A National Scandal: American Mothers March to Defend Motherhood and Children’s Human Rights

Mothers of Lost Children march from the U.S. Capitol to the White House in Washington DC to protest children being taken from safe mothers and given to battering or sexually abusive fathers through family courts.  This governmental cover up is similar to Penn State and the Catholic Church cover-ups. Mothers will protest at the Department of Justice and Demand Equal Rights for Women and Protection in Courts across America for whistle blowers who have the right to Defend Childhood.  Mothers are bringing attention to child trafficking in the Courts, and  States Judges who fail to Protect.  Help us send a mother from each state to represent the rights of mothers and abused children.

 Mothers March on Washington DC to end Child trafficking through the courts

October 1 – 2, 2014  Mothers of Lost Children demonstration and Lobby Day in Washington D.C.

California – Napa, Historical “Broken” Courthouse 12 pm

OCTOBER IS VIOLENCE IN THE FAMILY AWARENESS MONTH, Mothers of Lost Children (Mothers who have lost custody after reporting abuse)- bring attention to children of Domestic Violence.  October 1st is recognized as the National Safe Child Day.  Throughout the month communities across America will be participating in a campaign to bring attention to this National Scandal – Child Trafficking. We invite Mothers and Supporters from across the nation to join us in making the Safety of Our Children a National Priority.

To commemorate the National Safe Child Day- Mothers across the Nation will Protest  at Courthouses, State Capitals and the White house.  Delivering the message A Nurtured Childhood is Endangered, Declaring that we must make Safety the first Priority in US child custody Policies.

Vote like a mother-Mothers of Lost ChildrenHeal Mothers FlyerBring back our Girls and Boys

Vote like a mother-Mothers of Lost Children




Is your Judge for Sale?

The Campaign for Judicial Integrity

“Exercise your Rights – Vote for Justice.”

Image from Mother Jones Package


The New York Times, NPR, and Mother Jones are the latest national media to raise or report troubling questions that arise from big spending on judicial elections, all quoting Justice at Stake, and bannering such headlines as “Are our Courts for Sale?” (in the Times) and “Is Your Judge for Sale?” (Mother Jones).

Joe Nocera’s op-ed in the Times examines the ways that deep-pocketed special interests and partisans are spending on such judicial contests as a primary for the North Carolina Supreme Court. Incumbent Justice Robin Hudson was attacked in a TV ad as having “sided with the [child] molesters.” It was misleading and “one of the most shocking ads aired this political season,” Nocera writes.

“[H]er experience is being replicated in many of the 38 states that hold some form of judicial elections,” Nocera continues. Then he quotes JAS Executive Director Bert Brandenburg as saying,  “We are seeing money records broken all over the country. Right now, we are watching big money being spent in Michigan. We are seeing the same thing in Montana and Ohio. There is even money going into a district court race in Missouri.” Brandenburg added, “This is the new normal.”

The obvious problems arise because, Nocera says, “Judges need to be impartial, and that is harder when they have to raise a lot of money from people who are likely to appear before them in court — in order to compete with independent campaign expenditures. An influx of independent campaign money aimed at one judge can also serve as a warning shot to other judges that they’ll face the same opposition if their rulings aren’t conservative enough. Most of all, it is terribly corrosive to the rule of law if people don’t believe in the essential fairness of judges.”

NPR’s piece examined six-figure spending in a Cole County, Mo. Circuit Court race by a national group, the Republican State Leadership Committee (see Gavel Grab).

“Like the rest of politics, outside groups are muscling their way into judicial races,” Brandenburg told NPR. Responding to defenders of the spending who say it helps inform voters, he added, “This goes far beyond information. It’s an attempt to actually buy a seat on the court.”

Mother Jones has produced an unusual package of graphics and articles under the topic, “How Dark Money is Taking Over Judicial Elections: Secretive Partisan Groups are Spending Millions to Elect Their Favorite State Judges.”

- See more at: http://www.gavelgrab.org/?p=91686#sthash.hjhIkIAq.ZrbKwhiV.dpuf

“Exercise your Rights – Vote for Justice.”

“We, as intelligent, dedicated, citizens and voters are exercising our Constitutional right to “petition” our government officials to eradicate judicial corruption.  In pursuit of this goal we will work to vote out of office any elected official who continues to persist in supporting judicial corruption.”Contact: richardfine@campaignforjudicialintegrity.org

What is wrong with the county payments to judges?

The counties are parties in cases before the judges. The judges are state elected officials whose compensation is set by the Legislature and paid by the state, not the counties. The counties also may reimburse the courts for the court’s payments to the judges. If the court is being reimbursed by the county, the court is illegally using county money to double pay the judge above the compensation set by the state legislature.

Payments from parties to judges caused judges to lose their jobs* and were held to be bribes and to violate the “intangible right to honest services”**.

In the 2008 case of Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles, the California Court of Appeal held that the payments from Los Angeles County to state elected Superior Court judges which were called “local judicial benefits” violated Article VI, Section 19 of the California Constitution.

In response to the Sturgeon case, a special law called SBX 2 11 jointly sponsored by the California Judicial Council and the California Judges Association was enacted on February 20, 2009. This gave the judges who received the illegal payments from the counties and the government officials who made the illegal payments retroactive immunity from criminal prosecution, civil liability and disciplinary action. It also required the counties making such payments to continue the payments made as of July 1, 2008, during the then current term of the judge. The last of those current terms expired in 2012.

SBX 2 11 passed each chamber of the California Legislature by over a 2/3 vote, effectively “impeaching” and “convicting” the judges who received the county payments of “Misconduct in Office” under California Constitution, Article 4, Section 18. “Impeachment” and “conviction” required the judge’s removal from office. However, SBX 2 11 did not remove these judges from office. Every day California judges engage in “Misconduct in Office” by taking  “criminal” payments from counties appearing before them and violating their oath to uphold the U.S. and California Constitutions and laws.

In enacting Section 5 of SBX 2 11, each California legislator and the California governor violated the federal criminal law of Misprision of Felony (18 U.S.C. Section 4) by concealing and not reporting the judges’ violation of the federal criminal law of the intangible right to honest services (18 U.S.C. Section 1346). By violating federal criminal law, the California Legislators and Governor violated their oaths of office.

The U.S. Supreme Court held in Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 18 (1958): ” No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it.”

In the follow-up case of Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles, the court reaffirmed the illegality of the payments and held that the continuation of the payments was only an interim solution until the Legislature solved the problem.

California now has a judiciary with over 90 percent of the judges currently violating federal criminal law and receiving retroactive immunity from criminal prosecution for violating California criminal law.








Domestic Violence Awareness at the Poles

a special place in hell


If women want real change and protection we have to be aware of the history of candidates running for office this November 4th-

Voters Beware too close for comfort…“Betsy Close is an obstacle to women and children in Oregon seeking safety and security. She holds many extreme fundamentalist beliefs that are a detriment to women and children as well as the general community. As long as women like her are in office, women and children will have to prepare for the worse!” Coral Anika Theill

Once again, the republican party has produced some dangerous candidates who are up for re-election. One such representative who got her seat from a dubious start, has a history of voting along the obvious republican platforms: interfere with women’s equality in the workplace and in the home.  Don’t expect Republican Senator Betsy Close running for re-election in Oregon State Senate to represent you or protect your constitutional rights as she fails to understand equal rights and protection of all Oregonians and the safety of women and children.

