Over the years, hundreds of women have contacted National Organization for Women chapters looking for assistance in their efforts to protect minor children in family court custody proceedings. Often these women have been accused of a phony psychiatric condition, termed Parental Alienation Disorder (PAD). The “disorder” has been proposed by so-called father’s rights (men’s custody) activists to be added to the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostics and Statistics Manual – V to give it more legitimacy than it currently has — or should have — in court.
This accusation is made by abusive ex-husbands and is intended to cause the courts to disregard mothers’ claims of fathers’ physical or sexual abuse in an effort to gain the fathers’ full or joint custody. NOW Foundation is concerned that because of the alienation accusation known batterers and child abusers have been awarded custody; the numbers of cases involving dads in custody disputes abusing and murdering children is appalling. (See link below)
The notion of a parental alienation in custody disputes was advanced by the late Dr. Richard Gardner who committed suicide in 2003. The alienation accusation has been embraced by men’s custody activists as an effective weapon to undermine mothers’ bid for legal custody of minor children. Many advocates on behalf of mothers believe that batterers, child abusers and pedophiles populate these men’s custody networks. There have been numerous instances of documented batterers and child abusers being awarded custody by biased family court judges.
NOW Foundation has sent a letter recently to the American Psychiatric Association noting that publications by the American Bar Association and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges have concluded proposed “alienation disorder” is inadmissible in court and has been discredited by the scientific community. Accordingly, family court judges, lawyers and other court personnel should take action against the use of the alienation accusation in cases before them. Read NOW Foundation’s letter (PDF) and for more information on family court issues, go to the family law website.
More information on fathers and ex-partners involved in child custody or child support matters who have killed children, murdered mothers and/or committed suicide, please visit this website.
From the NOW Foundation
The next Supreme Court nominee should be a woman. Agree or disagree?
Agreed! And not just any woman — we need a justice who understands that women’s rights are human rights, and that our fundamental freedoms cannot legitimately be taken away by any legislature. While both men and women should have equal respect, women and men do not have the same bodies. We are different genders that need to be represented as such while respecting our human rights to be free to make our own decisions, live without a guardian, and more.
Out of 111 Supreme Court justices in history, only three have been women. Today, only two of the nine Supreme Court justices are women! In fact, women make up less than one-quarter of federal and well under one-third of state-level judgeships — despite the fact that nationally, women make up 48 percent of law school graduates.
At 17 percent of Congress, less than 20 percent of state governorships, and two out of nine Supreme Court justices, women are nowhere near to equal representation. How long will it take for women to see themselves represented in equitable proportion on our nation’s highest court?
We need equal for all women everywhere - in Congress, state governorships and legislatures and on the Supreme Court — where we belong. What we really need is to have government fully be equal by having one male and one female senator from each state and each district should have one man and one women as a representative. Only then can women have any chance of having their rights both represented and protected.
President Obama has advocated for women to have reservation in India so that women’s rights can be represented in Parliament there. What about representation for women here in the United States? Only two women on the Supreme Court does not represent that about half of the population of the United States are women. Contact President Obama and tell him that the United States has both men and women, and women need to be represented as such in judicial, legislative and executive positions.
The Dr. Phil Show worked with Kathleen Russell on behalf of the Center for Judicial Excellence to develop a compelling show that exposes the systemic breakdown of our nation’s family courts. The tragic story of a young mother named Katie Tagle sets the stage for a deeper conversation about the divorce courts’ routine failures to protect children. Kathleen Russell and Marin family law attorney Barbara Kauffman appear as experts in the 2nd half of the show.
The taping of this show represents an amazing turn of events in the media’s coverage of this growing national crisis. Don’t miss it!
Parental Alienation Awareness Day represents the epitome of disease mongering and propaganda. Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) is the faux mental illness created by abuse denier and pedophile sympathizer Richard Gardner. The promoters of Parental Alienation Awareness Day might as well be promoting “Family Sex Day” as the pedophile communities love this fake mental illness for pathologizing and criminalizing anyone who dares to protect a child from any type of abuse. Claiming a child has Parental Alienation patholizes children for disclosing abuse implying that the victim is a mentally ill and/or a liar. The sexual abusers benefit the most as sexual abuse is so difficult to prove as there is frequently no physical evidence and it is embarrassing for the victims to disclose. The Australian Shared Parenting Debate has published an article listing known pedophile organizations who support Parental Alienation theories:
- Reform Sex Offender Laws Campaign
- SOhopeful International
From Australian Shared Parenting Law Debate – Thursday, April 8, 2010
If a group of pedophiles and abusers named their cause, “Abusers Awareness Day,” no one would help champion their goals.
