Saturday, May 29, 2010

Parenting Practices and Violence, Domestic Violence

Rights for Mothers   Continuing on with the reality…

The existing social science literature on the parenting behaviors of both perpetrators and victims of domestic violence is growing but limited. This entry discusses such literature, the assessment of the impact and the risk of domestic violence on children, and interventions.

Parenting by Perpetrators and Victims

The literature on parenting by perpetrators of domestic violence indicates that they often continue their abuse of the adult victim and make targets of children in their homes. This behavior may negatively affect the development of children in a number of ways. Children may also continue to hold positive views of both parents despite the violence, but they more often assign negative qualities to the perpetrator.

The literature on parenting by adult victims- usually mothers-indicates they are many times under greater stress than other mothers, but that even in this hostile environment, they tend to parent adequately. Battered mothers may, however, be more likely than other mothers to use physical aggression against their children, but they are less likely to do so when they are safe. Adult victims repeatedly indicate that perpetrators interfere with their parenting and that the victims often make decisions to stay with or leave the perpetrator based on their sense of the best interests of their children. These protective strategies are often underestimated or overlooked in custody and visitation recommendations and decisions.

Ironically there are more data available on battered mothers and their caregiving than on the male perpetrators and theirs. This imbalance in the published literature is probably a result of the greater availability of battered mothers to researchers collecting data in social service and shelter systems. At times the over-reliance on data collected from and about battered mothers may lead to partial or inaccurate conclusions. For example, it may be that the perpetrator’s behavior is the key to predicting the emotional health of a child. However, a number of studies measure only battered mothers’ difficulties resulting from perpetrators’ violence and then associate these maternal difficulties with negative child outcomes. By not collecting data about the perpetrators, researchers may incorrectly conclude it is the mothers’ problems and not the perpetrators’ violent behavior that is creating negative outcomes for children. Thus, the results of some studies discussed in the literature may provide only a partial picture of the events that impact the victim’s parenting and a child’s emotional health.
Impact and Risk Assessment

Assessing the impact of violence on children and the parenting behaviors of both perpetrators and victims is a complex process for which few guidelines or protocols currently exist. It is known that the impact on children is likely to vary along a continuum of relevant factors that require thorough assessment when making safe custody and visitation arrangements for the child. Another ingredient is the careful assessment of parents, especially the perpetrator.

A major factor in custody and visitation decision making is to ascertain the level of continued risk a child may face. Risk assessment has been the focus of some areas of the social science literature for decades, but research into risk assessment is virtually nonexistent in the domain of children exposed to domestic violence. Guidelines drawn from extensive practice experience are, however, being published.


Interventions for children exposed to adult domestic violence have existed for over 25 years in shelters and in community-based programs for battered women. It is only recently, however, that these programs have expanded and that other, nonshelter services have become available. Interventions with children exposed to domestic violence are most often provided in the form of individual treatment for trauma, group support and education programs, and child witness to violence programs that work with children and their mothers. Although many programs offer groups for battered mothers and separate groups for their children, other programs may work with individual parent-child dyads. Initial evaluations of these various child-focused programs reveal that children who participated were able to reduce their use of aggressive behaviors, lessen anxious and depressive behaviors, and improve both their mental health and social relationships with peers.

The growing awareness of the impact of adult domestic violence on children has also led to increasing efforts to intervene with parents after domestic violence has occurred. Recently, a number of authors have published descriptions of their work with battered mothers alone or with parent-child dyads. One of the most common approaches is providing a parenting support group that runs concurrently with a children’s program. Others have described direct work with battered mothers through weekly in-home sessions over a number of months following shelter residence. Still another approach is to work with mother-child dyads in providing parenting support. Initial data on parenting group programs, in-home services, and dyadic counseling show positive outcomes for children and their participating parents. These programs have been developed by practitioners with a deep understanding of domestic violence.

The published literature contains few descriptions of programs for perpetrators who are parents. This scarcity is perhaps due to a focus in the field on adult-to-adult violence. Most batterer programs have not included significant content on parenting, but there are several examples of emerging programs specifically designed for training adult assailants to parent without violence. These programs include information and activities focused on (a) a father’s role in the family, (b) defining violence in parenting, (c) using discipline versus punishment, (d) nonviolent means for changing children’s behaviors, (e) information on child development, (f) the effects of child exposure to domestic violence, (g) how to use logical and natural consequences, and (h) communication skills, assertive-ness, and expressing feelings appropriately. However, to date there are few published evaluations of these programs that would help to understand their effectiveness or to refine existing efforts.

In addition, this growing literature reveals little about class or cultural differences in parenting within the context of domestic violence and offers scant guidance on how to respond uniquely to these families.

Supervised visitation programs are also increasingly being used for families in which domestic violence is occurring. Some perpetrators use visitation exchanges as an opportunity to abuse the other parent. The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges has repeatedly recommended that supervised visitation be provided only when safety and security measures are taken and visitation center staff are well trained in the unique dangers posed by domestic violence perpetrators. Suggested security measures include closer supervision of domestic violence-related visitations by trained staff, staggered arrival and departure times and separate entrances for mothers and fathers, escorts to cars, and center access to police protection through direct electronic connections. Although some data on the impact of supervised visitation centers on children and their parents do exist, none focuses on the impact of these programs on families experiencing domestic violence.

Overall, there is a steadily growing interest in the impact of domestic violence on children, and very recently this interest has moved to include a focus on how the parenting of both perpetrators and victims may be better assessed and improved through education and support efforts.

—Jeffrey L. Edleson
Entry Citation:

Edleson, Jeffrey L. “Parenting Practices and Violence, Domestic Violence.” Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Violence. 2008. SAGE Publications. 25 Apr. 2010.

WordPress Tags: Violence,Domestic,science,literature,victims,assessment,impact,children,Perpetrators,victim,behavior,development,qualities,perpetrator,times,environment,parent,aggression,Adult,interests,custody,data,male,imbalance,result,reliance,example,health,problems,Thus,results,events,Risk,guidelines,continuum,arrangements,Another,ingredient,factor,decision,domain,services,treatment,trauma,education,Although,Initial,relationships,efforts,descriptions,residence,Still,Most,activities,father,role,punishment,exposure,consequences,communication,feelings,addition,context,guidance,Some,exchanges,National,Council,Juvenile,Court,Judges,measures,supervision,arrival,departure,protection,Overall,Jeffrey,Edleson,Entry,Citation,Encyclopedia,Interpersonal,SAGE,interventions,decisions,strategies,recommendations,systems,conclusions,outcomes,protocols,factors,areas,evaluations,authors,sessions,examples,assailants,skills,differences,dangers,fathers,Publications,behaviors,parents,visitation,researchers,dyads

Tampa mom recalls final words with slain toddler Police search for man who beat toddler to death

Michell Blanco

Michell Blanco

Tampa mom recalls final words with slain toddler

Photo from Itzaira DeJesus

Alexis Garcia died Tuesday after emergency surgery for head injuries.

Alexis Garcia died Tuesday after emergency surgery for head injuries.

Photo from Itzaira DeJesus

Alexis Garcia died Tuesday after emergency surgery for head injuries.

Alexis Garcia died Tuesday after emergency surgery for head injuries.

TAMPA - Itzaira DeJesus remembers how happy her son was when she called from work to check on him.

Alexis, 3, had been feeding ducks.

"He told me, 'I love you, Mommy,' and I told him, 'I love you back and I'll see you later,'" DeJesus said.

Two hours later, her boyfriend called and said Alexis had fallen and was unconscious. DeJesus never got a chance to talk with her son again.

Alexis Garcia died Tuesday after emergency surgery for head injuries. The medical examiner's office determined Thursday that his death was a homicide.

Hillsborough County deputies are searching for DeJesus' boyfriend, 28-year-old Michell Blanco. He's wanted on charges of first-degree murder and aggravated child abuse.

"How can he do this to me?" DeJesus asked Friday. "He said he loved me. He said he loved my kid."

She doesn't know where Blanco has gone. They began dating in November and she and her son had been living with Blanco and his 5-year-old son.

DeJesus said Blanco called her Monday afternoon to tell her that Alexis had fallen while chasing ducks in the parking lot of their apartment complex on North Dale Mabry Highway.