Incumbent Close is a product of a dangerous history that has interfered with the emancipation of women, blacks, gays and Hispanics citizens. A history that has failed to protect women and children of Domestic Violence and force mothers to either go back to the abuser or beg the state to be rescued. Such marriages sold women into slavery as the state had refused to acknowledge women as sovereign citizens separate from their father or the next man to own you. With Betsy Close this ‘rule of the father’ is being upheld under her representation.

I recently read a story from an Oregonian women who has been seeking justice in the court system. During a Domestic Violence Divorce, that included rape, physical and emotional abuse, Ms. Theill also lost custody of her 8 children. State Senator Betsy Close testified in her trial.

After reading transcripts and the personal and tragic account of the abuse of Ms. Coral Theill, Betsy Close should be asking the Governor to present a personal apology from the state for participating in the cruel and unusual punishment of a Rape Victim and Domestic Violence Survivor.

Instead, Betsy Close who has personal ties to the victims assailant, gave testimony that helped to interfere with the woman’s First amendment rights and the rights of publishers to tell her story. This ‘Gag’ order allows criminal activity to continue with impunity while the courts fail to validate the constitutional rights of all citizens.

You have to hear Senator Close’s testimony in support of Ms. Theill’s ex-husband it is very telling.  (an audio court testimony is available in the link)Betsy Close appeared to purger testimony and provide false evidence, she offers up her religious opinions that are contrary to state and federal law that protects a women’s right.  Betsy Close was aware of abuse and failed to support this victim of Domestic Violence.  While in contrast she offers supportive testimony to help the perpetrator. Betsy Close prays with the ex-husband that the marriage will come back together despite the physical and emotional abuse.

Betsy Close Oregon Republican Senator

Oregon State Senator Betsy Close is an Obstacle to Women & Children’s Safety-VOTER BEWARE

OPEN LETTER TO Oregon Voters: “Exposing individuals who aid, support, enable and condone the criminal and violent behavior of abusers and predators is just as important as exposing the men who abuse women and children.”http://www.coralanikatheill.com/#!state-senator-betsy-close–voter-beware/cpou  http://www.coralanikatheill.com/

“I hope Betsy Close will step down from running for political office and seek the professional and spiritual help she needs.” Sadly, Betsy Close exemplifies the saying, “If you can’t be a good example, you will just have to be a horrible warning.” Coral Theill

The aggravated assault on this mother by agents of the government continue the inhumane treatment of a Domestic Violence Victim, who now suffers the legal abuse of a system that rewards the bullies for profit.

While Ms. Theill’s story is tragic and shocking, it is even more shocking to see this event repeating itself across the country. Nurturing and loving mothers losing permanent custody of their children as a result of failures in the system to support victims rights.  Mothers who strive to protect their children are commonly removed partially or completely from their children’s lives. Some 58,000 Child victims a year are taken from safe mothers and placed with known perpetrators.  http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/…

Betsy Close is considered a puritanical and patriarchal fanatic by some. An archaic throw back to a dangerous history. A time that discriminated against people of color, gay men and women and interferes with equal participation and enfranchisement of women. Whatever her indoctrination, be it her own personal religious beliefs, by applying these philosophies onto the citizens of Oregon she fails to comply with her duty to represent all the people.

As a legislator, Close drafted a bill attempting to force Oregon voters to present proof of U.S. citizenship before registering to vote. While similar prejudiced and misaligned requirements have stuck in some states, voter laws that require proof of citizenship have been struck down many times due to the potential for “disproportionate harm” to black and Hispanic voters. But apparently our Republican Senator strongly supports such requirements.

Close was a featured speaker at a Halsey church meeting in support of a state ballot measure proposed by the blatantly bigoted Defense of Marriage Coalition that would ban gay marriage in the state of Oregon. She’s also staunchly pro-life.

Republican candidates and representatives across the nation are voting along party lines whose motives clearly interfere with a women’s right to equality and protection.

Republican women running for office betray other women and act as gatekeepers in a patriarchal society whose architects entitle men to enslave women. Betsy Close is a product of this dangerous history.

In the Corvallis Advocate they acknowledge the obvious conflict of interest when Betsy Close was voted into office. The advocate reports, “Worse, voted in a candidate whose personal inclinations and biases make her a scary choice for more liberal-minded Oregonians, including fans of Morse. Close’s predecessor was a much more moderate Republican, called the “last of his breed” and a “pragmatic public servant.” He was respected by Democrats and Republicans alike. So, even given Close’s relevant political experience, why choose someone now who is obviously so far to the right?

Interestingly, had Jaramillo not voted, the seat would have gone to Larry Mullins, the CEO of Samaritan Health Services. And there have been some potentially disturbing not-so-political complaints about Close, even going to far as to suggest that her extreme religious views support ending a marriage only if one’s spouse is unfaithful—rape, and emotional and physical abuse be-damned.” http://www.corvallisadvocate.com/…

Close’s extreme anti-environment voting record and climate change denial earned her a spot on the list over hundreds of other candidates.

Among other groups concerned about Senator Close’s behavior, The Oregon League of Conservation Voters (OLCV) and the national League of Conservation Voters (LCV) announced earlier in October that Sen. Betsy Close has been named to LCV’s “Dirty Dozen in the States.” Modeled after LCV’s trademark federal “Dirty Dozen,” the state version highlights 12 of the most anti-environment candidates from around the country who state LCVs are working to defeat.http://olcv.org/…

A Senate Democratic campaign group filed a complaint with the Oregon Secretary of State against Sen. Betsy Close (R-Albany) for failing to disclose a contribution from Oregon’s most extreme gun political action committee.   Campaign finance records show that Close’s campaign received a major $10,000 contribution from the Oregon Firearms Federation PAC (OFF PAC) on May 6, 2014.

“Senator Close knows voters in her district don’t support Oregon Firearm Federation’s extreme gun agenda, and she’s not disclosing their big financial support of her campaign,” said Tom Powers, executive director for the Senate Democratic Leadership Fund. “Senator Close’s failure to comply with the law denies voters the information about the extreme groups who are underwriting her campaign. Fortunately for voters, Betsy Close can’t run from her record.”http://oregonsenatedemocrats.com/…

Ms. Close is too close to the archaic practices that have enslaved women for centuries.  Her personal beliefs interfere with her representation of the good people of Oregon who want equal rights for all people, Gay people, people of color, Equality for women, and protection for our environment and children. Vote Like a Mother casts a No Vote for Betsy Close and warmly supports Representative Sara Gelser Democrat – District 16 – Corvallis (D)https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/…https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/…

Coral Anika Theill will be a guest on Oct. 31st at 8:00 pm Eastern time for the National Assoc. of Adult Survivors of Child Sex Abuse . Host is Bill Murray ; (Show is 1 1/2 hours) http://www.blogtalkradio.com/bill-murray/2014/11/01/stop-child-abuse-now-scan–955


(WASHINGTON D.C.) – Nurturing and loving mothers losing permanent custody of their children is such depressing subject matter. But we cannot indefinitely avoid depressing subject matter, particularly if it is true.

WHY I MARCH – by Coral Anika Theill, Author, Advocate, Speaker & Reporter www.coralanikatheill.com  Coral Theills Fundraiser

“Historical responsibility is defined as an individual’s answerability for committing or failing to commit acts that would have affected the outcome of any given situation.” – Lucy Dawidowicz


Vote like a mother (2)http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/10/30/1340480/-Domestic-Violence-Awareness-at-the-Poles

M. Barnett An advocate for victims rights concerned about the inequity in the courts; rights for mothers and safety for children

Stop Erie County’s children from being murdered

Hope For Erie County

By Melanie Blow

A series of child murders, including children CPS was asked to protect, has exposed a failed response system in Erie County, when it comes to child abuse and domestic violence. Men and women have committed many shocking domestic homicides. The county has experienced some horrifying shaken-baby cases. Staggering numbers of child abuse reports, causing caseworkers to deal with caseloads 5-to-6 times the professional standard have been tolerated.  Perhaps worst of all, there are too many county officials uttering the phrase “and due to new, incoming cases…”, without realizing they can change that.

