FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Contacts:
Connie Valentine 916-233-8381
Kathleen Russell 415-250-1180
MOTHERS OF LOST CHILDREN TO GATHER FOR WHITE HOUSE VIGIL ON MOTHERS DAY
12 Noon Press Conference with Grieving Moms from Across America
<PHOTO OPPORTUNITY>
Mothers from across America who have lost their children because family courts ordered them into full custody or unsupervised visitation with their alleged abusers will gather for their first silent vigil at 11:00 am on Mothers’ Day, May 9, 2010 in front of the White House.
“We decided that Mother’s Day was the perfect time to stand vigil in front of the White House with mothers from all over America whose children are either dead or living in harm’s way because of the broken family court system,” said Connie Valentine, the vigil organizer and Co-founder of the California Protective Parents Association.
Experts at the Leadership Council on Child Abuse and Interpersonal Violence estimate that more than 58,000 children each year are either placed into dangerous homes or forced to go on unsupervised visits with their alleged abusers by divorce courts that simultaneously deny the children’s safe, protective parents access to their sexually and physically abused children.
The 11am silent vigil and 12noon press conference will take place in front of Lafayette Square, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, D.C.
Mildred Muhammad, the ex-wife of the Beltway Sniper, will join grieving mothers who recently appeared on the Dr. Phil Show’s Crisis in the Family Courts. California mother Katie Tagle, whose nine-month old baby Wyatt was murdered by his father, and Illinois mother Amy Leichtenberg, whose two school-aged children Duncan and Jack were murdered by their father, will share their tragic stories of desperately trying to keep their children alive. Advocates Kathleen Russell from the Center for Judicial Excellence and Eileen King from Justice for Children, who have been closely monitoring this escalating crisis for years, will discuss their work to expose and remedy the most under-reported human rights scandal in the United States.
These mothers of lost children are soccer moms, kindergarten teachers, physicians, flight attendants, dentists and homemakers. Most of them are middle class, educated and ordinary. They are safe, loving mothers (not addicts or abusers) who have been rendered powerless to protect their children from court-ordered child abuse. Most are battered women who tried to flee domestic abuse to save their children, only to end up mired in our nation’s family courts, unable to protect them at all.
“America’s Moms are coming to the President and First Lady to request a federal investigation into these horrific civil and human rights abuses. I need to make sure that that no parent has to ever go through this incredible pain again, and that my Duncan and Jack’s deaths mean something, ” said Amy Leichtenberg.
A cottage industry of mental health professionals and attorneys with cozy relationships with family court judges routinely bankrupt families with enormous court-ordered fees and often recommend that children be placed with their sexually or physically abusive fathers. Family court judges frequently ignore evidence of abuse, refuse to hear direct testimony from the children, and rubberstamp their cronies’ recommendations.
Nurturing mothers are forced to pay costly fees to attend supervised visits with the children they raised, watching helplessly as their children continue to report abuse by their abusers to uncaring visitation monitors. Mothers who speak out about system failure often face judicial retaliation and lose what little time they have with their children.
The unregulated cottage industry churns away, generating hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees to experts, while some of the worst cases settle only when the children turn 18. This is a national epidemic that is destroying families across America.
References
American Psychological Association (APA). (1996). Report on Violence and the Family: Issues and Dilemmas in Family Violence. APA Presidential Task Force on Violence and the Family. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nnflp.org/apa/intro.html.
Bruch, C. (2001). Parental Alienation Syndrome and Parental Alienation: Getting it wrong in child custody cases. Family Law Quarterly, 35(3), 527-552. Retreived fromhttp://ezproxy.gsu.edu:3305/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/famlq35&id=1&size=2&collection=journals&index=journals/famlq
Childress, S. (2006, September 25). Fighting over the kids: Battered spouses take aim at a controversial custody strategy. Newsweek. http://www.newsweek.com/id/35157
Finkelhor, D. (1994). Current information on the scope and nature of child sexual abuse. The Future of Children, 4(2), 31-53. Retrieved fromhttp://www.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/VS75.pdf.