She told him to take Alexis to a hospital; Blanco said he didn't think doctors would help because he wasn't the child's father.

When DeJesus got home from her housecleaning job, Alexis was in bed, unconscious and struggling to breathe. She carried her son to her car and told him she was with him. They went to St. Joseph's Hospital.

There, DeJesus was told her son's injuries did not come from a fall, but rather "that somebody beat him up."

DeJesus said she asked Blanco whether he had beaten her child. He promised her he had not.

A private memorial service for Alexis will be held Sunday.

DeJesus said her son loved Astro Boy, animals and picking flowers.

He trusted everybody – when he met someone for the first time, he did so with a hug and a kiss.

Alexis' organs have been donated, his mother said. His heart saved a 2-year-old child in South Carolina. His liver and kidney went to children in Florida and Georgia.

"He wanted to be a superhero," DeJesus said. "And he was."

Reporter Josh Poltilove can be reached at (813) 259-7691.




Story Published: May 29, 2010 at 1:27 PM CDT

Story Updated: May 29, 2010 at 1:31 PM CDT

The Smithville couple involved in what was believed to be an attempted murder-suicide earlier this week have died.

56–year–old Michael Peterson and his wife, 50–year–old Kaye Peterson, were both taken off life support Friday after having their organs donated.

Family members told the News Center the Peterson's were going through a divorce.

Police say Michael Peterson shot his wife in the head three times before turning the gun on himself at the couple's 9425 Grand Avenue home.

Kaye Peterson was pronounced dead at 8:55 Friday morning, Michael Peterson was pronounced dead at 2:30 Friday afternoon.

An autopsy was scheduled to be conducted on Kaye Saturday.

WordPress Tags: SMITHVILLE,COUPLE,POLICE,MURDER,SUICIDE,news,Story,Michael,Peterson,wife,Kaye,life,Center,times,Grand,Avenue,afternoon,members

Ex-Boy friends Jealous Rage in Murder Suicide (New Albany, IN)

VIDEO here:

Friends: Man killed in New Albany double shooting was victim of jealous ex

Posted: May 28, 2010 5:18 PM CDTUpdated: May 28, 2010 10:21 PM CDT


Ex-boyfriend's rage may be behind New Albany double shooting
RAW: Aerial view of double shooting in New Albany

By Connie Leonard - bio | email
Posted by Charles Gazaway - email

NEW ALBANY, IN (WAVE) - Two men are dead after a shooting in New Albany and people who know the victim tell us he was a person who got caught in the middle of an ex-boyfriend's rage.

The double-shooting happened around 5 p.m. May 28 in the front yard of 108 Greendale Drive. We have learned who one of the victims is, but will not use his name until it is officially released. Close friends and neighbors of the victim say one man shot the other and then turned the gun on himself.

"I heard four to six shots," said Robert Arnold, a neighbor.

Arnold is also a gun owner and knew exactly what he had heard.

"It was pop, pop, pop, pop, that quick," said Arnold of the gunfire in his neighborhood. "She was screaming and hollering for somebody to call 911."

We've learned the girl Arnold saw screaming was a friend and roommate of the man who lives at the house where the shooting happened. The two worked together at the Sports and Social Club at 4th Street Live! in Louisville.

Friends say after the young woman had some trouble with an ex-boyfriend, her friend and co-worker let her move in with him until she could find a place. Friends and neighbors say the ex-boyfriend slashed their tires and spray painted their home in recent weeks, but the trouble ended Friday on the front lawn of the home when they say the ex-boyfriend showed up and shot her friend then himself. 

"They were disputing over her and it just comes to a head," Arnold remembered.

According to Captain Keith Whitlow, the New Albany Police chief of detectives, when their officers arrived at the scene, both men were dead.

Arnold says another neighbor witnessed the murder-suicide and went to police headquarters to tell investigators what he saw.

"It's a tragedy," said Arnold said. "It really is."

Several friends of the man who was shot on his front lawn tell us he was one of the nicest people they ever met. By 10 p.m., his Facebook page was flooded with kind words for him. Many who knew him also sent e-mails to our newsroom about the man.

Assumption sheriff says ‘system did not fail' slain woman’ (what??)

THIBODAUX — Up until the point Gary LeBlanc walked into the bar where his estranged wife worked early Sunday morning, he had no documented violations of the protective order she obtained against him nearly four months earlier.

LeBlanc arrived unannounced inside the Lakeview Inn Bar on La. 401 in Napoleonville with a 9 mm pistol. Moments later, Jennifer LeBlanc, 44, lay dead behind the bar with three gunshot wounds. Her 50-year-old soon-to-be ex-husband, who was not supposed to come within 100 feet of the bar according to the order, lay dead less than 15 feet away from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

The shooting happened within seconds, authorities said, long before Assumption sheriff’s deputies could respond to the bar, located at the end of the long and winding La. 401, which leads to Lake Verrett.

Protective orders restrict in-person contact and contact over the phone and Internet between two parties. Law-enforcement officers can arrest protective order violators on the spot, without asking why they were at a place or why they tried to contact the other party.

But while protective orders are a valuable tool to stop recurring domestic abuse, they should not be viewed as infallible, law-enforcement and victim-rights advocates agreed.

“It’s not a bulletproof vest or a shield,” said Tamara Joseph, a domestic-rights advocate for the Metropolitan Center for Women and Children, which is housed in the Lafourche Sheriff’s Office’s police services division. “It has to work hand-in-hand with other things.”

Protective orders should be accompanied by safety plans, formulated to avoid and respond to potentially dangerous situations.

The LeBlancs each obtained protective orders against each other Jan. 27. It is unknown what steps, if any, they took to protect themselves from each other. Neither was arrested for violating protective orders, according to court records.

Gary LeBlanc violated his estranged wife’s protective order Sunday morning and would have been charged with a violation, Assumptiion Parish Sheriff Mike Waguespack said. There was no way for the murder-suicide to be prevented, the sheriff noted.

“It’s not a foolproof system,” Waguespack said. “The bottom line is if an individual wants to take another person’s life it’s an almost impossible task for the system to prevent them from doing so.”

Waguespack added, “I truly believe, in this situation, the system did not fail the victim. The system stood behind the victim.”

It is impossible to have a deputy watch over every person with a protective order, Waguespack noted. All law enforcement can do is respond to violations and make arrests based on those violations.

In general, protective-order violations, including telephone calls and text messages, are not always reported, said Pat Babin, the Terrebonne Sheriff’s Office’s domestic-violence coordinator.

Babin said a deputy in his division has served 108 protective orders since the new year. The department’s number could be higher, he noted, depending on the number of orders served on weekends and nights.

Only eight violations have been recorded.

“Sometimes it’s in the mind of an individual that as long as there is no physical contact that it’s all right,” Babin said.

After a person files paperwork for a protective order, both parties must appear before a judge to argue why the order should or should not be granted. The judge can issue the protective order for up to 18 months, or refuse to grant it.

In the LeBlancs case, the protective order was supposed to last until January 2011.

As of Wednesday, the Assumption Sheriff’s Office had served 31 protective orders, Waguespack said. The Lafourche Sheriff’s Office has served 77, Joseph said.

The numbers of protective orders issued in recent years have not changed much, according to Kimberly Clement, program manager for The Haven in Houma, an advocacy group for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault.

Clement encouraged victims of domestic violence to call The Haven at 800-915-0045 or the statewide number, 888-411-1333.

(OH) Coroner confirms murder/suicide of Boyfriend and Girlfriend

The bodies were found Thursday night

Updated: Friday, 28 May 2010, 5:52 PM EDT
Published : Friday, 28 May 2010, 5:52 PM EDT

  • Megan O'Rourke

DAYTON, Ohio (WDTN) - Dayton Police found two bodies inside a home at 130 Fernwood Avenue around 9:30 Thursday night.

They've since been identified 31 year-old Nichole Cochran, and her boyfriend, 49 year-old J.B. Jones.
Neighbors, like Steve Tannreuther, are in shock.

"It's awful," said Tannreuther.

At the scene, officers revealed they were looking at this as a possible murder/suicide.