Screen Shot 2014-10-26 at 8.13.54 PMMark Wynn is the leading domestic violence trainer for law enforcement officers in the United States.  He told Barry Goldstein, author of The Quincy Solution that he was offended as a young police officer by trainings that said police cannot prevent homicides but only catch the murderer afterwards.  Mark Wynn proved murders can be prevented with successful practices he implemented in Nashville, but Erie county, like most communities, had accepted child abuse and child fatalities as inevitable. So Stop Abuse Campaign came up with athree-part plan to prevent domestic violence and child abuse.

When you give families what they need to raise their children safely, they usually do it. Many children are born into families where their parent(s) will struggle to bond with them and struggle to raise them. It’s easy to predict who those parents are. If you offer them help, they usually take it, and it usually works wonderfully. This is what evidence-based home visiting programs like Healthy Families NY do. And the result is healthy, happy, un-abused children who, despite many risk factors, succeed in school and are more likely to be in gifted programs than remedial ones. 

Nothing works for all families. And sadly, the families least likely to respond well to home visiting are the ones experiencing domestic violence. Best practices that slash rates of domestic violence in a community, called The Quincy Solution, mean fewer men will abuse their partners or their children in a community, and there will be fewer barriers to their partners leaving and protecting their children.  The Quincy Solution is based on successful practices that dramatically reduced domestic violence crime in communities like Quincy, Nashville and San Diego.  In Quincy a county that averaged 5-6 murders enjoyed several years with none.

About 15% of the cases that CPS workers deal with involve a child being sexually abused, usually by someone they know. A much higher percent of those cases involve an abusive or neglectful parent who was sexually abused when they were a child and haven’t managed to break the cycle. New York’s laws against child sexual abuse are almost unenforceable, due to the state’s Statute of Limitations on the crime.  Flawed practices in custody courts result in 85% of alleged sexual abusers gaining custody. Since laws alone cannot protect children, adults in the community must be enabled to. This is done by educating them about child sexual abuse and its prevention. The third part of our plan is to make high-quality child sexual abuse education available to every adult in the county, and to use the county’s strong leadership to educate a critical mass of employees who work with children.

This plan will drastically reduce child abuse within a very beleaguered county. It will reduce CPS caseloads. It will reduce educational expenses, health care expenses and crime. It lets Erie County become a community where we draw a line in the sand and say “we are changing from a community where child abuse is tolerated to one where it is prevented”. And if you want to help make it happen, please click the red button below.

By signing the petition you let Erie County’s Chief Executive and Legislature know that you are voting for a safe home for every child in Erie County.

Take Action Now


Maternal Deprivation– A Human Rights Issue


 Deprivation and Alienation

Maternal Deprivation- Angelz Fury WordPress

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 ofJessica 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 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 privilegeThe 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 accuses Parental 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:

Failure of Family Court System Leads To Death and Devastation


Judicial Council of California Meeting

Stop Court Crimes Event Judicial Council Meeting San Francisco Oct 27 and 28, 2014

Judiciary Council Stop Court Crimes

Courts: The Judicial Branch of California

Open to the Public (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 10.6(a))
Ronald M. George State Office Complex
William C. Vickrey Judicial Council Conference Center
Malcolm M. Lucas Board Room
455 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, California 94102-3688


2:00–2:15 p.m. Swearing in of New and Reappointed Judicial Council Members and the Administrative Director

2:15–2:20 p.m. Approval of Minutes
Approve minutes of the August 21–22 and September 2, 2014, Judicial Council meetings.

2:20–2:35 p.m. Chief Justice’s Report

2:35–2:50 p.m. Administrative Director’s Report

Item 1 2:50–3:05 p.m.
Family and Juvenile Law: Special Immigrant Juvenile Status and the California Courts (No Action Required)

3:05–3:35 p.m. Public Comment

Item 2 (Deferred)

Item 3 3:35–3:50 p.m.
Trial Courts: Recidivism Reduction Fund Court Grant Program (No Action Required)

Item 4 3:50–4:00 p.m.
Judicial Branch Administration: Update to Court Technology Governance and Strategic Plan (Action Required)



Agenda Item for October 28, Supervised Visitation -http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/jc-20141028-itemA10.pdf


Agenda Item for October 28, 2014 – Adopting Task Force Recommendations for Self Representing Litigants





Stop Court Crimes event









Judicial Councel

Judicial Councel talking with reporters SF.Judicial.Protests_002 Judicial Councel Barbara Kaufman


Santa Clara County Appellate & Family Law Specialist…

back home to you very, very soon! 

Shelley is one of the many brave and articulate warrior Moms who amaze us with how gracefully they handle the most egregious injustices that a mother could i…

This clip sets the stage for the recent direct action that the Center for Judicial Excellence and California Protective Parents Association organized on Sept…

Calif Judge & Court CEO Commit Crimes. Who’s In Charge? Bob Buckley Responds.


California Protective Parents Assn Co-Founder Connie Valentine explains our long history of meeting with Judicial Council of CA staff members to the Council’…

Stalking through the Courts and DV by proxy

Domestic violence doesn’t stop at physical abuse. “Emotional, physical and financial abuse often go hand in hand.” We must stand up for victims, we must address this scourge now. #dvam http://j.mp/1tQU661

Domestic violence doesn’t stop at physical abuse. “Emotional, physical and financial abuse often go hand in hand.” We must stand up for victims, we must address this scourge now including Perpetrators who use Custody Orders to Abuse Women and Children after Divorce

  • Our society fails to provide safety for mothers leaving dangerous men. The inadequacies of Domestic Violence Services render mothers helpless in Civil Family Courts, where Court ordered Abuse can continue until children age out of the system.   Using custody orders to control and manipulate victims through legal channels is referred to as Legal Abuse/Court Ordered Abuse and it includes DV by proxy or stalking through the courts.
  • Once a women leaves a predator she faces a wide range of challenges to protect herself and her children.  He will continue to batter through the system, without help from Law enforcement or Domestic Violence services who step back once their is a child custody order.  The Family Court system fails victims of abuse and often rewards the bullies by providing access to the children and Ex by failing to recognize the complex issues of Intimate Partner Violence.
  • Family Court Judges are aided by Lawyers and Professionals in the Mental Health Field who have financial incentives and work to punish mothers who report abuse .  Placing children with the batterer and molester insures the continued need for court services and the reliance on mental health treatment programs now so widely used in the family, dependency and Juvenile court system.
  • Discrediting the Victim is the most used tool, falsely accusing her of mental illness or Parental Alienation Syndrome is a very effective legal strategy to get custody of the children.  The benefit to the perpetrator is the win, win, they relieve themselves of financial obligations of child support and continue to punish by taking her children from her.
  • With total control over the children fathers will use this power to dole out time and lord over the mother who tried to escape the power and control of the once abusive marriage.   The reason we do not hear more about this silent epidemic is that historically media doesn’t like to cover family issues, divorce, dv incest abuse and mothers are so damaged by the events of legal abuse and loss of custody don’t make good witnesses or advocates for themselves.  The fathers obtain fraudulent criminal charges that discredits the mothers and seldom are they able to navigate the legal system to appeal the charges and regain custody.  Sadly, Law enforcement, Court professionals and Domestic Violence Services fail to protect the women of Domestic Violence as a result of inadequate training and Bias.
Dr. KingDr. Jeanne King helps people stop domestic violence before it spirals out of control. She shows individuals and professionals in healthcare how to break the cycle of abuse and heal the wounds of interpersonal violation. She is a 30-year seasoned psychologist, published author and leading expert in identifying the subtle communication patterns of battering relationships.  In this Video Dr. King explains the events that occur in  Domestic Violence Divorces   http://www.domesticviolencedivorce.com/
Coersive Control wheel

