California Coalition for Families and Children and activist attorney Marc Angelucci have recently published a draft amicus curiae brief for submission to the California Fourth District Court of Appeal in case D057480, the appeal of the San Diego County Superior Court Case No. 37-2008-00093885-CU-BT-CTL in which Judge Jay Bloom sided with the corrupt family law courts and disreputable Dr. Stephen Doyne, one of the court’s favored 730 child custody evaluators, by ruling that Doyne is immune from suit and one of his victims, Dr. Emad Tadros, should pay his legal fees.
Dr. Emad Tadros caught Stephen Doyne using what are credibly alleged to be fraudulent credentials issued by a “diploma mill” style organization. Evidence of this is shown in documentation regarding Doyne’s credentials. This is just the tip of the iceberg in the growing allegations against Doyne and many other San Diego divorce industry profiteers.
CCFC and Angelucci are looking for members of the public who understand the abusive conduct of many of the 730 custody evaluators in San Diego County to sign the brief in support of the notion that nobody should be above the law, not even the divorce industry “professionals” favored by the corrupt judicial officers on the bench in San Diego.
Angelucci explains the current dire situation in the letter soliciting public support for the brief. Read more…
Veteran’s Day was last week, but despite the holiday for government workers it is clear that the American government does not care for its soldiers. You would do well to remember that American soldiers put their lives on the line to fight to defend a country that treats them as criminals and slaves who are worthy of nothing but poverty and death. As a result, the leading cause of death for these soldiers is suicide.
In a video from 2009, CNN reported that the number of military suicides (354) outnumbered the number of soldiers killed in combat (335). This trend has continued in the years since 2009.
Why is that so many soldiers are killing themselves? Soldiers have to deal with the trauma of combat and resulting PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) and depression. On top of that, then they are frequently denied contact with their children and are accused of being murderers and child abusers thanks to their time in the military. Then they are forced to pay ridiculous child support levels set by black-robed criminals in family law courts while their ex-spouses enjoy vacations and luxury goods as they eat MREs and camp in battlefields if fighting to defend the nation that enslaves them or are homeless except for bunking on a buddies’ sofa if they are not. Read more…
Associates of the California Coalition for Families and Children have launched the new website The Public Court. The site is focused on the violations of law and justice in San Diego family law courts and how the divorce industry is causing immense harm to children and parents.
Karen Lebow of the Southern California Parents of Alienated Children’s Network has announced that an all-day conference on parental alienation is planned for Saturday, November 13, 2010, from 8am to 5pm, at California State University as Northridge near Los Angeles. Admissions prices range from $60 to $75.
Once someone like Stephen Doyne, ill-reputed San Diego custody evaluator, or many of his Associate Family Court Dismantlers recommend a restraining order between two parents, the divorce industry is on its way to milking profits from yet another family. The Honorable Judge is highly likely to rubberstamp such recommendations. Why? We suspect many, perhaps most, have been receiving unpublicized Election Campaign Donations from such people. Such judges know how to support their financial backers.
As soon as the restraining order is issued, if mom or dad tries to communicate on any level, it will be considered a crime! No collateral contacts of any type are allowed — no priests, no friends, no family members of any side, no direct or indirect contact or any US mail or email or phone communications from any parent is allowed. Why? The divorce industry wants to isolate the parties from each other, sticking themselves in the middle where they can be sure to encourage the parents to fight until they exhaust their funds by limiting, monitoring, and controlling all communications.
The court then finds itself justified to make the next move by ordering a “mediator” such as Doyne & Associates. Stephen Doyne and those like him charge for back and forth phone communications between parents because it is now illegal for parents to communicate by any means by order of the court. Every phone call is about $75 or more to each parent. The more phone calls claimed, the richer the dismantlers become. Even if there is a simple inquiry about food for the children, instructions for medication, or questions about a school assignment, with a restraining order on board the divorce industry profiteers will be the only ones making the calls. They make a fat check from back and forth phone calls between them and both parents, turning a few minutes direct conversations into claims of several phone calls. The court won’t allow verification of such calls, so families should be rightly wondering just how many of them were actually placed and how long they took.
Imagine this order is enforced for a few years. Would this order alone pay the evaluator’s or mediator’s house payments? Would this order compel such dismantlers serving the court order to more generously contribute secretive judicial election campaign funds? Read more…
Sweden seems like a progressive country to the uninformed. It has parental leave policies for both genders. While mothers have always availed themselves of such leave, fathers seemed reluctant. So the parental leave laws have changed over time to encourage fathers to take time off of work after the birth of a baby. At present, two months of the 390 leave days allocated for parents must be used by the father or they are lost.
