advice of a psychiatrist or child psychologist.

Both the defense and the court were unaware of the doctor’s note.

In the defense’s Jan. 18 motion, Noworyta asks the court to hold Kim Damrow in contempt and punish her accordingly, and require the plaintiff reimburse Noworyta for attorney fees and other costs.

Third contempt hearing

During a four and a half hour contempt hearing Monday, of which the complete transcripts are not yet available, Reddy testified about her dealings with Boden and her letter and written observations were admitted into evidence.

Despite the explanations given, Knoblock held Kim Damrow in contempt, noting “it’s clear to me from all the hearings I’ve had, the testimony that I’ve heard, and including hers and that of other people presented during these hearings, that she does not want (this) father (to) be in the life of the child, she wants to cut him out, that’s what she wants to do,” according to partial transcripts that were available Friday.

Knoblock said he believes Kim Damrow’s actions border on child abuse.

However, in regard to Reddy’s testimony, he said an evaluation needs to be done. He ordered an appointment be made, and that order was fulfilled later that afternoon.

Until the evaluation is complete, the judge ordered the defense hold off on the two phone calls the court awarded him for each week, and ordered future visitation be supervised.

Emergency hearing

Kim Damrow’s attorney argued submitted an emergency motion for stay and appeal Thursday, noting the plaintiff did not have enough time to prepare for a criminal contempt charge, it was believed the charge was civil. The attorney, Nicole Saady, of Grosse Pointe, noted she was hired to represent Damrow on Saturday.

Thus, the court was denying Kim Damrow’s due process rights by not giving her enough time to represent herself.

She also argued that Kim Damrow should be able to purge herself, i.e. correct the offense by providing make-up parenting time.

Knoblock disagreed, stating the motion specifically asked she be punished, which adequately put her on notice that she was being charged with criminal contempt for willfully disobeying a court order.

While he sentenced her to 12 hours in jail, Knoblock said the law provides that for a criminal contempt charge, the defendant could be sentenced up to 93 days in jail and fined up to $7,500.

Both sides respond

Cubitt said in no way is his client a threat to his son. He explained Noworyta left his job to move to Huron County and had problems finding employment, which lead to depression. Matters worsened as the divorce was not amicable, and it wasn’t until Noworyta moved out of the area that he was able to get back on his feet financially and turn his life around. Once he had, he filed a motion for parenting time to spend time with his child, Cubitt said.

But Kim Damrow said he hasn’t changed, and if anything, he’s gotten worse. She voiced frustrations that she is trying to protect her child, but the system is not allowing her to do so.

“I can’t protect my child, and it is the most horrifying feeling for a mother,” Kim Damrow told the Tribune.

On Friday, Kim Damrow vehemently disagreed that she is the cause of Boden’s anguish.

“Some have questioned whether Kurt and I are the ones causing the mental anguish. What a gross injustice of the system to accuse the mother, when the mother has no mental health issues,” Kim Damrow told the Tribune. “But the father’s records from Huron Behavioral Health clearly show that he had depression, that he abused alcohol and he was abusive. Why would she not be concerned for child?” Especially when Dr. Kayla Reddy, Boden’s pediatrician and the only professional to have ever seen Boden throughout this entire thing, Dr. Reddy says after a visit with his father, there was a drastic change in his behavior which she witnessed. And Dr. Reddy had cause to be alarm, and Dr. Reddy asked the court to not remove him from his mother at this time, and that by further removing him from his mother could cause permanent damage — that’s huge.”

Editor’s note: Due to the high number of libelous comments posted, comments have been disabled on this article.

CRY BABY


 

Nobody Likes Me :(

First he pouted….

Whiney, Whiney Dr. Richard Warshak—HE alone responsible for Censorship of Comments on Huffington Post

WHY IS DR. RICHARD WARSHAK WHINING WHEN HE WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR CENSORING COMMENTS ON THE HUFFINGTON POST?