Leadership Council on DV by Proxy

  • As more and more abused women lose custody to batterers in family courts, they are wrongly embracing the very ideas that enabled their abusers to gain custody in the first place. False accusations of “parental alienation” are often used by batterers to gain custody and to defend against accusations of abuse.
  • Some unfortunate women after years of enduring domestic violence have lost custody to the batterers who abused them. In these cases, batterers have made good on their threat to attack their ex-partner in the place she is the most vulnerable—by taking her children away from her. After separation, these batterers continue to wage their campaign of manipulation and abuse by attempting to convince involved children that their mothers never loved them. Looking for a way to describe their batterers’ behavior, some mothers have called what their batterer is doing “parental alienation syndrome.
  • In reality, what these women are describing from their ex-partners is better termed Domestic Violence by Proxy (DV by Proxy), a term first used by Alina Patterson, author of Health and Healing. DV by Proxy refers to a pattern of behavior which is a parent with a history of using domestic violence or intimidation, uses a child as a substitute when he no longer has access to his former partner. Calling this behavior “parental alienation” is not strong enough to convey the criminal pattern of terroristic behaviors employed by batterers.

When his victim leaves him, batterers often recognize that the most expedient way to continue to hurt his partner is to assert his legal rights to control her access to their children. By gaining control of the children, an abusive male now has a powerful tool which allows him to continue to stalk, harass and batter an ex-partner even when he has no direct access to her. Moreover, by emotionally torturing the child and severing the bond between children and their mother, he is able to hurt his intended victim — the mother — in a way she cannot resist.

  • DV by Proxy includes tactics such as: threats of harm to children if they display a positive bond to the mother, destroying favored possessions given by the mother, and emotional torture (for example, telling the child the mother hates them, wanted an abortion, and is not coming to get them because they are unloved).

DV by Proxy may also include coaching the child to make false allegations regarding their mother’s behavior and harming or punishing the child for not complying. DV by Proxy perpetrators may also create fraudulent documents to defraud the court in order to prevent the mother from gaining custody. Whether or not the child is biologically related to them is irrelevant to perpetrators of DV by Proxy. The perpetrator’s main motivation is to hurt his ex; whether or not his own child is harmed in the process is irrelevant to him.


Domestic violence by proxy


Domestic violence by proxy- “Parental alienation” doesn’t properly convey the criminal behaviors of the Narcissist.  When a narcissist’s victim leaves Terrorist Tactics are employed, the way the narcissist continues to hurt the victim/ target is to continue to control through access to their children. “Parental alienation” doesn’t properly convey the criminal behaviors this allows, stalking, harassment; smear campaigning, financial loss, faults statement to court and police. Eventually emotionally torturing the children severing the bond with the target parent, hurting the target and the children victims for years.


The “Father’s Right’s” Movement: How to Legally Stalk, Harass, and Intimidate Victims of Domestic Violence after a Restraining Order has been Issued by Janet Normalvanbreucher

“It was with surprise and appreciation that I recently discovered and read Stalking Through the Courts. Although it has been many years since my divorce from Eric Bleicken, the pain of the intense lies that were told (that I wasn’t feeding my children, that I was suicidal, that I was a negligent mother, etc.), and the 200 plus harassment motions that Eric Bleicken filed over a five year period were still under the surface. I found it amazing that Janet Normalvanbreucher, someone I’ve never met, cared enough to research and reveal the truth about our case and the Fathers Rights political agenda. With sincerity and humility, I give her my thanks.”
– Lorraine Bleicken G.

STALKING THROUGH THE COURTS by Janet Normalvanbreucher © 1999


The Quest for Dominance and Control

“Abusive men typically have deeply entrenched notions about “traditional” male roles, with concomitant support for male dominance.”
– Lee H. Bowker, Beating the Wife Beating, p. 7-9 (1983)

“Victims [of domestic violence] are more likely… to have less traditional attitudes regarding women’s roles in the family.”
– Lenore Walker, The Battered Woman Syndrome, p. 8, (1984)

The batterer’s quest for control of the woman lies at the heart of an abusive relationship. “The men want to direct and determine how their partner behaves, and the way to do this is through violence… the men use violence to dominate, control, and force the woman to do what they want.” (Jan E. Stets, Domestic Violence and Control, p. 110, (1988). Battering is about domination. Violence is a way of “doing power” in a relationship, an effort by the batterer to control the woman who is the recipient of the violence. “At the moment of separation or attempted separation — for many women the first encounter with the authority of law — the batterer’s quest for control often becomes most acutely violent and potentially lethal.” (Desmond Ellis, Post-Separation Woman Abuse: The Contribution of Lawyers as “Barracudas,” “Advocates,” and “Counsellors,” 10 Intl. J.L. & Psychiatry 403, 408 (1987). Lenore Walker, a leading forensic psychologist in the field of battered women, has emphasized the batterer’s control of the woman. “A battered woman is a woman who is repeatedly subjected to any forceful physical or psychological behavior by a man in order to coerce her to do something he wants her to do without any concern for her rights.” (Lenore Walker, The Battered Woman Syndrome (1984)). Walker found that as her clients in psychotherapy became more assertive, they encountered more physical and psychological abuse.

The misperception that men cannot control their anger still permeates society. Abusive men will often use the threat of violence, whether actual or implied, to control his victim. “Men are violent and abusive towards women because this behavior allows them to establish and to maintain control within the relationship … and because no one has ever required them to stop.” (Lisa G. Lerman, The Decontextualization of Domestic Violence, 83 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 217, 236 (1992)). Abusive behavior can range from implied threats (“any other man would have beaten you to a pulp”) to overt acts against property (breaking apart the furniture, punching a hole in the wall) to direct physical assault (shoving, grabbing, battery). The abuser constantly finds fault with the victim, forcing the victim to remain constantly on the defensive, walking on eggshells lest she “cause” her abuser to lose control and incur another incident of violent behavior.

Studies indicate that, contrary to the assertions of the abuser that he just “lost it,” batterers are quite aware of what they are doing. “Loss of control is substantially contradicted by the batterers’ own testimony. While the men claim that their violence is beyond rational control, they simultaneously acknowledge that the violence is deliberate and warranted.” (James Ptacek, Why do Men Batter Their Wives, p. 153 (1985). Strongly indicative of this pattern of premeditation are the facts that abusers often limit their beatings to places that will not show (like the stomach), violent episodes occur almost exclusively in the home where they can get away with it, and despite the abusers justifications of “I just lost control,” most batterers have limits beyond which they will not go (most stop short of killing their partners). (Lenore E. Walker, The Battered Woman Syndrome, (1984)). Abusers are extremely manipulative and are often described as having a Jekyll and Hyde Personality. Ellen Pence and Michael Paymar’s training manual for batterer’s, Power and Control: Tactics of Men Who Batter, treat violence as a form of control and explicitly reject theories that focus on some flaw in the abuser, the victim, or the relationship. (Ellen Pence & Michael Paymar, Power and Control: Tactics of Men Who Batter, p. 64, (1986). Abusers view their right to dominate and control every aspect of their partner’s and children’s lives, their right to resort to physical violence, as a constitutionally protected right sanctioned by the founding fathers and the bible, not aberrant behavior.

