California man bitter over divorce dresses as Santa, kills at least 8 in Christmas Eve massacre

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-santa-shooting,0,3506094.story

COVINA, Calif. (AP) — The bloodbath began when an 8-year-old girl attending a Christmas Eve party answered a knock at the door. A man dressed as Santa and carrying what appeared to a present pulled out a handgun and shot her in the face, then began shooting indiscriminately as partygoers tried to flee.
By the time it was over, at least eight people at the party were dead and the house was torched. The gunman killed himself hours after exacting revenge against his ex-wife by going on a massacre at his former in-laws' home.
Bruce Pardo's ex-wife and her parents were believed to be among the dead. At daybreak Friday, investigators planned to resume searching what was left of their two-story home on a cul-de-sac in a quiet Covina neighborhood 25 miles east of Los Angeles.
Pardo, 45, had no criminal record and no history of violence, according to police, but he was angry following last week's settlement of his divorce after a marriage that lasted barely a year.

Related links

· Man in Santa suit found dead after opening fire at party Photos

"It was not an amicable divorce," police Lt. Pat Buchanan said.
Investigators seeking further information about Pardo's motives have begun searching his home in the suburban Los Angeles community of Montrose.
Police said he showed up at his former in-laws' home around 11:30 p.m. Wednesday for their annual Christmas party.
The gift-wrapped box Pardo was carrying actually contained a pressurized homemade device he used to spray a liquid that quickly sent the house up in flames. Police said Pardo had recently worked in the aerospace industry.
David Salgado, a neighbor, said he saw the 8-year-old victim being escorted to an ambulance by four SWAT team members as flames up to 40 feet high consumed the house.
"It was really ugly," Salgado said.
Another neighbor, Jan Gregory, said she saw a teenage boy flee the home, screaming "They shot my family!"
A 16-year-old girl was shot in the back, and a 20-year-old woman broke her ankle when she escaped by jumping from a second-story window. Those two, and the 8-year-old, remained hospitalized. All were expected to recover.
When the fire was extinguished early Thursday, officers found three charred bodies in the living room area.
"They were met with a scene that was just indescribable," police Chief Kim Raney said. Investigators found five more bodies amid the ashes later in the day and planned to return Friday to continue looking.
None of the dead or missing has been identified. Authorities were unable to immediately determine whether the victims were killed by the flames or the gunfire.
Following the shootings, Pardo quickly got out of the Santa suit and drove off, witnesses told police. He went to his brother's home about 25 miles away in the Sylmar area of Los Angeles. No one was home, so Pardo let himself in, police said.
Police were called to the home early Thursday, and officers found Pardo dead of a single bullet to the head. Two handguns were found at the scene, and two more were discovered in the wreckage of his former in-laws' house.
A car that Pardo apparently parked near his brother's home exploded Thursday evening and more ammunition was found in it, Los Angeles police Sgt. Francisco Wheeling said. She had no immediate details on what set off the explosion. No one was hurt.
Pardo's next-door neighbor, who did not want her name published to protect her privacy, said he moved in more than a year ago with a woman and a child. She said they kept mostly to themselves and the woman later moved out with the child.
Pardo was often seen walking a dog around the neighborhood and working on his lawn, the neighbor said.
He also served regularly as an usher at evening Mass at Holy Redeemer Catholic Church in Montrose, the Los Angeles Times reported.
Jan Detanna, the head usher at the church, was stunned when told about the violence.
"I'm just — this is shocking," Detanna told the Times. "He was the nicest guy you could imagine. Always a pleasure to talk to, always a big smile."
Bong Garcia, another of Pardo's next-door neighbors, told the Times he saw Pardo between 9 and 10 p.m. Christmas Eve and spoke briefly to him. Pardo told him he was on his way to a Christmas party, Garcia said.
___
Associated Press writer Daisy Nguyen contributed to this report.

Light a Candle For The Children-Judicial Abuse

 

 

Judicial Abuse

Introduction

Judicial abuse occurs when the effects of law itself are damaging to the person access to justice. In the most severe forms, Judicial abuse often occurs involving the most vulnerable members of our world: Children. For some time, judicial abuse has occurred across systems and mostly against mothers and children. Considering that it was not that long ago that both women and children were seen and not heard, just as things were improving it seemed as though humanity was finally valuing each and every precious human life. Out in the public, such things would and do cause enough outrage for a sense of "natural justice". Away from the public eye, these human rights atrocities occur almost unseen and unheard like a thief in the night.

Secrecy

There are laws that prevent survivors from speaking out about their experiences. Whilst it is "for the children", children are not allowed to speak about the proceedings either. The media have written too few articles on the family court. To bring the case to the media, participants must seek permission from the court itself or face imprisonment. Controversially, fathers rights groups were allowed to heavily voice their stories of "no contact", "falsely accused of child abuse and domestic violence" and few were allowed to challenge that except in utilizing generalist terms and evidence based research. We are aware that most of these stories are not the case at all but are withheld by law to bring the public the truth.

Family Court

In the process of seeking more time with children and promoting what appears to be the most noble cause, has entrenched the rights of mothers and children in their ability to seek safety from violence. Heads have been quoted in the media for stating that "family violence is our core business". The propaganda that is spread about the voices of children and their access to justice promotes the profitability in manufacturing child abuse and domestic violence. They can do something about it, but it is not within their best economical advantage to do so. This will continue until something is done. ShareThis

Out of the ashes of destruction and devastation, we give birth to Anonymums.

Disclaimer

Endangered Species: Mothers

Technorati Tags: Endangered Species: MothersChild Custody,Child Custody Battle,Child Custody Issues,Child custody for fathers,Custody for dads,Custody laws,Danielle Malmquist,Family Courts,Getting screwed by the Family Courts,Mother Child Relationship,Noncustodial Mothers

Endangered Species: Mothers

 

From Anonymums :

The campaigns for fathers ended up degrading and excluding single mothers from all walks of life. They were wrong for working and leaving their children, they were wrong for being poor, they were wrong for leaving abusive relationships and maintaining the “status quo” that would have harmed or even killed them, they were wrong for nurturing their children(alienating). A few years ago, I saw many grumpy mothers in the supermarket, now I see grumpy fathers - mothers were never any worse at raising children, they just did it more, thats all. The difference?

Single mothers are still being degraded no matter what they do and considering she has risked her life and body to bring each and everyone in the world, its about time, people began to show her a bit more gratitude and respect. Single mothers cannot continue to endure the wrath of the community for another lifetime, its bad for our youth and bad for society. It says to the rest of the world: “We as Australians are selfish and undeserving of the life that our mothers have given us”.

The solution is that Australians need to be more aware of this factor. This also includes same sex parents who can raise their children just as well, but should not be treated like baby factories and have abusers walk all over them to resolve “fatherlessness”. Its about time these fathers learn to take some of the responsibilities as to why a mother might be apprehensive at contact for the child. There is a real undermining of her reasons with little and in some cases large amounts of evidence as to why she would sacrifice the little time she has to herself to have the children stay with her for longer periods of time.

We need to ask ourselves:

Why are we calling mothers abductors of their own children?

Why are we looking down upon mothers for trying to bring food into their homes by working?

It is no wonder women want to abort and more are choosing to have children later in life

We didn’t just throw the baby out with the bath water - We threw the mother out too. Bring back Motherhood.

Danielle Malmquist Still Trying to get Access to Her Children

 
December 8, 2008
Danielle Malmquist Still Trying to get Access to Her Children

Got word today that Ernie Freeman, MyFoxMemphis, has another update
on Danielle Malmquist, formerly of Germantown, Tennessee. See the
story and video here:www.rightsformothers.comjustice4mothers @ 12:33 pm

MyFoxMemphis: Nasty Divorce Case Still Lingers
How sad it is that Shem Malmquist is pleading poverty and is using a
court-appointed attorney for the case, AND HE MAKES OVER $250,000 A
YEAR! That's the crap courts are giving fathers now…every
opportunity to screw over the mother. Thankfully, a local Memphis
attorney agreed to help Danielle on a Pro Bono basis. It has been
almost one year now since Danielle has seen her children. Stay tuned…

Nasty Divorce Case Still Lingers
Danielle Malmquist Still Trying to get Access to Her Children
MEMPHIS, Tenn. (WHBQ FOX13 myfoxmemphis.com) -- It's one of the nastiest divorce and custody cases you've ever seen and a former Mid-South wife says she's more convinced than ever the legal system is out to get her. Does she have a case? I-Team reporter Ernie Freeman reports on how a mother's desperate cries for help are not being heard
http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/myfox/pag...