Poor Richard Warshak.  He asked for commenters to come to his Huffington Post article and comment.  A few of us did, and he refused to post the comments.  He censored out everything that didn’t show adoration for him.  That is what he wanted.  Afterall, he has a book and “expert testimony” services to sell.  Now he is whining about those who he censored…there are many that are upset about this.

Several comments were made about the American Bar Association, the American Judges Association, the National District Attorney’s Association and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges debunking the use of “parental alienation” in child custody cases because of it’s well known use by abusers to take custody of children.  Of course, anyone who makes the kind of money that Warshak makes ($20,000 per patient per four days in “treatment”) doesn’t care who claimed what for what purpose, they just know they will make money.  He doesn’t care that children may be in the custody of someone who beat the other parent, probably in front of the children, or may have even been sexually abusing the children.  No, he doesn’t care, but the professional organizations know what the deal is.  They know that victims of abuse have lost their children to abusers, and corrupt individuals that support the use of this legal tactic should be shut down:

2009: A Judicial Guide to Child Safety in Custody Cases
National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges Family Violence Department

Page 12:
C. [§3.3] A Word of Caution about Parental Alienation34

Under relevant evidentiary standards, the court should not accept testimony regarding parental alienation syndrome, or “PAS.” The theory positing the existence of PAS has been discredited by the scientific community.35 In Kumho Tire v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999), the Supreme Court ruled that even expert testimony based in the “soft sciences” must meet the standard set in the Daubert case.36 Daubert, in which the court re-examined the standard it had earlier articulated in the Frye37 case, requires application of a multi-factor test, including peer review, publication, testability, rate of error, and general acceptance. PAS does not pass this test. Any testimony that a party to a custody case suffers from the syndrome or “parental alienation” should therefore be ruled inadmissible and stricken from the evaluation report under both the standard established in Daubert and the earlier Frye standard.38

The discredited “diagnosis” of PAS (or an allegation of “parental alienation”), quite apart from its scientific invalidity, inappropriately asks the court to assume that the child’s behaviors and attitudes toward the parent who claims to be “alienated” have no grounding in reality. It also diverts attention away from the behaviors of the abusive parent, who may have directly influenced the child’s responses by acting in violent, disrespectful, intimidating, humiliating, or discrediting ways toward the child or the other parent. The task for the court is to distinguish between situations in which the child is critical of one parent because they have been inappropriately manipulated by the other (taking care not to rely solely on subtle indications) , and situations in which the child has his or her own legitimate grounds for criticism or fear of a parent, which will likely be the case when that parent has perpetrated domestic violence. Those grounds do not become less legitimate because the abused parent shares them, and seeks to advocate for the child by voicing his or her concerns.

Then he got spanked….

Richard Warshak Responds To Critics – And The Countess Responds To Him

So look at this. After all the attention Richard Warshak’s critics have received – including dominating Google searches – he finally addresses them – and completely misses the boat. His comments are indented and in italics. My responses are in between.

Parental Alienation: Impracticality & Impressions. Dr. Richard Warshak Answers Critics

Answering Critics by Dr. Richard Warshak

The many parents I have helped, women and men, express astonishment that some people demonize me, attempt to tarnish my reputation, and spread misleading and false information about my work and me. Although my supporters far outweigh my detractors, the people seeking to quiet my voice yell loudly and work hard to circulate their misinformation.

Your critics and critics of parental alienation have been out there for a very long time. What the most recent critics have been saying is nothing new. However, this is the first time they’ve found a real voice on the internet, and we can’t have that, can we?

Until now I have allowed the personal attacks and gross misrepresentations to go without answer.

Good. So you’re finally going to address the facts that parental alienation is not going to be in the DSM-V, that it has never been peer reviewed, that it is not accepted as a valid disorder in the general scientific, medical, psychological, and legal communities, that it has become a huge cottage industry that makes lots of money for the people who make a living using it in divorce and child custody cases, that the man who coined it (original term “parental alienation syndrome”) made statements supportive of incest and pedophilia (and he’s your mentor), that parental alienation does not meet Frye and Daubert standards for admissibility in court, and that it is the most common weapon used in court by abusive fathers to get custody of their children away from the mothers they’ve been threatening and abusing.