On Friday, the Montgomery County Coroners office confirmed investigators initial suspicions. They said Jones shot Cochran, then turned the gun on himself.

"We're questioning numerous individuals and try to ascertain as much history as we can to try to find out what was going on prior to anything that may have happened here," said Sgt. Dan Mauch.
A gun found inside the house was being tested to see if it was the weapon used.

In the meantime, neighbors are coping and questioning what went wrong.

"We never heard any arguments between them or anything," said Tannreuther.

Both Cochron and Jones do have criminal pasts. In 2007, they were convicted with drug crimes and receiving stolen property. In 2003, Jones was convicted of felonious assault with a deadly weapon.

Police are still investigating the deaths in hopes of finding a motive.

Murder-suicide at motel tops police blotter

Possible murder-suicide in motel

Investigating police found the bodies of a man and a woman inside a SeaTac motel room. A police spokesman reported that there was a great deal of blood in the room. Police plan to investigate the situation as a murder-suicide. Last month, a man was arrested for another killing that occurred at the same hotel.

(St. Louis) Murder charges filed in deaths of mother, 2-year-old

Bookmark and Share


Gebar J. Byrd, Jr.


Gebar Byrd, Sr.


Mom found dead; police searching for toddler


Yasmin Rodriguez

A St. Louis man is charged with first degree murder in the deaths of his 2-year-old son and the boy's mother.

Gebar Byrd, Sr., 26, of the 8200 block of Monroe Street in St. Louis, is charged with two counts of first degree murder, endangering the welfare of a child and domestic assault. Byrd, Sr. is being held without bond Thursday.

The charges stem from an investigation that took two months.

Gebar Byrd Jr., 2, was reported missing March 28. His mother, Yasmin Rodriguez, was also reported missing at that time, but was later found dead in the Mississippi River. The boy's body has not been found.

Police said the investigation revealed that on or about March 23, Byrd, Sr., his girlfriend Rodriguez and their 23 month-old son Byrd, Jr. were near the riverbank at Riverview and Spring Garden Drive. Rodriguez was holding Byrd, Jr. in her arms. Byrd, Sr. pushed Rodriguez, who was still holding their son, into the river through mud, branches and logs. Eventually, neither she nor the baby resurfaced, police said.

Victim called 911 twice in 30 mins before she she was shot dead by husband while she was holding her baby (West Haven)

Report On Murder-Suicide Shows Gaps In Response He was bonded out twice before he


    6:23 a.m. EDT, May 25, 2010


    The first time he was arrested on charges of beating and kicking his wife, Selami Ozdemir was ordered into a family violence education program. Four months later, when he was arrested for hurting her again, Ozdemir posted bail, returned to his West Havenhome and killed his wife, then himself.
    It was three weeks before his first domestic violence class was to begin.
    Because of a backlog in the program for first-time domestic violence offenders, defendants like Ozdemir can go months between being arrested and receiving domestic violence counseling, services and monitoring, a five-month investigation by the Ansonia-Milford state's attorney's office found.
    A report on the case released Monday included several recommendations for changes, including increasing the number of slots in the family violence education program to minimize the wait time and increasing the supervision of domestic violence defendants while their cases are pending.

    Ansonia-Milford State's Attorney Kevin D. Lawlor said that some recommendations might cost money, but that they could also produce savings in the long run if they can reduce the likelihood of domestic violence defendants reoffending.
    "Justice shouldn't come with a price tag," Lawlor said. "We have a job to do."
    The report detailed a host of problems in the case. Ozdemir, 41, and his wife, Shengyl Rasim, 25, had two children, and his first arrest, last September, included allegations that he knocked his wife against the crib where their 3-month-old slept. But none of the agencies involved alerted the Department of Children and Families after the first arrest; each appears to have assumed that someone else had, the report said. It recommended formalizing the procedures for notifying DCF in domestic violence cases that involve potential child endangerment.
    After his second arrest, on Jan. 16, Ozdemir allegedly managed to get out of custody without putting up any money for his $25,000 bond or signing a contract or payment plan — allegations that the state Insurance Department is investigating, according to the report. The report suggested reforms to the bail bond industry designed to keep agents from allowing people to "get out of jail free."
    The report also described the failure of 911 operators to relay key information to police who were at the family's home minutes before the murder-suicide.
    Two officers had arrived after Rasim called police at 3:29 a.m., saying that she heard her husband banging on the door. When the officers arrived, Ozdemir was not there. Then, at 3:43 a.m., another woman called 911 and reported that Ozdemir was drunk and returning home. The woman expressed "grave concern" for the safety of Rasim and the police, the report said.
    But the dispatchers did not tell the officers at the house that Ozdemir was coming. The officers left at 3:47 a.m.
    About six minutes later, the dispatch center received another call from the house. On the line were the sounds of an argument and a baby crying. Then there were loud sounds that seemed to be gunshots.
    Dispatchers told the officers to return to the home, but did not mention the gunshots. The tape recorded several more minutes of the baby's cries and the officers trying to enter through two locked doors.
    West Haven police and fire departments — which both supervise the 911 system — are conducting an internal investigation into the handling of the calls, according to the report. The police department has modified and clarified its procedures for relaying information to responding officers, the report said.
    On Monday, attorneys representing Rasim's estate and her children filed a notice of intent to sue the town of West Haven, the police officers and dispatchers involved in her case.
    "This is probably the most preventable tragedy that I have ever witnessed in my career as a lawyer," Joel T. Faxon, whose firm, Stratton Faxon, represents Rasim's estate, said in a written statement.
    Stratton said the lawyers plan to file a federal civil rights complaint and ask the U.S. attorney to investigate whether there was evidence of racial bias in the department's handling of the case. Rasim was from Turkey and did not speak English well. The state's attorney's report cites multiple instances in which language barriers presented problems, including during the 911 call shortly before Rasim was killed. The report noted that West Haven police can access translation services by telephone to communicate with 911 callers but did not use them with Rasim.
    A call to the West Haven police department was not returned Monday.
    Since the murder-suicide, the judicial branch has increased the number of family violence education classes, the report said.
    It now takes between 60 and 65 days for a person ordered into the family violence program to begin sessions — better than before, but not ideal, said William Carbone, executive director of the state's court support-services division.
    The program consists of 9-week group sessions that focus on educating defendants about the effects of violence on relationships, as well as interpersonal skills to develop violence-free relationships and an understanding of power and control dynamics, according to a report by the state judicial branch.
    In the first three quarters of this fiscal year, 3,663 people were ordered into the program, and 172 groups were completed, with an average of 15 people per group, according to the judicial branch. Each group costs about $4,000 to run.
    The report also recommended increasing the supervision of domestic violence defendants and suggested that one way to reduce recidivism would be to make court family resource counselors more involved in supervising them.
    Family resource counselors typically handle both domestic violence and family court cases, and in the Ansonia-Milford judicial district, they have more than 100 domestic violence clients each. The report recommended letting some counselors work only on criminal cases and receive training on more closely monitoring defendants.
    Carbone said he would not disagree with the recommendation, but said it is not possible to do now.
    "That's a resource-driven recommendation," he said. "At the present time, the resources are not there to accomplish it."
    Stephen R. Grant, director of family services for the judicial branch, noted that restraining orders are civil, not criminal, matters, and that some recent domestic violence murders occurred in families with no previous criminal cases.

    Copyright © 2010, The Hartford Courant

    The Cross-Referral PAS Relationships, CUSTODY EVALUATORS: IN THEIR OWN WORDS

Does a Custody Evaluation, wherein, inter alia, he ponders what a 13-year-old girl is doing in the bathroom for an hour, watches an 11-year-old brush her teeth, admires the idea of a father's tickling and wrestling a pre-pubescent female to the floor, pontificates on the relationship between eating salad, diabetes, and girls' body shapes, admires the culinary competence required to cook Spaghetti, and generally demonstrates his ignorance of child development and age-appropriate parenting. The father who hired him paid $20,000 for this remarkable piece of crap.

    Children need. . . THIS?

