It's always good to see survivors working together, and with regards to this article I would like to thank up front CC from the Therapy Abuse list for suggesting to me that this would make a great article. Her contribution along with those from Aly, Sue and Arthur all from the Therapy Abuse list who also kindly took the time to compile and edit this article - which provide surviors worldwide with some of the best insights into the nature of therapy abuse anywhere. Many thanks also to Marion publisher and co-moderator of the Therapy-Abuse website and list.Who gave her permission for the messages from the Therapy-Abuse list to be published in this way.
http://www.therapy-abuse.net
Ray Hurford - VEX
There are many ways in which therapists and counsellors can abuse their clients. The list below, which does not claim to be exhaustive, is based on the experiences of some of those who have been abused in therapy. Categorising the suggestions has not always been easy: some behaviours fit into more than one category, and there is some overlap between the categories themselves. NB. The words "therapy" and "therapists" here should be taken to refer also to "counselling" and "counsellors" - or indeed to any kind of talking treatment and those who practise it.
"You Don't Matter" - Lack of respect, shaming & not listening
Treating the client as a "diagnosis" rather than as a person
Undermining the client's self-confidence and self-esteem and making them feel humiliated; emphasising their "deficiency" and never acknowledging their good qualities
Not listening properly to clients - and only "hearing" what fits in with the therapist's own preconceived ideas
Rubbishing the client's own insight, understanding, ideals, goals etc. and making them doubt their own reality (gaslighting)
Not allowing client to critically question the therapy they are being subjected to, demanding unlimited compliance and agreement and "faith" in the therapeutic process.
Failing to act on/disbelieving/dismissing/writing off client's complaints or distress re their emotional or psychological problems, engaging in the old "same time next week" attitude
Treating the client as though he/she is malingering/feigning symptoms so as to get sympathy, time off work etc, and thereby discounting client's complaints about symptoms
Dismissing a client's problem (for which they are seeking help) with "you just need to deal with it/exercise/pray/do volunteer work/be more grateful" etc.
Refusal/inability to acknowledge the realities of the client's circumstances (e.g. insisting a client of workplace bullying return to work without proper support or changes to the situation)
Construing client's belief system as deviant/bad for their mental health/downright delusional simply because it differs from what the therapist considers "normal" (This can also occur when e.g. male therapists encounter feminists or their supporters.)
Asking the client to pursue "homework" that is never used in the process of the therapy (e.g. telling client to "think about it!" then forgetting all about it, dismissing it as unimportant or accusing client of "wanting to stay stuck on an issue")
Breaking promises made to a client
"You Don't Need To Know" - Withholding information
Lying, withholding or distorting information
Inflicting any kind of treatment modality on the client without discussing the treatment and particulars with client first and gaining their consent
Not telling the client that the therapist is making some kind of assessment or diagnosis of them, and/or not informing the client of any diagnosis which has been made
Not allowing client to critically question the therapy they are being subjected to, demanding unlimited compliance and agreement and "faith" in the therapeutic process
Refusing to allow a client access to their client record
Deliberately confusing a client in order to keep the client off-balance
Refusal to explain terminology the therapist is using, such as any psychology or DSM terms
Refusal to answer direct requests for clarification of the therapist's words or non-verbal communications
"I'm in Charge" - Controlling, threatening and manipulative behaviour
Shifting the balance of power further in favour of the therapist
Refusal to address the issues which the client wishes to address in therapy
Setting the client's goals for them without reference to what the client sees as important, in relation to either therapy or life in general
Making a client work on an issue on the therapist's agenda or to his timing
Threatening to have the client forcibly admitted to a mental hospital
Guilt-tripping the client with phrases such as "You don't want to get better", "You have a problem with trust" etc.