Meier, J. S. (2009, January). Parental Alienation Syndrome and parentalalienation: Research reviews. National Online Resource Center on Violence Against Women, 1-17. Retrieved from http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/pas/1.html
National Council of Family Court Judges (2006). Navigating Custody andVisitation Evaluations in Cases with Domestic Violence: A Judge’s Guide. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ncjfcj.org/content/blogcategory/256/302/
United States Department of Veterans Affairs (2010). Child Sexual Abuse. National Center for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/pages/child-sexual-abuse.asp.
Wallerstein, J. S., & Kelly, J. B. (1976). The effects of parental divorce: Experiences of the child in early latency. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 46(1), 20-32. Retrieved fromhttp://ezproxy.gsu.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=fyh&AN=MRB-FSD0228448&site=ehost-live
World Health Organization (2006). World health organization says violence against children can and must be prevented. News release WHO/57. Retrieved fromwww.whqlibdoc.who.int/press_release/2006/PR_57.pdf
Other Resources
Berliner, L & Conte J. R. (1993). Sex abuse evaluations: Conceptual and empirical obstacles. Child Abuse and Neglect, 17, 111-125.Retrieved fromhttp://www.thelizlibrary.org
Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2005). Prevalence of individual adverse childhood experiences. Retrieved fromhttp://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/ace/prevalence.htm
Kelly, J. B., & Johnston, J. R. (2001). The Alienated Child: A Reformulation ofParental Alienation Syndrome, 39, Family Court Review, 249-266. Retrieved fromhttp://sfx.galib.uga.edu/sfx_gsu1?genre=article&issn=15312445&title=Family%20Court%20Review&volume=39&issue=3&date=20010701&atitle=The%20alienated%20child%3A%20A%20reformulation%20of%20parental%20alienation%20syndrome.&spage=249&sid=EBSCO%3Apsyh&pid=Kelly%2C%20Joan%20B.%3BJohnston%2C%20Janet%20R
The Leadership Council. Abuse and custody disputes: Scientific and legal issues.Retrieved from http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/pas/1.html
Meir, J. S. (2009, January). Parental Alienation Syndrome and parentalalienation: Research reviews. National Online Resource Center on Violence Against Women, 1-17. Retrieved from http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/pas/1.html
Wood, C. L. (1994). The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Dangerous Aura of Reliability, Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 27, 1367-1415. Retrieved fromhttp://ezproxy.gsu.edu:2650/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T8031369353&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T8031369356&cisb=22_T8031369355&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=138774&docNo=1
Technorati Tags: Lost,Children,Gather,White,House,Vigil,IMMEDIATE,RELEASE,Contacts,Connie,Valentine,Russell,Noon,Conference,Moms,Across,America,PHOTO,courts,custody,Mother,system,organizer,California,Protective,Parents,Association,Leadership,Council,Child,Abuse,Interpersonal,Violence,Lafayette,Square,Pennsylvania,Avenue,Washington,Muhammad,wife,Beltway,Sniper,Phil,Crisis,Katie,Tagle,Wyatt,father,Illinois,Leichtenberg,Duncan,Jack,Center,Judicial,Excellence,Justice,expose,human,rights,scandal,kindergarten,attendants,Most,nation,President,Lady,investigation,parent,pain,cottage,industry,health,relationships,judges,fees,testimony,cronies,failure,retaliation,cases,American,Psychological,Report,Presidential,Task,Force,Author,Parental,Alienation,Syndrome,Page,size,collection,index,September,kids,strategy,Newsweek,Finkelhor,Current,scope,nature,Future,Meier,January,Research,National,Online,Resource,Against,Women,Court,Domestic,Judge,Guide,Department,Veterans,Affairs,Sexual,Post,Traumatic,Disorder,Wallerstein,Journal,Orthopsychiatry,World,Organization,News,press_release,Resources,Berliner,Conte,Conceptual,Neglect,Services,Disease,Control,Prevention,Prevalence,Johnston,Reformulation,Review,genre,article,EBSCO,Scientific,Meir,Wood,Dangerous,Aura,Loyola,Angeles,results,GNBFI,RELEVANCE,teachers,physicians,addicts,deaths,fathers,recommendations,References,Dilemmas,journals,spouses,Evaluations,obstacles,visitation,abusers,html,ezproxy,parentalalienation,leadershipcouncil,login,docview
In Colorado, we have been working hard for change and I would appreciate your posting, circulation, and broadcasting for publicity on behalf of all the victimized children and mothers of Colorado. The Supreme Court Standing Committee on Family Issues has proposed CFI Reforms again, based on our experiences.