    Liz's article, "Why 'Therapeutic Jurisprudence' Must Be -- and Will Be -- Eliminated From Our Family Courts", published in 13Domestic Violence Report 65 (2008) is available at


    The Cross-Referral PAS Relationships;
    featuring Joe Goldberg aka Bernard Joseph Goldberg

    Below my comments is an example of a solicitation/marketing letter by a PAS (Parental Alienation Syndrome)promoter (the links and bold emphasis have been added, and the lawyer's name deleted, but the text otherwise is intact.) This is one way garbage put out by the MHP crowd in furtherance of unscientific therapeutic jurisprudence has permeated the family courts and made its way into the public discourse.

    While Joseph Goldberg, the letter's author (below), does not appear to be a licensed psychologist or expert of any legitimate kind, he is far from the only one doing this. A number of father's rights types, such as Dean Tong and Ken Pangborn have managed to convince lawyers as well as litigants to work with them as "medical legal consultants" or "forensic experts" (whatever that means -- some kind of glorified paralegal.) In addition, licensed psychs and other MHPs also do this same thing, soliciting business as "coaches" and "consultants" as well as appointments as experts for the court.

    The problem permeates the entire industry of therapeutic jurisprudence. It's particularly egregious in the area of the false-acc/abusers' defense lobbies, many of whom have an odd and interesting overlap with the "parental alienation syndrome" crowd, which seems to involve substantially the same motley activist network of PAS ringleaders, functional disciples of Richard A. Gardner. The PAS group includes psychs, lawyers, and the father's rights forensic paralegal types.

    PAS debunked in Australia; psych Wrigley disciplined for incompetent behaviorOne of the psychologists listed below, Barry Brody of Miami ("Forensic Family Services", regularly has sent out a "parental alienation" newsletter to members of the Florida Bar family law section (I haven't received one in a while; perhaps he's finally removed me from his mailing list, but if I get another one, I will scan it and upload it here). Brody as well as a number of more familiar names have chimed in to bless the nonsense of "hostile-aggressive parenting" which burst on the scene a couple of years ago to rehabilitate this discredited drivel. See the sister websites (same ownership) and These include an unhealthy mix of professionals, who, based on their permitting their names to be used this way, apparently support the promulgation of the unscientific crap. Although by no means exhaustive, it's a convenient list of who to stay away from in child custody cases:

    Richard Austin, R. Christopher Barden, Stephen Ceci, Douglas Darnall, Stephen Herman, Jayne Major, Daniel Rybicki, S. Richard Sauber  (listed twice) , W. vonBoch-Galhau, Richard A Warshak, Michael Bone, L.F. Lowenstein, Reena Sommer, Jerry Brinegar, Katherine Andre, Ken Lewis, Catherine Swanson Cain, Monty Weinstein, Amy J. L. Baker, David Britton, Robert Evans, Debra Gordy, Christina McGhee, Harvey Shapiro (Elizabeth Loftus's "investigator"), Jose Manuel Aguilar Cuenca, Theresa K. Cooke, Jeff Opperman, Remi Thivierge, Joe Goldberg, James J. Gross, Randy Kolin, Randy Rand, David Carico, Lawrence W. Daly, Charles D. Jamieson. [from accessed 01/01/08]

    Notice in Goldberg's letter, below, the trade-promotion claim that these cases are "difficult to resolve". This is typical parenting evaluator propaganda -- it increases the appearance of some kind of need for their "expertise". Also note that not only does he make the ubiquitous misrepresentation that there is a disorder known as "parental alienation syndrome" but -- and this is fraudulent -- adds the embellishment that it is a medical disorder! (Who is infected? At its least implausible, PAS was a description of a relationship dynamic.)

    There's a big problem with this kind of thing that supersedes even the promotion of bogus parental alienation theories. The problem arises because most lawyers represent different clients taking different sides in different cases (sometimes the wife, sometimes the husband, sometimes the "good guy", sometimes the "bad guy", etc.). If Solicited Attorney runs up against Expert in another case, after they have established a "cross-referral professional relationship" and formal or informal "working partnership" (the formal kind is of dubious legal ethicity because of the inappropriate feeder of referrals in exchange for indirect compensation), and have "mutual" cases pending, Solicited will have a very difficult time shredding Expert or Expert's testimony when that is required in another case, or filing a complaint against him, if necessary, because that would place Solicited's other clients' pending cases at risk.

    In such cases, the lawyer will be tempted to rationalize to himself, as well as maintain the posture in the community at large, that Expert's horsepuckey is scientifically valid, and pretend that lawyer in any event can safely buy into this because lawyer is not a "scientist". Expert (who likely knows his spoutings are specious) also will know that Solicited is doing this, and thus has given clients less than competent representation (potentially damaging information to have against a lawyer).

    But because it's all ostensibly collegial, neither of them will admit to the bogus science, or what is going on, even to each other, and as people do, they both will maintain the pretext of belief in such things as the "medical disorder of parental alienation" or "the benefits of joint custody", as well as the value of their memberships in the organizations that promote these make-work ideas.

    It's almost like unacknowledged blackmail. The lawyer who naively or purposefully steps down this path and goes along with this kind of thing (encouraged by the mixed-discipline organizations, such as the AFCC) in order to obtain referrals has sold his professional soul to the devil, literally. This is true whether the cross-referral relationship is with a licensed psychologist, or, as in this case, with a paralegal-type bird dog.

    Deliberate relationships with expert witnesses such as the one sought in the below should be recognized as ethical violations and banned by state bar ethics rules. But the conflict of interest problems are inherent in the nature of the association and exist even when there is no explicit referral relationship -- a reason for banning these people from the court system altogether. Ironically, it's worse for the lawyers who are not ideologues, because they are more likely to advocate for different client perspectives. The repeated association of these "experts" into cases, however, any one of whom at any time and from time to time may show up on the wrong side of a given case, creates many of the same dilemmas that ordinary client conflict-of-interest issues do. This problem also applies to guardians ad litem, frequently a small group of lawyers or MHPs who are appointed by judges and placed over and over again in the same local group of lawyers' cases, and who similarly opine and write reports that sometimes are on the right side and sometimes on the wrong side.

    These people are witnesses in each case (or, in the case of GALs, sometimes even considered to be parties proper). They are not in fact "neutrals" (even if hired as such, once their reports are rendered, they are advocates for one or the other side, and they are never neutral when they are hired as a consultant-turned-testifying expert for one of the lawyers). Thus, at a point, they are, just as a party would be, pointedly in favor of one side and outcome, and overtly adverse to the position of the other party in a case.

    They are not objective disinterested witnesses. They are not neutrals. They are not scientists. They are not immune from bias and self-interest (especially where favor is curried with judges and lawyers for future referrals), and especially where their professional trade organizations have lobbied for immunity and effectively protected them from oversight. They are not doing this because they "care about children". They are not akin to a doctor who drew blood and put it under a microscope and testifies in court that yes, he saw the little amoebae or bacteria or whatever and made a diagnosis. (And the Goldbergs and Tongs are not even licensed, regulated professionals of ANY sort -- not that licensed psychologists are much better.) If you don't understand this, having spent your life immersed in this over-therapized. infotainment pop-psychology advice-columnized big-pharma drug-pushing culture we live in: it's time to get educated.

    Not only are they witnesses, just like litigants and other interested, affiliated parties on one side or another of a case, but they are an especially dangerous kind of witness, because they appear in case after case after case. One lawyer may encounter the same expert in different cases in which the same fraudulent snake oil is sometimes favorable and sometimes disfavorable to the lawyer's client. Expert may be taking a meritless position for the lawyer's client in one case (which position the lawyer would like to bolster, being an advocate for the client), but show up in another case with the same meritless position that is against the lawyer's client in that case. Or, Expert might be opining differently because after all, so much psychological opining and "theories" -- er ideas -- (these are not scientific theories) are unsubstantiable, unfalsifiable, unresearched nonsense. If Expert and a lawyer are in cahoots in various cases, the lawyer is placed into a conflict in the instant case, unable to zealously discredit Expert and do what is appropriate and necessary to protect his potentially harmed client in the instant case -- even if the lawyer otherwise would be willing to sacrifice his own referral source or collegial association with Expert. Can't do it.