There needs to be a little bit of propaganda to blanket their true goals.
Richard Gardner gave them that blanket by promoting ideas that society should punish those to speak against abuse as, “sick” and “requiring therapy”. He coined the term, “Parental Alienation Syndrome”. Appalled by the pro-pedophile material that was circulated on a large scale, researchers on child abuse and family violence worked even harder to debunk this content and for many years it has been frequently rejected by the American Psychology Association as a Syndrome. Regardless of the theory being discredited, it has still been used on court cases all over the world including a case where it was a defense for a brutal murder of a mother. Some backyard psychologists have even held workshops about, “Maternal Gate-keeping” and others have promoted theories such as, “Malicious Mother Syndrome.”
Whilst in most debates, we all amicably prefer to keep things gender neutral apart from where one gender is being targeted in a way no different to the apartheid in Africa, the slavery towards African Americans and of course the stolen generation of aboriginal children. Whilst the use of parental alienation syndrome appears to be one of those gender neutral terms, the literature and statistics of court cases where the reversal of custody cases involving abuse allegations suggests that the number one target is the mother. Enmeshed with child abuse cases are often intimate partner terrorism, mostly perpetrated by fathers and a deep lack of community support towards mothers who try against many odds to protect their children from further abuse and exposure to violence. The superficial surface of parent alienation suggests that their goal is to stop “false accusers” despite statistics stating over and over again that false accusers are a minority of cases and in fact most of the false allegations are use by fathers. Empirical research has defined this as part of a series of behaviors that follow the intervention of a intimate partner terrorism relationship. This is where the real problem lies, with little support thanks to the erosion of domestic violence and child protection services, mothers experiencing false accusations towards them have drifted unknowingly towards the movement that is solely there to continue these abuses against her and the children.
Supporters of this theory have even gone as far as promoting it as a form of child abuse and sadly many court cases involving child abuse and intimate partner terrorism with evidence are treated as alienation resulting with the child being transferred to the abuser. The influence of this theory has been so great that other aspects of the system where the perpetrator could be convicted are thwarted.
Whilst Parental Alienation attracts pedophile lobbyists, batterers and abusers, they also attract mistaken victims. These victims are in turn used to become the front of the organisations eliminating the promotion of any true need for children and victims of violence and appear as though they are gender inclusive. The laws, case statistics and culture of the courts are a true reflection of the backyard psych therapists and abuse excuser’s causes. Some organisations are obvious in their agenda, whilst others confuse the situation.
Given the clusters of abusers that are attracted to the cause, it is important to encourage police abuse units to investigate the members of these groups as they do with pedophile rings. This could help stop abuse occurring. Other things that can be done is reporting professionals who use the theory as a form of diagnosis to psychologist registers, law bars and social worker accreditation organisations. The use of junk science destroys the credibility of professionals who do not practice backyard therapies and such reports are welcomed to peak bodies. By alerting other parents of the dangers of these organisations, parents can then become aware of the potential risks they could expose the children to by engaging with potential abusers activities and prevent abuse from occurring.
Here is a list of links from confirmed pedophile organisations that promote Parent Alienation:
What is Marin County, California Family Court hiding? After many years of complaints by family court victims, an audit has been ordered focusing on the use and potential misuse of court-appointed specialists, such as mediators, investigators and therapists, in family-law disputes. Members of the state Joint Legislative Audit Committee voted unanimously last year to approve the audit with the encouragement of state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco.
“Despite the fact that our statutes clearly give our office access to the individuals and records we are now seeking and make it a misdemeanor for the courts to fail or refuse to grant us access, it is now March 2010 and the courts are still refusing to cooperate,” Sharon Reilly, chief legal counsel to California State Auditor Elaine Howle, wrote in a March 18 letter to Robert Buckley, managing attorney of the Judicial Council of California. The state auditor’s office has notified superior courts in Marin and Sacramento counties it will seek a court order to gain access to information needed to conduct an audit of the family court system – unless the courts guarantee by Monday that they will comply.