When the intimate partner of a domineering male demands an end to controlling or abusive behavior or attempts to sever the relationship, his abnormal behavior will often escalate into violence. Separation assault is the attack on the woman’s body and volition in which her partner seeks to prevent her from leaving, retaliate for the separation, or force her to return. It aims at overbearing her will as to where and with whom she will live, and coercing her in order to enforce connection in a relationship. It is an attempt to gain, retain, or regain power in a relationship, or to punish the woman for ending the relationship. It often takes place over time. (Martha R. Mahoney, Legal Images of Battered Women: Redefining the Issue of Separation, 90 Mich. L. Rev. 1, p. 65-66, (1991)).

Despite the obvious physical and psychological harm caused by battering, the abuser is able to continue battering his partner because he does not fear legal or social consequences. A batterer often believes he has the right to control his partner through the use of force. Reinforcement of learned behavior may encourage this obsessive, dependent personality. Impulsive and easily frustrated, a batterer resorts to physical violence. The batterer will deny his violence to himself and others. A batterer is not violent in other relationships. In fact, with people outside the family, he can be seen as the pillar of the community. (Lisa N. Birmingham, Closing the Loophole: Vermont’s Legislative Response to Stalking, 18 Vt. L. Rev. 477, 484-485 (1994)). This hinders the victim’s attempts to seek help or emotional support from friends and even her own family because batterers tend to wear a false persona to the outside world. The victim’s claims that her partner is out of control tend to be met with disbelief and outright hostility from the outside world.

Most child psychologists agree that divorced families are less desirable than intact families from a child-rearing standpoint when the family is not dysfunctional. However, reducing children to chattels owned by the parent who is least dissatisfied with the status quo, shuffling them between two households, or returning to the days when women were the legal property of their husbands, is even more repugnant. Father’s Rights advocates “real agenda is to make sure that men maintain control over custodial parents and have access to their children regardless of the father’s behavior and regardless of whether it’s in the best interest of the children themselves” (Patricia A. Levesh, Greater Boston Legal Services Battered Women’s Legal Assistance Project, Letter to the Editor, the Boston Globe, January 6, 1999).

Although most people would agree that courts are not well equipped to handle the emotional battlefield of a divorce, effectively returning to an era when women, children, and property were all chattels owned by the husband is not the answer. Judges (who are often male) are generally quite sensitive to the needs of non-custodial fathers and will bend over backwards to award liberal visitation agreements affording ample opportunity to remain an active part of children’s lives (sometimes to the detriment of children who have witnessed spousal abuse). It is only when a non-custodial parent has demonstrated an extreme pattern of using the child to control the custodial parent or there are serious questions about the child’s wellbeing that visitation will be restricted or supervised.
“For purposes of determining child custody, it is not in the best interest of children to (a) force parents to share custody over the objection of one or both parents when there is a history of domestic violence; (b) punish abused or protective parents who protect themselves or their children; (c) presume allegations of domestic violence or child sexual assault are likely to be made falsely or for tactical advantage during custody and divorce proceedings; and (d) make ‘friendly parent’ provisions a factor when there is abuse by one parent against the other or a child…” (Congressional findings, VAWA proposed 1999 amendments, H.R. 357, Title II, s. 241).


Read entire Research paper at:


The Liz Library Site Index – women’s law and history resources | research, studies, reference, family, children, child custody, parent, children’s education, mother, father, divorce, marital, time-sharing, parenting, parenting plan, custody, domestic, violence, abuse, gender, therapeutic jurispruden…

Do Courts Punish Mothers who Report Abuse?

‘Parental alienation’ is sometimes used in family court to wrest custody from a parent who alleges abuse

Does this controversial diagnosis help fathers dodge abuse Charges?

Coined in the 1980's, Parental Alienation Syndrome

The once prominent child psychiatrist Richard A. Gardner coined “parental alienation syndrome” in the 1980s. Embraced by fathers’-rights advocates, the theory has been rejected by many experts and has never been recognized by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.Christa Renee/Getty Images

Do courts use a controversial theory to punish mothers who allege abuse?

“I see parent after parent after parent punished for raising good-faith allegations in court in order to get the authorities looking at the same evidence they’ve seen.”  Gregory Jacob   former Department of Labor solicitor

On a winter evening in 2009, Anna Cooper was with her 5-year-old son, Ben, at her parents’ apartment in Connecticut. Cooper, who had filed for divorce just a few months earlier, was relaxing in the living-room rocking chair while Ben was playing with his toy train set when, without warning, he reached for his mother and thrust his hand between her legs. (Cooper’s name and those of other family members have been changed to protect their privacy.)

Cooper, horrified, asked Ben if his friends played that way. “And he goes, ‘Not friends. Daddy plays that way,’” she says. “My whole world just fell apart.”

Two weeks later, Cooper took Ben to see a pediatrician, Richard Whelan. During the visit, the boy hid under the table and told the doctor that his father “grabs at his crotch” as a game, according to Whelan’s notes from the visit, which were provided to her and to Eli Newberger, founder of the child-protection unit at Boston Children’s Hospital. Cooper says Whelan told her that he planned to refer the case to the sex-abuse clinic at Yale University. (Whelan is now retired; a man who identified himself as Dr. Richard Whelan declined to comment, citing patient confidentiality.)

Shortly after the visit, Cooper was warned against taking Ben to Yale. In a letter, her husband’s lawyer, Noah Eisenhandler, wrote that her “insistence on exposing this child to these baseless accusations will result in a request for sole custody based upon child alienation.” He cautioned her to “tread very lightly on these allegations that she is making.” (Both Eisenhandler and Cooper’s ex-husband denied requests for comment.)

Cooper didn’t know what Eisenhandler was talking about. She had no idea that “alienation” referred to a controversial form of emotional abuse that typically involves children in high-conflict custody disputes. Nor did she know its history — that alienation is rooted in the theories of Richard A. Gardner, the once prominent child psychiatrist who spent much of his career arguing that women often fabricated custody-related child-abuse claims and programmed their children to do the same. He called this phenomenon parental alienation syndrome, or PAS.

For the last two decades, the concept has been the subject of a high-pitched, highly gendered debate. Despite a recent campaign to add the syndrome to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the concept is still not officially recognized. Many experts argue that when alienation surfaces in the legal system, it is used to punish well-intentioned mothers who raise allegations of abuse.

“It really is Gardner’s PAS that laid the groundwork for what is happening in family courts across the country,” says Joan Meier, a professor of clinical law at George Washington University. “When a mother alleges abuse or children allege abuse or fear or hostility to a parent who is alleged to have been abusive, it tends to be very quickly attributed to the mother’s vendetta.”

Two years ago, for instance, a judge in a California custody case suggested that a mother was alienating her two sons and turning them against their father, who had been convicted of raping the mother. Against her objections — as well as the recommendations of a court-appointed custody evaluator — the judge ruled that the father should be reunited with their children immediately after his release from prison.

In Iowa a few years ago, a father involved in a custody case was accused of sexually abusing his two daughters. He countered that their grandmother — who had been caring for the children and first reported the possibility of abuse — had brainwashed the girls. The judge refused to hear testimony from child-protective workers and therapists who found the allegations credible, and the grandmother was limited to supervised visitation rights. The father, meanwhile, was awarded joint custody.