Got word today that Ernie Freeman, MyFoxMemphis, has another update
on Danielle Malmquist, formerly of Germantown, Tennessee. See the
story and video here:
MyFoxMemphis: Nasty Divorce Case Still Lingers
How sad it is that Shem Malmquist is pleading poverty and is using a
court-appointed attorney for the case, AND HE MAKES OVER $250,000 A
YEAR! That's the crap courts are giving fathers now every
opportunity to screw over the mother. Thankfully, a local Memphis
attorney agreed to help Danielle on a Pro Bono basis. It has been
almost one year now since Danielle has seen her children. Stay tuned

Ignoring boy's plight costs state $1.5 million: Government | adn.com

 

CHILDREN'S SERVICES: 37 reports outlined danger youth was in.

By LISA DEMER
ldemer@adn.com

Published: December 2nd, 2008 11:42 PM
Last Modified: December 2nd, 2008 11:21 AM

The baby boy was born with cocaine in his system. His mother abandoned him when he was an infant. At age 3, he lay down in the street and said he wished a truck would run over him.

And the system that was supposed to protect him was every bit as dysfunctional.

He bounced from one Anchorage foster home to another and then back to his father, who beat and neglected him, according to a lawsuit filed on his behalf against the state Office of Children's Services.

The complaint accused OCS of failing to protect the child from repeated abuse and neglect, despite dozens of reports to state workers that he was in danger. The result: an emotionally damaged boy.

Late in November, the state settled the lawsuit for $1.5 million. The boy is now 18, attending a special school, and living with his adoptive parents.

Alaska's system to protect children let the boy down and is broken, said Christine Schleuss, one of his attorneys.

Neighbors, teachers, foster parents, a nurse and others all made reports to the state that the boy was in danger, 37 reports in all, most of them naming his father as a source of abuse and neglect. But an expert hired by the boy's lawyers determined that not a single report was handled properly, according to the state's own minimal standards, Schleuss said. Some weren't investigated at all.

"There was systemic indifference ... just complete indifference and lack of accountability: Oh, don't blame us for this. Even though our own rules and regulations require us to do these things, don't hold us accountable when we don't do them," Schleuss said Tuesday.

"They are not building a record of what is happening in this child's life," said co-counsel Cynthia Strout. He had unexplained bruises. There were reports of no food in the house, of drug abuse by adults, of the boy and his brothers running around unsupervised.

The boy and his adoptive parents didn't want to talk about what happened for this story but gave the lawyers permission to do so, they said. The lawsuit doesn't identify the family.

The adoptive parents never sought any money for themselves but sued to ensure the boy's needs are met, Schleuss said. He may require counseling, a job coach, assisted living and other help.

"He is a wonderful, lovely human being. He is a delightful young man. But life is going to be tough for him," Schleuss said.

The money will be managed by a court-appointed conservator, his lawyers say.

The case settled just before it was to go to trial. Schleuss wouldn't say how much of the $1.5 million will go for attorney fees. But costs for experts, travel and other expenses amounted to $170,000 as she and Strout prepared for trial, the lawyers said.

It's the second big lawsuit against OCS that Schleuss has settled this year. The other one, on behalf of two boys, settled midway through the trial, with each boy getting $1.2 million.

In the recent case, state officials didn't admit any wrongdoing but said the boy's side was seeking over $3 million in damages at what was expected to be a three-week trial.

State officials provided a written statement on the settlement through the Department of Law. One of the issues was whether the state failed to permanently sever the father's rights to the boy soon enough, the statement said.

The boy's case dates back to 1990. The state took custody of the boy at birth and had to try to reunify him with his family, the statement said. There were years of court proceedings.

Those efforts happened before a 1998 change in state law that requires abusive or neglectful parents to prove their ability to safely care for their children more quickly, the statement said.

The boy is the youngest of three and seemed to get the brunt of his father's anger, his lawyers say. As a preschooler, his emotional troubles led to repeated stays in an Anchorage psychiatric hospital, the suit said. The hospital described him as feral. After one of the stays, the staff urged that he not be returned to his father.

"And they just ignored that," Strout said.

By the time he was 6, he was in a foster home and life was more stable. But the state still required unsupervised visits with his father, and he would return to the foster home with bruises and once, with stitches. There were also suspicions another child in his father's home was sexually abusing him, the lawsuit said.

When he was 7, the foster parents agreed to become his legal guardians. Then the boy's father showed up and demanded the child back. The boy's caseworker had failed to file the court papers for the state to keep custody. The boy went back to his father.

Right away, the state learned that the father refused to give the boy medicine he needed to combat seizures. The foster parents visited and found "animal-like conditions" that they reported to the state. No one investigated.

In fact, his social worker never visited over the five months the boy was back with his father, Schleuss said.

In February 1999, the foster mother saw the boy at a Boys and Girls Club in Anchorage. He pulled up his shirt and showed welts from beatings with a dog leash. His father wasn't there. The foster mother took him straight to state authorities.

Police were called, and the father was charged with assault, the lawyers said.

The boy ended up back with the foster parents. They adopted him when he was 11. Even then he wasn't safe. The state put an older foster boy in the home who had a history of violence, without telling the foster parents about his past.

The 14-year-old had killed a cat, set fires, and molested other children. But the foster parents didn't know any of that, Schleuss said.

He molested the younger boy, the lawyer said, who had already been through so much.

The Alaska Supreme Court earlier had ruled in a separate case that the state had to inform foster parents about risky behavior of children being placed in their homes. The state even created a form. But the critical page in this case was missing, Schleuss said.

The boy's lawyers said the state can do better. They have some ideas: lower caseloads. Better pay, so workers stay on the job. Better supervision of front-line workers, an emphasis of Tammy Sandoval, the OCS director since 2005.

"What is disturbing to me is we are a fairly small state. We have the resources to do it. We can do it," Schleuss said.

But until the system improves, Schleuss and Strout say they intend to keep after OCS, one child at a time. Their next lawsuit is set for trial in April.

---

Find Lisa Demer online at adn.com/contact/ldemer or call 257-4390.

Ignoring boy's plight costs state $1.5 million: Government | adn.com

Battered Mothers Custody Conference Interviews

[IMPORTANT: The following audiovisual piece includes real-life interviews featuring disturbing verbal content and statements on child abuse and domestic violence. Viewer discretion is advised.]

Prof. Garland Waller produced "Small Justice: Little Justice in America's Family Courts" which is an independent documentary that explores the relationship between domestic violence, child sexual abuse and custody laws in America. To learn more about the stories of the women seen in this 10 minute clip, please go to http://batteredmotherscustodyconferen...

Jessie Beers Altman, a graduate student in the College of Communication, was in charge of editing this video.

For more information of Boston University's Department of Film and Television at the College of Communication, visit: http://www.bu.edu/com/ft

Abused and charged with murder: 8-year-old boy shoots & kills father and family friend after 1,000th spanking

 

Susan Mernit: Abused and charged with murder: 8-year-old boy shoots & kills father and family friend after 1,000th spanking

 

Posted December 1, 2008 | 10:01 PM (EST)

Abused and charged with murder: 8-year-old boy shoots & kills father and family friend after 1,000th spanking

stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust mixx.com

Read More: Child Abuse, Crime, Families, Juvenile Crime, Murder, Patricide, Media News

If you are 8 years old and you have received 1,000 spankings since you were old enough to start counting them, what does that mean?

It could mean you'd been recording them for 3 years, since you learned to write in kindergarten, or that you'd been recording them for a year, since you were seven and learned how to carry forth numbers in addition. If you'd been recording them since you were five, that would mean you'd been spanked almost once a day for the past 3 years, with 95 days off from getting your butt hit. If you'd started keeping track of the spankings when you were seven, which mean you were being hit more than 3 times a day for the past year.

Think about it. Breakfast, lunch, dinner, spanking. Every day for three years. Or, breakfast, spanking, dinner, spanking, before bed, spanking--spankings happening more frequently to this child per day than many people spent walking their dog.

Can you imagine living your life knowing that every day, at some point--perhaps more than once--a beating was going to happen? And that your father, responsible for mentoring you and your upbringing, was going to be the one to lay it on? Flat of the hand, paddle, belt, kitchen implement--did it matter after a while what your Dad hit you with?

