20.7.10

Maternal Deprivation Inflicted on Battered Women and Abused Children - This is the Father Rights Movement

American Mothers Political Party

"Maternal Deprivation Abuse is featured on BMLCTA Blog in an effort to wipe out this heinous crime against mothers and children."

Maternal Deprivation, or Motherlessness, is occurring with alarming frequency due to the unethical treatment of women and children in family court. Maternal Deprivation is inflicting abuse by severing the mother-child bond. It is a form of abuse that men inflict on both the mother and children, especially men who claim they are “parentally alienated” from their children when there are complaints of abusive treatment by the father.

Maternal Deprivation occurs when men seek to keep their children from being raised by their mothers who are the children’s natural caretakers. Some men murder the mothers of their own children. Others seek to sever the maternal bonds by making false allegations of fictitious psychological syndromes in a deliberate effort to change custody and/or keep the child from having contact with their mother when there are legal proceedings. A twisted form of Maternal Deprivation is to kill the children, so that the mother will be left to suffer. Sometimes there are family annihilation murders where the father kills the children and himself (or dies by cop), but the mother is not killed because she has received protective orders and her children have not as in the case of Jessica Gonzales.

In seeking to define this form of abuse certain common elements are found in the Maternal Deprivation scenario as follows:

  • History of domestic abuse that could be physical, psychological, sexual, and/or social abuse occurring on or off again, occasionally, or chronically which could be mild, moderate, or severe, including homicidal and/or suicidal threats.
  • Legal proceedings relating to abuse
  • Hiring of “Fathers Rights” attorney
  • Use of “Hired Gun” mental health professionals to make accusations of psychological disorder against the mother and children in deliberate effort to excuse abuse and change custody or grant visitation that is contrary to safety concerns. Another name for these unethical professionals are “Whores of the Courts“
  • Raising claims of “psychological disorders” against the mother such as “Parental Alienation Syndrome” (PAS),Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome, Malicious Mother Syndrome, Lying Litigant Syndrome, Hostile Aggressive Parenting or any other mother-blaming psychological disorder that can be used by the unethical professional to re-victimize the victims.
  • Infliction of “Legal Abuse” by continually and excessively filing motions so that the mother continually has to defend herself and her child(ren) causing financial and emotional devastation.
  • Can occur in response to child support legal proceedings as retaliation.

The intent of “Maternal Deprivation” is to punish the mother and the child for revealing the abuse and to falsely claim that they are not abusive. This very commonly occurs as there are more and more “abuse-excuse”parental alienation accusing professionals who use this scientifically invalid theory over and over to achieve specific goals of the person paying them. Maternal Deprivation can also occur in response to child support legal proceedings. When occurring in this manner, Maternal Deprivation is a response to the financial demands as retaliation. Suddenly the father who had little prior involvement wants to take the kids half the time to avoid child support obligations, etc. When the men are really abusive, they ask for sole custody and demand the mother of the child pay them.

Although some people call this “Maternal Alienation”, a distinction needs to be made as the pro-pedophilia “Parental Alienation Syndrome” and the use of the word “Alienation” are most often used AGAINST battered women and abused children. There needs to be a distinction between the phony psychological syndrome and the intentional infliction of abuse on a mother and child by intentionally severing their natural bond. This distinction can best be made by NOT using the label of “Alienation” which will always be associated with the pro-pedophilia monster Doctor Richard Gardner.

Some of the characteristics of the especially heinous abusers who inflict Maternal Deprivation include but are not limited to the following:

  • Angry
  • Abusive
  • Violent
  • Coercive
  • Controlling
  • Threatening
  • Intimidating
  • Demanding
  • Domineering
  • Harassing
  • Stalking
  • Tyrannical
  • Oppressive
  • Forceful
  • Manipulative
  • Deceptive
  • Unethical
  • Un-empathetic (Lacks Empathy)
  • Entitled
  • Immature
  • Self-centered
  • Neglectful
  • Guilt inducing
  • Pushy
  • Intentionally tries to humiliate mother and/or child
  • Harsh, rigid and punitive parenting style
  • Outrage at child’s challenge of authority
  • May use force to reassert parental position
  • Dismissive of child’s feelings and negative attitudes
  • Vents rage, blames mother for “brainwashing” child and takes no responsibility
  • Challenges child’s beliefs and/or attitudes and tries to convince them otherwise
  • Inept and unempathic pursuit of child, pushes calls and letters, unannounced or embarrassing visits

There is a distinct overlap of the intimate terrorist type domestic violence abuser with the Maternal Deprivation abusers as follows:

  • Coercion and threats
  • Intimidation
  • Emotional abuse
  • Isolation
  • Minimizing, denying and blaming (Hallmarks of PAS)
  • Using children
  • Economic abuse
  • Male privilege

The people who most often engage in Maternal Deprivation Abuse are most often:

  • Abusive men
  • Vindictive second wives who don’t want to deal with the real mother of the children
  • Paternal grandparents who raised dysfunctional children (abusers)

The effects of Maternal Deprivation often cause the children to become psychotic, depressed, and sometimes suicidal or to have suicidal ideations. Another terrible reaction is when the child retaliates against the parent who accusesParental Alienation Syndrome as in a Texas case where the child killed his father. Other times when the Maternal Deprivation abuser completely takes over the will of the child by using brainwashing techniques similar to those used in prison camps where deprivation and isolation are used to force ideological changes in captives, these children often have a sort of trauma-bonding with the abuser and model their behavior. Sometimes these children will also abuse the mother in the same manner as the father. Another generation is created to carry on the abuse, and will likely do the same to their own spouse and children.

For more articles involving Maternal Deprivation:

WordPress Tags: Maternal,Deprivation,Women,Children,American,Political,Abuse,BMLCTA,Blog,effort,crime,frequency,treatment,father,Some,custody,proceedings,Sometimes,annihilation,orders,Jessica,Gonzales,scenario,History,threats,Legal,Rights,attorney,health,disorder,Another,Whores,Courts,Parental,Alienation,Syndrome,Munchausen,Proxy,Malicious,Mother,Litigant,Hostile,Aggressive,victims,Infliction,devastation,response,retaliation,theory,person,manner,demands,involvement,kids,Although,distinction,needs,word,AGAINST,Doctor,Richard,Gardner,characteristics,Angry,Abusive,Violent,Coercive,Tyrannical,Oppressive,Forceful,Manipulative,Deceptive,Unethical,Empathy,Immature,Self,Neglectful,Guilt,Pushy,Harsh,Outrage,Dismissive,feelings,beliefs,Inept,pursuit,terrorist,violence,abuser,Coercion,Intimidation,Emotional,Isolation,Economic,Male,Vindictive,Paternal,reaction,parent,Texas,times,prison,trauma,behavior,generation,spouse,Report,Failure,Protect,Crisis,Court,System,Death,Monster,Child,fraud,Cincinatti,VAWnet,Joan,Meier,Research,complaints,caretakers,allegations,syndromes,Fathers,accusations,disorders,goals,obligations,attitudes,Hallmarks,techniques,articles,pedophilia,abusers

Monkey Brain Scans with and without Mom

Courtesy American Mothers political Party

Click Link below for more troublesome information related to the experiments performed on the mother child bond with terrible consequences.

Maternal Deprivation Inflicted on Battered Women and Abused Children

Monkey Brain Scans Maternal Deprivation

Background. Monkeys who suffer maternal deprivation in childhood have behavioral abnormalities as adults. They tend to be fearful, more aggressive, less exploratory, and subject to binge drinking on exposure to alcohol. Prior studies showed that these monkeys have decreased levels of a metabolite of serotonin, a neurotransmitter in brain. We performed PET imaging of the serotonin transporter, a protein located on serotonin-containing nerve terminals. This transporter is the site of action of antidepressant drugs like fluoxetine (Prozac®). Consistent with the loss of serotonin metabolite in cerebrospinal fluid, adult monkeys who had suffered maternal deprivation (i.e., raised by peers), showed widespread loss of serotonin transporters in brain. We recently completed a study with this radioligand in human subjects with alcoholism (see references below) and will soon scan patients with depression in collaboration with Dr. Wayne Drevets.

Legend. Figure 1. Spatially normalized parametric images of serotonin transporter (SERT) binding potential (BP) fused onto the rhesus magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) template. BP images are shown in color while the template MRIs are shown with a gray scale. One peer-reared (PR) monkey and one mother-reared (MR) monkey are shown, respectively, in the upper half (two upper rows) and lower half (two lower rows) separated by a horizontal white line. For each monkey, coronal (top left), sagittal (top right) and transaxial (bottom left) slices are shown. The color scale on the left represents the range of BP-values from 0 to 2.4. RT = right.

Figure 2. Voxel-wise comparison of serotonin transporter (SERT) binding potential (BP) between peer-reared (PR) and mother-reared (MR) rhesus monkeys by SPM2. The panels show coronal (left top), sagittal (right top), and axial (left bottom) views of the rhesus MRI template represented with a gray scale, with superimposed p-values for a t-test (thresholded at p < 0.01, T = 2.62) representing an interconnected cluster of voxels with decreases of BP in the PR group. The color scale on the left represents the range of t-values from 0 to 4.8. RT = right.