After the incident at her home, Cooper requested — and was granted — sole custody of Ben. By raising the possibility of abuse, she risked losing it completely.

I see parent after parent after parent punished for raising good-faith allegations in court in order to get the authorities looking at the same evidence they’ve seen.

Gregory Jacob

former Department of Labor solicitor

When Gardner coined PAS in the mid-1980s, he believed that custody-related fabrications constituted a kind of hysteria; he described these accusatory mothers as “sadistic” animals who “literally fight to the death in order to safeguard their progeny.” Their goal, he wrote, was “the total elimination of the father.” Gardner also believed that these parents were perverted and that they found “vicarious gratification” in making false child-sex-abuse claims. Because these mothers were so uncooperative, he believed in a style of therapy that seemed more like punishment. It must be court-ordered, and fines, reduction of visitation, loss of custody and jail were appropriate remedies.

Gardner was embraced by fathers’-rights advocates, and he worked on hundreds of cases across the country. “Richard Gardner’s contributions provided a foundation for subsequent work in the field,” says Richard Warshak, a clinical psychologist at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and author of “Divorce Poison: How to Protect Your Family From Bad-Mouthing and Brainwashing.”

Yet a six-month study conducted in 1987 and 1988 by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts found no evidence of the hysteria Gardner described. “What he was seeing, he tried to understand through one lens,” says Robin Deutsch, a psychologist and director of the Center of Excellence for Children, Families and the Law at the Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology. “So he made all of this stuff up.”

Since Gardner committed suicide in 2003 at the age of 72, the study of alienation has flourished. Psychologists like Warshak have written popular books about the subject; lawyers promote themselves as specialists. Governors and mayors from Alabama to Illinois have signed proclamations recognizing its ostensibly tragic consequences. For her book “Adult Children of Parental Alienation Syndrome: Breaking the Ties That Bind,” research psychologist Amy Baker interviewed 40 adults who told her they were manipulated into rejecting a parent. “They hated themselves because they participated in it,” she says. “They have grown into depressed adults who have low self-esteem and problems trusting others.”

It is unclear how frequently alienation appears in custody battles or what the genders are of the accusers and the accused. As with Cooper’s case, the term “alienation” may not even appear in publicly available court records, so it is difficult for researchers to make empirical assessments. Eileen King, a former director of the Washington, D.C., Office for Justice for Children, tells Al Jazeera America that from 2000 to 2012 she typically had 50 to 70 alienation-type cases at any given time. Often, these were cases in which a mother reported a classic symptom of abuse — acting in a sexually inappropriate manner, for instance, or having overly sexualized knowledge. Every time, she says, “those cases were not considered to be credible because the mother was considered to be alienating or because she was thought to have a mental-health issue.”

One of the pro bono lawyers King turned to with these cases was Gregory Jacob, a former solicitor in George W. Bush’s Department of Labor. “I see parent after parent after parent punished for raising good-faith allegations in court in order to get the authorities looking at the same evidence they’ve seen,” he says. In all but one of the 20 to 30 cases Jacob has handled over the last 13 years, the accused abuser opted for the same defense: She’s trying to alienate me from my child. “It’s what I would do if I was an attorney representing an abuser,” he says.

Baker says one way to prevent false allegations of alienation is by “acknowledging and agreeing on the criteria for a true case.” Her solution is to add parental alienation syndrome to the DSM.

Yet this proposal remains highly contentious. As the American Psychiatric Association was preparing the most recent edition of the DSM, advocacy groups dueled over an effort backed by Baker and others to include it. In a 2010 letter to the APA, the National Organization for Women (NOW) described alienation as having no scientific foundation. “We believe that if the proposed subject disorder is added to the DSM-V it will be given an undeserved credibility as it is used unfairly against protective parents — usually mothers — in the courts,” the group wrote. Meanwhile, Fathers and Families (now called the National Parents Organization), argued that NOW was attempting to “suppress” the recognition of alienation and urged its supporters to back the DSM campaign.

In the end, the APA did not adopt it as a psychiatric diagnosis. Baker, however, still claims something of a victory: Though parental alienation syndrome, or parental alienation disorder, as it has also been called, is not mentioned in the DSM, language that pertains to it was added to an already recognized condition, parent-child relational problem, as well as a new one, child psychological abuse. “The words are not in there — the concept is in there. If you were treating a child who has this problem, you could treat them,” Baker says.

In the meantime, children involved in false alienation cases can wind up trapped with their abusers, says King, who recently started her own organization, Child Justice. There’s an assumption “that fathers are essential to raising their children,” King says. “Children do not do better with an abusive parent — no matter if it is a man or if it is a woman.”

I always believed in our justice system. That’s why I invested everything in it. Do I believe in it now? No, I don’t. I absolutely don’t.


grandmother of Ben

Ben’s symptoms continued. He was singing disturbing songs and punching himself. According to Cooper, Ben returned from a visit with his father — who had a four-days-a-week custody arrangement — with bruises and abrasions that he couldn’t explain. After returning from another visit, Ben asked Cooper for help going to the bathroom. When she discovered blood on his toilet paper, she rushed him to the hospital, where he was diagnosed with anal fissures.

The hospital diagnosis led to an inquiry from the police and a visit to the Yale Child Sexual Abuse Clinic, where Ben was interviewed. Cooper later shared a video of the interview with Newberger, whom she hired as a consultant. Newberger later suggested that Ben was showing signs of post-traumatic stress disorder. Cooper also hired Joyanna Silberg, a psychologist and child-trauma specialist at Sheppard Pratt hospital in Maryland. To Silberg, Ben’s regressive, destructive and sexualized behavior indicated severe abuse. “This is how children cope when they don’t know how to handle the extremes of what they’re enduring,” she told Al Jazeera America. No one at the Yale Clinic had photographed Ben’s injuries, and after the initial visit, the bleeding continued. Cooper’s mother, Catherine, a nurse, decided they should take a photo themselves. “Anytime someone comes in the hospital, you take a picture,” Catherine says.

Meanwhile, Cooper’s ex-husband denied ever touching his son inappropriately. Cooper, his lawyer claimed, was the one harming their child.

The court agreed with him. In the judge’s telling, Cooper was a far more destructive force than her ex-husband: Cooper had “taken it upon herself to become the documentarian of record (for what) she believes is a righteous and just cause,” the judge said. “The downside of that, sincere as her belief may be, is that her conduct towards the child itself is abusive. The taking of that picture was abusive.”

The judge awarded sole custody to Ben’s father. Cooper would be allowed to see her son only under supervision.

In the months after the judge’s order, Ben’s erratic behavior continued. He seemed obsessed with violence — severed heads and hands were mentioned — and one day at his therapist’s office he described someone defecating in his mouth. A child psychiatrist, Kenneth Robson, was appointed to evaluate the case. Robson was a well-known authority on alienation with an impressive resume — two decades at Tufts University School of Medicine, a decade as director of child and adolescent psychiatry at a Hartford, Conn., hospital, an appointment at Yale University School of Medicine. According to court transcripts, Robson called Cooper a “French whore” during a phone call with a visitation worker, and he cited Gardner as an influence on his evaluation. James Smith, Cooper’s lawyer, asked that Robson be barred from evaluating the case. “The court said that he is a well-known expert who’s qualified as a child psychiatrist,” Smith says.