By the way, you did answer. You and the Huffington Post deleted most comments, most very well-thought out, reasonable, and backed up by research, that criticized you and parental alienation in your “Stop Divorce Poison” HuffPost article.

I understand the mentality of a true believer and realize that clarification of reality and objective evidence will hit the brick wall of a closed mind. For various reasons, these people want to hold on to their beliefs. They cling to misguided ideas rather than acknowledge the widespread mistreatment of children described in Divorce Poison and my other works. In some respects, they resemble people from earlier generations who refused to acknowledge the evidence of their senses that children were being physically and sexually abused with alarming frequency. Just as the professionals who first pointed an accusing finger at a society that tolerated such abuse were attacked, I suppose it is my fate to be the target of similar attacks.

Interesting statement there, since your mentor Dr. Richard Gardner, who created Parental Alienation Syndrome, was one of those people who refused to acknowledge that children were being physically and sexually abused with alarming frequency. He believed most allegations moms and children made of sexual abuse were false. He also claimed that 90% of his PAS caseload was mothers. People who fought for children’s welfare in the face of abuse were ridiculed as being “child savers” who were delusional. Fanatics. On a witch hunt. Demonizers. True believers. The same terms you are using to demean professionals and lay people who speak out against parental alienation and work to help abused mothers and children. Ironically, that’s the same language used by the false-acc witchhunt sex abuser defense crowd.

More below the fold.

And I continue with my response to Richard Warshak’s weak response to his critics. Warshak’s statements are indented and in italics. Mine are in between.

Defending myself against such attacks feels a bit undignified. It seems an unnecessary waste of time, and gives currency to a few fanatics who attempt to alienate my audience from me using the same tactics that some parents use to alienate their children from the other parent. Some of these extremists have lost custody of their children in a ruling that seeks to protect the children from severe doses of divorce poison. Rather than recognize the rationale for the court’s decision, these people believe that the judge either was biased or was foolishly taken in by the other parent’s allegations.

Smooth move, there. You just bashed and minimized abused women who criticized you. And you call yourself a friend of abused women!

Some of these people would have you believe that there is an epidemic of judges who take joy in placing children with parents who beat or sexually molest them. In fact, one website claims a conspiracy of Masonic judges who, in every family court across North America (I am not exaggerating), automatically give custody to pedophiliac fathers who in turn pimp their children to pedophiliac members of the Illuminati (the group profiled in Dan Brown’s novel Angels & Demons). I am not kidding. . . . Nor are they.

Now that’s a sleight-of-hand move! When I first read this paragraph I wondered what the hell was he talking about. I had to read it a couple of times to make sure I was reading it correctly. I’d never heard of any such thing. So I did a Google search. You found one – one – article by a woman and you try to paint all your critics as crazy fanatics. That article is not on a custody site. There is only one person I know of who believes all that, and she wasn’t one of the people commenting on your HuffPost article. I know of only one other person who believes something similar to what you say, minus all the Masonic and Illuminati stuff. The domestic violence community at large doesn’t believe any of that. But don’t let those facts get in your way of painting all domestic violence critics of you and parental alienation with a broad brush.

As I say in the Afterword to the revised edition of my book, when my wife reads these vicious and absurd accounts, she shakes her head in disbelief at the raw animosity that greets the work I do on behalf of suffering families. She asks, “Don’t they know that you’ve devoted your career to the welfare of children?” The many women I have helped through my writing, consultations, and courtroom testimony cannot understand what motivates the detractors, who claim to be advocates for women.

It’s nice your wife supports you. That’s what wives are supposed to do. It’s also nice your have women who support you. However, your wife’s support and the support of some women isn’t what matters here. What experts have written about you and parental alienation does matter. See below:

The National Association Of Juvenile And Family Court Judges
A Judicial Guide To Safety In Child Custody Cases – see page 12.