Using threats of termination to control a client's actions, reactions, or behaviour
Deliberately confusing a client so as to throw them off-balance
Emotional blackmail and verbal assault
Manipulation through the use of withdrawal and silence (e.g. encouraging client to overstate their distress so as to get a reaction)
Unconditional positive regard (conveying the impression that the therapist cares and understands)
Arbitrary, capricious or variable attitude to client (cf. "Good Cop, Bad Cop" routine)
Making the client make "contracts" as a method of control (e.g. making a client be a "Pollyanna" by having a contract where the client must report "good things that have happened" regardless of the reality of the client's life and recent happenings)
Therapist passive-aggressively re-enacts a traumatic or abusive incident that client experienced, without client's consent or knowledge of this "therapeutic technique", just to see how client will respond
"I Know Best" - Misinterpretation of client's symptoms/situation & imposing own beliefs/ preconceptions
Not listening properly to clients - and only "hearing" what fits in with the therapist's own preconceived ideas
Defining clients in terms of the therapist's own outlook, beliefs, ideals etc
Using circular self-confirming hypotheses, i.e. basing assessments on the therapists's conjecture rather than actual evidence, and then making further assumptions about the client based on those assessments
Labelling understandable distress/anger etc at external events in terms of mental illness
Insisting the client accepts the therapist's interpretation of their distress and submits to a therapy protocol which is not designed for nor is effective for client's specific problem (e.g. treating a depressed person for narcissistic or antisocial personality disorder)
Developing endless attributions for client's behaviour (e.g. depression/anxiety/OCD etc.) to justify solving it for a long time, and when behaviour is still present after therapy, develop a new attribution for the behaviour
Making the client make "contracts" as a way to control the client or to minimise the client's emotional situation, not as a useful therapy tool (e.g. where the client must report only "good things that have happened" regardless of the reality of the client's life and recent happening)
Using ANY type of spiritual/religious or otherwise-not-mainstream "therapy" without first explaining such and getting consent
Insisting client adopt therapist's belief system
"You Need Me" - Encouraging dependence & setting self up as only hope
Persuading the client that the therapist is their only hope of happiness, and that they should accept and do everything the therapist says
Encouraging an unhealthy dependence on therapy and/or the therapist
Making extreme and seeming serious suggestions like cutting off contact with family members or verbally abusing family members, and justifying this behaviour by claiming it will "facilitate the therapeutic process"
Use of jargon, clichés, pretence and other inappropriate modes of address
Using complex jargon to confuse and disadvantage the client
Making jokes at the client's expense
Passing off abusive comments as "just a joke"
Passing off superficial clichés as "insight" and "wisdom"
Using manipulative phrases which contain a critical subtext, e.g.:
"This is life, you must learn to deal with it" (subtext: "You are deficient")
"Choose to like where you are at, what you've got and to be with whoever you are with" (subtext: "Stop complaining")
"I never promised you a rose garden" (subtext: "You are unreasonable" - when the only expectation may have been for decent and respectful behaviour!)
"Be grateful for what you have" (subtext: "You are ungrateful" )
"Do volunteer work" (subtext: "You are ungiving")
"Now you're sadder but wiser" (subtext: "Don't be ungrateful - I've done something for you" - even though you sought help in dealing with the sadness)
"To have a friend you must be a friend" (subtext: "You are the problem - and if you say anything against other people, you're paranoid")
"There's no such word as 'can't'" (subtext: "You are pathetic", or "I don't believe you")
"Don't you know that?" (subtext: "You ought to know that")
"Don't you want to get better?" (subtext: "You don't want to get better", or " You will only get better if you do what I say")
Attempting to lead client to therapist's predetermined conclusions by any of the following:
Lying, omitting or distorting information
Loaded questions
Feigning ignorance about a topic
Passing attributional suggestions off as compliments (e.g. "you are a tidy person")
Making coercive/fear inducing statements (e.g. "that sounds pretty paranoid to me...")
Feigning an anger response to client to regain control or compliance
Feigning identification with client's feelings
Playing on client's weaknesses/fears/needs/vulnerabilities
Setting client up by encouraging him/her to do something that will fail or appear silly
Playing games with client (e.g. therapist brings own problems into sessions and has an "iddn't it terrible" competition - "you think you got problems, well, I'll give you a reason to be depressed....")
Causing disruption to client's life, including breach of confidentiality
Encouraging or causing disruption to client's long term friendships and marital relationships
Failing to respect client's lifestyle choices as a "given"
Discussing the client with others outside the therapy setting, unless the client has given explicit and informed consent to such discussions (which may include both giving and receiving information)
Character assassination
Financial/material exploitation
Using ANYTHING from a client for the therapist's personal gain, without their knowledge (including the client's story as an anecdotal case study for publication in a book)
Keeping any item belonging to the client, even if the item was "created" during therapy or a session of therapy (poetry, artwork, journals etc), and refusing to return these items when asked to do so
Using billing or financial arrangements to control or manipulate the client (e.g. requiring them to pay for a fixed number of sessions when client has decided to terminate early, or threatening to withdraw counselling which is being provided free or at reduced cost)
"It's Your Fault" - Blaming the client & denial of any responsibility for distress in therapy
"Pollyannaism" - emphasizing only good qualities, people are all nice, well-adjusted, polite, and kind, so if a problem occurs it's the client's fault, while ignoring/overlooking/minimizing bad things people do, or the possibility that people can deliberately do bad things to others; if client questions trustworthiness of others, he/she is labelled "paranoid"
Demanding client "confess" to doing bad things as part of the therapeutic process and refusing to believe denials (e.g. using illegal narcotics, hurting other people, "being an asshole", theft, lying)
"Cure must fit the symptom" (i.e. if client has excessive guilt feelings, therapist insists client must have done something bad to make client feel guilty and must "come clean about what you did")
Treating the client as though he/she is malingering/feigning symptoms
Saying a client is deliberately "dragging their feet" in getting well when the client is confused or does not understand what is going on in the therapy
Labelling the client as manipulative or disturbed for questioning the therapist's approach (e.g. diagnosing a personality disorder in order to discredit a client who makes a legitimate complaint)
Labelling the client as resistant or in denial if they don't accept the therapist's understanding
Refusing to accept that therapists ever make mistakes and blaming the client for any distress the therapist has caused them
Character assassination
Assuming all therapy "works", even the latest fad, and if client doesn't improve then they are "doing something wrong" (which entails many more hours of therapy) because the "theory" certainly cannot be at fault
Playing the victim when the client makes a complaint
THE EFFECTS OF EMOTIONAL ABUSE FROM THERAPEUTIC SETTINGS
Complete devastation and despair (feeling like Munch's The Scream - see http://www.ivcc.edu/rambo/eng1001/munch.htm )
Self blame and feelings of failure, guilt and confusion
Loss of self-confidence and self-esteem, with excessive over-compensatory behaviour for new insecurities and fear about how others will respond to you
Withdrawal and inability to talk about the abuse; and feeling also that no one understands
Doubting your own perceptions and reality
Post-traumatic stress, and ongoing high levels of stress
Emotional detachment or "shutting down" (leading among other things to loss of empathy and lack of emotional response within oneself)
Intrusive negative rumination/intrusive negative thoughts/flashbacks
Extreme (but completely rational) fear of therapists and therapy
Retraumatization in circumstances reminiscent of the abusive behaviour (this may lead to becoming unexpectedly or unduly upset with others, and even to adopting therapist's abusive style in dealing with them)
Breakdown of or disruption to client's long-term friendships and marital relationships
HOW THERAPISTS ABUSE THEIR CLIENTS
There are many ways in which therapists and counsellors can abuse their clients. The list below, which does not claim to be exhaustive, is based on the experiences of some of those who have been abused in therapy. Categorising the suggestions has not always been easy: some behaviours fit into more than one category, and there is some overlap between the categories themselves. NB. The words "therapy" and "therapists" here should be taken to refer also to "counselling" and "counsellors" - or indeed to any kind of talking treatment and those who practise it.