    Unlike lawyers in many other areas of practice, who may retain their clients for years, family lawyers typically need a steady stream of new one-shot clients. In addition, family lawyers also tend to work in smaller firms. So they value those who send them business. From what I've personally seen, I suspect that too many family lawyers, perhaps without recognizing or acknowledging the conflicts of interest that have caused their discomfort and unwillingness adequately to represent some of their clients, in fact have sacrificed these clients on the altar of maintaining their professional relationships, associations, and referral sources.

    These people are not colleagues, however. They are case witnesses and participants.

    Some lawyers admit to feeling burnout, but they've rationalized their unwillingness to zealously advocate for their clients, and their discomfort, as stemming from the "high conflict" created by unreasonable clients, or the high emotional toll the cases are taking on them. Others retain their enthusiasm by becoming ideologues, and taking only cases in which they will not encounter the conflicts (e.g. overwhelmingly their clients raise claims that the other parent is an alienator.) This conveniently furthers the propagation of the bad science.

    The rest justify their lack of vigorous representation, and the coerced settlements they've foisted on some clients as concern for the best interests of children, or as the only reasonable settlement position, or as their ideological commitment to helping people to just get along (especially when the retainer has run out). They profess to themselves and everyone around a great affinity for mediation and therapy and collaborative resolution, and all manner of therapeutic jurisprudence in the interests of everyone, and similar specious posturing, encouraged in their self-delusion by a steady drip of MHP literature. This kind of thing is just not as pervasive in other areas of the law, no matter how heated the conflicts get, and it's one substantial reason the public has such a generally dim view of the family courts and family lawyers.

    Given that clients are entitled to their choice of attorneys, and are entitled to independent, unconflicted, attorneys (agents) who are committed to furthering their interests and goals (as the client, not the attorney, has defined them), the only viable solution is a disqualification of any GAL or forensic expert who previously has been associated in any case with either of the lawyers in that case, and the striking and nullification of all testimony and reports of that expert, no matter at what stage of a case the lawyer is hired. It also is time to substantially limit the use of forensic experts and GALs in family court altogether because for the most part, MHPs, including child custody evaluators and their relatedforensic offshoots, in fact are unneeded, unhelpful, and undesirable in the vast majority of child custody cases.

    (And any judge who would let Joe "PAS is a medical disorder" Goldberg** testify as an expert in a case really should be removed from the bench for incompetence. Yes, I said that.)

            -- liz

      **Joe Goldberg formerly was known as Bernard Joseph Goldberg. In his own Florida divorce case, Goldberg claimed that his ex-wife was "alienating" his teenage daughters, and even the psychs didn't buy it -- except, Goldberg urges us to mention, an evaluator in his case, Glenn Caddy, Ph.D. Not surprisingly, Caddy is listed as a speaker in and among some of the usual names in the PAS promotion set at a September 2008 "Canadian Symposium for Parental Alienation Syndrome" organized and promoted by Mr. Goldberg. See Dean Tong also is listed as a speaker at the event. That pretty much says it all. (That and that Mrs. Goldberg and her two poised and articulate daughters ultimately and fortuitously prevailed against the frivolous machinations.)

    Examples of Goldberg's approach to lawyers, financial advisors, vocational experts, and evendomestic violence groups! More. This is not "medicine", it's marketing and money. Very dangerous, given Goldberg's obvious promotional talents combined with his obsessive motivation stemming from his own failed attempts to control his ex-wife and children in his own divorce case. (Recent misguided Canadian courts apparently are being influenced, too, sending children for deprogramming "treatments" at Warshak "clinics" in the U.S. at unthinkably ridiculous expense. I could not call this merely a financial con because children and family affectional relationships -- which should not in the first place be the province of government engineering -- literally are being experimented on and at risk of being harmed. Judges, wake up!)

    Below, he approaches a lawyer:

    Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 18:24:00 EST
    Subject: Re: Client Referral from Goldberg & Associates - Joe Goldberg
    To: [Solicited Attorney]

    Dear [Solicited Attorney]:

    My name is Joe Goldberg. I am a Medical Legal Consultant specializing in Family Law cases that involveParental Alienation and Parental Alienation Syndrome.

    I found you listed in ACFLS ( Association of Certified Family Law Specialist ).

    There are times I'm sure, when you've come across high conflict cases regarding Visitation, Custody and Parental Alienation. These cases are extremely difficult to resolve in the best interest of the child.

    You may not know that Parental Alienation and Parental Alienation Syndrome, is both a medical disorder and a form of Child Abuse.

    In many of the cases I am involved in, I refer a client to a new attorney.

    I like the fact that you have the highest qualifications and I believe that you could assist us with legal representation.

    I would like for us to get to know each other, a little better and I would also like to know if you would be interested in developing a cross-referral professional relationship on these type of cases?

    Allow me to introduce you to our website, so you can learn more about me and my firm: Presently we work on cases all over California.

    We would also like to link websites with you.

    Please let me know, if you'd be interested in a working partnership and if you would like to talk with me after the holidays.

    Until then, I want to wish you a Happy and Healthy Holiday Season.

    Respectfully Yours,

    Joe Goldberg
    Goldberg & Associates
    Tel 905-481-0367

    Below: Goldberg targeting -- and contaminating -- financial forensics with this specious rot by promising them $$$$ referrals...

    Date: Sunday, May 18, 2008 2:30 AM
    Subject: CDFA Assistance Needed - Please Call Joseph Goldberg /905-481-0367
    To: [Solicited Financial Advisor]

    Hello [Solicited Financial Advisor]:

    My name is Joseph Goldberg and the name of my firm is Goldberg & Associates. We work with family law attorneys in divorce litigation and specifically on the topic of Parental Alienation Syndrome.

    Please visit our web site at www.ParentalAlienation.Ca

    We have many clients that need CDFA Services. The clients we represent and local to you (although we have offices in FL, & ON.).

    I would like to discuss an offer to refer my clients and their business to your firm. In fact, I would like to give you an opportunity to be our "Exclusive Affiliate" for all of our clients needing CDFA Services.

    Due to the fact that I am the Founder of The Canadian Symposium For Parental Alienation Syndrome, ( CS-PAS ), my firm anticipates a significant increase in the number of clients that come to us for assistance, we want to prepare for that volume of business by having your help lined up in advance.

    I assume that you did not know that Parental Alienation Syndrome is both a Medical Disorder and a widely recognized form of Child Abuse.

    Please visit the website for CS-PAS so you'll understand the importance of this event.


    It would be greatly appreciated if we could get better acquainted on the phone. I would very much like to discuss our interest in the arrangement to work with you and your firm. Please call me at - Tel : 905-481-0367

    Once again, I look forward to hearing from you soon !

    Respectfully Yours,

    Joseph Goldberg
    Goldberg & Associates

    Tel: 905-481-0367

    And below: yet another marketing ploy, targeting vocational forensics -- and with the promise of referrals, soliciting money from them!

    [Saturday, June 28, 2008]

    Hi [Solicited Vocational Forensic

    Please do me a favor and try and mail out a few packets of information about you and your firm so I can pass it along to our interested clients. If you can send it by Express Mail that would be appreciated. (Include your CV, Photos, Logos, etc.)

    You can mail it to me at:

    Goldberg & Associates
    A7-1390 Major Mackenzie Drive East
    Suite 127
    Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada L4S 0A1

    Also... I forgot to mention this but in reference to the one time Sponsorship Fee, if you want to make the payment with a credit card directly to CSPAS, they ;made it very simple and easy to do.

    All you have to do is click on the hyperlink below: Click here: Canadian Symposium for Parental Alienation Syndrome

    Then scroll down to the very bottom of the page and click on the button that says:  


    Once again, I look forward to doing business with you soon.

    Respectfully Yours,

    Joe Goldberg
    Goldberg & Associates
    Tel: 905-481-0367

    [Sunday, June 29, 2008]

    Hi [Solicited Vocational Forensic]

    It was a pleasure getting to know you and I am very excited about this opportunity to work with you and your firm.  