National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. (2006).
Navigating Custody & Visitation Evaluations in Cases with Domestic Violence: A Judge’s Guide (2nd edition)

[excerpt]

“The discredited “diagnosis” of “PAS” (or allegation of “parental alienation”), quite apart from its scientific invalidity, inappropriately asks the court to assume that the children’s behaviors and attitudes toward the parent who claims to be “alienated” have no grounding in reality. It also diverts attention away from the behaviors of the abusive parent, who may have directly influenced the children’s responses by acting in violent, disrespectful, intimidating, humiliating and/or discrediting ways toward the children themselves, or the children’s other parent. The task for the court is to distinguish between situations in which children are critical of one parent because they have been inappropriately manipulated by the other (taking care not to rely solely on subtle indications), and situations in which children have their own legitimate grounds for criticism or fear of a parent, which will likely be the case when that parent has perpetrated domestic violence. Those grounds do not become less legitimate because the abused parent shares them, and seeks to advocate for the children by voicing their concerns.” – page 24

American Psychological Association. (1996).
Report of the APA Presidential Task Force on Violence and the Family
Washington, D.C

[excerpt]

Noting that custody and visitation disputes appear to occur more frequently when there is a history of domestic violence. Family courts often do not consider the history of violence between the parents in making custody and visitation decisions. In this context, the nonviolent parent may be at a disadvantage, and behavior that would seem reasonable as a protection from abuse may be misinterpreted as a sign of instability. Psychological evaluators not trained in domestic violence may contribute to this process by ignoring or minimizing the violence and by giving inappropriate pathological labels to women’s responses to chronic victimization. Terms such as `parental alienation’ may be used to blame the women for the children’s reasonable fear or anger toward their violent father.” (p. 100).

The American Psychological Association
Statement On Parental Alienation Syndrome

“The American Psychological Association (APA) believes that all mental health practitioners as well as law enforcement officials and the courts must take any reports of domestic violence in divorce and child custody cases seriously. An APA 1996 Presidential Task Force on Violence and the Family noted the lack of data to support so-called “parental alienation syndrome”, and raised concern about the term’s use. However, we have no official position on the purported syndrome.”

Bruch, Carol S. Parental (2001).
Parental Alienation Syndrome and Parental Alienation: Getting It Wrong in Child Custody Cases.
Family Law Quarterly, 35, 527

Meier, Joan S. (January 2009).
Parental Alienation Syndrome & Parental Alienation: Research Reviews.
VAWnet: The National Online Resource Center on Violence Against Women.

Jennifer Hoult. (Spring 2006).
The Evidentiary Admissibility of Parental Alienation Syndrome: Science, Law, and Policy
Children’s Legal Rights Journal

Court-Appointed Parenting Evaluators And Guardians Ad Litem:
Practical Realities And An Argument For Abolition
Margaret K. Dore, Esq.
2006

Domestic Violence (DV) By Proxy: Why Terrorist Tactics Employed By Batterers Are Not “PAS”
Joyanna Silberg
The Leadership Council
2009

Divorce Poison
A Critique of Richard Warshak’s book “Divorce Poison”
Cheryl Melletus

National District Attorneys Association
Parental Alienation Syndrome: What Professionals Need To Know – Part 1 of 2
Parental Alienation Syndrome: What Professionals Need To Know – Part 2 of 2

Justice For Children
Parental Alienation “Syndrome”
“It is the position of Justice For Children that PAS is junk science.”

In 1998, Jon Conte [Professor of Law University of the Pacific McGeorge School] wrote that Gardner’s Sex Abuse Legitimacy Scale is “probably the most unscientific piece of garbage I’ve seen in the field in all my time. To base social policy on something as flimsy as this is exceedingly dangerous.” (Moss, 1988)

There are many more legitimate organizations that have come down over the years against Parental Alienation Syndrome and it’s watered-down cousin Parental Alienation (and Parental Alienation Disorder… how many times are you guys going to reinvent yourselves?). I’ve listed more than enough here to prove my point.