"You Don't Matter" - Lack of respect, shaming & not listening
Treating the client as a "diagnosis" rather than as a person
Undermining the client's self-confidence and self-esteem and making them feel humiliated; emphasising their "deficiency" and never acknowledging their good qualities
Not listening properly to clients - and only "hearing" what fits in with the therapist's own preconceived ideas
Rubbishing the client's own insight, understanding, ideals, goals etc. and making them doubt their own reality (gaslighting)
Not allowing client to critically question the therapy they are being subjected to, demanding unlimited compliance and agreement and "faith" in the therapeutic process.
Failing to act on/disbelieving/dismissing/writing off client's complaints or distress re their emotional or psychological problems, engaging in the old "same time next week" attitude
Treating the client as though he/she is malingering/feigning symptoms so as to get sympathy, time off work etc, and thereby discounting client's complaints about symptoms
Dismissing a client's problem (for which they are seeking help) with "you just need to deal with it/exercise/pray/do volunteer work/be more grateful" etc.
Refusal/inability to acknowledge the realities of the client's circumstances (e.g. insisting a client of workplace bullying return to work without proper support or changes to the situation)
Construing client's belief system as deviant/bad for their mental health/downright delusional simply because it differs from what the therapist considers "normal" (This can also occur when e.g. male therapists encounter feminists or their supporters.)
Asking the client to pursue "homework" that is never used in the process of the therapy (e.g. telling client to "think about it!" then forgetting all about it, dismissing it as unimportant or accusing client of "wanting to stay stuck on an issue")
Breaking promises made to a client
"You Don't Need To Know" - Withholding information
Lying, withholding or distorting information
Inflicting any kind of treatment modality on the client without discussing the treatment and particulars with client first and gaining their consent
Not telling the client that the therapist is making some kind of assessment or diagnosis of them, and/or not informing the client of any diagnosis which has been made
Not allowing client to critically question the therapy they are being subjected to, demanding unlimited compliance and agreement and "faith" in the therapeutic process
Refusing to allow a client access to their client record
Deliberately confusing a client in order to keep the client off-balance
Refusal to explain terminology the therapist is using, such as any psychology or DSM terms
Refusal to answer direct requests for clarification of the therapist's words or non-verbal communications
"I'm in Charge" - Controlling, threatening and manipulative behaviour
Shifting the balance of power further in favour of the therapist
Refusal to address the issues which the client wishes to address in therapy
Setting the client's goals for them without reference to what the client sees as important, in relation to either therapy or life in general
Making a client work on an issue on the therapist's agenda or to his timing
Threatening to have the client forcibly admitted to a mental hospital
Guilt-tripping the client with phrases such as "You don't want to get better", "You have a problem with trust" etc.