    I'd like to itemize the details regarding your Exclusive Vendor Affiliation with G&A. We truly want to make this a successful and profitable arrangement for your company because we need your assistance for Vocational Evaluations

    We are prepared to offer your firm all of the following benefits - all we seek in return is your support of the CS-PAS, (symposium) and a one time Sponsorship Fee in the amount of $750.00 ;


    1. Your company will be our Exclusive Vendor for Vocational Evaluations in Texas

    2. The Registration Fee for you to attend the symposium will be waived ($395.00)

    3. The Fee to attend the Gala Banquet Dinner will be waived ($250.00)

    4. Significant advertisements promoting your company will be posted on the CS-PAS website. The cost to design the ad will be paid for by the CS-PAS, it will be designed by an advertising agency. The value of the ad would normally cost $400.00, and the ad will be seen on ;

    5. Significant advertisements promoting your company will also be posted on our website. The cost of the ad will be paid for by the CS-PAS, it will be designed by an advertising agency. The value of the ad would normally cost $400.00, and it will be seen online at

    We want to build a business relationship that will last for many years to come. It would be a great pleasure to work with you on these services.

    Please Make Your Check Payable To:
    CSPAS / Canadian Symposium

    Please Mail It To:
    CSPAS / Canadian Symposium
    A7-1390 Major Mackenzie Drive East, Suite 127
    Richmond Hill, Ontario L4S 0A1
    Attn: Corporate Sponsors Dept.

    Once again, I look forward to meeting you and doing business with your firm!

    Respectfully Yours,

    Joseph Goldberg
    Goldberg & Associates
    Tel: 905-481-0367

    Below: Goldberg attempting to schnor the email subscriber list from a domestic violence group:

    From: <>
    Subject: Announcement To Members from The CSPAS - Founder Joseph Goldberg
    Date: Thursday, December 25, 2008, 1:44 AM

    I am with The Canadian Symposium for Parental Alienation Syndrome, and my name is Joseph Goldberg. We would like to know if it is possible to obtain an opt-in email list of your members so we can send them a video clip of our upcoming conference at The Metro Toronto Convention Center March 27th through March 29th.

    Please visit our website for the details

    Since this is our First Annual Conference we hope you will allow us to use your email list solely for this purpose and at no time would your list be given out to any third parties. I am the Founder of the Conference, and I will take every measure to safeguard the usage of your email information.

    We would also like to ask if your email name and address information is available in a CSV data format ? ( This way we can do a simple blast of the emails all at one time, or perhaps we could send you the video clip and you could send it out to all of your members for us ? ) Either way, The Canadian Symposium for Parental Alienation Syndrome would be forever grateful for your assistance.

    Did you know that Parental Alienation Syndrome ( P.A.S. ), is a recognized form of child abuse ?

    Once again, thank you for giving us this opportunity to inform your members with our promotional video clip of the conference.

    Respectfully Yours,

    Joseph Goldberg
    Founder of The Canadian Symposium for Parental Alienation Syndrome

    Below: Goldberg flattering psychologists and promising referrals:

    Sent: 1/29/2009 6:07:32 P.M. Central Standard Time
    Subj: Client Referral To Your Office - From G&A / JG  

    My name is Joseph Goldberg, and I'm with the C.S.P.A.S.   I was looking online at a few different websites when I came across your information.

    I'm trying to help some clients that live in close proximity to your office. My clients recently expressed a need for professional services that you can provide.

    Are you presently meeting with and taking on new clients and if we wanted to refer these clients to you is that something that would be of interest?

    All of the clients that I would refer, are local to your office and the main reason that I'm able to refer a potentially large number of new clients to you, is because we have public access to a database of experienced professionals who are affiliated with the CSPAS - Referral Service Center.

    FYI, there are no charges of any kind in connection with the CSPAS - RSC.

    The CSPAS provides assistance to adults and children who are dealing with problems that relate to "Parental Alienation." We also try to encourage professional's to enroll in at least a few lectures that offer CEU's to assist them in working with the clients that we refer.

    FYI ...We have an upcoming conference on Parental Alienation this coming - March 27 - March 29th at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre (MTCC).   As Founder of the CSPAS -  I'm very interested in supporting the work you do, and I believe we can,  and should help each other on an on going basis. I assume that you are acquainted with the fact that Parental Alienation and Parental Alienation Syndrome ( P.A.S. ), is a widely recognized form of child abuse.

    Please let me know if you're interested in taking on some new clients and our client referral services which can help you to expand the growth of your practice.

    My Kindest Regards,

    Joseph Goldberg Founder of CSPAS

    For more information about the conference, please visit our website at

    To stop receiving these emails please unsubscribe.
    The Canadian Symposium For Parental Alienation Syndrome
    A7 - 1390 Major Mackenzie Drive East, Suite 127
    Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada L4S 0A1

    Respectfully Yours,

    Joseph Goldberg
    Founder of The Canadian Symposium for Parental Alienation Syndrome

    Dean Tong (another non-psychologist "forensic consultant") was arrested 01/28/08 in Florida for domestic violence and witness tampering. Tong was accused in a prior marriage of child sexual abuse, which lead the former paramedic to create a business of, inter alia, helping guys accused of abuse beat the rap (although in recent years he apparently sought to gain legitimacy occasionally working for the "other side" too). His primary affiliations, however, appeared to be with the PAS purveyor crowd, a number of the individuals listed above, and other "it's a false accusation and mom brainwashed the kid to make this up" defense lawyers and forensics such as Ralph Underwager. Lightning striking twice? More of these types: Steven Carlson, "the custody coach", Ken Pangborn, and Allen Cowling. And of course the agenda's Ph.D.s...

    More on Dean Tong, can be found here:

    A side note on one reason parental alienation theory is so appealing to the family law therapeutic jurisprudence types, including not only the forensics but also the therapists, guardians ad litem, parenting coordinators, and supervised visitation and therapeutic visitation opportunists: when their ineffective make-believe, "reunification therapies" and similar ideas don't work (probably because not a one is backed by any credible research or even anecdotally effective methodology), even if parental alienation wasn't earlier raised in the case and abuse was founded, it provides the perfect alibi to give some schnookered judge who wants to know what happened. And so they just point the finger for all of the wasted time, money, and miserable mess they've made of the case at... the mother (usually), claiming "unconscious alienation" or "covert alienation".

    This work is part of ongoing research being conducted by the National Network on Family Law Policy, with the assistance of numerous scholars, professionals, and others who are investigating the workings of our justice system. For more information, contact sarah,

    Also see
    Rethinking the Assumptions of Therapeutic Jurisprudence in the Family Courts
    Custody Evaluator Quotes
    What's Wrong With Parenting Coordination
    Parenting Coordination issues
    Psychology in Family Court
    Custody Evaluators Lack Expertise
    Forensic Evaluators Lack Science
    Custody Evaluator Discovery Issues
    Collaborative Divorce Psychologists

    Friday, May 28, 2010

    M. Jill Dykes GAL Topeka Kansas Topeka Kansas "Court Appointed Child Abuser"

    Note: Cross posted from [wp angelzfury] Battered Mothers-A Human Rights Issue.





    By MamaLiberty

    When I started this blog, over a year ago, I promised that I would expose every last criminal in family court.  I will continue to keep that promise and Mama Liberty will be expanding to other various outlets to give Mothers a voice even more.  We are United States Citizens with the same rights as any other.

    If you do not like what is being exposed about you and your corrupt system then do the right thing and stop abusing your power and feeding your ego!

    We have the right to expose any government entity for fraud, abuse or neglect.

    You all cannot shut us all up, we have power in numbers.

    The wind always blows mightily over Kansas as it has for so long,  just ask Dorothy.

    Now the winds of change are upon the dirty family court system in Shawnee County.  Well over a decade a Mother in Kansas has fought the court system and its criminals to have visitation with her daughter.

    Claudine Dombrowski continues to ask the court to follow the custody guidelines for her visitation time.  In February 2010 a miracle happened when the Judge actually adhered and allowed the now teenage daughter to have unsupervised visitation with her Mother with no interference from the father.

    But the continued problems this Mother and Child face is the Guardian Ad Litem for the child, Jill M. Dykes, who wishes nothing more than to keep Claudine from her child.  Instead of trying to assistwith fostering a relationship with the Mother, Dykes wants to stay on this case, she wants more taxpayers money to keep her job.