Or was it just the consistent searing drip of the days, held together by having your pants pulled down and your butt beaten--not only by your Dad, but by his friend, a man who rented a room in their house.

How bad could any child be--any person--that someone could justify beating him, day after day?

If this isn't child abuse, I don't know what is.

If you think I'd strongly consider handing this eight year old the shotgun he is accused of picking up and using to fire two rounds each into Dad and his pal, you're reading me right.

And when I realized that this child--who doesn't live with his Dad full time--managed to score all these beatings from a monster who had only partial custody, I'd consider shooting this abuser myself.

For me, reading the news reports about this story underscores how powerless children are and how powerful the family is. In every account reported on this tragedy, the child's grandma is reported to have said, on hearing the news, "'I knew this would happen. They were too hard on (the boy). I knew (he) did it. He spent the night in my bed cuddling up to me. I had a feeling he did it. If any eight year old boy is capable of doing this, it's (him).

Which do you think would be more likely to cause Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome? Being an 8 year old who is spanked daily or multiple times a day by your father and stepmother and their friend, or doing a tour of duty in the Middle East as an adult?

I'd argue that the child--who was abused and no one did a thing about it--could be more screwed up than any vet suffering from PTSS--after all, if the kid's perception was that people who loved him wanted to beat the living crap out of him--in this case, it would be true.

When this case comes to trial, I have no doubt we are going to find out this child was a scapegoat for a sexual sadist or some other kind of pedophile sicko who found excuses to inflict pain on his son under the guise of discipline. And if that is true, this evil dad raised a son who killed out of self-defense.

MNADV Receives Grant for Domestic Violence Lethality Assessment Program

The

Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence (MNADV) is currently offering an opportunity for comprehensive domestic violence programs and local law enforcement agencies throughout the country to partner in a new, effective way that improves the response to high danger victims of domestic violence.

The Department of Justice has awarded a one-year Edward Byrne Memorial Grant to MNADV to provide cost-free train-the-trainer instruction and technical assistance to partnering law enforcement agencies and community based domestic violence programs in five regions of the nation to implement the Domestic Violence Lethality Assessment Program (LAP) in their jurisdictions and expand the LAP to other areas in their state.
The LAP, developed by the MNADV, is a two-pronged first responder intervention process that makes use of a specialized lethality assessment instrument and an accompanying protocol. Trained police officers on the scene of a domestic violence call assess a victim's risk for serious injury or death using the one-of-a-kind Lethality Assessment Screen and immediately link "high-risk" victims to the community-based domestic violence hotline in their area.
The LAP enables police officers and local domestic violence service providers to work as equal partners in a more coordinated, communicative, and cooperative manner to engage victims who would, otherwise, be unlikely to seek the support of domestic violence services. The LAP is the only program of its kind in the nation and was recently recognized by Harvard University's Ash Institute as one of the "Top 50" Innovations in American Government programs.
Download the LAP Training and Technical Assistance Application here.
Learn more about the LAP program here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Be sure to GOODSHOP for NCADV this holiday season! By using GOODSHOP to connect to your favorite online retailers, you can help raise money for NCADV.

Our Website

Products

More About Us

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Patriarchy Reasserted: Fathers’ Rights and Anti-VAWA Activism

Patriarchy Reasserted: Fathers’ Rights and Anti-VAWA Activism

Filed under: Angry fathers, Child Custody, Child custody for fathers, Children's rights, Corrupt Judges, Corrupt bastards, Custody for dads, Custody for moms, Custody laws, Domestic Law, Domestic Violence, Family Courts, Fatherhood groups, Fathers Rights, Fathers Rights Websites, Noncustodial Mothers, Protect yourself from FR groups, Studies completed, father custody, fathers fighting for custody — justice4mothers @ 3:26 am

A new article just published, really nails the issue being discussed.  Written by Molly Dragiewicz.  Here’s an excerpt:

Despite the repetition of FR pronouncements that domestic violence is not about patriarchy, sex, or gender, FR discourse on VAWA reveals the centrality of patriarchy, sex, and gender to their efforts. My analysis of FR discourse about VAWA found calls for formal equality, calls for the reassertion of patriarchy, and objections to women’s authority to be central. The intensification of anti-VAWA rhetoric in the form of calls for “fathers’ rights” not only fails to challenge feminist research and theorizing on violence, but also points to the centrality of the relationship between patriarchy and men’s violence against women. FR emphasis on reasserting patriarchy is paradigmatic of backlash, but FR groups are not just talking to themselves. Many complicated connections exist to mainstream fatherhood and marriage promotion initiatives and liberal and conservative politics that are yet to be investigated. The use of FR Web sites as places for like-minded men to seek out and receive peer support for violence-supportive attitudes is a serious concern for those interested in decreasing domestic violence, especially when we recognize their similarity to batterer accounts. The compatibility of FR commentary on VAWA with patriarchal peer support for violence against women should not go unnoticed.

This inquiry has limitations inherent to a discourse analysis of FR Web sites on VAWA. As a qualitative study, it is not representative of the total number of themes or the frequency with which they are found in all FR attacks on VAWA. Rather, this is an exploratory study that categorizes many different claims according to important themes. The sources that I cite here represent commentaries and arguments that are posted over and over again on many FR Web sites, and there is a great deal of continuity between the sites, but we cannot know about the reception of these claims from looking at Web postings alone. Additional studies that look at a larger number of sites using quantitative approaches would help to develop our understanding of this field. Additional work is needed to investigate more fully the relationships between the different sites, including cross-membership, and the funding relationships between FR and other groups across the political spectrum. Research that combines analysis of Web sites with materials made available to members but not posted online, and studies that compare FR group activities with their Web presence are still needed.

The good news is that the escalation of fathers’ rights rhetoric and other forms of backlash indicate that feminism is hitting a nerve in its criticism of patriarchy. The following quotation exemplifies the extent to which members of FR groups perceive that feminism has resulted in substantive changes for women and men:

[W]hen I lived in Democrat-ruled San Francisco, and was accused by my estranged wife of domestic violence, the ideological Feminist/leftist/democrats were in control of Family Court Services, the Criminal Courts, the prosecutors office, Social Services, and all the attendant government-funded NGOs whose purpose was to brutally and methodically separate fathers from their children. This was a world of purchased justice, wherein the Feminist Left were the rulers, and any man accused—regardless of his political affiliations (and I was at that time a Democrat)—was an instant enemy in the eyes of the State Apparatus. (LaSalle, 2007)

There is plenty of room for further research and advocacy against violence, and it is important to remember that multiple forms of violence, not just men’s violence against women, are shaped by gender. We need to understand the tactics of backlash and how they work in order to advance efforts to protect victims of abuse and decrease the occurrence of violence. Because of their preoccupation with issues related to battering and their bountiful Web presence, FR groups provide a plethora of opportunities for studying the specific dynamics of backlash against perceived feminist gains related to violence policy. 

I understand that many scholars have been slow to respond to FR rhetoric for a variety of reasons, but it is important to recognize that FR groups’ organization around violence against women is having a negative impact on battered women and their children. Survivors, service providers, and attorneys report the adverse impact of FR activism (Booth vs. Hvass, 2002; Jaffe & Crooks, 2004; Kaufman & Davis, 2006; Morrill, Dai, Dunn, Sung, & Smith, 2006; Rosen & O’Sullivan, 2005; Waits, 2003). Battered women’s organizations note that battered women have problems with abusers receiving custody at divorce (Varcoe & Irwin, 2004). FR group members have also sued shelters and other domestic violence service providers (Blumhorst v. Jewish Family Services of Los Angeles, 2005; Booth v. Hvass, 2002).  Despite their lack of success, such lawsuits are a waste of time and money for agencies that are already unable to fully meet demand for services (California Women’s Law Center, 2003). Rather than seeing FR groups as marginal, we need to understand the relationships between their cause and the other efforts that allow them some measure of influence.  Finally, FR groups’ literal and figurative emphasis on patriarchy provides ample opportunities for theorizing its relationship to masculinity and violence that are increasingly important in an era of federally funded fatherhood and marriage promotion initiatives.

Read the entire article here.

Leadership Council on Child Abuse and Interpersonal Violence (LC), more than 58,000 children a year are ordered into unsupervised contact with physically or sexually abusive parents following divorce in the United States.