Using threats of termination to control a client's actions, reactions, or behaviour
Deliberately confusing a client so as to throw them off-balance
Emotional blackmail and verbal assault
Manipulation through the use of withdrawal and silence (e.g. encouraging client to overstate their distress so as to get a reaction)
Unconditional positive regard (conveying the impression that the therapist cares and understands)
Arbitrary, capricious or variable attitude to client (cf. "Good Cop, Bad Cop" routine)
Making the client make "contracts" as a method of control (e.g. making a client be a "Pollyanna" by having a contract where the client must report "good things that have happened" regardless of the reality of the client's life and recent happenings)
Therapist passive-aggressively re-enacts a traumatic or abusive incident that client experienced, without client's consent or knowledge of this "therapeutic technique", just to see how client will respond
"I Know Best" - Misinterpretation of client's symptoms/situation & imposing own beliefs/ preconceptions
Not listening properly to clients - and only "hearing" what fits in with the therapist's own preconceived ideas
Defining clients in terms of the therapist's own outlook, beliefs, ideals etc
Using circular self-confirming hypotheses, i.e. basing assessments on the therapists's conjecture rather than actual evidence, and then making further assumptions about the client based on those assessments
Labelling understandable distress/anger etc at external events in terms of mental illness
Insisting the client accepts the therapist's interpretation of their distress and submits to a therapy protocol which is not designed for nor is effective for client's specific problem (e.g. treating a depressed person for narcissistic or antisocial personality disorder)
Developing endless attributions for client's behaviour (e.g. depression/anxiety/OCD etc.) to justify solving it for a long time, and when behaviour is still present after therapy, develop a new attribution for the behaviour
Making the client make "contracts" as a way to control the client or to minimise the client's emotional situation, not as a useful therapy tool (e.g. where the client must report only "good things that have happened" regardless of the reality of the client's life and recent happening)
Using ANY type of spiritual/religious or otherwise-not-mainstream "therapy" without first explaining such and getting consent
Insisting client adopt therapist's belief system
"You Need Me" - Encouraging dependence & setting self up as only hope
Persuading the client that the therapist is their only hope of happiness, and that they should accept and do everything the therapist says
Encouraging an unhealthy dependence on therapy and/or the therapist
Making extreme and seeming serious suggestions like cutting off contact with family members or verbally abusing family members, and justifying this behaviour by claiming it will "facilitate the therapeutic process"
Use of jargon, clichés, pretence and other inappropriate modes of address
Using complex jargon to confuse and disadvantage the client
Making jokes at the client's expense
Passing off abusive comments as "just a joke"
Passing off superficial clichés as "insight" and "wisdom"
Using manipulative phrases which contain a critical subtext, e.g.:
"This is life, you must learn to deal with it" (subtext: "You are deficient")
"Choose to like where you are at, what you've got and to be with whoever you are with" (subtext: "Stop complaining")
"I never promised you a rose garden" (subtext: "You are unreasonable" - when the only expectation may have been for decent and respectful behaviour!)
"Be grateful for what you have" (subtext: "You are ungrateful" )
"Do volunteer work" (subtext: "You are ungiving")
"Now you're sadder but wiser" (subtext: "Don't be ungrateful - I've done something for you" - even though you sought help in dealing with the sadness)
"To have a friend you must be a friend" (subtext: "You are the problem - and if you say anything against other people, you're paranoid")
"There's no such word as 'can't'" (subtext: "You are pathetic", or "I don't believe you")
"Don't you know that?" (subtext: "You ought to know that")
"Don't you want to get better?" (subtext: "You don't want to get better", or " You will only get better if you do what I say")
Attempting to lead client to therapist's predetermined conclusions by any of the following:
Lying, omitting or distorting information
Loaded questions
Feigning ignorance about a topic
Passing attributional suggestions off as compliments (e.g. "you are a tidy person")
Making coercive/fear inducing statements (e.g. "that sounds pretty paranoid to me...")
Feigning an anger response to client to regain control or compliance
Feigning identification with client's feelings
Playing on client's weaknesses/fears/needs/vulnerabilities
Setting client up by encouraging him/her to do something that will fail or appear silly
Playing games with client (e.g. therapist brings own problems into sessions and has an "iddn't it terrible" competition - "you think you got problems, well, I'll give you a reason to be depressed....")
Causing disruption to client's life, including breach of confidentiality
Encouraging or causing disruption to client's long term friendships and marital relationships
Failing to respect client's lifestyle choices as a "given"
Discussing the client with others outside the therapy setting, unless the client has given explicit and informed consent to such discussions (which may include both giving and receiving information)
Character assassination
Financial/material exploitation
Using ANYTHING from a client for the therapist's personal gain, without their knowledge (including the client's story as an anecdotal case study for publication in a book)
Keeping any item belonging to the client, even if the item was "created" during therapy or a session of therapy (poetry, artwork, journals etc), and refusing to return these items when asked to do so
Using billing or financial arrangements to control or manipulate the client (e.g. requiring them to pay for a fixed number of sessions when client has decided to terminate early, or threatening to withdraw counselling which is being provided free or at reduced cost)
"It's Your Fault" - Blaming the client & denial of any responsibility for distress in therapy
"Pollyannaism" - emphasizing only good qualities, people are all nice, well-adjusted, polite, and kind, so if a problem occurs it's the client's fault, while ignoring/overlooking/minimizing bad things people do, or the possibility that people can deliberately do bad things to others; if client questions trustworthiness of others, he/she is labelled "paranoid"
Demanding client "confess" to doing bad things as part of the therapeutic process and refusing to believe denials (e.g. using illegal narcotics, hurting other people, "being an asshole", theft, lying)