So why am I writing this article? It occurred to me that those who find value in my work might be confused by the drumbeat of misinformation. The downside of responding to critics is that it fuels their zeal and brings more attention to their smears. They live for the battle and are gratified when anyone takes them seriously. I would rather spend my time providing guidance on how to understand, prevent, and repair damaged parent-child relationships. But, for the sake of those who really want to know, here is some clarification.

So… when are you going to address parental alienation not being in the DSM-V, not being considered valid in the general scientific community, etc. … I’m waiting…

Are you really afraid your supporters will drop you like a hot potato because of the alleged “drumbeat of misinformation” and “smears”? Or are you really afraid that those who matter most – people in the legal, psychological, and medical communities – will read what has really been published lately about you and parental alienation, such as the statements above, and realize that parental alienation is junk science that is harmful for children and that it’s used as a weapon by abusive fathers? And therefore no longer recommend your Bridges program?

One smear that has been making the rounds involves a case where I helped a mother whose children were irrationally alienated. Some important details I cannot divulge because they are not a matter of public record and I wish to protect the family’s privacy. Were these details known, domestic violence activists who criticize my involvement in this case would surely regret their words. They would think twice about circulating the innuendos and arguments raised by the father’s lawyer in his attempt to defeat the mother.

Parental alienation isn’t going to be in the DSM-V. It doesn’t meet accepted standards for allowing expert testimony in court. It has no known error rate. Abusive fathers have successfully used parental alienation to wrest child custody away from the abused mothers trying to protect their children. … Still waiting for you to address all this. I have a feeling I’m going to wait a very long time…

And why focus so much attention on this case when your critics have focused so much more on what I list in my previous paragraph? Is it because this case came out in your favor? One case doesn’t prove your program works. It only proves you have one happy customer.

Several mental health professionals concluded that the children’s estrangement from their mother was unreasonable. Even the father’s own expert witness recommended that the one child under the age of 18 be removed from the father’s home (but, for reasons unclear, not placed with his mother).

That’s not what the critics have been talking about with that case. They mention the cost – $40,000. For four days. I’ve seen a report of another case where the program cost $20,000. For four days. Also, critics have pointed out that the program is unproven and untested. We have only your word that it works and you’re biased in your own favor, of course.

The case was heard before an arbitrator. The arbitrator found that “the mother was the intentional victim of irrational alienation by her sons, designed and orchestrated by the father.” The decision awarded sole custody to the mother and gave her the authority to make decisions on behalf of her son including, at her discretion, enrolling him in my educational workshop. The Arbitrator’s decision was appealed to the Family Court. The Court did not dispute the findings of irrational alienation. But the judge did rule that the Arbitrator should have ordered another evaluation. In the decision the judge pointed out that I gave no recommendations because, as I made clear to the Arbitrator, I had not conducted a custody evaluation. The judge set aside the Arbitrator’s award and allowed the case to go to a new trial.

You never interviewed the two boys in question before recommending your Bridges Family workshop – at $40,000 for four days. How can you recommend your program when you don’t even know if it’s appropriate for the family in question? You haven’t mentioned the cost here at all.

Here is where the smears begin. The purpose of my testimony was to educate the court about general issues and the state of knowledge regarding parent-child conflicts and children’s rejection of a parent, and to describe various interventions for families in which the court finds that the children’s rejection of a parent is unjustified, irrational, disproportionate to the child’s experience of the parent, and not in the children’s best interests. An expert witness who testifies in this capacity is obliged to explain the limitations of his work in the case. As is my duty, I clarified the purpose of my testimony and volunteered the information that I had not conducted an evaluation and was not there to make a specific recommendation for this family.