Reference. 1.) M. Ichise, D.C. Vines, T. Gura, G.M. Anderson, S.J. Suomi, J.D. Higley, R.B. Innis. Effects of early life stress on [11C]DASB PET imaging of serotonin transporters in adolescent peer- and mother-reared rhesus monkeys. J. Neurosci. 26: 4638-4643, 2006. Download Reference in PDF Format (377 kb)

2) A.K. Brown, D.T. George, M. Fujita, J.-S. Liow, M. Ichise, J. Hibbeln, S. Ghose, J. Sangare, D. Hommer, and R.B. Innis. PET [11C]DASB imaging of serotonin transporters in patients with alcoholism. Alcoholism: Clin. & Exp. Res.. 31: 1-5, 2007. Download Reference in PDF

more info here: NIMH - Monkey Brain Scans With and Without Mom

WordPress Tags: Monkey,Brain,Courtesy,American,NIMH,Maternal,Deprivation,Women,Children,Background,subject,exposure,Prior,transporter,nerve,action,Prozac,Consistent,human,depression,collaboration,Wayne,Drevets,Legend,Figure,images,SERT,resonance,template,MRIs,bottom,Voxel,comparison,Reference,Ichise,Vines,Gura,Anderson,Suomi,Higley,Innis,Effects,life,DASB,Neurosci,Download,Format,Brown,George,Fujita,Hibbeln,Ghose,Sangare,Hommer,Alcoholism,Clin,Monkeys,subjects,references,panels,metabolite,serotonin,transporters,patients,rhesus,coronal,sagittal

19.7.10

Who Submitted Statements Fatherhood Funding Hearings June 2010?

WHO ELSE GOT THEIR COMMENTS IN, THEN?

The FOLLOWING individuals, some on behalf of their organizations, made “statements of record” between the time of the June 17, 2010 hearing and the cutoff for submitting statements on-line July 1, 2010. Those ‘For’ have apparent financial funding from and of course want to keep their funding- Those ‘Against’ are not given any funding- they are ‘battered mothers’ who lost their children to the Fatherhood Funding Initiatives’.

Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/hearings/hearingDetails.aspx?newsid=11217

Hearing to Review Responsible Fatherhood Programs

B-318 Rayburn House Office Building - beginning at 10:00 AM

FOCUS OF THE HEARING:

The hearing will focus on the effectiveness of Responsible Fatherhood Programs in improving the relationship between non-custodial parents and their children, as well as their ability to provide financial support. 

Click here to provide a submission for the record

You can watch our hearing live here.

Click here for a printable list of witnesses.

Hearing Advisory

Hearing to Review Responsible Fatherhood Programs

WITNESS STATEMENTS

Panel 1

The Honorable David Hansell

Panel 2

The Honorable Milton C. Lee Jr.

Ronald Mincy Ph.D.

Kirk E. Harris Ph.D.

Ralph Smith

Nathan Rauschendorfer, MSW, LICSW

Mark J. Perry Ph.D.

Statement for the Record 

For - American Humane Association

For - Illinois Council on Responsible Fatherhood

For - PAIRS Foundation

*Against - American Mothers Political Party

*Against - AngelFury.org

*Against - Anita Barnes

For - Dr. Alan Hawkins, Brigham Young University

For - California Healthy Marriages Coalition 1

For - California Healthy Marriages Coalition 2

For - Center for Family Policy & Practice

For - Center for Urban Families

For - Child Find of America Inc.

For - Community Endeavors Foundation

For - COPES, Inc.

For - Families in Crisis, Inc

For - Fatherhood and Marriage Leadership Institute

*Against - Gail Lakritz

For - Goodwill - Easter Seals Minnesota

For - Greg Eckenrode

For- Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, Health Policy Institute

*Against - Linda Battershall

For - Male Empowerment Network Inc.

*Against - Maria Zwiefka

*Against - Mothers of Lost Children - Indianapolis

For- National Fatherhood Initiative

For - National African American Drug Policy Coalition, I

*Against - National Alliance for Family Court Justice

For - National Center for Fathering

For - Nurturing Father's Program

For- Nurturing Father's Program, Study 1

For - Ohio Practitioners Network for Fathers and Families

For - Dr. Philip Cowan, Supporting Father Involvement Project

* Against - Randi James

For - Relationship Research Foundation, Inc.