These Interim reforms http://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Administration/Executive/Standing%20Committee%20on%20Family%20Issues/Interim_Report_to_Chief_Justice_062310.pdf
need Mothers comments by September 30, 2010 http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/MVWL839.
Chief Justice Mullarkey responded to a January 2007 direct letter from parents, testimony by mothers including myself before the House Judiciary Committee against SB09-069 and Recommendation 69 A-F of the Final Report of the Commission on Families in the Colorado Courts (August 2002) by tasking the State Court Administrator’s Office (SCAO) to make recommendations for Child Family Investigator (CFI) and Parenting Coordinators (PCs) reform by September 2010.
Reforms were suggested in 2002 and again in 2003, but died due to considerable pushback by unethical practitioners. Significant opposition is expected in 2010 also, eliminating Legislative and Judicial approval once again.
The role of the CFI in Colorado is very powerful. As the “investigative arm of the Court”, they enjoy quasi-judicial immunity, are subject to no body of regulation, report only to the District Court, with the opinion of the CFI as omnipresent. This also applies to court-appointed Parental Responsibility Evaluators (PREs), Guardian Ad litems (GALs), Decision Makers (DMs), and Parenting Coordinators (PCs). See attached No Jurisdiction = No Accountability pictorial.
These psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers and attorneys are taking advantage of the system as court appointed assignments are not subject to any insurance payment maximums. They are able to earn $200 – $400 an hour; without any oversight or accountability, background checks, verification of training requirements, competency assessments, continued qualifications, or standard investigation protocols.
The proposed Reforms seek to address this as the SCAO learned our state Licensing Board (DORA) is not protecting Colorado’s families and children. The report highlights ~ 60 complaints per year have been dismissed due to the quasi judicial immunity granted by C.R.S. 12-43-215(7). The CFI role has been in effect since 1998, totaling 720+ dismissed complaints at DORA alone with no accountability for fraud, perjury, or false child abuse allegations which have taken children away from deserving parents.
I’ve been to the Sheriff, the District Attorney, the FBI, DORA, the American Psychological Association, the Chief Judge, the District Court Administrator, the SCAO, and the Office of the Child’s Representative — all of whom claim no jurisdiction. My complaint is one of the 5 mentioned before them in the Report on pg 3, however there isn’t a process to continue investigating it. Recommendations #2 and #4 seek to change this.
Please see Video created by my son’s sister in honor of her brother http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHFwHn64FZ0 and our story below –
I learned all this by unknowingly becoming a target in Colorado’s Divorce Industry. Previously, I had 60/40 physical custody and joint decision-making of my young son as recommended by the first CFI. Dad was not happy with this initial custody decision as he always wanted sole custody. Two years later Dad’s attorney[1] brought her Facebook’s personal web page listed ‘friend’ into the Family Court case as a CFI to launch a new investigation to get Dad sole custody.
I lost all parenting time and parenting responsibilities of my then 9 year old son based on false allegations of child abuse reported by CFI Dr. Marian Camden to Social Services in November of 2005. Her allegations included emotional abuse, parental alienation, Munchausen’s by Proxy, and multiple personality disorders. I have since been found innocent of all allegations by the State of Colorado, Department of Human Services in 2007.
The Child Abuse and Prevention Act was amended in 1996 eliminating immunity for those making false reports; however, I have been unable to hold the CFI accountable due to the quasi-judicial immunity granted by C.R.S. 12-43-215(7) to court appointees in Colorado.