 

The Leadership Council - Press Release Sept 22, 2008

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

How Many Children Are Court -Ordered Into Unsupervised Contact With an Abusive Parent After Divorce?

Contact: Joyanna Silberg, PhD, Executive Vice President
tel: (410) 938-4974 or email Joyanna Silberg

Bala Cynwyd, Pa.

According to a conservative estimate by experts at the Leadership Council on Child Abuse and Interpersonal Violence (LC), more than 58,000 children a year are ordered into unsupervised contact with physically or sexually abusive parents following divorce in the United States. This is over twice the yearly rate of new cases of childhood cancer. 

Experts at the LC consider the crisis in our family courts to constitute a public health crisis. Once placed with an abusive parent or forced to visit, children will continue to be exposed to parental violence and abuse until they reach 18. Thus, we estimate that half a million children will be affected in the US at any point of time. Many of these children will suffer physical and psychological damage which may take a lifetime to heal. The Leadership Council urges citizens to work with legislators and agencies in their communities to examine this problem, review state agency policies and procedures, and develop legislative and policy solutions that help ensure safety from violence for children following divorce.

How We Obtained This Estimate:

No one knows the exact number of children who are left in the unprotected care of an abusive parent following their parents' divorce. The Leadership Council has studied the problem and using the best available research has attempted to come up with a conservative estimate of the problem. We estimate that each year, 58,500 minor children are placed at risk for injury because the courts ordered them into the unsupervised care of a violent parent.

The estimate is meant to be conservative and was obtained using the figures in the following table. The research that we used to obtain these figures is explained in more depth in the following section.

Number of children affected by divorce each year

1,000,000

Number of families with allegations of child abuse and/or severe domestic violence (13%)

x.13

=130,000 cases

When investigated, percentage of cases found to be valid or suspected to be valid. (Research suggests that the number is between 43 and 73%, with most data showing the rate is closer to 70%. To be conservative we will use 60%)

X .60

=78,000

Percentage of children left unprotected. (Research suggests that the number is between 56-90%, with most data showing the rate is closer to 90%. A conservative estimate is 75%)

X .75

Estimate of children in the U.S. who are left in the unprotected care of an abuser after their parents' divorce

=58,500

The research:

Estimates suggest that between 1 and 1.5 million children experience the divorce of their parents each year -- ultimately 40% of all children are affected by divorce.1,2,3

It is difficult to determine the number of divorcing families affected by violence. The Women's Law Center of Maryland analyzed an extensive dataset, which consists of a random sampling of all divorce and custody cases filed in Maryland during fiscal year 1999. Domestic violence (including child abuse) was alleged by at least one party in 240 cases out of 1,847 (13.0%).4

This is likely an underestimate as court records often fail to note domestic violence5 and other studies have shown higher rates. For example, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC), looking solely at court records, found documented evidence of domestic violence in 24%-55% of custody court records depending on the state.6

In addition, studies suggest that in divorces marked by ongoing disputes over the custody and care of children, there is often a history of violence in the family and a likelihood that the violence will continue after the separation. In many cases, the violence involves severe battering and/or the use of weapons.7

To be conservative we will go with 13%. So how many of these allegations are likely to be valid. Research suggests when allegations of child abuse are investigated, approximately 50-73% are found to be valid.8

However, when courts get involved in determining custody, children are rarely protected from the violent parent. In at least 75% of cases the child is ordered into unsupervised contact with the alleged abuser. (Research has found results ranging from 56-90%; a conservative estimate is 75%).9

So how many children whose parents divorce are left in the unprotected care of an abuser each year in the United States ? Thus a conservative estimate based on available research is that approximately 58,500 are left at risk of physical and psychological injury after being ordered into the unsupervised care of an abuser after their parents divorce. This number includes both those who are left in the sole care of an abuser and those who are required to have unsupervised visits.

Compare this to the number of cases of childhood cancer per year. In 2004 the incidence rate of newly diagnosed childhood cancers in the U.S. was 22,586.10

Most people who divorce do so early in their marriage,.3 and children who are court-ordered into the custody of, or unsupervised visitation with, an abuser will be at risk of abuse until they reach adulthood. Consequently, at any point in time it is likely that a half a million children are left unprotected from a violent parent after their parents' divorce.

References

1. American Academy of Pediatrics. (2000). Divorce - Helping Children Adjust. http://www.medem.com/medlb/article_detaillb.cfm?article_ID=ZZZ4KZADH4C&sub_cat=0
(“Every year, more than one million children in the United States experience the divorce of their parents.”)

2. National Institutes of Mental Health. (2002, October 15). Preventive Sessions After Divorce Protect Children into Teens.
http://www.nimh.nih.gov/science-news/2002/preventive-sessions-after-divorce-protect-children-into-teens.shtml
(“About 1.5 million children experience the divorce of their parents each year—ultimately 40 percent of all children.”)

3. Shiono, P. H., & Quinn, L. S. (1994, Spring). Epidemiology of Divorce. Future of Children, 4 (1). Available at http://www.futureofchildren.org/usr_doc/vol4no1ART2.pdf
(Each year since the mid-1970s, more than 1 million children have experienced a family divorce.”)

4. The Women's Law Center of Maryland. (2004). Custody and financial distribution in Maryland: An empirical study of custody and divorce cases filed in Maryland during fiscal year 1999. Towson, MD.
http://www.wlcmd.org/pdf/CustodyFinancialDistributionInMD.pdf
(“Domestic violence (including child abuse) was alleged by at least one party in 240 cases out of 1,847 (13.0 percent). Of these, 169 allegations were made by women and 36 by men.”)

5. Kernic, M.A., Monary-Ernsdorff, D. J., Koepsell, J. K., & Holt, V. L. (2005). Children in the crossfire: Child custody determinations among couples with a history of intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women, 11 (8), 991-1021.
(Researchers at the Harborview Injury Prevention & Research Center in Seattle , studied divorce cases and found that in 47.6% of cases with a documented, substantiated history of domestic violence, no mention of the abuse was found in the divorce case files. Similarly the National Center for State Courts that a screening process [utilized by the mediation program] revealed a much higher incidence of domestic violence than a review of court records alone would have indicated [see ref 6 below]).

6. Susan Keilitz et al, Domestic Violence and Child Custody Disputes: A Resource Handbook for Judges and Court Managers , prepared for the National Center for State Courts; State Justice Institute," NCSC Publication Number R- 202, p. 5.

7. Johnston, J. R. (1994). High-Conflict Divorce. The Future of Children, 4(1), 165-182, p. 167.

8. Research used in substantiation estimate:

Brown, T., Frederico, M., Hewitt, L., & Sheehan, R. (1997). Problems and solutions in the management of child abuse allegations in custody and access disputes in the family court. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 36 (4), 431-443.
(Researchers reviewed court records of some 200 families where child abuse allegations had been made in custody and access disputes in jurisdictions in two states, observed court proceedings and interviewed court and related services' staff. The allegations of abuse were usually valid. 70% were determined to involve severe physical and/or sexual abuse. The overall rate of false allegations during divorce to be about 9%, similar to the rate of false allegations in noncustody related investigations.) 

Faller, K. C., & DeVoe, E. (1995). Allegations of sexual abuse in divorce. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 4 (4), 1-25.
(Researchers examined 214 allegations of sexual abuse in divorce cases that were evaluated by a multidisciplinary team at a university-based clinic. 72.6% were determined likely; 20% unlikely; and 7.4% uncertain. Of the 20% of cases that were judged to be false or possibly false cases, only approximately a quarter (n = 10) were determined to have been consciously made. The remainder were classified as misinterpretations.)

Thoennes, N., & Tjaden, P. G. (1990). The extent, nature, and validity of sexual abuse allegations in custody and visitation disputes. Child Sexual Abuse & Neglect, 14(2), 151-63.
(Researchers examined court records in 9,000 families in custody/visitation disputes. In the 129 cases for which a determination of the validity of the allegation was available, 50% were found to involve abuse , 33% were found to involve no abuse, and 17% resulted in an indeterminate ruling. [*note: Court records provide less reliable than evaluations by multidisciplinary teams trained in recognizing child abuse].)