For - Renovando Familias

*Against - Rights for Mother’s Group

For - Ruth Whipple

For - Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project

For - Technical College System of Georgia- Fatherhood Program

For - Teen-Aid, Inc.

For- Texas Coalition for Healthy Families

For - Dr. Jennifer Baker, The School of Professional Psychology at Forest Institute

For - VA EQUAL Parents

For - VOW Family Champions

For - Warren County Center for the Family

For - YouandMe.We

For - ICF International

For - Northwest Family Services

For - The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy

For - Patty Howell, California Healthy Marriages Coalition

WordPress Tags: June,individuals,Against,children,status,Subcommittee,Income,Support,Review,Responsible,Rayburn,House,Office,OCUS,relationship,Click,submission,Advisory,Panel,Honorable,David,Hansell,Milton,Ronald,Mincy,Kirk,Harris,Ralph,Smith,Nathan,Rauschendorfer,LICSW,Mark,Perry,Statement,Record,American,Humane,Association,Illinois,Council,Foundation,Political,AngelFury,Anita,Barnes,Alan,Hawkins,Brigham,Young,California,Healthy,Coalition,Center,Policy,Practice,Urban,Child,Find,America,Endeavors,Crisis,Marriage,Leadership,Institute,Gail,Lakritz,Goodwill,Easter,Minnesota,Greg,Eckenrode,Joint,Economic,Health,Linda,Battershall,Male,Empowerment,Network,Maria,Zwiefka,Lost,Indianapolis,National,Initiative,African,Drug,Alliance,Court,Justice,Father,Program,Study,Ohio,Practitioners,Philip,Cowan,Involvement,Project,Randi,James,Research,Renovando,Familias,Rights,Mother,Group,Ruth,Whipple,Sacramento,Technical,College,System,Georgia,Texas,Jennifer,Baker,School,Professional,Psychology,Forest,EQUAL,Parents,Warren,YouandMe,International,Northwest,Services,Campaign,Prevent,Pregnancy,Howell,Statements,organizations,Marriages,Fathers

Protective Mothers Were Right: Courts Are Biased Against Them

Article Courtesy: AMPP-American Mothers Political Party

http://americanmotherspoliticalparty.org/ampp-article-library-family-court-custody-abuse-dv

Confirmed: Protective Mothers Were Right Courts ARE Biased Against Mothers

By Barry Goldstein

For many years, protective mothers have complained about a broken custody court system giving custody to abusive fathers. The courts dismissed the complaints by saying they came from disgruntled litigants. Now, a new book based on multi-disciplinary research has confirmed that common mistakes in the custody courts have resulted in thousands of children being forced to live with abusers. Domestic Violence, Abuse and Child Custody: Legal Strategies and Policy Issues, co-edited by Dr. Mo Therese Hannah and Barry Goldstein includes chapters by over 25 of the leading experts in domestic violence and custody in the U.S. and Canada including judges, lawyers, psychiatrists, psychologists, sociologists, journalists and domestic violence advocates. Although the writers come from different disciplines and professional experience, there is remarkable agreement that the courts’ failure to use up-to-date research is responsible for placing children at risk and undermining laws designed to prevent domestic violence.

The custody court system developed practices to respond to domestic violence allegations over thirty years ago at a time when there was no research. The courts relied on popular assumptions such as the belief domestic violence was caused by mental illness, substance abuse and the victims’ behavior. They assumed domestic violence only involved physical abuse and children were unaffected unless directly assaulted. All of these and many other assumptions relied on by the courts have proven wrong, but the court continues to use outdated and discredited practices. Even worse, after hearing misinformation constantly repeated for over thirty years the myths and stereotypes are so deeply ingrained that courts often don’t believe accurate information based upon up-to-date research because it is so different from what they have heard repeated their entire professional careers. Hopefully by putting all the research together in one volume, the book will force the courts to take a fresh look at practices that have worked so poorly for children.

Most cases are settled more or less amicably. The problem is with the 3.8% of contested custody cases that continue to trial and usually far beyond. The courts think of these as "high conflict" cases and literally they are, but 90% of these cases involve abusive fathers which is why they can’t be settled. Male supremacist groups have developed an unspeakably cruel tactic of encouraging abusers to go after the children as a way to pressure the mother to return, punish her for leaving and avoid child support. As a result, the courts repeatedly see cases in which fathers who had little involvement with the children before the separation suddenly seeking custody, but the court system has been slow to recognize the tactic or respond to it. Judges have constantly been told that children do better with both parents in their lives but not that this is untrue if one of the parents is abusive.