"Cure must fit the symptom" (i.e. if client has excessive guilt feelings, therapist insists client must have done something bad to make client feel guilty and must "come clean about what you did")
Treating the client as though he/she is malingering/feigning symptoms
Saying a client is deliberately "dragging their feet" in getting well when the client is confused or does not understand what is going on in the therapy
Labelling the client as manipulative or disturbed for questioning the therapist's approach (e.g. diagnosing a personality disorder in order to discredit a client who makes a legitimate complaint)
Labelling the client as resistant or in denial if they don't accept the therapist's understanding
Refusing to accept that therapists ever make mistakes and blaming the client for any distress the therapist has caused them
Character assassination
Assuming all therapy "works", even the latest fad, and if client doesn't improve then they are "doing something wrong" (which entails many more hours of therapy) because the "theory" certainly cannot be at fault
Playing the victim when the client makes a complaint
THE EFFECTS OF EMOTIONAL ABUSE FROM THERAPEUTIC SETTINGS
Complete devastation and despair (feeling like Munch's The Scream - see http://www.ivcc.edu/rambo/eng1001/munch.htm )
Self blame and feelings of failure, guilt and confusion
Loss of self-confidence and self-esteem, with excessive over-compensatory behaviour for new insecurities and fear about how others will respond to you
Withdrawal and inability to talk about the abuse; and feeling also that no one understands
Doubting your own perceptions and reality
Post-traumatic stress, and ongoing high levels of stress
Emotional detachment or "shutting down" (leading among other things to loss of empathy and lack of emotional response within oneself)
Intrusive negative rumination/intrusive negative thoughts/flashbacks
Extreme (but completely rational) fear of therapists and therapy
Retraumatization in circumstances reminiscent of the abusive behaviour (this may lead to becoming unexpectedly or unduly upset with others, and even to adopting therapist's abusive style in dealing with them)
Breakdown of or disruption to client's long-term friendships and marital relationships
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Monday, February 13, 2012
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Falsely Accused
Start with agencies in your state. Learn the Public Records Act for your State. It’s a huge tool in your arsenal. THink about this - send a letter to the head of your CHild Support Agency, ask for all of his email for the past 30 days. Go ahead, read them, find out who else he is talking with on a regular basis, and what the subject it. NExt, ask for their emails, and see who they are talking to, and what they are doing. You will beging to see where the bodies are buried in their dispicable business. NExt, start requesting documents from their organization
Lost your child? Lost your Parent? Family Finder can help find them!
May 17th, 2009
We launched Family Finder at USSharedParenting.com about 2 years ago. It’s taken awhile to grow, but it is slowing coming of its own. It’s a place for parents who have lost contact with their children can advertise for them. Or for children that were alienated from their parent to search for them. Of course grandma and grandpa are welcome too!
The service is free! There is no obligation. The site was created in case I lose contact with my children - I want a place to look for them. And I want it to be popular and effective when I do.
So, it it effective? you bet it is. The search engines search our site regularly. And every name in our Family Finder database gets indexed. Once only has too Google a name in family finder to find it right away in Google.
If you have lost access to a child, reach out to them via family finder. If you want to hear your other parents side of the story, reach out for them with Family Finder. If you think about them, you miss them. Search for them, begin the healing process now, and begin to live life to the fullest again.
Falsely Accused Father takes full custody of chilren - Are California Police starting to get it?
June 25th, 2008
We hear these stories all the time - mother or father falsely accused so the other parent can have the winner takes all spoils of divorce - the custody of the children. Occassionally, we hear of it backfiring, but not near enough. In Placentia, Ca the courts got it right this week.
Someone called Fullerton police and left an anonymous tip that Gregory Abbott, a high school teacher, was a drug dealer with a gun in the trunk of his car. He was subsequently arrested and then released two days later. Police discovered the gun was placed in his vehicle by his estranged wife, Devon Abbot and her boyfriend Solomon Silver. Abbot claims it was a scheme to get custody of his children and then move them to Maine.
This again shows the length people will go to in order to get custody of children. All too often, the courts accept these false allegations of abuse, drug usage, etc. in this winner take all game of custody. What is left is destroyed lives of innocent members of the public, and children separated from their other parent for no reason other than illness on the part of one irresponsible parent.
This story turned out right for Abbott, lets hope the courts follow through and award custody to the responsible parent, rather than the irresponsible parent.
Do you have a similar story - please share it with us.
Maryland Court of Appeals backs up court ruling for parent to pay damages for alienating children from parent
April 15th, 2008
This is certainly good news for Shared Parenting advocates everywhere, that believe custodial parents should be help accountable when they keep a parent from having a relationship with their child. Maryland’s Court of Appeals upheld a $3 million dollar judgement against a women who took her three children from the United State and fled to her home country of Egypt. The parents shared custody, with the mother having custody of one child, and the father having custody of the other. During one of her visits with both children, she bolted to Eqypt and the kids have not been seen by the father for 7 years.
A court awarded damages to the father, and the court of appeals has upheld that decision, demonstrating their lack of support for what this woman has done. These courts are to be congratulations, for taking this position and imposing fines on the woman for what she has done.
Now, how do we get her to educate the rest of the Judiciary in the United States that parental alienation should not be tolerated, that keeping a parent from their child is domestic violence, just like the Department of Justice has stated on their web site. How do we remove bias from the courts, who make incredibly biased decision that effect the lives of children each day?