    Within the transcript of a hearing held in 2009 Ms. Dykes ineptness and bias against Claudine Dombrowski is evident. In the below transcript Dykes continues to interrupt the judge and fervently tries to prevent the judge from allowing unsupervised visitation. Dykes other favorite thing is to submit overtime to the county for keeping a parent and child separated.

    Much to the dismay of the court system and specifically Jill M. Dykes this Mother is demanding that the statutes be upheld…otherwise they should terminate her parental rights.  It is not something that would be easy for any Mother but perhaps it is the right thing to do, in the best interest of the child and this mother.

    They have once again started their campaign to end the unsupervised visits.  In fact what has been learned by this blogger is that :

    “if there is any extended visitation time it would evaporate any progress that the mother and child have made.”

    That is right, you read that right, the court whores are going to make it very difficult for any mother and child relationship.  Therefore until justice is given to Claudine and her child, this blog and others will continue to expose the injustices by Shawnee County and those that profit from it. The winds of change are coming Shawnee…and its a BIG one…watch out for falling houses Jill


    Entry Filed under: Child Custody Issues,Child Custody for fathers,Children's Rights,Family Courts,activism,child abuse,domestic violence. Tags: domestic violence, family court,abusers,government corruption, battered women, Violence, Judges, domestic abuse, abused children,bad fathers, women haters, cyber stalking, protective parent, abusive men, mother rights,family court corruption, violence against women, maternal deprivation, stupid men,Claudine Dombrowski, Shawnee KS, Jill M. Dykes.

    WordPress Tags:SOMEWHERE,OVER,expose,Mama,Citizens,rights,system,government,fraud,numbers,Kansas,Dorothy,Shawnee,Mother,daughter,Claudine,Dombrowski,custody,guidelines,February,miracle,Judge,interference,father,problems,Child,Guardian,Litem,Jill,Dykes,wishes,Instead,relationship,money,Within,transcript,bias,parent,January,Court,Abuser,OVERTIME,Documents,Richardson,fact,justice,Entry,Children,Courts,violence,corruption,Judges,deprivation,outlets,statutes,injustices,fathers,blog,visitation,women

    Showdown in Shawnee County: We finally got some hell instead of corn (Topeka, Kansas)

    Showdown in Shawnee County: We finally got some hell instead of corn (Topeka, Kansas)

    "What you farmers need to do is raise less corn and more Hell."

    Mary Elizabeth Lease (1853-1933)

    Kansas political activist, suffragist, populist, writer, and lecturer

    Not too many years ago, Thomas Frank wrote a book called "What's the Matter with Kansas?" where he wondered whatever happened to the spirit of progressive Kansas voices like Mary Elizabeth Lease.

    After attending a custody hearing as a court observer in Shawnee County, Kansas last week, I can tell you that Mary's spirit still lives on--in Claudine Dombrowski.

    Unfortunately, I also saw that the corruption and special interests that Mary railed against all her life are still with us too.

    It's taken me a week to gather my thoughts together, because my experience as a court watcher was inspiring, maddening, frustrating, and revolting--all at the same time.

    Claudine Dombrowski is a Kansas mother, a domestic violence survivor, who lost custody of her daughter to her abusive ex-husband, Hal Richardson, in an ex parte decision.

    For those of you who are not legal experts, an ex parte decision is one decided by a judge without requiring all of the parties to the controversy to be present. Basically we're talking about a legal proceeding brought by one person in the absence of and without representation or notification of other parties.

    In the United States--or so we're told--the availability of ex parte orders or decrees from both federal and state courts is sharply limited by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, which provide that a person shall not be deprived of any interest in liberty or property without due process of law.

    In THEORY, this has been interpreted to require adequate notice of the request for judicial relief and an opportunity to be heard concerning the merits of such relief. A court order issued on the basis of an ex parte proceeding, therefore, SHOULD necessarily be TEMPORARY AND INTERIM in nature, and the person(s) affected by the order must be given an opportunity to contest the appropriateness of the order before it can be made permanent.

    In REALITY, this has never happened in Claudine's case. The ex-parte hearing took place in 2004. Six long years ago. That's an huge piece of somebody's childhood. Since then, Claudine has been on supervised visitation although I NEVER heard Hal Richardson's attorney, Jason P. Hoffman, bother to articulate A SINGLE REASON AS TO WHY. In fact, Claudine has never been accused of or investigated for child abuse, substance abuse, domestic violence, sexual abuse, or any other abuse you can think of.

    But more about that later.

    The purpose of this hearing was to finally get Claudine unsupervised parenting time and to force the court to follow established Kansas law per Chapter 60, article 16. This states that a parent must be allowed "reasonable parenting time" unless it can be DEMONSTRATED that the parent is dangerous or somehow harmful to the child.

    I've mentioned that I did not hear one single accusation regarding Claudine's parenting abilities, much less any evidence, even of the flimsiest sort.

    So what did I hear? I heard utterly ALARMING AND FRIGHTENING attacks on Claudine as an outspoken advocate for victims of domestic violence and as a human rights activist. I saw an obsessive fishing expedition orchestrated by Jason Hoffman, who was demanding that the authorship of various domestic violence blogs and websites be publicly revealed--even ones that I know for a fact that Claudine has no connection with. As if being a domestic violence advocate was some sort of act of treason or crime against the state!

    Where the hell are we? I kept asking myself. China? Burma? North Korea?

    I also witnessed an obsessive line of inquiry as to whether Claudine had removed all references and photos of her daughter from the Internet. Through all this, Hoffman did not produce one piece of timely evidence to suggest that she had not. In short, another ridiculous piece of legal grandstanding.

    Oh, and another thing. The specter of ALIENATION! Despite the fact that the father (and his cronies) had limited this mother to supervised visitation since 2004, and that the father had conveniently obstructed all visits since last summer, Hoffman had the nerve to accuse Claudine of being an alienator or potential alienator! Never mind that if ANYBODY should be labeled an alienator, it's Daddy Dearest. For me, this moment crystalized how the whole "alienation" label has become increasingly bogus with every passing day. That Daddy has shut off a child from contact with a non-abusive, fit, and loving mother isn't "alienation." That Mom might have some residual anger or frustration about the situation is. Horse patootie.

    One other party in this scam deserves special recognition. Jill Dykes, who has been connected with this case as a guardian ad litem, showed that she was utterly incapable of even the barest appearance of professional objectivity. Throughout the entire hearing, she was literally at Daddy's elbow, sometimes whispering into his ear. This is neutrality? This is the best interest of the child? Though she objected to unsupervised visitation being granted, she produced zero evidence to support her position. There was something about a letter, not written by Ms. Dykes, but by somebody else who was conveniently unavailable for questioning or cross-examination. Such a coincidence. And even that letter was said to be quite old--didn't catch how old.

    Generally, her reasoning came down to a distorted circle of pseudo logic: Ms. Dombrowski should be on supervised visitation because...she's been on supervised visitation. Not good enough, Ms. Dykes. Can you come up with better? Didn't think so.

    It seemed quite apparent that Mr. Hoffman, Mr. Richardson, and Ms. Dykes thought they could play the same old games and get away with it. And maybe they would have.

    Except in the audience, there were a half dozen observers from Topeka, Kansas City, and even out of state, who were scribbling down every word. Because all of us had heard about the blatant constitutional violations in this case, and all us had decided to bear witness to it.

    I'll give credit to Judge David Debenham. Maybe he has seen the light, and realized what a legal travesty and constitutional outrage this case has become. Or maybe he just felt the heat, with all the court watchers present.

    The end result is that he ordered limited unsupervised visitation. Just two hours on a Sunday to start. And the right to telephone twice a week.

    But it's a start. And it's an opportunity for this mother and daughter to start a healing process that is long overdue.

    Posted by silverside at 8:41 AM

    Labels: child custody, custodial father, custody/visitation, DV, ex parte, Kansas


    PHOENIX By MamaLiberty

    Entry Filed under: Child Custody Issues,Child Custody for fathers,Children's Rights,Family Courts,activism,child abuse,domestic violence. Tags: abused, abused children, abusers,abusive men, bad fathers, battered women, batterers, Claudine Dombrowski, corruption, court whores, CPS, custody, cyber stalking, domestic abuse, domestic violence, family court, father rights, government corruption, maternal deprivation, misogynists, mother, mother rights,mothers, Shawnee KS, violence against women, women haters.