In the typical case, the mother is the primary parent. She complains about the father’s abuse and he counters by claiming alienation. Primary attachment refers to the parent who does most of the child care in the first couple of years of a child’s life. If the child is separated from their primary attachment figure, the child is more likely to commit suicide, suffer depression, have low self-esteem and other harmful attributes. Children who witness domestic violence are more likely to engage in a wide range of dysfunctional behaviors when they are older and their developmental progress is interfered with. On the other hand, it is common even in intact families for parents to make negative statements about the other parent and there is no research that alienation causes long-term harm to children.

At the same time, in our still sexist society, mothers continue to do most of the child care so claims of primary attachment are virtually always true and often not contested by the father. Contrary to popular myths, women rarely make false allegations of abuse so that at least 98% of a mother’s allegations of abuse in custody cases are accurate. Fathers on the other hand, are 16 times more likely to make false allegations in contested custody cases than mothers. This is not because women are so much more honest, but that most fathers in custody cases are abusers using the children to maintain control of their ex-partner and they seem to believe they are entitled to use any tactics to win custody.

Accordingly most allegations of alienation by fathers in custody cases are false. In other words the allegations by the mothers have the most consequences for the children and are most likely to be true, but the courts are paying more attention to the allegations by the fathers that are likely to be false and of little consequence to the children.

The book can be used by mothers and their attorneys to challenge the common mistakes made in domestic violence cases. One of the big problems is that because of the original mistaken assumption that domestic violence is caused by mental health or substance abuse issues, the courts have relied on mental health professionals who have little or no understanding or training in domestic violence. They rarely have any familiarity with up-to-date research and instead frequently rely on myths and stereotypes.

Although professional ethics require psychologists and psychiatrists to consult with an expert if they are handling a case involving an issue in which they lack expertise, evaluators and other court professionals routinely ignore this requirement by pretending they have expertise even with only an hour or two of training.

Evaluators often rely on psychological tests to create the illusion of a scientific basis for their opinions. These tests were developed for a population very different from the parents seen in custody court. When advocates for mothers tell courts that most abusers tend to be manipulative or mothers rarely make deliberately false allegations they respond by saying they are judging THIS case and cannot rely on probabilities. Under the best of circumstances the psychological tests are accurate between 55-65% of the time. So what happens if the mother is part of the 35-45% for which it is not accurate? Even worse factors like domestic violence or the pressure of going through a contested custody case reduce the accuracy significantly.

Furthermore, many of the tests are gender biased and criticize women but not men for the same responses. Of course the evaluators rarely inform courts of this information and most attorneys don’t know enough to raise these issues.

A critical problem that does not receive the attention it deserves is that judges and the professionals they rely on repeatedly fail to recognize domestic violence because they don’t know what to look for. Judge Mike Brigner wrote a chapter for the book in which he discusses his training of judges about domestic violence. They constantly ask him what to do about women who are lying. When he asks what they mean they refer to women who return to their abuser, seek protective orders, but don’t follow-up or don’t have police or medical reports after alleged assaults. In reality battered mothers do all these things for safety and other good reasons, but when ignorant professionals use this to discredit allegations of abuse, they have no chance to get it right.

Another common example is when judges, lawyers or evaluators watch fathers interact with the children. If the children show no fear, it convinces these professionals that the abuse allegations must be false. What the children understand is that their father would never hurt them in front of witnesses, especially someone he is trying to impress and in fact they could be punished if they showed fear. At the same time the mental health professionals are discrediting valid allegations based on information that is not probative, they tend to look only for physical abuse and miss many other domestic violence tactics that demonstrate the control and coercion he practices.

The mistaken practices give the courts little chance to recognize the father’s abuse, but it is even worse than that. The mental health professionals often use their failure to recognize domestic violence as an excuse to pathologize the mother. She is often called delusional or paranoid because she believes something they missed. This or the assumption she is deliberately trying to interfere with the father’s relationship with the children often results in extreme outcomes in which the mother is given supervised or no visitation based on the court’s mistakes.

In her chapter on retaliation and manipulation, Joan Zorza says that in light of the frequency in which courts fail to recognize domestic violence they should avoid retaliating or penalizing mothers who continue to believe the allegations of abuse after the court finds against them. This recommendation can be used to ask courts to modify orders with extreme results when there is no proof the mother is unsafe.

Some child protective agencies have participated in programs in which they work with the local domestic violence agency. The train each other and when there is a case with possible domestic violence issues, the child protective caseworkers consult with domestic violence advocates. This helps them recognize and respond more appropriately to domestic violence cases. This should be considered best practices and needs to be expanded to the custody courts.