Jones, D.P.H., & Seig, A. (1988). Child sexual abuse allegations in custody or visitation disputes: A report of 20 cases. In E.B. Nicholson & J. Bulkley (Eds.), Sexual Abuse Allegations in Custody and Visitation Cases: A Resource Book for Judges and Court Personnel. Washington, DC: American Bar Association, pp. 22-36.
(This article reports on 20 cases evaluated by the C. Henry Kempe Centre which involved both sexual abuse allegations and a parental custody dispute. 70% of cases were found to be reliable and 20% of the cases appeared fictitious.)

McGraw, J.M., & Smith, H.A. (1992). Child sexual abuse allegations amidst divorce and custody proceedings: Refining the validation process. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 1(1), 49-61.
(This study describes 18 cases of child sexual abuse allegations made during divorce and custody disputes. The cases were reviewed using the clinical process of validation used at the Kempe Center in Denver, Colorado. The number of cases categorized as founded was eight [44.4%].  In two cases [ 11%]) there was insufficient information to make a determination, and five were judged to be based on an unsubstantiated suspicion. Three cases were judged to be fictitious [16.5%], only one of which came from a child.)

Paradise, J. E., Rostain, A. L., & Nathanson, M. (1988). Substantiation of sexual abuse charges when parents dispute custody or visitation. Pediatrics, 81(6), 835-9.
(Researchers systematically evaluated child sexual abuse cases in a hospital-based consecutive series and one author's practice were systematically reviewed. Abuse allegations made within the context custody or visitation dispute [39% of the sample] were compared with cases in which custody or visitation was not an issue. Cases involving custody problems were found to involve younger children [5.4 vs 7.8 years]. Sexual abuse allegations were substantiated less frequently when there was concomitant parental conflict [nonsignificant] but were nevertheless substantiated more than half of the time.)

Trocme, N., & Bala, N. (2005). False allegations of abuse and neglect when parents separate. Child Abuse & Neglect, 29(12), 1333. (PDF)
Using data from the 1998 Canadian Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect (CIS-98), this paper provides a detailed summary of the characteristics associated with intentionally false reports of child abuse and neglect within the context of parental separation. The national study examined abuse and neglect investigated by child welfare services in Canada.
When there was an on-going custody dispute the substantiation rate by CPS was 40% and an addition 14% were suspected but there wasn't enough evidence to make a final determination. 12% were believed to be intentionally false. Allegations of neglect was the most common form of intentionally fabricated maltreatment. Substantiation rates varied significantly by source of report, with reports from the police (60%), custodial parents (47%), and children (54%) being generally most likely to be substantiated, while noncustodial parents (usually fathers) have a lower substantiation rate (33%), and anonymous reports being least likely to be substantiated (16%). Of the intentionally false allegations of maltreatment tracked by the study, custodial parents (usually mothers) and children were least likely to fabricate reports of abuse or neglect.

Hlady, L.J., & Gunter, E.J. (1990). Alleged child abuse in custody access disputes. Child Abuse & Neglect, 14(4), 591-3.
(Researchers reviewed the charts of all children involved in custody access disputes seen by Child Protective Services (CPS) at British Columbia's Children's Hospital in 1988. Of the 370 such children evaluated by CPS, 34 involved allegations of child sexual abuse (CSA) that arose during custody/access disputes. These children's physical examinations were then compared with the 219 children seen during the same one-year period for alleged CSA not involving custody/access disputes. A similar percentage of positive physical findings were found in both groups. It is concluded that the concern that allegations of CSA that arise during custody/access disputes are likely to be false is not borne out by these findings.)

9. Research used in this estimate:

Neustein, A., & Goetting, A. (1999). Judicial Responses to Protective Parents, Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 4, 103-122.
http://www.haworthpressinc.com/store/SampleText/J070.pdf (go to page 109 of pdf)
(Examined judicial responses to protective parents' complaints of child sexual abuse in 300 custody cases with extensive family court records. The investigators found that only in 10% of cases was primary custody was given to the protective parent and supervised contact with alleged abuser. Conversely, 20% of the cases resulted in a predominantly negative outcome where the child was placed in the primary legal and physical custody of the allegedly sexually abusive parent (see p. 108). In the rest of the cases, the judges awarded joint custody with no provisions for supervised visitation with the alleged abuser.)

Lowenstein, S. R. (1991). Child sexual abuse in custody and visitation litigation: Representation for the benefit of victims. UMKC Law Review, 60, 227-82.
(This study examined 96 custody and visitation disputes involving allegations of child sexual abuse from 33 states. Visitation was the principal issues in 36 cases. The father was alleged to have sexually molested their child in each of these 36 cases. Yet in two-thirds (24) of these cases the alleged perpetrator was granted unsupervised visitation.
Custody was the principle issue in 56 cases. In 27 of the 56 cases (48%) mothers lost custody. In 17 of these cases (63%) the mother lost custody to a father alleged to be a perpetrator. In two cases (3.6%) fathers lost custody. No father lost custody to a mother whose household included an alleged perpetrator (either the mother, a stepfather, the mother's boyfriend, or one of mother's relatives).

Kernic, M.A., Monary-Ernsdorff, D. J., Koepsell, J. K., & Holt, V. L. (2005). Children in the crossfire: Child custody determinations among couples with a history of intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women, 11(8), 991-1021.
(Examined the effects of a history of interpersonal violence on child custody and visitation outcomes. Mothers in cases with a violent partner were no more likely to obtain custody than mothers in non-abuse cases. Fathers with a history of committing abuse were denied child visitation in only 17% of cases.)

Saccuzzo, D. P., & Johnson, N. E. (2004). Child custody mediation's failure to protect: Why should the criminal justice system care? National Institute of Justice Journal, 251, 21-23. Available at http://ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/jr000251.pdf
(Researchers compared 200 child custody mediations involving charges of domestic violence with 200 mediations that did not. Joint legal custody was awarded about 90% of the time, even when domestic violence was an issue.)

See also:
Johnson, N. E., Saccuzzo, D. P., & Koen, W. J. (2005). Child custody mediation in cases of domestic violence: Empirical evidence of a failure to protect. Violence Against Women, 11(8), 1022-1053.

10. U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group. (2007). United States Cancer Statistics: 1999–2004 Incidence and Mortality Web-based Report. Atlanta: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute. Available at: www.cdc.gov/uscs .

For more information see:

Dallam. S. J., & Silberg, J. L. (Jan/Feb 2006). Myths that place children at risk during custody disputes. Sexual Assault Report, 9 (3), 33-47. (PDF)

American Bar Association Commission on Domestic Violence. (2006). 10 Myths About Custody and Domestic Violence and How to Counter Them. Washington, DC: Author. http://leadershipcouncil.org/docs/ABA_custody_myths.pdf

More research is available from the Leadership Council web site
www.leadershipcouncil.org

The Leadership Council on Child Abuse & Interpersonal Violence is composed of national leaders in psychology, psychiatry, medicine, law, and public policy who are committed to the ethical application of psychological science and countering its misuse by special interest groups. Members of the Council are dedicated to the health, safety and well-being of children and other vulnerable populations. More information can be found at: www.leadershipcouncil.org

Jessica Gonzales- Inter-American Commission on Human Rights

 

This is the first case from the U.S. involving violence against women to ever be heard before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and people can actually watch it live over the Internet.

Jessica Gonzales (now Lenahan) sadly lost her case against the Castle Rock [Colorado] police in the U.S. Supreme Court.  They held the police had no duty to protect her children by enforcing her order of protection, despite clear law in Colorado mandating that police arrest  anyone in violation of an order of protection.  The failure resulted in her ex-husband killing all three of their children.  Her case, now reframed as a violation of her human rights by the U.S. government, will be presented before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights this coming Wednesday (Oct. 22nd).

It is officially scheduled from 3:15 to 4:15 pm (Eastern Time)in Washington, DC at 1889 F St., NW  at the corner of 19th St.  Her information will be posted on the ACLU’s web site.  For those who can’t attend in person (most readers, I suspect), but would like to hear the arguments, read the draft of what she plans to post on the ACLU web site, which ends with how to access the court’s hearing on-line.  (And one can listen in on about 5 languages, including English.) 

Note that she will testify herself, as well as be represented.  Please feel free to pass this on to others likely to be interested in seeing this case.  It is an amazing opportunity.  The IACHR court grants only a few hearings even when it takes cases.  Previously it heard issues around standing and exhaustion of remedies in this case. Feel free to pass this on to others who might want to watch this case.