Robson, who did not respond to interview requests, completed his evaluation in the summer of 2011. In the report, which was provided to Cooper, he described Ben as a “complex diagnostic picture” — a precocious boy who was “bonded” to a “sturdy” father. Cooper, meanwhile, was damaged and dangerous. In a passage that recalled Gardner’s ideas about “vicarious gratification,” Robson wrote that when she told Ben to stop his sexualized outbursts, she was not only unconvincing but wanted him to continue. This “orgiastic” obsession with Ben’s genitals had so overstimulated the boy that he could no longer “contain the passions thus aroused,” he wrote, adding that, like “Moby Dick,” this story would end in tragedy. The damage would be to “(Ben’s) soul.” Robson recommended that sole custody remain with Ben’s father.

A decision reached last winter gave Cooper two supervised visits a week, plus five hours on Mother’s Day and Christmas. Cooper says that she is more than half a million dollars in debt and cannot afford to pay for supervised visitation; she has not seen Ben in more than a year. Randy Burton, a former Houston prosecutor who specialized in child sexual abuse and who founded Justice for Children, wasn’t familiar with Cooper’s case. After reviewing the facts for Al Jazeera America, he said that it showed how much law enforcement, the judiciary and mental-health experts have been “infected” by a “bogus theory” like PAS. “At every opportunity where the system could have intervened to protect the child,” it failed to do so, Burton wrote in an email. “What this pervasive pattern of denial in the presence of such overwhelming evidence of abuse indicates is just how far the system has been compromised by this junk science.”

Catherine gave her daughter her life savings, $550,000, to help with the case. She later filed for bankruptcy. “I always believed in our justice system. That’s why I invested everything in it,” Catherine says. “Do I believe in it now? No, I don’t. I absolutely don’t.”


Judge Gothard discusses the harm caused by the rampant use of junk science-PAS in courts dealing with child sexual abuse cases. Clip from Breaking the Silence at www.globalvillagemedia.org/breakingthesi­lence

 http://www.nowayoutbutone.com, Kids of Divorce Speak Out, Divorce Corp,The Untold Story from the Center for Judicial Excellence. Documentary clips about the Collins family, the first American family granted asylum in the Netherlands because of dangerous 

Emily Gallup: Family Court Whistleblower, Former Mediator-  

whistleblower Emily Gallup sued the Nevada County Family Court and won. Judicial bias & rampant illegal activity at the Nevada County Family Court. Additional footage available.

California family court whistleblower Emily Gallup describes family court corruption, collusion and the lack of accountability in the documentary Divorce Corp. Gallup reveals that her family court co-workers and supervisors were “cutting corners” and not following state law and established policies and procedures. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADh_PX1eVQk

Rebecca: Family Court Survivor- 

http://www.centerforjudicialexcellenc… Kids of Divorce Speak Out, Divorce Corp. The Untold Story from the Center for Judicial Excellence. A harrowing first-hand account exposing greed and corruption in the California family courts. This clip only scratches the surface of this young woman’s incredible tale of survival. Additional footage available.


Breaking The Silence; Children’s Stories-

Breaking The Silence: Children’s Stories (BTS) chronicles the impact of domestic violence on children and the recurring failings of family courts across the country to protect them from their abusers.
In stark and often poignant interviews, children and battered mothers tell their stories of abuse at home 

Shelley is one of the many brave and articulate warrior Moms who amaze us with how gracefully they handle the most egregious injustices that a mother could imagine- watching your precious girls be taken from you and put into the custody of their abusive Dad, a man who was on probation for a child abuse 

Santa Clara County Appellate & Family Law Specialist Robin Yeamans speaks about her 44 years of experience in the California family law system, explaining how broken the system has become. This footage was gathered at the Sept. 19th Stop Court Crimes Protest at the Judicial Council HQ in San 
Part 1 of 2- This 5 min. trailer exposes a brewing nightmare in family courts across America: children are routinely being placed by the family court in the sole custody of their abusive parents. This film exposes a few outrageous cases from Marin County, California. It must be seen and heard to be believed.
Children Lost In System Wistleblower Former Family Court Judge Speaks Out Salcido
A Family Court Judge Admits She Made a mistake, speaks out about the million dollar industry of abused mothers and children in family Court default is to give abuser custody

Children and The Courts Placed Back With Abusive Parents


Children are devastated by the loss of contact with the target parent


No child should be called a TRAITOR simply for loving the “other parent.”

Many mothers who seek safety from abuse are routinely prohibited from having even themost basic contact with their own children, not because they were unfit parents, but because they were outspent, out represented, and out-maneuvered in a court atmosphere not prepared to understand the needs of families dealing with domestic violence.

To unnecessarily and violently separate a woman and her young children can represent the gravest form of abuse, with major social ramifications in generations to come.

When a court orders the removal of a child from a parent it can have the same emotional wounding effect on the deprived mother (or father) as if that child has been kidnapped or murdered. When the deprived parent has been the protective parent, and the court gives custody and decision-making power to the abusive parent under the guise of “Best Interests of the Child” statutes, the loss to the severed parent is deeply damaging.

In addition to trying to recover from the abuse of a spouse and the profound grief at being separated from your children, there is an overwhelming guilt at not having fought successfully to protect your children. The fact is that sometimes the courts get it wrong. Prolonged custody fights require a tremendous amount of stamina and money for lawyers. A domineering and abusive spouse with access to funds can easily manipulate the court system to his (or her) advantage and drag the fight out for years. One day you wake up to discover that the children you love and cherish and have been aching for have grown up, been told for years that you abandoned them and taught to hate you.

While many people focus their outrage on the judicial system alone, it’s easy to lose sight of broader problems that assist in the culture of abuse—like churches, pastors, family members and the local community. These elements, too, played a role in the corruption and silence that has allowed a man like my ex-husband, Marty Warner, of Independence, Oregon, and others like him, to operate untouched for so long.

What I learned through these past few decades is that domestic violence, rape, child abuse and child sexual molestation is socially acceptable in our society and often in many church settings. This needs to change!

Posted by Coral Anika Theill
Author, Advocate, Speaker & Reporter
Memoir: BONSHEA Making Light of the Dark
Website: www.coralanikatheill.com

The price for my own safety and freedom in 1996 was an imposed, unnatural and unwanted separation from my eight children. The injustice committed against me is not just the physical separation from my children, but the willful desecration of the mother-child relationship and bond, a sacred spiritual and emotional entity.

Extreme Father Rights undermines Victims of Domestic Violence

Patriarchy remembered


The Custody Wars For Father’s Property 

“The utilization of equality and civil rights language does not change the underlying call for the reinstatement of patriarchy in the fathers’ rights movement. Harkening back to a time when men had near absolute control over children as property, activists advocate for male property rights that trump both the best interests of children and the safety of battered mothers.”

Kelly BehreKelly Behre is a visiting associate professor of law at West Virginia University and the incoming director of the Family Protection and Legal Assistance Clinic at the University of California, Davis.

Director, Family Protection and Legal Assistance Clinic 

UC Davis School of Law

 Martin Luther King, Jr. Hall
Davis, CA 95616-5201
United States


The Fathers’ Rights Movement Undermines Victims of Domestic Violence

A social movement that promotes equal rights for men who want to parent their children is essentially feminist. But the current fathers’ rights movement is not.

I could simply point to the fathers’ rights fringe groups, with their misogynist rants and close ties to the men’s rights movement, to make the case that the movement is not only anti-feminist but anti-women.

The fathers’ rights movement is characterized by thinly veiled misogyny.

But even the more moderate groups within the fathers’ rights movement engage in a backlash against feminism when they attempt to discredit the experiences of female victims of intimate partner violence and roll back legal protections for all victims of domestic and sexual violence.