Kathleen Russell of the Center for Judicial Excellence, a Marin watchdog organization, said, “This is indicative of the lack of transparency at the Marin County courthouse. In our four years of attempting to get basic information from the court and meet with them and collaborate with them they have always had a stonewall and been very territorial about information that is not confidential. That is why there is such a need for this audit.”
Glenn Sacks the National Executive Director of Fathers & Families has been known to target victims of abuse, such as the Collins family, and instigate mob mentality with his misinformation. Now he has sent a personal message to Parenting News Network™:
From: Glenn Sacks
Date: Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 5:03 PM
Subject: for Trish Wilson
From: Glenn Sacks
Subject: for Trish Wilson
Trish–Nice to see you back in the family law business. As for “Maryland delegates have been lobbied hard by fathers’ and men’s rights activists, most notably Glenn Sacks and Fathers And Families,” as a mere point of fact, this is untrue–we didn’t do anything on the Maryland bill. Simmons’ op-ed makes sense to me, and we probably should have done something, but there are only so many hours in a day and sometimes things get missed.
How is your son–is he in college now?
Glenn Sacks, MA
National Executive Director,
Fathers & Families
Parenting News Network™ found that Glenn Sacks seems to be splitting hairs as the following information is on Fathers & Families website:
Fathers & Families’ Holstein Discusses DV Restraining Order Bill on Ron Smith Show in Baltimore
March 16th, 2009 by Glenn Sacks, MA, Executive Director
Fathers & Families‘ Dr. Ned Holstein discussed a bill regarding domestic violence restraining orders on The Ron Smith Show on WBAL AM 1090 in Baltimore on Wednesday.
A recent vote in the Maryland House of Delegates upheld by a narrow margin a law that keeps recipients of Temporary Restraining Orders in a computer registry even though a judge has dismissed or denied the TRO.
Holstein explained the effects of the law–people who had been cleared are being denied jobs and/or housing because they’re being kept in the computer registry.
From the Baltimore Sun’s Delegate shares personal story of domestic abuse (3/11/09):
Delegate Luiz R.S. Simmons, a Montgomery County Democrat and trial attorney, sponsored the bill.
He said that when temporary protective orders, which judge’s grant after hearing only from the accuser, don’t materialize as final orders, it is only fair to wipe away the public record of the court hearings.
“The question before the House is: Innocent until proven guilty – do we believe in it?” Simmons said.
Simmons argued that the civil orders are “the equivalent of criminal records” and can be viewed by potential employers and landlords. Even if removed from public view, Simmons said, police officers and courts would have maintained access to the records. He said it was time for lawmakers to address the problem of false accusations of domestic violence.
Of the more than 17,000 temporary protective orders granted last year in Maryland, about 9,000 were made final, said Del. Joseph F. Vallario, a Democrat representing Calvert and Prince George’s counties and a proponent of Simmons’ bill.
Simmons was 100% correct but the delegates were apparently swayed by Delegate Cheryl D. Glenn’s emotional appeal based on abuse she claimed she suffered at the hands of her deceased husband 30 years ago.
For additional information on the Bill, see the Washington Post’s Md. Domestic Violence Bill Splits Female Lawmakers (3/15/09). Notice how the article focuses on female legislators’ apparent hesitance to break with their feminist sisters, as opposed to recognizing the appalling number of innocent men who are victimized by the current restraining order system.
Glenn Sacks and Fathers & Families do appear to have asked people to lobby Maryland Delegate Luiz Simmons regarding legislation that relates to restraining orders in 2009. They may not have posted a new message in 2010, but the old message was still there letting batterers know who they should contact in Maryland’s legislature regarding domestic violence legislation.
This is just one more example of Glenn Sacks misleading communications. With this proof of the actions of the “Abuser’s Lobby” at work, please be sure to contact your legislators and let them know that domestic violence and child abuse are serious problems and that groups like Fathers and Families have an agenda to cover up abuse and enforce patriarchal domination on women and children.