All my best, Joan Zorza
Editor, Domestic Violence Report

Technorati Tags: *Jessica (Gonzales) Lenahan blog post *

 

*Jessica (Gonzales) Lenahan blog post *

 
Jessica and her three murdered daughters

My name is Jessica Lenahan and I am a survivor of domestic violence.  On Wednesday I will make my second appearance before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Washington, DC.  The IACHR is responsible for promoting and protecting human rights throughout the Americas.  I turned to the IACHR three years ago because the justice system in the United States abandoned me.

In June 1999, my estranged husband, Simon Gonzales, abducted my three young daughters in violation of a domestic violence restraining order I had obtained against him three weeks before.  I repeatedly contacted and pleaded with the Castle Rock Police for assistance, but they refused to act.  Late that night, Simon arrived at the police station and opened fire.  He was killed and the bodies of my three girls were found murdered in the cab of his truck.

I sued the town of Castle Rock, Colorado for failing to enforce the restraining order I had against my husband at the time. The case went all the way up to the Supreme Court, but they ruled that the enforcement of a restraining order wasn’t mandatory under Colorado law.  I felt utterly abandoned: the police had failed in their duty to protect me and my girls, and the government told me there was nothing wrong with that.  I was sure that I would never have my day in court or a proper investigation of what happened.  I nearly gave up at that point – I had gone all the way to the Supreme Court, and I thought that was the end of the line.

But in December 2005, with the help of the ACLU and the Human Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School, I filed a petition with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.  In March 2007, I testified before the IACHR – the first time I was allowed to tell my story in a legal forum.  Before this case, I never knew this regional system existed and never thought of my private issues as human rights violations.  I am the first survivor of domestic violence to bring an individual complaint against the United States for international human rights violations.

I want other people like me out there to know that this system exists to protect all of us, and that our government cannot just turn its back on us and get away with it.  Although the U.S. is always pointing its finger at other countries for their human rights violations, there are plenty of violations occurring right here at home.  International human rights bodies like the IACHR give U.S. citizens the opportunity to have a voice, particularly those who have lost everything.

It is fitting that my hearing is being held in October, Domestic Violence Awareness Month, an important marker of what continues to be one of the most dangerous issues facing women today.

To watch a webcast of the hearing on Wednesday go to:
http://www.oas.org/oaspage/live/OASlive.asp.

For more information, contact:
*Selene Kaye, Advocacy Coordinator*
Women’s Rights Project | American Civil Liberties Union
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10004
T: 212.549.2645 | F: 212.549.2580 | skaye@aclu.org
www.aclu.org/womensrights

See previous post about Jessica’s case.
Article:
http://justice4mothers.wordpress.com/2008/10/19/opportunity-to-watch-jessica-gonzales-human-rights-case-online/

Opportunity To Watch Jessica Gonzales Human Rights Case Online On Wednesday, October 22nd

RightsForMothers.com

October 19, 2008

Opportunity To Watch Jessica Gonzales Human Rights Case Online On Wednesday, October 22nd

Filed under: Angry fathers, Child Abuse, Children's rights, Corrupt bastards, Domestic Law, Domestic Violence, Getting screwed by the Family Courts, Getting screwed by the politicians, Speak Out — justice4mothers @ 12:00 am

This is the first case from the U.S. involving violence against women to ever be heard before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and people can actually watch it live over the Internet.

Jessica Gonzales (now Lenahan) sadly lost her case against the Castle Rock [Colorado] police in the U.S. Supreme Court.  They held the police had no duty to protect her children by enforcing her order of protection, despite clear law in Colorado mandating that police arrest  anyone in violation of an order of protection.  The failure resulted in her ex-husband killing all three of their children.  Her case, now reframed as a violation of her human rights by the U.S. government, will be presented before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights this coming Wednesday (Oct. 22nd).

It is officially scheduled from 3:15 to 4:15 pm (Eastern Time)in Washington, DC at 1889 F St., NW  at the corner of 19th St.  Her information will be posted on the ACLU’s web site.  For those who can’t attend in person (most readers, I suspect), but would like to hear the arguments, read the draft of what she plans to post on the ACLU web site, which ends with how to access the court’s hearing on-line.  (And one can listen in on about 5 languages, including English.)  Note that she will testify herself, as well as be represented.  Please feel free to pass this on to others likely to be interested in seeing this case.  It is an amazing opportunity.  The IACHR court grants only a few hearings even when it takes cases.  Previously it heard issues around standing and exhaustion of remedies in this case. Feel free to pass this on to others who might want to watch this case.

All my best, Joan Zorza
Editor, Domestic Violence Report

*Jessica (Gonzales) Lenahan blog post *

My name is Jessica Lenahan and I am a survivor of domestic violence.  On Wednesday I will make my second appearance before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Washington, DC.  The IACHR is responsible for promoting and protecting human rights throughout the Americas.  I turned to the IACHR three years ago because the justice system in the United States abandoned me.

Jessica and her three murdered daughters

In June 1999, my estranged husband, Simon Gonzales, abducted my three young daughters in violation of a domestic violence restraining order I had obtained against him three weeks before.  I repeatedly contacted and pleaded with the Castle Rock Police for assistance, but they refused to act.  Late that night, Simon arrived at the police station and opened fire.  He was killed and the bodies of my three girls were found murdered in the cab of his truck.

I sued the town of Castle Rock, Colorado for failing to enforce the restraining order I had against my husband at the time. The case went all the way up to the Supreme Court, but they ruled that the enforcement of a restraining order wasn’t mandatory under Colorado law.  I felt utterly abandoned: the police had failed in their duty to protect me and my girls, and the government told me there was nothing wrong with that.  I was sure that I would never have my day in court or a proper investigation of what happened.  I nearly gave up at that point – I had gone all the way to the Supreme Court, and I thought that was the end of the line.

But in December 2005, with the help of the ACLU and the Human Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School, I filed a petition with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.  In March 2007, I testified before the IACHR – the first time I was allowed to tell my story in a legal forum.  Before this case, I never knew this regional system existed and never thought of my private issues as human rights violations.  I am the first survivor of domestic violence to bring an individual complaint against the United States for international human rights violations.  I want other people like me out there to know that this system exists to protect all of us, and that our government cannot just turn its back on us and get away with it.  Although the U.S. is always pointing its finger at other countries for their human rights violations, there are plenty of violations occurring right here at home.  International human rights bodies like the IACHR give U.S. citizens the opportunity to have a voice, particularly those who have lost everything.

It is fitting that my hearing is being held in October, Domestic Violence Awareness Month, an important marker of what continues to be one of the most dangerous issues facing women today.

To watch a webcast of the hearing on Wednesday go to:
http://www.oas.org/oaspage/live/OASlive.asp.

For more information, contact:

*Selene Kaye, Advocacy Coordinator*
Women’s Rights Project | American Civil Liberties Union
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10004
T: 212.549.2645 | F: 212.549.2580 | skaye@aclu.org
www.aclu.org/womensrights

See previous post about Jessica’s case.

---

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• Jessica Gonzales v. United States Hearing To Be Held In Washington, DC
• Amnesty Internal - Not their finest moment
• U.S. Commits, Lies About Domestic Human Rights Violations
• Read this: “Swept under the rug” by Human Rights Watch

Google Reader - AngelFury's shared items

Family Law Prof Blog: News: Domestic Violence and Asylum

The Other Side of PAS, Parental Alienation Syndrome

Thursday, October 9, 2008

The Other Side of PAS, Parental Alienation Syndrome

Wow...
I'm embarrassed to admit that I finally got around to really researching PAS, Parental Alienation Syndrome. Upon reading about this "syndrome" initially, I was horrified to think of the "alienated" parents who are supposedly forced to endure these horrific ex-spouses...who for no reason seem hell bent on keeping their kids from them. I jumped on the PAS bandwagon and set forth to "righting" this incredibly destructive wrong.
Flash forward to a Google search of PAS beyond the first page results...and thus the reason behind this post.
But, honestly...please don't just take my word for it, decide for yourselves, check out some of these links, be aware of the facts and make the best decision. Awareness is key towards making our world a better place.