The custody courts do a particularly bad job of responding to allegations of sexual abuse. By the time a child reaches the age of 18, one-third of the girls and one-sixth of the boys have been sexually abused. The myth is that rape and sexual abuse are mostly committed by strangers but in fact 83% of the time it is someone they know, often the father. Courts don’t want to believe a father could do something so heinous especially if he is successful in other parts of his life. Accordingly a very high percentage of sexual abuse allegations result in custody to the alleged abuser.

One of the problems is that sexual abuse of children is very hard to prove. Often there is no physical evidence particularly if the child does not reveal it immediately. Younger children may not have the language to describe what was done to them and older children may have been threatened or don’t want someone they love to get in trouble. Few of the evaluators relied on by courts have expertise in child sexual abuse. What is a mother supposed to do when the child’s behavior or other clues suggest sexual abuse? If she does nothing she is placing the safety and well-being of her child at risk, but if she asks for an investigation she can lose custody.

We have seen many cases in which a child acts out because the father violated the child’s boundaries such as by sleeping with the child. The father did not inappropriately touch the child. The issue could easily be handled by instructing the father to change his routine and it would be totally safe for the father to continue with normal visitation. This would be a win-win situation, but instead courts and the unqualified professionals they rely on assume the mother is making deliberately false allegations and so separate the child from their primary attachment figure and deny the child a relationship with her.

The book also takes on Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) which is one of the major reasons courts get so many cases wrong. Dr. Paul Fink past president of the American Psychiatric Association wrote a chapter about PAS and Nancy Erickson who is an attorney and law professor who went back to school to become a psychologist wrote about how to challenge false allegations of PAS. Richard Gardner concocted PAS based on his belief system which included many statements to the effect that sex between adults and children is appropriate. Many of his quotations are in the chapter and can be cited to judges who presumably will not want to be associated with such behavior.

There is no scientific basis to PAS and it is not recognized by any reputable professional organization. It is based on the myth that most allegations of abuse are false. Psychologists are starting to lose their licenses for using PAS because they are in effect diagnosing something that does not exist. As PAS has become more discredited, abusers and the professionals they pay to support them have started using PAS by other names such as parental alienation or just alienation. It the idea is to assume allegations of abuse must be wrong or to justify giving custody to the alleged abuser and supervised or no visitation to the protective mothers they are using the discredited PAS by another name.

Professor Garland Waller wrote a chapter about the failure of the media to cover the crisis in the custody court system. She writes about the tipping point when enough information reaches the public so that they will no longer tolerate frequent court mistakes that place children in jeopardy. We believe this book can move us towards the tipping point and hope those committed to ending the injustice in the custody court system will consider some of the following actions to help us reach the tipping point.

1. Inform the courts in your area about this book. They can find additional information atwww.domesticviolenceabuseandchildcustody.com Ask the courts to use the research in the book to train judges and other court personnel and to reform practices that the research demonstrates are working poorly for children.

2. Contact your local media to cover the crisis in the custody court system by using the research in the book to understand the harm the courts are doing to children. If you want to seek publicity for your case use the book to show the context and national problem and then your case illustrates how it played out in a local case. When there are local domestic violence stories bring the information in the book to the reporters.

3. If you have local colleges, universities or law schools in the area, ask them to incorporate the research from the book into the curriculum and to sponsor programs about the custody courts based on this research.

4. Ask local and college libraries to obtain a copy of the book. This would be particularly helpful for protective mothers who cannot afford to purchase the book.

5. Cite the book in court cases and appeals. Use the research to challenge unqualified evaluators and other court professionals and to obtain experts who can put this research into evidence.

6. Use the book to inform legislators of the problems in the court. Ask them to hold hearings and sponsor legislation to protect children and prevent abuse. We will soon have legislative proposals available based on the research in the book.

7. Work together with domestic violence agencies, women’s groups and anyone else sympathetic to the cause.

8. Come up with your own ideas. We cannot tolerate a system that continues to place children in jeopardy because they fail to use the up-to-date research now available.