Dean Click has been successful at hunting down and capturing Wendy Hill for the crime of raising her own child. Dean Click manipulated the court system taking custody of Jessica Click-Hill from her mother over 14 years ago despite Jessica’s complaints. California courts have been notorious for awarding custody to men whose children complain of abuse, basing custody decisions on hypothetical theories such as “Parental Alienation Syndrome” made up by pedophile sympathizing Dr. Richard Gardner. After continued complaints by her daughter, Wendy Hill then disobeyed a custody order in an effort to protect her child. Wendy Hill has been arrested after being tracked down like an animal. Thankfully, Jessica is able to finally speak for herself. It’s time that her complaints are listened to. Jessica is saying that she does not want to see Dean Click and that he molested her. She has changed her name and is still in hiding, afraid that her father “is going to find me and show up on my doorstep.”
Dean Click has maligned both Wendy Hill and Jessica Click-Hill claiming that it is Jessica that suffers from mental illness and that she has been brainwashed by her mother. Such claims are impossible to prove and are subjective and self-serving. This story of Wendy Hill protecting her child is very similar to another California case where a mother named Joyce Murphy fled with her daughter to protect her. Henry Parson, Joyce Murphy’s ex-husband, also claimed to be falsely accused and that Joyce too had “Parental Alienation Syndrome.” Joyce and her daughter were also hunted down and captured. Unfortunately, her daughter was under 18 and she lost custody of her for 6 years. Had Henry Parson not been caught on video molesting children, to this day he would still be saying that he was falsely accused and that Joyce was mentally ill with Parental Alienation Syndrome.
Once a mother is accused of being an “alienator” she is usually accused of being dangerous to the child and that she coaches, brainwashes, and alienates her children from the father. It’s the same rhetoric in case after case. Parental Alienation Syndrome is a catchphrase that convicts. It is used to blame other people for making things up and to deflect blame onto others. Allegations of alienation are used to malign and destroy relationships between protective parents and their children. This disorder is not a medically or scientifically accepted syndrome. It has been repeatedly denounced as junk science. Any person accusing someone who is trying to protect a child of this disorder needs to be closely scrutinized. It needs to be made illegal to accuse victims of being mentally ill or liars as it re-victimizes the victims and is yet one more way to inflict abuse on them.
The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges published a warning in their 2009 publication, “A Judicial Guide to Child Safety in Custody Cases”
C. [§3.3] A Word of Caution about Parental Alienation
Under relevant evidentiary standards, the court should not accept testimony regarding parental alienation syndrome, or “PAS.” The theory positing the existence of PAS has been discredited by the scientific community.35 In Kumho Tire v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999), the Supreme Court ruled that even expert testimony based in the “soft sciences” must meet the standard set in the Daubert case.36 Daubert, in which the court re-examined the standard it had earlier articulated in the Frye37 case, requires application of a multi-factor test, including peer review, publication, testability, rate of error, and general acceptance. PAS does not pass this test. Any testimony that a party to a custody case suffers from the syndrome or “parental alienation” should therefore be ruled inadmissible and stricken from the evaluation report under both the standard established in Daubert and the earlier Frye standard.38
The discredited “diagnosis” of PAS (or an allegation of “parental alienation”), quite apart from its scientific invalidity, inappropriately asks the court to assume that the child’s behaviors and attitudes toward the parent who claims to be “alienated” have no grounding in reality. It also diverts attention away from the behaviors of the abusive parent, who may have directly influenced the child’s responses by acting in violent, disrespectful, intimidating, humiliating, or discrediting ways toward the child or the other parent. 12
The same ideas behind Parental Alienation Syndrome can be used just by claiming a protective parent is lying or is not credible as in the cases of Katie Tagle and Amy Castillo. Both mothers had concerns for the safety of their children and they were maligned as liars and their credibility was questioned. Both mothers had their worst fears come true. Amy Castillo’s three children were drowned by their father. Katie Tagle’s son Wyatt was shot by his father in January. It’s time to stop blaming protective parents and children and start questioning the credibility of people who point their finger at others.
On January 21, 2010, Judge Robert Lemkau denied a protective order claiming that protective mother Katie Tagle was lying and fabricating evidence. She was ordered to turn over her son that day. Nine-month-old Wyatt Garcia was then killed by Stephen Garcia ten days later which proves that Katie Tagle was not lying, but doesn’t bring her son back. People are outraged over this preventable crime. Despite a protest with over 100 people, Judge Lemkau has not resigned, and he is even running for re-election. Words fail at the unmitigated gall of this.