"The PAS label "has lived a lot longer than the data that supports it". "I expect people to come up with crackpot theories. But then I expect scientists to do their jobs." Alan Scheflin, professor at Santa Clara University Law School
Editor's note: Some moms and their advocates have expressed the need to read father's rights materials on PAS. We have made a policy decision not to post any links to such information on this website. It is not surprising that you can type this topic into any search engine and find hundreds of father's rights sites promoting PAS as a legal defense or strategy for fathers in custody litigation. It is our position that if we were to link to father's rights sites promoting PAS, we would lend credence to those sources and enable them to advertise their products. We do not endorse in any way purchasing their materials. If you are curious or think it will help your understanding of the issues, we hope you will use you local library or the Internet to do so instead of furthering the father's rights agenda with your families income.

http://www.custodyprepformoms.org/pas.htm

The Truth About Parental Alienation Syndrome And The American Psychological Association
Richard Gardner, Inventor of PAS Idea
The so-called Parental Alienation Syndrome, touted by many in the Rhode Island Family Court, has been discredited by the American Psychological Association and, recently, by both the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and the Childrenʼs Legal Rights Journal.
Please join us at Peace4 the Missing
Missing Persons Awareness and Support Network
http://peace4missing.ning.com

 

Labels: active-aware, child-custody, children-need-both-parents, cnbp, domestic-violence-awareness, fathers-rights, parental alienation, parental-abduction, parental-alienation-syndrome, pas Posted by Maggie's Rose at 11:51 PM

Killer dad stalked us, mother says

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Canada/1082380.html

Killer dad stalked us, mother says
By The Canadian Press
Thu. Oct 2 - 4:47 AM

ROSEDALE, Alta. — The mother of a tot slain by his father in a murder-suicide says she had been stalked by the man for months and fled her home in fear.

Meara McIntosh, 27, sat on a deck outside that house in Rosedale, Alta., on Wednesday saying she had left because she felt it was the only way to save her son Colton from harm.

"I left here because I was terrified to be in my own home," she said.

On Sunday, her worst fear was realized when police found the three-year-old dead in a house in nearby Drumheller. He had been killed by his father, Richard Saunders, who was found dead at his side.

McIntosh said a court order forced her to hand Colton over to Saunders for the weekend despite her fears.

"I knew, statistically, it was the most dangerous time and had no intention of letting him see Colton again."

She said she is particularly distraught because "I forgot to say goodbye."

"But baby boy didn’t. He always said goodbye. He said goodbye over his shoulder and went bouncing off."

McIntosh said she left her husband because of his drug use and late nights when Colton was 10 months old.

She moved from Fort McMurray where they were living to Drumheller, but Saunders soon followed to try to rekindle the relationship, she said.

A custody dispute unfolded.

"Then the stalking started."

McIntosh said it began with suspicious footprints in the snow outside her home, vandalism and slashed car tires. She got a restraining order but after it expired she sought help — only to find none.

She said police threatened to arrest her "for making false complaints," while a social worker tried to claim she was an unfit mother. Some people in the community simply didn’t believe her.

Parental Alienation Syndrome Misused to Defeat Valid Abuse Claims in Child Custody Cases

Contact: Rob Valente

240.354.4842 or rvalente@nnedv. org

For Immediate Release

Parental Alienation Syndrome Misused to Defeat Valid Abuse Claims in Child Custody Cases

 

In response to the increased media attention surrounding the release of Alec Baldwin’s book entitled, “A Promise to Ourselves,” the National Network to End Domestic Violence, the Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project, the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, and StopFamilyViolence.org release the following:

(September 29, 2008) Washington, DC – The National Network to End Domestic Violence (NNEDV), the Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project (DV LEAP), Stop Family Violence, and the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, four of the nation’s leading domestic violence victim advocacy organizations, call on the media and the courts to rectify the misunderstanding and misuse of Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) in custody cases. 

“Child custody cases are among the toughest cases courts have to handle.  And in custody cases where domestic violence is involved, the judges have an even higher responsibility to ensure that the safety of family members is not dangerously impaired by misleading – and legally unjustifiable – ‘parental alienation syndrome’ theories,” said Sue Else, president of the National Network to End Domestic Violence.

“Parental Alienation Syndrome” is a claim that has been used to suggest that some parents try to undermine their children’s relationship with the other parent, typically the noncustodial parent, by making false statements about that other parent, most often in the form of abuse allegations.  In fact, actor Alec Baldwin made that claim about his own child custody case in a recent interview with Diane Sawyer.  

“PAS is being used by some abusers as a tactic to demonize parents’ attempts to protect their children from abuse, denying victims of domestic violence justice in the courts.  The fact that some parents behave badly in ordinary cases is no reason to ignore real abuse when it is presented to the court,” also stated Else. 

Joan Meier, DV LEAP’s Executive Director, said, “PAS was invented to defeat child abuse claims - and it has been remarkably successful in misleading family courts into believing that women who are sincerely trying to protect their children and themselves from abuse, are just seeking to end the children’s relationship with their noncustodial father.”

According to NNEDV, DV LEAP, SFV, and NCADV, victims of domestic violence face a surprisingly uphill battle in family court to win custody of and safety for their children.  All too often, courts award custody and unsupervised visitation to parents found to have committed domestic abuse.  Many courts handling custody cases do not understand the dynamics of domestic violence and fail to properly factor in the impact of abuse when considering the best interests of the child.

“The most important factor judges should be weighing in making custody decisions is the safety of the mother and children, and the introduction of PAS overshadows this critical need for safety,” said Rita Smith, Executive Director of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

Meier states that research has shown that children become “alienated” from a parent for a variety of valid reasons, most often resulting from the parent’s own negative behavior and relationship with that child. 

“The proponents of ‘parental alienation syndrome’ are purveying invalid junk science is not even legally admissible.   PAS has been emphatically rejected by the Presidential Task Force of the American Psychological Association and by the National Council of Juvenile & Family Court Judges.  Leading researchers in the field of custody have agreed that PAS has no scientific validity and the only courts to address the issue have found it inadmissible,” said Meier.

“With the increased media attention surrounding the release of Alec Baldwin’s book, it is important to let the public know that victims of domestic violence are being silenced through the use of ‘parental alienation syndrome.’  We cannot afford to consign thousands of children to unsafe custody or visitation with abusive parents because family courts have come to believe that abuse allegations mean nothing more than a campaign of alienation,” said Else. 

ABOUT NNEDV

The National Network to End Domestic Violence Fund (NNEDV) is a 501(c) (3) non-profit organization dedicated to providing public education, training and technical assistance to maintain and develop the professional expertise of advocates working to end domestic violence.  NNEDV strives to strengthen advocates as organizers and activists in the tradition of social change movements. For more information, please visit www.nnedv.org.

ABOUT DV LEAP

The Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project (DV LEAP) is a 501 (c) (3) non-profit organization which provides a stronger voice for justice by fighting to overturn unjust trial court outcomes, advancing legal protections for victims and their children through expert appellate advocacy, training lawyers, psychologists and judges on best practices, and spearheading domestic violence litigation in the Supreme Court.  For more information, visit www.dvleap.org.

ABOUT NCADV

The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV) is a 501(c) (3) non-profit organization formed in 1978 to establish a national network of community based programs to assist victims of domestic violence. NCADV provides support to programs and state coalitions, technical assistance, public policy and community awareness campaigns to work towards the vision of every home a safe home.  For more information, visit www.ncadv.org.

ABOUT SFV

StopFamilyViolence. org is an online national activist organization that works to organize and amplify our nation's collective voice against family violence.  SFV activists raise their voice to ensure safety, justice, accountability and healing for people whose lives have been affected by family violence.  StopFamilyViolence. org is a project of The Tides Center, a 501(c) (3) non-profit organization. For more information visit www.stopfamilyviole nce.org

Eleven Hundred Torches seeks to encourage hundreds of ordinary citizens to serve others. Inspired by the life of advocate and activist Jana Mackey, and motivated into action by her death, this national campaign has been created to inspire others to make a difference

• Home

Jana Mackey

Young social activist and feminist, Jana Lynne Mackey, was taken from this world before her noble and inspiring work was completed.

She dedicated her short life to pursuing social justice and equality for all. Jana was locally and nationally known for her advocacy for women’s rights.  This 25 year old KU law student had worked on several state and national political campaigns, served three years as one of the youngest lobbyists at the Kansas State Capitol for the National Organization for Women and the Kansas Equality Coalition, and she had volunteered endless hours caring for sexual assault and domestic violence victims. 
One dear friend said when describing Jana, “Never was there a more caring, more compassionate, more brilliant woman with each of these qualities and more wrapped into the heart of one activist.”  Jana Mackey represented all that is good in this world.