Consider contemporary family life in Sweden. In the past, new parents split 390 days of paid leave however they liked—monthly, weekly, daily, and even hourly. Women used far more of it than men. But today, new fathers no longer rush back to work, leaving the mother to raise little Sven all by herself. The reason for the change? Smart public policy.
In 1995, Sweden passed a simple but revolutionary law: couples would lose one month of leave unless the father was the one who took it. A second use-it-or-lose-it month was added in 2002, and now more than 80 percent of Swedish fathers take four months off for the birth of a new child, up from 4 percent a decade ago. And a full 41 percent of companies now formally encourage fathers to go on parental leave, up from only 2 percent in 1993. Simply put, men are expected to work less and father more.
By altering the roles of the Swedish father and the Swedish worker, Sweden’s paternity-leave legislation has, in turn, rewritten the rules for Swedish men (and, by extension, women). “Swedish dads of my generation and younger have been raised to feel competent at child-rearing,” writes Slate’s Nathan Hegedus, an American who experienced the system firsthand. “They simply expect to do it, just as their wives and partners expect it of them.” If a man refuses time at home with the kids, he faces questions from friends, family, and, yes, other guys. Policy changes produced personal changes—and then, slowly but surely, society changed as well.
On the surface, this sounds quite progressive. The United States lacks similar leave policies and American men often feel discouraged from taking time off from work for family matters. They fear they will be looked down upon, ridiculed, or passed over for promotions if they take more than a short time away from work for a new baby.
But the reality is that Sweden’s progressiveness is merely a veneer over a solid core of the same false feminist male-bashing that predominates in the Western world. Children in Sweden, you see, are treated as property of the mother. If the mother doesn’t want to share, she simply starts making false abuse allegations. No proof is required, obviously a mad mom’s word is more reliable than all the evidence in the world. She will be quickly and easily rewarded with sole custody, marginalizing the father to no more a few days per month with the children.
Many fathers quickly see even this small amount of contacted whittled down to just a few hours of supervised visitation, supervised because obviously fathers cannot be trusted with children if the mother says so. In Sweden, as in the United States, men are guilty upon accusation and must struggle to prove themselves innocent, a task which is effectively impossible in many cases. After all, if you are a man who was accused of some crime that nobody else saw and there is no evidence of it occurring or not occurring, how are you to prove that you didn’t do it when a mom says you did? You can’t, so her lies win.
If a father fights for equal child custody, Swedes will consider him a brute. If he is beaten senseless by false accusations from a malicious mom, his life in tatters, he will suffer in many ways including by very limited contact with his children. Then Swedes will consider him a deadbeat. Being a father in Sweden is a losing proposition, the only chance of success is at the whim of a woman. But if she changes her mind, for any reason — her affair, her drug abuse problem, etc. — the father is instantly a degenerate who should be banned from seeing the children without the watchful eyes of the state closely monitoring his every move.
This is no different, really, than the United States and many other nations in which men are not even second-class citizens in all matters involving families and children. Not only is this extremely unfair, it contributes to a wide range of social problems including gender conflict, parental alienation child abuse, and harming children’s educational attainment and mental health.
To their credit, many women understand these issues very well and fully support equal rights. Some of them are strident enough about it to actively support both the father’s rights movement and going to significant effort to ensure their own ex-partners stay involved in their children’s lives. Unfortunately, there are more than a few naysayers remaining. Some of them are quite intent on not only denying equal rights but going so far as to even any messages that advocate for changes they do not approve.
Amnesty International Shows Its Sexist Bias
A lot of children in Sweden are upset about deprivation of access to a loving parent, generally their fathers. Four Swedish high school students, Sara Sivesson, Jerry Wallén, Sandra Atas, and Oskar Krantz, set out to expose Sweden’s human rights crimes against children and fathers to the world. They produced a video which they submitted to Amnesty International for a human rights video contest. Their video explains what happens to so many Swedish fathers who long to spend time with their children but who are prevented from doing so by the typical false feminist tool of false accusations.
The video made it to the finalist stage. The students were of course very excited by this.
But then a woman’s violence organization in Uppsala reportedly demanded that Amnesty International remove the video from the competition and its website. Read more…
The recent release of Davis Guggenheim’s film Waiting for Superman has contributed to a flurry of discussion over how to fix failing American schools. I’ve read quite a bit on thoughts regarding school reform and find that there is a striking absence of discussion of American family policies and the abusive family law courts as major contributors to poor student performance. Yet studies show that divorce has a major negative impact on student performance.