There is one big difference with this Judge. She did not grow up in Family Court like many of the judges and commissioners that hear family law do. They grow their teeth in a corrupt system, and hand down the same corrupt decisions they are used to seeing during their career. This judge has a much more diverse background, including spending time in the Federal Court System. Her credentials make her well qualified to hear cases like this, as opposed to the Quasi Judges that hear typical family law issues.
Judge Battaglia - Thank you! You are to be celebrated for this decision, and please help educate others to start doing the same thing.
Posted in In the news, In the courts, Judicial | 6 Comments »
Mom kills kids while Dad fights the courts for custody to protect them
February 25th, 2008
Another bonehead Judge or Commissioner making a decision in “The best interest of the child” has kept three young children with a mother who has killed them. Nassau County Courts in New York need to investigate this issue with independent investigators to see if their contracts with the State for collection of child support put another family in harms way.
All this while the fathers of the children are fighting the courts for custody to protect these very children. This reminds me of our previous story where Mark Supanich actually took his daughter because he felt she was not safe. It resulted in his arrest by US Marshals for kidnapping - which he was eventually aquitted of. Yet, the family courts still restrict him rom seeing his daughter.
Thankfully, Mark’s daughter is still alive! His taking her from the harm he thought she was being exposed to may have saved her tender life.
These two fathers, Ricky Ward and Innocent Demesyeux were both fighting to get custody of the three children from the mother. Leatrice Brewer called 911 to report she had killed her three children. Cause of death is still under investigation. Foaming around the mouths of the childen may indicate they were drowned or poisoned.
Tragedy - Yes. Expected - of course. Our courts, driven by payments from child support agencies that pay for courts to hear their cases, incented under US Title IV-D will continue to make decision that keep custodial parents off of welfare, and loving parents out of the life of their children. It’s a sad reality of our government today.
The answer to many of these issues is simple - shared parenting. Allow both parents into the lives of the children equally, providing the oversight of another parent who can identify when harm may be coming to their child. Conviction of DIVORCE is not a reason to remove a child from the life of their children. How can it be justified?
Posted in In the news, Children's Health, where's DAD | 10 Comments »
Lost your child? Lost your Parent? Family Finder can help find them!
May 17th, 2009
We launched Family Finder at USSharedParenting.com about 2 years ago. It’s taken awhile to grow, but it is slowing coming of its own. It’s a place for parents who have lost contact with their children can advertise for them. Or for children that were alienated from their parent to search for them. Of course grandma and grandpa are welcome too!
The service is free! There is no obligation. The site was created in case I lose contact with my children - I want a place to look for them. And I want it to be popular and effective when I do.
So, it it effective? you bet it is. The search engines search our site regularly. And every name in our Family Finder database gets indexed. Once only has too Google a name in family finder to find it right away in Google.
If you have lost access to a child, reach out to them via family finder. If you want to hear your other parents side of the story, reach out for them with Family Finder. If you think about them, you miss them. Search for them, begin the healing process now, and begin to live life to the fullest again.
Falsely Accused Father takes full custody of chilren - Are California Police starting to get it?
June 25th, 2008
We hear these stories all the time - mother or father falsely accused so the other parent can have the winner takes all spoils of divorce - the custody of the children. Occassionally, we hear of it backfiring, but not near enough. In Placentia, Ca the courts got it right this week.
Someone called Fullerton police and left an anonymous tip that Gregory Abbott, a high school teacher, was a drug dealer with a gun in the trunk of his car. He was subsequently arrested and then released two days later. Police discovered the gun was placed in his vehicle by his estranged wife, Devon Abbot and her boyfriend Solomon Silver. Abbot claims it was a scheme to get custody of his children and then move them to Maine.
This again shows the length people will go to in order to get custody of children. All too often, the courts accept these false allegations of abuse, drug usage, etc. in this winner take all game of custody. What is left is destroyed lives of innocent members of the public, and children separated from their other parent for no reason other than illness on the part of one irresponsible parent.
This story turned out right for Abbott, lets hope the courts follow through and award custody to the responsible parent, rather than the irresponsible parent.
Do you have a similar story - please share it with us.
Maryland Court of Appeals backs up court ruling for parent to pay damages for alienating children from parent
April 15th, 2008
This is certainly good news for Shared Parenting advocates everywhere, that believe custodial parents should be help accountable when they keep a parent from having a relationship with their child. Maryland’s Court of Appeals upheld a $3 million dollar judgement against a women who took her three children from the United State and fled to her home country of Egypt. The parents shared custody, with the mother having custody of one child, and the father having custody of the other. During one of her visits with both children, she bolted to Eqypt and the kids have not been seen by the father for 7 years.
A court awarded damages to the father, and the court of appeals has upheld that decision, demonstrating their lack of support for what this woman has done. These courts are to be congratulations, for taking this position and imposing fines on the woman for what she has done.
Now, how do we get her to educate the rest of the Judiciary in the United States that parental alienation should not be tolerated, that keeping a parent from their child is domestic violence, just like the Department of Justice has stated on their web site. How do we remove bias from the courts, who make incredibly biased decision that effect the lives of children each day?
There is one big difference with this Judge. She did not grow up in Family Court like many of the judges and commissioners that hear family law do. They grow their teeth in a corrupt system, and hand down the same corrupt decisions they are used to seeing during their career. This judge has a much more diverse background, including spending time in the Federal Court System. Her credentials make her well qualified to hear cases like this, as opposed to the Quasi Judges that hear typical family law issues.