See More here: http://americanmotherspoliticalparty.org/ampp-article-library-family-court-custody-abuse-dv/1-research-articles-family-court-bias-custody-abuse-battered-moms

WordPress Tags: Protective,Courts,Against,Article,Courtesy,AMPP,American,Political,Barry,Goldstein,custody,system,disciplinary,children,Domestic,Violence,Abuse,Child,Legal,Policy,Therese,Hannah,Canada,judges,journalists,Although,agreement,failure,belief,substance,victims,behavior,misinformation,myths,Most,cases,Male,tactic,result,involvement,separation,parent,father,alienation,Primary,attachment,life,depression,self,sexist,Contrary,times,words,consequences,attention,consequence,problems,assumption,health,ethics,expertise,requirement,Evaluators,basis,population,Under,accuracy,gender,Judge,Mike,Brigner,chapter,abuser,orders,reports,Another,example,fact,coercion,relationship,results,retaliation,manipulation,Joan,Zorza,frequency,recommendation,Some,agency,needs,myth,percentage,Often,Younger,language,investigation,boundaries,situation,Parental,Syndrome,Paul,Fink,president,Psychiatric,Association,Nancy,Erickson,attorney,professor,Richard,Gardner,Many,organization,Psychologists,Garland,Waller,crisis,jeopardy,injustice,actions,Inform,area,personnel,Contact,context,reporters,curriculum,college,Cite,Work,Come,ideas,library,bias,fathers,complaints,Strategies,chapters,lawyers,psychiatrists,allegations,assumptions,careers,statements,opinions,factors,responses,outcomes,agencies,strangers,clues,quotations,colleges,proposals,articles,abusers,parents,women,attorneys,visitation,sexual

AMPP - American Mothers Political Party

www.AmericanMothersPoliticalParty.org

Mothers Seeking Justice & Accountability

AMPP is a social movement seeking justice and accountability within the family court system which includes DHHS/CPS, psychologists and other so called experts.

We as mothers demand CITIZENSHIP and our Rights to our Children. We demand that our children not be used as pawns by our abuser in a custody dispute. We demand that Mothers and Children be equally protected against court ordered visitation with an abuser. We demand that Mothers and Children be given the same rights, privileges and voice that the abuser gets in family courts!

We demand that our President take action now as can no longer afford to be silent and we won’t. We demand the same "rights and freedoms" to which all humans are entitled. Behind the closed doors of the dirty little secret of the family court system, thousands of women each year lose child custody to violent men who beat and abuse Mothers and Children. Family courts are not family-friendly and betray the best interests of the child. Until Mothers and Children's voices are heard we will never shut up, give up or go away!

WordPress Tags: American,Political,Live,Justice,AMPP,movement,system,DHHS,CITIZENSHIP,Rights,Children,abuser,custody,privileges,courts,President,action,Behind,interests,Childrens,humans,doors

American Mothers Political Party - is now Live!

We Are Now Live!!!www.AmericanMothersPoliticalParty.org

Mothers Seeking Justice & Accountability

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxRm7_faGto&hl=en_US&fs=1]

AMPP is a social movement seeking justice and accountability within the family court system which includes DHHS/CPS, psychologists and other so called experts.

We as mothers demand CITIZENSHIP and our Rights to our Children. We demand that our children not be used as pawns by our abuser in a custody dispute. We demand that Mothers and Children be equally protected against court ordered visitation with an abuser. We demand that Mothers and Children be given the same rights, privileges and voice that the abuser gets in family courts!

We demand that our President take action now as can no longer afford to be silent and we won’t. We demand the same "rights and freedoms" to which all humans are entitled. Behind the closed doors of the dirty little secret of the family court system, thousands of women each year lose child custody to violent men who beat and abuse Mothers and Children. Family courts are not family-friendly and betray the best interests of the child. Until Mothers and Childrens voices are heard we will never shut up, give up or go away!

WordPress Tags: American,Political,Live,Justice,AMPP,movement,system,DHHS,CITIZENSHIP,Rights,Children,abuser,custody,privileges,courts,President,action,Behind,interests,Childrens,humans,doors

NCADV - Nat'l Dialogue on Family Court Crisis 7/20 noon

 

The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence presents...

A National Dialogue:

The Family Law Courts Crisis

Tuesday, July 20, 2010**

12:00pm-1:00pm EST

Across the nation, protective parents have been reporting, at alarming rates, the injustices they suffer at the hands of state family courts. Battered mothers are at particular risk as they work tirelessly to protect their children from abusive fathers who use the family court system to continue to abuse, harass, impoverish, punish, stalk and destroy their families.

Join NCADV, and legal and policy experts for a discussion about the crisis in our nation’s family courts. The dialogue will focus on organizational efforts to address this tragedy, and give recommendations for handling cases and courts in your* own community.