    You have not killed me…you have made me stronger like a Phoenix born from the ashes…so am I. You may have taken a piece of my soul but that part has been replaced by love and justice. Our children will someday come looking for their Mothers, they will not be pleased. Why you ask? Why would children that have purposefully separated from them for no good reason want to see you? Why indeed is the question you should all write upon your souls how you desecrated the most sacred of a womens being….MOTHER.

    Why do you think I fight so hard? I fight as any Mother would, never-ending, unconditional LOVE. Our children feel the same way even though you have tried to break our bond it also is never-ending. So beware to those who intend to cause to do harm on my child…we will never give up in getting justice, we willnever shut up about how much we love and miss our children and now that we are reborn and anew we will NEVER GO AWAY! For we have loved and lost and will never LOSE again!

    UPDATE: Dombrowski Case: Trial set January 8th, 2010 (The Murder of Motherhood)

    December 18, 2009 — Claudine Dombrowski

    Quick Publish to just update, will delve further as I can, Thank you my dear friends and family,

    (To the Perpetrator and his many many attorneys and the dea Judge who is monitoring the ww for any activity relating to this case!)I will not shut up, give up and I WILL NOT GO AWAY!

    Sin Denied Telling All; Reminding Others of Morals

    UPDATE: Dombrowski Case:

    SN. CO. Case No. 96-D-217

    December 16, 2009

    “ We walked into Court and Jason P Hoffman one’ of Attorney’s for thePerpetrator came with a two inch stack of ‘contempt’ papers (to clean up the internet) I still do not have copy of the recent contempt’s not allowed to have  (as with GAL and FOC’s private reports) as I turn them all over to bepublished.

    The current ‘claim’ remains – is I STILL  have ‘ alleged images’ of my daughter (now why would I want images of my child and my dead mom?) But are actually ‘court documents’ and several  media appearances’ most recently on Domestic Violence.

    Not to mention that Kansas is at an all time record high in DV Fatalities in TWO DECADES with State Warnings and the Media and Senate Hearings Testimonies on the Kansas Joint Committee on Children’s Issues.”

    KansasWatchDog: Video

    and Audio Testimonies:

    Claudine Dombrowski: An abused mom victimized again by the Kansas Courts

    The bottom line is this:

    1. I am NOT a threat to my daughter nor have I ever been alleged to be a threat to my daughter unlike that of the well documented HX of violence of the perpetrator.

    2. Under K.S.A 60-1616: Unless AFTER hearing- showing that I am a threat or harm to my daughter- The Courts can not deny our parenting time- (as they have this past ten years)  DV by Proxy and other Court Whores that Profit.

    Like my daughters Guardian ad Litem GAL  M. Jill Dykes, Topeka Kansas Bottom dweller and blood profiteer of children. and we shant forget the ‘good judge himself’ Judge ‘death’ David Debenham Who one year ago denied my daughter the right to go to her Grandmothers funeral.


    We kill off Granny, now a year later, time to finish off mom? I think not!!

    The ‘Best interest of the Perpetrators’ remains quite clear. Domestic Violence by Proxy

    Domestic Violence (DV) by Proxy: Terrorist Tactics Employed by Batterers

    Click Here to View Full Size

    In the below is a recent appellate court opinion where this statute was upheld and remanded back down to the lower courts, for error in denying parenting time and or ‘conditioned’ parenting time.

    So, on Jan 8, 2010 ‘charge us or release us’- Habeas Corpus, find me a threat to my daughter or sever my (alleged) rights under the law. (the only piece of paper they have NOT done)

    Media and testimonies to the Kansas Senate does NOT make me a Threat or danger to my child.

    “ I am tired this is draining to do- so I will publish now- and update as possible.” I Love you my Mother and my daughter- “ Don’t Give up”

    K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 60-1616(a), a parent has a right to reasonable parenting time unless the trial court finds, after a hearing, that the exercise of parenting time would seriously endanger the child’s physical, mental, moral, or emotional health. K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 60-1616(a) creates a rebuttable presumption that a parent is entitled to reasonable parenting time and visitation. This presumption may be rebutted if, after a hearing, the trial court finds that the exercise of parenting time would seriously endanger the child’s physical, mental, moral, or emotional health.


    No. 93,450


    In the Matter of the Marriage of







    1. Under K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 60-1616(a), a parent has a right to reasonable parenting time unless the trial court finds, after a hearing, that the exercise of parenting time would seriously endanger the child’s physical, mental, moral, or emotional health. K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 60-1616(a) creates a rebuttable presumption that a parent is entitled to reasonable parenting time and visitation. This presumption may be rebutted if, after a hearing, the trial court finds that the exercise of parenting time would seriously endanger the child’s physical, mental, moral, or emotional health.

    2. The fundamental rule of statutory construction to which all other rules are subordinate is that the intent of the legislature governs if that intent can be ascertained. The legislature is presumed to have expressed its intent through the language of the statutory scheme it enacted. When a statute is plain and unambiguous, the court must give effect to the intention of the legislature as expressed rather than determine what the law should or should not be.

    3. Orders which condition parenting time and visitation upon a minor child’s desires to see a parent give a minor child the authority to determine parenting time and can have the effect of denying parenting time altogether.

    4. Among the factors that must be considered when determining the issue of child custody, residency, and parenting time under K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 60-1610(a)(3)(B) and K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 60-1616(a), the trial court must look at the desires of a minor child as to the child’s custody or residency. The child’s wishes as to custody, residency, and parenting time and visitation cannot be the exclusive factor relied upon by the trial court in determining parenting time.

    Appeal from Douglas District Court; JEAN F. SHEPHERD, judge. Opinion filed September 16, 2005. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with directions.

    Brant M. Laue and Chadler E. Colgan, of Armstrong Teasdale LLP, of Kansas City, Missouri, for appellant.

    Sherri E. Loveland, of Stevens & Brand, L.L.P., of Lawrence, for appellee.

    Before MALONE, P.J., GREEN and BUSER, JJ.

    GREEN, J.: William David Kimbrell (David) appeals the trial court’s decision regarding parenting time with his 16-year-old son Evan Kimbrell. The issue in this case is whether the trial court can condition a noncustodial parent’s right to parenting time with his or her minor child upon the desires of the child.

    We determine that this cannot be done.

    K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 60-1616(a) makes it clear that a parent has a right to reasonable parenting time with his or her minor child “unless the court finds, after a hearing, that the exercise of parenting time would seriously endanger the child’s physical, mental, moral or emotional health.” Conditioning parenting time on the wishes of a minor child improperly gives the child the authority to determine a noncustodial parent’s rights to parenting time and visitation and can have the effect of completely denying the noncustodial parent’s rights to parenting time.

    Trackback this post

    wordpress visitors

    Where’s a pair of ruby slippers when you need them?


    0COMMENTSAuthor: Claudine Dombrowski |

    If only Claudine Dombrowski and her precious child could click their heels and get the hell outta Kansucks!


    A Kansas Judge consistently has shown how unethical Family Courts are. The story is simple, a mother, Claudine Dombrowski, loses custody to her abuser and the Family Court think that she will go away. They hope she will give up. They are counting on her shutting up. But there is a problem with that, this woman has friends. She has lots and lots of friends that have gone through the same corruption of Family Courts and unethical Judges, Court Whores and the like. This Judge has gone as far as not allowing this mothers child from attending her loving Grandmothers funeral. This Judge wants to make problems because of a tribute video?

    Not on my watch…… You cannot shut us all up Judge….we will not allow you to tarnish the memory of “Granny”….hold us all in contempt…..and watch out for falling houses. See the rest of the article here:


    Children and mothers never truly part, bound in the beating of each other's heart. ~ Charlotte Gray

    The moment a child is born, the mother is also born. She never existed before. The woman existed, but the mother, never. A mother is something absolutely new. ~Rajneesh

    Entry Filed under: activism. Tags: abused children, abusive men, battered women,corruption,Court, court whores, Don Hoffman, family court corruption, Judge David Debenham, M. Jill Dykes, misogynists, mother rights, parental alienation, protective parent, Rape, restraining orders, woman haters.