You still haven’t addressed my concerns from the top of this article. Parental alienation isn’t accepted by the scientific community at large. It’s vague and untested. It won’t be in the DSM-V. You have a product to sell and you go to court to do that. Now you’re on the Huffington Post Divorce section doing just that – with a dangerous and unproven disorder that has been used by abusive dads in court against the moms they abuse.

Rather than point out that I had testified in a professionally ethical and objective manner and properly apprised the court of the scope of my work in the case, including limitations, some bloggers imply that the Family Court Judge “discovered” the limitations and that I then had to “admit” that I had not seen the children. This is not what happened. I never testified before the Family Court Judge. The Judge simply noted what I had volunteered in my testimony in the Arbitration. My professional colleagues understand that what I did was precisely in accord with professional ethics.

Now it gets interesting, and this is the part critics conceal from their blogs. This was not the conclusion of the case. A new custody assessment was conducted. The assessment results strongly supported the mother’s position, recommended giving her the authority to enroll her son in Family Bridges, and concluded that the workshop was the best option for this family.

So you win after all. Another $40,000 goes into your pocket. All for an unproven program.

The case did go to trial. But, on the eve of the trial, the father’s lawyer, in what appeared to me to be a desperate last-ditch attempt to try his case in the media when it was clear that the evidence favored the mother, submitted an article to Canada’s Law Times that attacked my workshop as unscientific. Fortunately, the editor recognized distortions in the lawyer’s submission and asked me to submit commentary to set the record straight. My article was published. It effectively refutes the lawyer’s arguments. You do not learn about my article by reading the advocate’s blog posts. (See The Slanted Truth for the use of such tactics by alienating parents.) It is as if it did not exist. You can read my article by clicking here.

I read that article. We have only your word that your program (which is similar to the same used by the debunked and abusive Rachel Foundation) has been subjected to peer review and passes Daubert standards. Richard Gardner said the same about Parental Alienation Syndrome, too, when nothing could be further from the truth. Don’t forget that Gardner had his own deprogramming program he called “threat therapy”, which was very similar to the Rachel Foundation program and Bridges. One child who refused to go committed suicide. That case made the news and tarnished Gardner’s reputation even further. He also claimed PAS had been peer reviewed, enjoyed general acceptance in the scientific community, and passed acceptance standards. None of this was true.

And here are statements by other custody evaluators who didn’t think very highly of your “The Warshak Parenting Questionnaire 2nd Edition” or “WPQ”:

“…We custody evaluators are appointed to do our own work, at least in interviewing and evaluating… I would think that part of my job would be to generate my OWN follow-up questions… don’t know how any computerized questionnaire can do that… also a little troubled by the intent that evaluators “cut and paste”… interpretive language of any kind… into their reports… what “follow up” questions will pop up based on the parent’s responses?… how would the evaluator-user justify, on the witness stand, why they chose to ask alienation questions… if neither parent has raised that as an allegation? …” (California Ph.D., September 10, 2006).

“…the section on “Differential Treatment of Parents” (about two-thirds through the sample report (at w w w. wpqonline.com), under “Symptoms of Possible Mental Health Problems”) seems to invite alienation claims if parent was not thinking of such claims, and seems to suggest strongly how to support such a claim if parent is thinking of it. It seems to me to be way too suggestive/leading. In effect: Now, parent, would you like to consider making a claim of PAS? If so, have you considered claiming that your child does X? How about claiming that your child does Y? And don’t forget Z, have you considered that as possibly supporting a PAS claim? (This is assuming that the questions posed to the parent closely parallel the topics covered in this section of the report, and I suppose I could be wrong in making that assumption.)” (Ohio Ph.D., February 22, 2007).

What you also never learn from reading the blogger’s accounts of this case is the ultimate outcome. Notwithstanding the father’s lawyer’s maneuvers, again, the mother prevailed on all counts. After hearing all the evidence, the judge concluded that “Mother should have sole legal and residential custody of [the child]. Mother shall have complete authority to make decisions regarding [the child's] welfare. She is not required to consult with anyone before doing so; Mother is specifically authorized to obtain any treatment and/or intervention for [the child] as she, in her sole discretion, deems necessary and appropriate for [the child's] best interests; Mother’s authority described above includes, but is not limited to `Family Bridges: A Workshop for Troubled and Alienated Parent-Child Relationships,’ to enable and assist [the child] in adjusting to living with her.”