Judge Battaglia - Thank you! You are to be celebrated for this decision, and please help educate others to start doing the same thing.
Posted in In the news, In the courts, Judicial | 6 Comments »
Mom kills kids while Dad fights the courts for custody to protect them
February 25th, 2008
Another bonehead Judge or Commissioner making a decision in “The best interest of the child” has kept three young children with a mother who has killed them. Nassau County Courts in New York need to investigate this issue with independent investigators to see if their contracts with the State for collection of child support put another family in harms way.
All this while the fathers of the children are fighting the courts for custody to protect these very children. This reminds me of our previous story where Mark Supanich actually took his daughter because he felt she was not safe. It resulted in his arrest by US Marshals for kidnapping - which he was eventually aquitted of. Yet, the family courts still restrict him rom seeing his daughter.
Thankfully, Mark’s daughter is still alive! His taking her from the harm he thought she was being exposed to may have saved her tender life.
These two fathers, Ricky Ward and Innocent Demesyeux were both fighting to get custody of the three children from the mother. Leatrice Brewer called 911 to report she had killed her three children. Cause of death is still under investigation. Foaming around the mouths of the childen may indicate they were drowned or poisoned.
Tragedy - Yes. Expected - of course. Our courts, driven by payments from child support agencies that pay for courts to hear their cases, incented under US Title IV-D will continue to make decision that keep custodial parents off of welfare, and loving parents out of the life of their children. It’s a sad reality of our government today.
The answer to many of these issues is simple - shared parenting. Allow both parents into the lives of the children equally, providing the oversight of another parent who can identify when harm may be coming to their child. Conviction of DIVORCE is not a reason to remove a child from the life of their children. How can it be justified?
Posted in In the news, Children's Health, where's DAD | 10 Comments »
PAS
I was with a friend at wal-mart, I saw a family taking their small children inside in a shopping cart and right there in the parking lot broke down and cried for no apparent reason, well I knew the reason, this sick, selfish woman had forever taken my dream of the happy family away from me.
http://www.divorcemag.com/articles/Parental-Alienation-Syndrome/parents-fought.html
Descriptions that are commonly used to describe severe cases of PAS are that the alienating parent is unable to "individuate" (a psychological term used when the person is unable to see the child as a separate human being from him or herself). The parent is narcissistic (self-centered) and enmeshed with the child (overly involved). Furthermore, they presume that they have a special entitlement to whatever they want. They think that there are rules in life, but only for other people, not for them.
Also, they may be called a sociopath, a person who has no moral conscience. This means that they are unable to have empathy or compassion for others. They are unable to see a situation from another person's point of view, especially their child's point of view. They don't distinguish between telling the truth and lying in the way that others do.
In spite of admonitions from judges and mental-health professionals to stop alienating, they can't. The prognosis for severely alienating parents is poor. It is unlikely that they will ever "get it". It is also unlikely that they will ever stop trying to perpetuate the alienation. It is a gut wrenching survival issue to them.
http://www.divorcemag.com/articles/Parental-Alienation-Syndrome/parents-fought.html
Descriptions that are commonly used to describe severe cases of PAS are that the alienating parent is unable to "individuate" (a psychological term used when the person is unable to see the child as a separate human being from him or herself). The parent is narcissistic (self-centered) and enmeshed with the child (overly involved). Furthermore, they presume that they have a special entitlement to whatever they want. They think that there are rules in life, but only for other people, not for them.
Also, they may be called a sociopath, a person who has no moral conscience. This means that they are unable to have empathy or compassion for others. They are unable to see a situation from another person's point of view, especially their child's point of view. They don't distinguish between telling the truth and lying in the way that others do.
In spite of admonitions from judges and mental-health professionals to stop alienating, they can't. The prognosis for severely alienating parents is poor. It is unlikely that they will ever "get it". It is also unlikely that they will ever stop trying to perpetuate the alienation. It is a gut wrenching survival issue to them.
Best Interests
The Best Interests standard has received considerable criticism by certain groups within the privacy rights and family law reform movement, particularly with regard to how it unlawfully marginalizes children from one of their parents absent a compelling government interest, and often cultivates protracted litigation. Critics argue that a higher evidentiary standard should be applied to fit parents, and that the Best Interests standard should only be applied in cases where a termination of parental rights has already occurred.
Dad’s troubles with a sociopathic ex-wife
Dad’s troubles with a sociopathic ex-wife and
tactics for child custody battles with sociopaths
If your ex is a sociopath, at best, she will be a lousy parent. At worst, she will intentionally try to damage your children. Therefore, if at all possible, it may be best to cut the sociopath out of your children’s lives.
You may want to consider offering the sociopath an incentive to walk away. Tell the sociopath to give up parental rights, and he or she won’t have to pay any child support. You may feel that you need the child support payments, but chances are that you’ll never get the money, or it will always be a struggle to get it. The money isn’t worth having the predator in your family’s life. Figure out a way to support your children without it.