I am a managerial professional with a Top Security clearance by the Department of Defense. As a result of the CFI’s report to Social Services, I was remanded to supervised parenting time for almost 450 hours over three years and then unsupervised parenting time for a year and half at a cost of ~$40K.
My attorney filed an appeal through the Social Services court system which was returned 1 1/2 years later just prior to the final Family Court date; however was suppressed from being entered into evidence upon objections by my ex’s attorney. I remained guilty of Child Abuse in the Court’s eyes and Final Orders were issued accordingly.
One of the methodologies that CFIs or PREs frequently use to remove children or frame parents is to distort, misrepresent, or suppress the psychological profiles from their own psychological testing instruments. The Family Court Judges and Magistrates of course are not psychologists and follow blindly along with any testimony or recommendation put forth by the CFI. Once the case is closed and the CFI dismissed, the unknowing parent has no access to the raw psychological data which can either prove or disprove their innocence. I secured my raw psychological data finally after 4 years and found that was misrepresented as well. I don’t have the multiple personality disorders as reported to Social Services, the Kempe Center, and testified to by the CFI in multiple courts.
I have seen my son only 18 hours a month with no telephone contact for almost 5 years. My son, who has since become an adolescent, hasn’t had any overnight visitation, holidays or vacations with his Mom, sister, or maternal family members. We have all lost years of his childhood and adolescence due to the manufactured child abuse charges by the CFI.
I have been financially and emotionally decimated by this case, spending well in excess of $200K to defend myself. I am now forced to represent myself pro se without an attorney as we are back in Court again 5 years later for my now 14 year old son to gain more parenting time with his mother. His Dad is fighting it every step of the way. He can afford an attorney, I pay $725 a month in child support. All costs of this new investigation have been attributed to me, another ~$20K. I have invested almost $250K for my and my son’s rights.
My family’s life has been forever changed by this ordeal. My son experienced a Parentectomy and trauma that will affect him for the rest of his life. My children each lost their sibling. My son will never be the happy, confident, healthy person he once was, and could have been. This is a crime and needs local media attention to broadcast the Reforms for public awareness and legislative change.
Many more stories can be found at http://www.knowyourcourts.com/ColoPsychBoard/ColoPsychBoard.htm.
For more information, please contact
Amy Miller
Public Policy Director
Colorado Coalition Against Domestic Violence
1120 Lincoln Street, Suite 900
Denver, CO 80203
Direct: 303-962-0933
Cell: 303-968-5964
Toll Free: 888-778-7091 x 812
and
Chad Edinger
Court Auxiliary Services Coordinator
Colorado State Court Administrators Office
101 West Colfax Ave, Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202
phone: 303-837-3605
fax: 303-837-2340
chad.edinger@judicial.state.co.us
and
Bill DeLisio
Family Law Program Manager
Colorado State Court Administrator’s Office
101 West Colfax, 5th Floor
Denver, CO 80202
(o) 303-837-3623
(f) 303-837-2340
bill.delisio@judicial.state.co.us
Interestingly, DORA has not stepped forward with recommendations for reforms nor implemented the ones advanced in the 2003 Sunset Review (pg 46), despite the 700+ that have reached their office and been declined for lack of jurisdiction since 1998.
Bryan Jameson and Saul Larsen
Policy Analysts
Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies
Executive Director’s Office
Office of Policy, Research & Regulatory Reform
1560 Broadway, Suite 1550
Denver, CO 80202
Ph: 303-894-7833
bryan.jameson@dora.state.co.us
saul.larsen@dora.state.co.us.
The reforms are also supported by the Equal Justice Foundation, Three Sides to Every Story, and Knowyourcourts.com.
Sincerely,
Janice
Moms4ChangeNow@gmail.com
[1] Aug. 13, 2009 – KnowYourCOurts.com exclusive – Family Law “Institute” or thieves’ den? http://knowyourcourts.com/News/2009-3Q.htm