To learn more about Jana, please see the links below:

Jana's Story
Tributes

A New Legacy Dawns

Thanks to the energy, passion, and the spirit of one young activist, others are now answering the call to serve.  Eleven Hundred Torches seeks to encourage hundreds of ordinary citizens to serve others.  Inspired by the life of advocate and activist Jana Mackey, and motivated into action by her death, this national campaign has been created to inspire others to make a difference. 
Jana Mackey served as an advocate and a devoted civic servant.  She worked tirelessly to promote the rights of women, victims of violence, and the voices of many often unheard and underrepresented.  A victim of an unjust crime, she was taken before her time.  We can never replace Jana, but we can help her service live on through others. 

On July 9th, 2008, speakers at “Jana’s celebration of life” service called on the 1100 people in attendance to pick up her fallen torch and find the courage to carry her work forward.  It is our hope that her single torch will soon become eleven hundred torches. Eleven hundred others making a difference in our world.
Jana’s legacy can live on with your help.  We ask you to get involved and find a place to serve.  Please click on the links below to see how others have joined our movement:

Call To Action

1100 Others

News and Updates

“Jana was strongly committed to social justice, and in her memory, we hope to
inspire others to share her cause and make a difference.” 

-Gail Agrawal

© 2008   Eleven Hundred Torches.   All rights reserved.

Progress report on Sedgwick County Child Welfare issues

 

On Thursday the 18th, a small team from the Wichita Branch NAACP traveled to the State Capitol Building in Topeka to meet with Representatives from the Governor's office in our continuing effort to bring about substantive policy change in the area of SRS and Child Placements.
We began this effort nearly 5 years ago in response to a number of complaints we'd received from parents whose children had removed from the home and placed in foster or adoptive care. Many of these parents told similar stories of how their children were being placed in home out in Western Kansas where they had no access, many talked about various problems the children faced inside of the foster homes, and many more described a seemingly endless list of courses, tests, and court orders they were required to submit to or they would face the severance of their parental rights.
All of our early complainants were African American, so our initial investigation sought to determine if there was a bias in the system that was impacting African American families. What we determined (pretty early on) was that although there is some degree of disproportionality, the complaints themselves were common to families from all racial and ethnic groups who've had contact with the system.
We began our investigation by calling a series of meetings with various persons representing SRS. Those meetings served to clarify the role of Youthville (an agency contracted by the state to handle child-placements) and our meetings were expanded to include representatives of Youthville. The meetings with SRS & Youthville were later expanded to include representatives from DCCA, and then various judges and members of the Permanency council.
Throughout these dozens of meetings, we have operated from a very simple strategy with three main goals that we've pursued in order. We have sought first to understand the system and all of its complexities, second to isolate the problems and issues, and third to design and suggest systemic and policy-oriented solutions that will impact the greatest number of people with the least amount of effort.

This system has a very steep learning curve. "Child Welfare" has an incredible number of "moving parts" which are divided between a number of independent and autonomous agencies which would easily challenge the effectiveness of any singular study or reform. Law Enforcement, the Wichita Children's Home, SRS - Social Workers, the DA's Office, the Courts, the individual Judges, DCCA, CASA's, Youthville, the Farm; each agency has a distinct role to play in Child Welfare cases. But far from being synthesized, each agency is separate and autonomous, making the final case plan a strange and expensive composite of differing philosophies, practices, court orders and recommendations that the families are mandated to comport with. And if they're not able to meet all the requirements in the prescribed time? ...well then, say goodbye to little Jesse.

As we examined the system, what we looked for were "choke points"; areas of system-wide convergence wherein a single policy or procedural change could modify or at least simplify the outcome. We found 2.
The first of these deals with the decision of whether to place Children in need of care with members of their extended family. Over the last 5 years, as we met with the various agencies and stakeholders, we heard numerous times that it is the policy of each respective agency to place children in the homes of their extended family members whenever practical. But despite that, the anecdotal evidence seemed to suggest that in far too many cases, the extended family members were being ruled out or simply passed over in favor of non-relative foster care. We looked further and further into the policies of the respective agencies and surprisingly found that the provisions for relative placement were not codified in statute. Put simply, placing children with their extended family members is considered a "best practice" but no agency is actually required to do it. To address this we have started working on a piece of legislation that we hope to have introduced in the fall session that would state that children shall be be placed with extended family members except in cases where there are extenuating circumstances that pose a risk to the health of safety of the child. By codifying this best practice into law, we hope to see a marked increase in the number of extended family placements.
The second choke-point comes in the form of the Temporary Custody Journal Entry. This one is slightly more difficult to explain. There are numerous exceptions to this rule but... Generally what happens is when there is an allegation of suspected child abuse or neglect SRS workers will screen the initial allegation. If they determine that a more substantial investigation is warranted or needed, they will contact Law Enforcement or the DA's office. When that child comes into the system, they are removed from their home by Law Enforcement and placed in the Wichita Children's home. They are kept in the Children's Home for 72 hours, during which time an SRS social worker does a more formal assessment of the child and the child's needs. That social worker records their findings in the form of an affidavit which is submitted to the DA's Office. The DA reviews the affidavit and other information provided by law enforcement and completes the Temporary Custody Journal entry which is submitted to the District Courts as a listing of recommended court orders. The Judge may modify the document at their discretion, however once signed, the orders are in effect and the family must comply with all recommendations at their own expense if the wish to be reunited with their child.
Yet it is After this point that the child is referred back to SRS and family care services such as Youthville or the Farm, and these agencies then perform a more comprehensive 20-day assessment of the child and the family to build a specific case plan. And the case plan must then include all of the court orders that were listed in the Temporary Custody Journal Entry.
None of this seems particularly onerous until you examine the Temporary Custody Journal Entry form itself. It is an 8 page document which lists a possible 69 individual court orders that are checked off by the DA's office or the courts. (NOTE: on the surface, the document appears to list only 39 court orders, but order number 18 which deals with tests, assessments, and evaluations, lists 31 individual tests and assessments that the family can be ordered to complete.) These orders may include neurological exams, parenting classes, hair follicle examinations, UA's, BA's, Dental Examinations, substance abuse evaluations, etc, all of which must be completed within the prescribed time at the family's expense. And if the family is not able to comply with the orders, even if their only impediment is financial, then the family is not reunified.
Now here's the Choke Point... Any one of these orders may be warranted in a specific case. But our system is administered in such a way as to have the tests and assessments ordered PRIOR to the comprehensive 20-day assessment and case plan that is completed by the SRS family services contractors and social workers. At the time the Journal Entry is completed, only a 72 hour cursory investigation has been completed. The Journal Entry form is designed to allow the DA's office and the Courts to order tests and assessments of various areas of inquiry so as to ensure the safety and well-being of the child. However, given that there is relatively little case-specific information available at the time the form is completed, the Journal Entry often orders numerous tests and assessments that the family does not need. If the family has no history of drug or substance abuse, then they should not have to pay for random urinalysis testing as a prerequisite for reunification. If the family has no history of violence or violent outbursts, then they should not have to pay for Anger Management classes as a prerequisite for reunification. etc...etc...
We believe that a sensible no-cost reform would be to change the Journal Entry form so that it would essentially order the family to submit to working with the SRS Family services agency and the case plan that would be derived from the 20-day comprehensive assessment. Then, once the assessment was complete and the family-specific case plan was built, that case plan could then be taken back to the courts at the end of the 20-day period and affirmed by the Judge so that the case plan would become the court order.
This change would preserve any needed or required classes or assessments, it would be driven by a detailed family-specific case plan that would not endanger the health or welfare of the children involved, and it would eliminate any unnecessary hurdles or expenses placed in the way of family reunification.
On Thursday, September 18th, Mary Dean, Carolyn Wallace and myself traveled to the State Capitol building in Topeka to meet with representatives of the Governor's office. We were joined by Pat Woods from SRS, Danielle Dempsey Swopes of the African American Affairs Commission, and Renee Wiggins of the Topeka Branch NAACP. We asked for the Governor's office to conduct a State-wide analysis of Child in need of Care policies to help affirm our analysis and to see if this process would explain the statistical disparities we see between Sedgwick County and the other counties around the State in child in need of care cases. And we are pleased to report that they responded favorably to our request.
Since returning, I have also placed a call to request a meeting with Sedgwick County DA Nola Foulston to discuss our suggested modification to the Journal Entry form. We'll keep working at it, and I'll keep you all posted as things happen.