Self-proclaimed fathers’ rights activists minimize the well-documented prevalenceand severity of domestic violence against women, accusing domestic violence advocates of promoting false allegations that alienate children from their parents.

Many fathers’ rights activists argue that women perpetuate as much, if not more, violence against intimate partners and that most domestic violence is mutual, ignoring or discounting all research to the contrary. They accuse programs that serve battered women of discrimination on the basis of sex, even to the point of bringing (unsuccessful) lawsuits against them on equal protection claims.

They respond to the higher rates of homicide and serious injury committed against women by intimate partners by blaming victims, advocates and court systems, rather than the actual perpetrators of violence. Many even lobbied against the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.

The utilization of equality and civil rights language does not change the underlying call for the reinstatement of patriarchy in the fathers’ rights movement. Harkening back to a time when men had near absolute control over children as property, activists advocate for male property rights that trump both the best interests of children and the safety of battered mothers.

in the comment section you will find the regular ranting of misogyny and then this jewel appeared -

The trepidness of the feminist response to the onslaught of anti-woman, anti-mother, anti-child legislation that is running rampant in this country ensures that it will continue. Feminists need to organize around this issue and realize that if we don’t, we are soon going to find ourselves with no rights to choose when to have a child and or how to parent the children we choose to have. Last year, in a NYC family court, a female judge ordered that a pregnant woman had no right to leave the state and equated her doing so to kidnapping–this despite the fact that the child’s father had told the mother he wanted nothing to do with it and married someone else! To begin with, feminists are going to have to abandon the language of equality. Mothers and fathers are not equal. This is basic biology. At the moment a child is born, the mother has contributed substantially more to bringing the child into the world than the father. She has, in fact, risked her life to do so. She will then, likely, proceed to produce and distribute the food the child needs to live for the next year. Only when fathers provide half of carrying the child, half of delivering the child, and half of producing the milk for the child, can we have a conversation that is based on an idea of “equality.” And that is impossible. This is a fundamentally unequal arena. Please see two excellent books by Mary Ann Mason: The History of Child Custody in the United States, and The Equality Trap.

Mary Ann Mason is currently professor and co-director of the Center, Economics & Family Security at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law.

Mary Ann Mason’s scholarship spans children and family law, policy, and history. Recent works have focused on working families, in particular the issues faced by the surging numbers of professional women in law, medicine, science, and the academic world. Her most recent books are, “Do Babies Matter? Gender and Family in the Ivory Tower” (with Nicholas Wolfinger and Marc Goulden, 2013) and “Mothers on the Fast Track”  (with daughter, Eve Mason Ekman, 2007).


In the Best Interest of the Child?



Digging beneath the Equality Language: The Influence of the Fathers’ Rights Movement on Intimate Partner Violence Public Policy Debates and Family Law

To anyone unfamiliar with the fathers’ right movement, this story may not cause concern, let alone outrage. But another look at the research and the law may raise red flags. In spite of its dissemination between and beyond the fathers’ rights movement, the evaluation conclusions bear little rational relationship to the findings. The research is at best misguided and confused, and at worst, a deliberate attempt to mislead the public in order to promote a political agenda. The new law is inexplicably redundant, as both the domestic relations code and criminal code already provide sanctions for parents who make false allegations of abuse. The law was essentially a solution created to prove a problem by shifting the public policy focus from protecting victims to questioning their motives and potentially silencing them.

At first glance, the modern fathers’ rights movement and law reform efforts appear progressive, as do the names and rhetoric of the “father’s rights” and “children’s rights” groups advocating for the reforms. They appear a long way removed from the activists who climbed on bridges dressed in superhero costumes or the member martyred by the movement after setting himself on fire on courthouse steps. Their use of civil rights language and appeal to formal gender equality is compelling. But a closer look reveals a social movement increasingly identifying itself as the opposition to the battered women’s movement and intimate partner violence advocates. Beneath a veneer of gender equality language and increased political savyness remains misogynistic undertones and a call to reinforce patriarchy.


Let John David see His Mom

Mothers Protest at the White house to let John David see his mother

Mothers of Lost Children protest at the Whitehouse 2013

Mothers of Lost Children supports Protective Mom Andrea in sending the message,

“Let John David See His Mom!”

Mothers protest at the Whitehouse  and Congress the separation of mothers and children after Divorce. Mothers took our message to the Victims Rights Caucus and Congressman Ted Poe bringing attention to Domestic Violence Divorces, the need for equal protection under the law and the need to address Custody issues in these High Risk Cases, were the non-offending mother is separated from the child victim.

The Coalition of Mothers sends the message that children taken from primary attached mothers causes life long trauma.  Under the Constitution of the United States, Women have the right to Equal Justice under the law and require help to protect these rights; to parent and protect their children.  Routinely, Children are taken from safe mothers in Separation and Divorce in Family Courts and require the Federal Government to address the violations of law in State Courts, funded by federal grants.

Mothers of Lost Children at the Victims Rights Caucus

Mothers of Lost Children Vigil Lobbying Congress to let John David see his mom

Federal Oversight Now on Domestic Violence and Child Abuse in America

MOST contested custody cases are actually domestic abuse or child abuse cases in which abusers have been allowed to use the courts to regain control over their victims, and bankrupt the safe, non-offending, primary care-giving, protective mother. These innocent children lose contact with their mothers and experience irreparable harm.  With perverse financial incentives children are taken from loving mothers and placed with dangerous fathers. In doing so they insure the contentious litigation that family courts are famous for. Additional federal funding is fueling the war on women and children and its time to stop the madness. Judges are failing to protect our children and our Due Process. Mr. President Protect our rights under the Constitution and provide protection for Women and Children of Domestic Violence Divorces…Mothers Justice Movement for Equal Rights in the Courts

Stop New Jersey Judges from forcing defenseless children to be harmed by ABUSERS!



Let John David See his mom at Lincoln memorial

Let John David see his mom

Reposted from Safe Kids international social media campaign -

Poem by Protective Mom Andrea for Son Taken Away
Like So Many Who Have Fought to Keep and Protect

I breathe you in dreams…I breathe you awake….
I breathe you in every breath that I take….

I breathe to your birth…was there for your creation…
Then the ensuing devastating hellation…

Why are some people born, I wonder…
To live such lives asunder….

I think of the way I thought life would be….
At least I saw your sweet smile…for a little while….
I miss you and hope you’re doing fine
Love, me

*You can leave comments of support here for Andrea.

There is no reason for judges to take children away from good mothers, yet there are hundreds of thousands (millions?) around the world who have had their children taken away completely or placed on supervised visitation indefinitely by family court judges.

Even when fathers are violent and/or sexually assault their children (or other children), they virtually never get their children taken away completely or placed on supervised visitation for long. There is almost always an immediate goal of reunifying with fathers, no matter what violence they have perpetrated on the children or their mother.

Not so with mothers. Many good mothers lose all contact with their children for long periods of time, often until they are 18. And by 18, the children are sometimes so Stockholmed and brainwashed that they do not want to see their mother anymore.

This ingrained systemic bias against women MUST STOP. The single most important social issue facing our society today is this oppression and devastation of women and children by the legal and “justice” system.

When thousands unite and protest whenever a judge takes a child away from a good mother, we will be a force to be reckoned with! Stay active on Safe Kids FB to support Protective Moms and join the International Organization for Women and Children:


Stop Abuse Campaign


Children's Justice Campaignhttp://www.childrensjusticecampaign.org/