Sometimes this works—there are sociopaths who care more about money than kids. But many times it doesn’t, because the sociopath considers children to be possessions. Or, the sociopath just wants to win the battle with you, and destroy you in the process. In those cases, you’ll end up in court.
Keep a journal of everything that happens. Often, the craziness is so intense that you don’t want to remember what happens. Your journal will be important when you need to tell a cohesive story of what has been going on with the sociopath, especially if you need to tell it long after events have transpired. Save every scrap of paper, every e-mail, every fax, every receipt. Develop a way of organizing the information, whether chronological, or by topic. Keep copies in a safe place.
It is best not to deal with the sociopath alone; every interaction then becomes he said/she said. Have a trusted friend or relative present during child exchanges or other interactions as much as you can. You may even want to consider tape recording and videotaping some of what goes on.
Do not allow the sociopathic parent to control information about your children. Make sure you get information directly from schools, doctors and others.
Child custody cases with sociopaths are not normal cases. The sociopath will not play by the rules. Your attorney must understand this. The sociopath will lie in court, although her performance will appear heartfelt, like she is “just concerned with the welfare of the children.” The sociopath will make outrageous accusations. The sociopath is also likely to retain an attorney who is also sociopathic. Therefore, your attorney must be up for the challenge.
Sociopaths lie. Sociopaths lie convincingly. You cannot allow unchallenged lies to become part of the court records. Once they are, they take on the aura of truth, and put you in a very bad position. Some lies and accusations may haunt you forever.
Unfortunately, many judges really do not understand what this means to the welfare of a child. Like the general public, many judges equate “sociopath” with “serial killer,” and may consequently believe that you are overreacting. So it may not be in your best interest to prove that she is a sociopath. Focus on proving the behavior.
Insist on detailed court orders. The order should not say, “parent has visitation every other weekend.” It should specify exactly which weekends, starting at what times, returning at what times, who is responsible for transporting children, who is responsible for bathing and feeding them—everything must be spelled out in detail. If there is any ambiguity, the sociopath will exploit it.
If the sociopath fails to honor the orders, do not cut her any slack. Record any violation. Call the police if necessary. Continue to document everything that happens, because you may need to go to court again. If you ever decide that you need to cut the sociopath out of the child’s life, you’ll need evidence to do it.
written by Donna Andersen on lovefraud.com
tactics for child custody battles with sociopaths
If your ex is a sociopath, at best, she will be a lousy parent. At worst, she will intentionally try to damage your children. Therefore, if at all possible, it may be best to cut the sociopath out of your children’s lives.
You may want to consider offering the sociopath an incentive to walk away. Tell the sociopath to give up parental rights, and he or she won’t have to pay any child support. You may feel that you need the child support payments, but chances are that you’ll never get the money, or it will always be a struggle to get it. The money isn’t worth having the predator in your family’s life. Figure out a way to support your children without it.
Sometimes this works—there are sociopaths who care more about money than kids. But many times it doesn’t, because the sociopath considers children to be possessions. Or, the sociopath just wants to win the battle with you, and destroy you in the process. In those cases, you’ll end up in court.
Keep a journal of everything that happens. Often, the craziness is so intense that you don’t want to remember what happens. Your journal will be important when you need to tell a cohesive story of what has been going on with the sociopath, especially if you need to tell it long after events have transpired. Save every scrap of paper, every e-mail, every fax, every receipt. Develop a way of organizing the information, whether chronological, or by topic. Keep copies in a safe place.
It is best not to deal with the sociopath alone; every interaction then becomes he said/she said. Have a trusted friend or relative present during child exchanges or other interactions as much as you can. You may even want to consider tape recording and videotaping some of what goes on.
Do not allow the sociopathic parent to control information about your children. Make sure you get information directly from schools, doctors and others.
Child custody cases with sociopaths are not normal cases. The sociopath will not play by the rules. Your attorney must understand this. The sociopath will lie in court, although her performance will appear heartfelt, like she is “just concerned with the welfare of the children.” The sociopath will make outrageous accusations. The sociopath is also likely to retain an attorney who is also sociopathic. Therefore, your attorney must be up for the challenge.
Sociopaths lie. Sociopaths lie convincingly. You cannot allow unchallenged lies to become part of the court records. Once they are, they take on the aura of truth, and put you in a very bad position. Some lies and accusations may haunt you forever.
Unfortunately, many judges really do not understand what this means to the welfare of a child. Like the general public, many judges equate “sociopath” with “serial killer,” and may consequently believe that you are overreacting. So it may not be in your best interest to prove that she is a sociopath. Focus on proving the behavior.
Insist on detailed court orders. The order should not say, “parent has visitation every other weekend.” It should specify exactly which weekends, starting at what times, returning at what times, who is responsible for transporting children, who is responsible for bathing and feeding them—everything must be spelled out in detail. If there is any ambiguity, the sociopath will exploit it.
If the sociopath fails to honor the orders, do not cut her any slack. Record any violation. Call the police if necessary. Continue to document everything that happens, because you may need to go to court again. If you ever decide that you need to cut the sociopath out of the child’s life, you’ll need evidence to do it.
written by Donna Andersen on lovefraud.com
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)