Adverse impact of divorce upon education has skyrocketed as divorce has been more common. Divorces in 1920 caused a 3.6 month loss of education, but since 1970 they have blown up to about a year in lost education. This timeframe roughly corresponds with the rise of “no fault divorce” in Western nations.
Multiple divorces had an even worse impact on high school graduation rates. While students who parents stay together average a 78.4% rate of graduation from high school by age 20, one divorce drops the graduation rate to 60%, about the same as for children whose mother or father died. Divorce and remarriage did not significantly change the graduation rates for children versus divorce with no remarriage. But with divorce-remarriage-divorce (two divorces), the graduation rate drops further to only about 40%, half of that for children whose parents remained married.
Parties as diverse as social scientists, economists, and national security experts point out that America’s under-performing educational system is a threat to the future of the nation. The United States has long maintained the economic and military superiority over its adversaries that lead to a secure and prosperous nation in large part due to the educational opportunities available to American children. Universal K-12 education means every child is supposed to have access to the knowledge and skills needed to get a start in life. American universities attract the best and brightest students from around the world. The inventiveness of these students is immense. They often become scientists, entrepreneurs, and other major contributors to the advancement of knowledge and wealth of the nation.
America’s academic performance has been on a steady downward slope for decades. This decline parallels the destruction of families via no-fault divorce that has made divorce far more common as well as the laws and court behaviors that create conflict and place children into traumatic and contentious custody battles. Often these children are stripped of most or all contact with one of their parents due to wrongful sole custody decisions and the courts enabling and encouraging parental alienation child abuse. The two phenomena of poor school performance and poor family life are directly related. While parents do make their own share of mistakes, failed government policies are the glue that binds together these interconnected disasters into a destructive spiral. Read more…
Personality disorders are a growing problem in the United States. Recent NIH studies indicate that 20% or more of Americans suffer from one or more personality disorders. Author Bill Eddy points out that in his experience about half of “High Conflict Personalities” (or HCPs) involved in destructive divorce and child custody battles probably do have one or more full-blown personality disorders. The other half may not meet all the criteria for a full-blown personality disorder yet still show many traits consistent with troublesome personality disorders such as BPD and NPD.
I believe that about half of HCPs have a personality disorder and about half have some of these traits, but not a full personality disorder. This means that they are still difficult, but may respond more easily to approaches designed for people with personality disorders.
It helps to understand some of these traits, but it is important to not tell someone you think they have a personality disorder. They may become very defensive and angry with you, as defensiveness is a common characteristic of those with personality disorders and those just with traits.
I fully agree with Eddy’s advice about not telling a person they may have a personality disorder. To be clear, this is not because it is better for them but primarily because hearing this news seems to turn them into even more destructive abusers than they were in the first place. Even if you are only trying to help, they will probably interpret your words as dire threats and redouble their efforts to destroy you. There is also a substantial risk that you will be ridiculed for your reasonable beliefs by divorce industry “professionals” who have an agenda that does not make room for unpleasant truths unless they are stated by an expensive paid expert. Read more…
A common problem that many parents in child custody battles experience is the malicious false police reports generated by the nasty ex exhibiting sociopathic behaviors. Such people may suffer from a personality disorder associated with pathological lying such as BPD or NPD, but not all people with BPD or NPD will resort to filing false police reports.
You might think that when the police investigate and find that the ex lied or can’t keep her or his story straight, that will be the end of it. But for many target parents, that is not the case at all. Instead, the nasty ex takes those reports and uses them as the basis for spreading defamation that looks very official and credible looking to the average naive person on the street. With a little effort, she or he can have dozens or more people believing the lies by using the police reports to deceive and manipulate them.
Sometimes, false police reports even get people arrested wrongly. Look at what happened to the father in the article Ben Vonderheide Exposes Pennsylvania’s Abusive Child Profiteering Racket. He was falsely arrested and his son taken from him. Later, his falsely accusing ex and her new boyfriend were convicted of filing false police reports in a criminal court with its far higher evidentiary standards than family court. But he is still suffering from the damage caused by the false police reports even years later.
More often, false police reports and the resulting “official looking” papers generated are used to defame and harass the target parent. This is a common element in the distortion campaigns practiced by Borderlines, Narcissists, and other abusively dishonest personalities. Read more…
and a DVD entitled 
, has launched a new blog he is calling 
.
)
Recent Comments