There is a Facebook group setup for all who want to see Judge Lemkau removed called ‘Lemkau Must Go.’ You would think that this group with over 800 members would not have opposition as it is based on keeping children safe, but there are actually supporters of Lemkau who were trolling the group today. The only good point that the infiltrators made was that two other judges also refused to protect the child. They asked why the other judges aren’t they being chided for their poor decision making. In the interest of fairness, Judge Debra Harris and Judge J. David Mazurek also refused to give protection when Katie Tagle applied for a protective order. Mazurek did end up granting a temporary protective order the next day when an SBC Sheriff’s Deputy requested it after reviewing the messages sent to Katie Tagle. Judge Lemkau has made statements saying his decision was based on the fact that two prior judges had not believed Katie Tagle. Those of you in San Bernardino County may want to consider this information at election time.
San Bernardino County Deputy District Attorney James Hosking is running for Superior Court Judge against Judge Robert Lemkau. Voters will decide between the two of them on Election Day June 8, 2010. Hosking decided he would run against Judge lemkau ’based in part upon being outraged by his [Lemkau's] ruling that allowed this baby [Wyatt] to be murdered by his psychotic father’. Hosking states on his website, “The People of San Bernardino County deserve a legal system that reviews all the evidence available and protects its citizens.” Hosking received his Juris Doctorate from Loyola Law School. In 1999, he became a Deputy District Attorney for San Bernardino County. Said Hosking, “After the recent tragic news that shattered the Tagle family last month, I knew in my heart that without a doubt I needed to commit to pursuing a seat in an effort to remove Judge Lemkau from the bench. It is time for change!” Contact James Hosking at ElectHosking@sbcglobal.net
San Bernardino, California, courts and Judge Robert Lemkau have destroyed mother, Katie Tagle’s world by failing to allow her to protect her son. Like many other women, Katie was being harassed by her ex-boyfriend, Stephen Garcia. But because he was the father of her child, Katie’s complaints not only were not taken seriously, but also she repeatedly was accused of lying and fabricating evidence. Read the transcript here: Tagle Transcript
Judge Robert Lemkau and two other judges all refused to give protection to both Katie Tagle and her son Wyatt Garcia, claiming that Stephen Garcia was not a danger to either of them, even though Katie had been knocked to the ground previously and Stephen had admitted in various documents to hitting her. It would appear that Katie was not given due process by the judges in San Bernardino County. She was threatened with “adverse consequences” just for trying to protect herself and her child.
Katie is not alone is this treatment. This goes on every day where women and children who have been victimized are falsely accused of making false allegations. In Katie Tagle’s case, she actually has been vindicated of being a liar, but only at the cost of her son’s life. If Stephen Garcia had not gone through with his threats, he might have managed to lie his way into getting sole custody as many other alleged abusers have done, such as convicted child sexual abuser Henry Parson.
Katie Tagle was ordered to turn over her son to a man who was threatening to kill her child. She complied with Judge Lemkau’s orders because she feared having her son taken away all together. Tagle said, “I didn’t want to get in trouble. I didn’t want to get Wyatt fully taken away from me.” Although the police did their best to try to stop the tragedy, Stephen Garcia shot Wyatt and himself on January 31, 2010, as he had threatened to do.
The community is outraged over the death of Wyatt and the treatment of his mother. Deputy District Attorney James Hoskins said he plans to challenge Lemkau for his seat on the bench, because of this tragedy. Sites have sprung up on the internet demanding that “Lemkau Must Go!” There are also “Lemkau Must Go” groups on Facebook and on Twitter. JOHN & KEN OF KFI-AM also had Katie Tagle on their show. Judge Lemkau declined to appear on the radio show, although he was asked. You can listen to the broadcast here: Katie Tagle on the JOHN & KEN SHOW. They discuss the fact that Judge Lemkau seem to disbelieve or find fault with almost every woman that complained of a problem.
Judge Lemkau read a statement of apology at a hearing after Wyatt was killed. According to an article in The Sun, Katie Tagle felt Lemkau’s words lacked feeling. There is a protest organized for Monday, March, 8, 2010 at 7:45 AM at the Victorville, California courthouse on 14455 Civic Drive.
Video from Victorville Press: Katie Speaks