The program remains unproven. You claim a high success rate. And it’s very expensive. Parents of lesser means who are having problems with alleged “alienation” are not able to afford you.

By selectively citing the earlier Family Court decision, and concealing the trial outcome, the bloggers leave the impression that the court was critical of Family Bridges and blocked the family from participating in the workshop. In the end, the truth is the exact opposite. (Selective attention is another tactic of alienating parents that critics adopt to try to alienate audiences from my work.)

Still waiting… parental alienation is not in the DSM… doesn’t meet scientific standards for admission into a courtroom … unknown error rate … untested … you aren’t going to address those criticisms, are you? You’re only going to claim your detractors are as alienated as your clients.

Here is what the judge wrote in her opinion: “This leaves the Workshop, coupled with a change in custody, as the only potential remedy with any chance of success in this difficult case. . . . The court is faced with compelling evidence that a change in custody, coupled with the Workshop is best for [the child]. . . . The Workshop is a last resort. Obviously it would have been better had these problems been identified and corrected early on. . . . Unfortunately, they were not. This leaves the Workshop as [the child's] best last hope.” [Emphasis added.]

That’s not exactly a ringing endorsement. Your program is the “last best hope”? The “only potential remedy”? Were other remedies even looked at?

I fully expect detractors to post other information attempting to cast doubt on the wisdom of the judge’s decision in this case (which was essentially identical to the arbitrator’s decision; that is, two different triers of fact, after hearing all the evidence, concluded that the mother should have custody and have the right to enroll her child in Family Bridges). I do not intend to respond to such posts.

The issue isn’t whether or not the mother should have custody. It’s that your program is a huge money-maker for you, it’s unproven, and it’s never been tested. All those questions of mine and others that you never answered have gone unanswered. Parental alienation is not regarded as a valid disorder in the general scientific community. It doesn’t meet Frye and Daubert standards. It has an unknown rate of error. It’s never been peer reviewed. It’s never been tested. It’s defined in layman’s terms you gleaned from the dictionary.

As rebuttal to any future innuendoes and misrepresentations, I can state the following. The mother has authorized me to state that she is very pleased with the ultimate outcome of her case. Her formerly alienated son, estranged for six years, participated in, and greatly benefitted from, the four day Family Bridges workshop. He rapidly restored his loving relationship with his mother and they now live happily together.

One case doesn’t make parental alienation valid, and we have only your word that your program works. It’s never been tested and its error rate is unknown. It’s very expensive. What about parents who can’t afford your services?

There are other cases involving reunification programs and parental alienation:

Son’s birthday pact with parents leads to ceasefire in bitter eight-year dispute

Quotes:

Yesterday, in a revealing conversation, P.F. criticized therapists and child welfare authorities in the case for clutching to pet theories about parental alienation syndrome. Under the controversial PAS diagnosis, children who are seen to have been systematically poisoned toward one parent by the other cannot evaluate their emotions accurately.

“I think they have done a lot more harm than good for our family,” P.F. said. “I think they were tilting the whole case in a direction that was more favourable to them, which was a more costly and stressful and damaging alternative for us. We don’t need all these people getting into our lives and directing the way things go.”

He also criticized the justice system for too easily sidelining children who are caught up in their parents’ warfare.

“Where people are making decisions, the kids should at least be heard and their opinions thoroughly considered; not interpreted or cast aside, as they were here,” he said. “When it is possible to simply walk up and say, ‘This kid is parentally alienated,’ that instantly takes away all their credibility. Our family made their minds up for themselves. In a way, we emancipated ourselves from these professionals that have been breathing down our necks the whole time.”

