Mad Magazine's "Clueless" Game


Here's one I'll pass on this Christmas. At least in the old version Miss Scarlet was a likeable villain. Double click to enlarge so you can read the fine print.

Florida: Family therapist charged with domestic battery


Florida: Miami Beach psychiatrist linked to prostitution bust


Colorado: Psychotherapist lied about qualifications


North Dakota: Former state mental hospital psychologist pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography

Blogger's Note from the article: "Belanger often was asked to testify in court on whether convicted sex offenders were dangerous and should be confined indefinitely for psychiatric treatment. He was an expert witness in hundreds of cases


Washington: Therapist's arrest and later suicide could trigger challenges in legal cases

(Blogger's Note: Greenberg was allowed some limited practice in Alaska as well)

New York: Psychiatrist Gardner's suicide casts doubt on abuse claims


Just some representative samples of the illustrious characters the courts allow to opine about what is best for children in child custody and child abuse cases.

Ignoring boy's plight costs Alaska $1.5 million
http://www.adn.com/news/government/story/609593.html

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

Alaska's mishandling of abuse and neglect doesn't end with Office of Children's Services. The court system is also miserably failing children in divorce and custody litigation.

I've observed numerous cases where mothers spoke out about theirs and their children's abuse at the hands of a father, and all our judges can seem to accomplish, no matter how much evidence there is, is to coerce the mom into the hands of mediators, co-parenting counselors, therapists and psychologists to try to make her shut up, go away and accept 50/50 custody with the abusive father. Yup, divvy those kids up in half, just like the property. And by doing so, you make sure to insure all your cohorts that feed off the divorcing parents have a continued stream of income.

We should pass a law that prevents kids from being placed in the unsupervised care of abusers.

Oh, wait! We have. Several. The judges rarely acknowledge abuse and go happily along ignoring the laws already in place.

I used to laugh when people said they never vote for any judge's retention. I'm starting to think its not so funny. Maybe if we make a statement as voters by cleaning house we'll actually get a legal professional who understands what "best interest of the child" means. The statutes do not say "best interest of the parent", but that is what ends up happening. Divide Johnny in two to make the parents feel "equal".

I dare the judges to pack a backpack every other week and go live with a guy that yells, calls you names, demeans you, doesn't support your work or education, doesn't allow you access to medical and dental care, puts down your relatives, maybe smacks you around once in a while, locks you in a closet maybe if you speak up.... these are the kind of things kids have to live with because some judge thinks kids "need" both parents, even when one is woefully deficient.

What they need is normalcy and safety.

Thank you to the attorneys taking on the state. We need more of you willing to go to bat for kids and a lot less that are afraid to buck the status quo.

Now, when are the rest of the Alaska Family law section going to start really advocating for their clients and their children instead of pressuring them to cave in and accept a fractured, ping-ponging life for their kids.

Australia is getting it right...they have recently concluded that 50/50 custody is failing kids.
http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/shared-parenting-failing-in-australia.html
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24729425-5016679,00.html

Their Attorney-General says some shared-parenting orders that followed relationship breakdowns were "clearly not appropriate and (were) causing extreme distress for children and their parents".

You folks calling yourself custody evaluators? Let me let you in on some basics. Domestic violence perpetrators, incest perpetrators, sexual deviancy, untreated mental disorders, untreated substance abusers--these aren't candidates for father-of-the year. Take a long hard look in the mirror, and ask yourself if it is more important to insure your gravy-train of work by forcing children of hostile, if not one abusive parent, than it is to protect the children you are charged with making lifetime recommendations for.

Wooten's Custody Woes Continue
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/608332.html


The McCann-Wooten custody case is textbook for what not do in custody litigation, and now Wooten is embroiled in another one. Where does he find the time?

You'd think with the entourage McCann's attorney trots around that he could have practiced some client control on the McCann side. Given the current propensity of Alaska Superior Court judges to give really bad fathers every benefit of the doubt (to the children's detriment), it is a wonder Molly hasn't lost her child in entirety to Wooten. Her family, the Palins and the Heaths, also did just about everything on the "don't" list (www.custodyprepformoms.org) in their involvement with sister Molly's custody litigation. Disclosing abuse and poor parenting is appropriate, but reporting it to every possible entity down to the local dogcatcher in triplicate, throwing political weight around and trying to get the ex huband fired is over the top. Interesting though that when S. Palin witnessed her sister being verbally abused by the dad through a window, she did nothing...did not go inside, did not call the police...just went on to a meeting.