Host

Rita Smith, Executive Director, National Coalition Against Domestic Violence

Presenters

Special address by the Office on Violence Against Women, U.S. Department of Justice

Barry Goldstein, Esq. - Mr. Goldstein is a New York State attorney, author, teacher, advocate for battered women, and expert on abuser’s legal tactics. He is the author of the 2002 book Scared to Leave, Afraid to Stay: Paths From Family Violence to Safety. Mr. Goldstein has practiced law for 24 years and served on the board of directors of the local battered women's shelter for 14 years. For several years, Mr. Goldstein has worked with the Community Change Project of the Volunteer Counseling Service teaching domestic violence classes for men convicted of abusing their partners. He is co-editor of the recently published book Domestic Violence, Abuse, and Child Custody: Legal Strategies and Policy Issues.

Mo Hannah, Ph.D., Professor of Psychology and Licensed Psychologist, Siena College - Dr. Hannah practices clinical psychology specializing in couples’ therapy. Dr. Hannah’s interest in abusive dynamics and their impact on interpersonal relationships and in forensic psychology led her to plan and chair the first annual Battered Mothers Custody Conference (BMCC), held in January 2004. At this conference, many of the nation's leading attorneys, batterers' intervention experts, authors, and advocates working in the area of battered mothers custody issues gather to present their cutting-edge knowledge and experience. Dr. Hannah has published many books and produced numerous articles and presentations on topics related to relational psychology, including co-editing her most recent book: Domestic Violence, Abuse, and Child Custody: Legal Strategies and Policy Issues.

Vivian Huelgo, Esq., Chief Counsel, Commission on Domestic Violence of the American Bar Association - Ms. Huelgo leads the development and implementation of initiatives designed to assist lawyers representing victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking through continuing legal education programs; provision of legal technical assistance; publication of legal manuals, treatises and texts; and promotion of protective state and federal legislation. She is the former Director of the Community Law Project of Sanctuary for Families’ Center for Battered Women’s Legal Services. There, she helped craft legislative advocacy efforts, coordinated pro bono on family law matters and helped oversee law student advocacy programs in family court.

Joan Meier, Esq., Executive Director, Domestic Violence Legal Appeals and Empowerment Project - For over 20 years, Ms. Meier has litigated hundreds of domestic violence cases at both the trial and appellate court levels. She has engaged in national and local domestic violence advocacy efforts in collaboration with the domestic violence community; consulted for numerous organizations including the Department of Justice and American Bar Association; and delivers regular trainings and workshops for lawyers, judges, advocates, and mental health professionals.

Kathleen Russell, Owner and Founder, Kathleen Russell Consulting - Kathleen serves as the lead strategist on all KRC projects and brings more than eighteen years of experience in strategic communications, government relations, grassroots organizing and campaign consulting to

the helm of KRC. In 2008, she co-directed and produced the award-winning film Family Court Crisis: Our Children At Risk for the Center for Judicial Excellence (CJE). She coordinates CJE’s advocacy and media relations work in Sacramento and Washington, DC.

REGISTER for the call.

You will receive a confirmation email once your information has been processed. For questions, email legal@ncadv.org .

*The target audience for this call is legal and policy practitioners, domestic violence or child abuse service providers, and survivors of domestic violence or the family court system.

**This call will be recorded. Replay dates are forthcoming.

Irene Weiser

StopFamilyViolence.org

331 W. 57th St #518

New York, NY 10019

607-539-6856

iw@stopfamilyviolence.org

WordPress Tags: NCADV,Dialogue,Court,Crisis,noon,National,Coalition,Against,Domestic,Violence,Courts,Across,nation,rates,children,system,Join,policy,discussion,efforts,tragedy,cases,Host,Rita,Smith,Executive,Director,Presenters,Special,Office,Women,Department,Justice,Barry,Goldstein,York,State,attorney,author,teacher,abuser,Leave,Afraid,Stay,From,Change,Project,Volunteer,Service,classes,partners,Abuse,Child,Custody,Legal,Hannah,Professor,Psychology,Psychologist,Siena,College,therapy,impact,relationships,Conference,BMCC,January,intervention,area,knowledge,Vivian,Huelgo,Chief,Counsel,Commission,American,Association,development,implementation,victims,education,provision,assistance,publication,promotion,Sanctuary,Center,Services,advocacy,student,Joan,Meier,Empowerment,collaboration,judges,health,Russell,Owner,Founder,communications,government,grassroots,helm,Risk,Judicial,Excellence,Sacramento,Washington,REGISTER,confirmation,audience,Replay,Irene,Weiser,StopFamilyViolence,injustices,fathers,recommendations,Paths,directors,Strategies,authors,articles,presentations,topics,lawyers,treatises,texts,organizations,providers