IN RE BIANCA H., On Appeal from the 254th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas

Richard Warshak testified he is a clinical research psychologist. Alfano hired Warshak to evaluate Alfano’s case. Warshak has never met with Bianca, but has evaluated reports from other professionals and viewed a videotape of Bianca with Alfano. According to Warshak, Alfano is Bianca’s “psychological father,” and ceasing contact with him could be devastating to Bianca. Warshak admitted that the law does not recognize the concept of a “psychological parent.” He further acknowledged that another psychologist said Bianca’s attachment to Alfano was more like an attachment to an uncle or a grandfather.

Warshak testified that when conflict between “parents” causes a child distress, a court should order counseling and sanction the parent that instigated the conflict. Warshak believed any harm Bianca suffered because of the conflict would be less than the harm she would suffer if she lost Alfano. Indeed, Warshak testified the best way to remedy the conflict would be to increase Alfano’s access to the child.

After the testimony, the trial court stated that Alfano had been put in the position of an uncle since the child was twenty months old. The trial court noted that it had attempted to resolve the situation for four years with no progress. The trial court considered limited visitation, but determined that it would only put off the inevitable. Accordingly, the trial court terminated Alfano’s visitation rights.

In its findings of fact, the trial court found that (1) Alfano is not legally or biologically related to the child, (2) a great deal of conflict exists between Mother and Alfano, (3) the conflict was unlikely to abate in the future, (4) the conflict was injurious to the child’s best interest, (5) the circumstances of the child have materially and substantially changed since the date of the order sought to be modified, (6) the order has become unworkable and inappropriate under existing circumstances, and (7) modification would produce a positive improvement for and be in the best interest of the child. The trial court modified its prior order eliminating Alfano’s right to possession of and access to the child. This appeal followed.

Appellant raises six points of error. In the first five points of error, appellant asserts the trial court abused its discretion in modifying its prior order because the evidence is factually insufficient to support the trial court’s findings. In the sixth point of error, appellant asserts the trial court incorrectly applied the law in determining modification would be in the child’s best interest.

You never address the primary criticisms made by your critics. Parental alienation is an untested theory that has never been up for peer review. It’s not accepted by the legal, medical, scientific, and psychological community at large as valid. Parental alienation has been used by abusive fathers and their hired lawyers, evaluators, and psychs to wrest child custody away from mothers. Rather than point fingers at the Illuminati and one case supporting your Bridges program, and demonize your critics, you need to address your critic’s primary criticisms … which you haven’t done. And I’m not surprised.

DUNG


WHATS BROWN AND SOUNDS LIKE A BELL?

I think the appropriate word for this dude is ninny….

UK based mail online MR. Justice Coleridge states that:

Mothers who refuse to let separated fathers see their children should have them taken away, a senior family court judge said yesterday.

The children should be handed over to the full time care of the father if the mother persistently defies court orders, Mr Justice Coleridge said.

He called for a ‘three strikes and you’re out rule’ by which children would be taken away if mothers ignored three court orders.

The judge said that family courts are losing their authority because so many people take no notice of their judgments.

Around 5,000 new cases a year come before the family courts in which parents – almost always mothers – defy orders to let the other parent have contact.

Judges are extremely reluctant to jail such mothers because of the damaging effects on the children, so many continue to get away with it.

Mr Justice Coleridge, 61, said: ‘If I were to call it three strikes and you’re out it sounds insensitive but something like it perhaps should be the norm.’

He added that occasionally it might be necessary to send a mother to jail.

First things first….how you could even take this Marie Antoinette cross dressing wannabe serious is beyond me!  If the laws were applied the same for fathers abusers to be to held to the same standards in family court we would have no issue.
BUT….this is NOT the case in family court.   Mothers and children are dying at the hands of their former abuser thanks to family court ordered visitation abuse.  Maternal deprivation is NOT acceptable any longer.
So as the old Monty Pythons Flying Circus recurring joke goes….Whats brown and sounds like a bell?
The idiot above.