Although I do believe the Trooper dad should not have custody for his apparent poor parenting and abusive behaviors which were reported through numerous sources, I also believe the Heath-Palin family blew things way out of proportion and set about to destroy him, destroy his career and in the course of that damaged McCann's case.

The judge made statements exactly to that extent in the transcripts. He also pointed out, if they destroyed dad's career, Molly's kids would not benefit from child support. The Heath and Palin clan set themselves up to get slapped with a lawsuit from Wooten and Monegan for this vendetta...both appear to have lawyered up.

Cooler heads need to prevail on behalf of the children. Judge's are supposed to be that "cooler head". Judge Suddock was right to set forth some terse warnings for McGann, Wooten, the Heaths and the Palins. Everyone needs to behave, because the kids that are the subject of this circus need some modicum of privacy, a lot of stability and a whole lot more peace.

But Suddock, in his frustration, threatens to order the children into Wooten’s residential custody if the “emotional child abuse” continued. Ah yes, throw Parental Alienation Syndrome, i.e. junk science created to silence abused women and children into the mix, judge. Sudduck makes several mistakes--failing to recognize the necessity of a full analysis of "best interests of the child" (BIOC) is the primary one.

First, you don't punish the child for the parent's behavior. That does not meet the BIOC test. If McCann can't control her family members, you don't take custody away from her. That punishes the child by removing him from his primary caregiver who really can't control others if those others refuse to listen. Third parties are not the subject of this custody litigation and are not under the control of the court. And although Molly should not bad mouth the dad to the child, it is her responsibility to bring up poor parenting and abusive behaviors to the courts attention. She should not be punished for speaking out on those subjects to the court and it is simply bad public policy to allude that she shouldn't. The protection of the kids has to be paramount.

Secondly, Suddock is applying the theories of Parental Alienation Syndrome, whereby you threaten the abused mom with loss of custody if she doesn't stop trying to protect her kids from abuse. Oh judge, check your National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges benchbook. Ya ain't supposed to do that.

And lastly, forcing these warring factions to "share" children under a joint custody arrangement is insane. Let the child have a main home base with mom who has no reported history of violence or substance abuse.

That said, we don't know what the most recent custody modification agreement order was in this case. We also really don't know if it truly was an "agreement" or a coercion. Coercion is more typical of the local process for mothers--a custody evaluator with their hand in the parent's bank accounts pushes for shared custody knowing that will keep the parents embroiled in battle and the children exposed to endless meddling by the system. No normal childhood for children in custody litigation with an abuser. More money for the custody evaluator. The judge, too lazy to do the hard work himself, rubber stamps the custody evaluator's recommendation and threatens the mom that if she doesn't take the agreement she'll lose her kids to the dad. Not much of an agreement, but I'd be willing to bet the agreement was something like that and that McCann was pressured into some sort of shared custody arrangement. I'd like to hope Judge Suddock didn't take that easy way out and truly thought about what was healthy for the child.

Given dad's propensity towards violence, controlling behaviors, misuse of alcohol, and now refusal to return a child to another mother who resides out of state, supervised visitation is probably in order. But sole custody to the primary caregiver doesn't make the system money. Nope, dollars to donuts, I'd bet the judge has these two people, who couldn't agree on the color of the sky sharing custody. And the child will suffer for it.

Common sense, judge, common sense. Children need to heal and that can't be done packing a suitcase every other week between hostile camps.

The mom in Washington state says, "What I can't fathom is why this man is allowed to get away with so much." He gets away with so much because the system keeps placing father's access to their children over the children's mental and physical health, well-being and safety. When and if the system rights itself, we'll once again have stable kids in this country. Until then, we are creating future generations with pretty messed up people.


More bloggers and articles on this subject:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/158140
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/10/10018/1899
http://sharpynews.com/politics/sarah-palin/sarah-palin-news/can-a-family-court-judge-restrict-the-right-to-petition-the-government-palin-r-alaska.html
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/6420ap_ak_troopergate_trooper.html