The Trojan Horse: Shared Custody helping Abusers get custody
Father’s Rights 101 and Why can’t we be friends by Janie McQueen are a must read! All hail Ms. McQueen!, Author and Divorce Gamesmanship Expert who breaks down the issues surrounding the custody war and tactics of the extreme fatherhood initiative. The cloak and dagger of this Extremist Hate Group is using a new vehicle, the film Divorce Corp. and the thrust of they’re campaign is a mission to sell shared custody. This ad in North Dakota supporting Measure 6 clever, using a child to sell the message, notice the supporters. This clever tool is helping to educate the public while introducing legislation and public policies on custody. They want mothers to believe it’s the courts versus us, and shifting away from Fathers vs Mothers. These Divorce Corp folks want you to believe that men suffer equally. They want you to believe this fraud rather than see the truth that the system which has been designed to dismantle mothers in custody hearings was created by them to reward the bully and make lawyers rich. With the help of this lobbying group called the fatherhood initiative they have acquired Billions in federal funds to fuel these unjust, and inhumane court proceedings that violates state and federal policies. This has become the State vs Motherhood, instigated by abusive entitled men, making children collateral damage and restoring the patriarchal rule in America. The Trojan Horse revealed.
The State courts have become a profitable political machine fueled by greedy lawyers and abusive litigants. Court professionals have gotten behind ‘Super Dad’, rewarding the appearance of fatherly devotion, and why not? Mothers and Fathers are equal, right? He can provide for the children. Let’s not forget all the federal funding and fraternal devotion. With this Health and Human Services funding earmarked to help fathers continue contact with children, court services works to the detriment of the ‘good mother’. Inside this Trojan horse called ‘shared parenting’ are the winning strategies, that work to find mother’s unfit, and win the war.
In Phyllis Chesler books on this subject she memorialized these events with several titles on the subject of the ‘good enough Mother’ losing Custody to violent men. Controlling men who see escaping women as something to capture or destroy. While entitled fathers abscond with the children, hopped up on the belief that they have the right to ownership, the well oiled machine of the fatherhood industry created court policies and psycho babble used in litigation to assist and cover up the crimes of these dangerous men. Some men use the court to devastate financially and emotionally to the extent that the women have no choice but to give up and go back, but if the non-offending mother dares to fight back or the children disclose abuse, it’s bye, bye mommy.
Recently, Janie investigated the reasons why mothers were supporting Shared Parenting, the film Divorce Corp and mothers and advocates who are getting on board the ‘gender neutral train’.
In “Why Can’t We Be Friends?” - “[T]he more we legitimize their forums and films by attending and listening, and half-supporting and narrowly endorsing, and dropping in to see what’s up, and treating them like we’re related in some way, and Facebook friending them and generally playing both sides, the more confused and messed up this will become. And it’s already plenty messed up.”
Janie, went on to ask in an an email, she says ‘Old School” -
[T]his weekend I ventured outside the touchy-feely-friendly world of Facebook and asked some people outright, old school, via email on Saturday night, why they are taking a role, even a supporting role, in a film with a clear Fathers’ Rights and mandatory shared parenting agenda, and/or the conference it has spawned.
I wrote this note to five people who either are engaged to appear at a Fathers’ Rights conference next weekend, or otherwise have good things to say about the FR film Divorce Corp.
“I’m doing a story on advocacy for mothers and children, versus advocates for the fathers’ movement. I’m questioning why some of the former advocates for the moms and kids that shared parenting has failed, are supporting Divorce Corp, an FR film and their sponsors. It doesn’t seem to me to be gray issue, but quite black and white.
Are you in support of shared parenting? I don’t want PR, I just want to understand why some of the people whom the BMCC and others felt were their advocates, now seem to be toeing the other line, and/or playing both sides.”
…Either you Like it, or you don’t. Either you are Friends or you are not. Isn’t there some other film that tells the whole truth, that our advocates can support? Because in Divorce Corp, I see pure Fathers’ Rights propaganda shoddily hidden behind the Family Courts issues all parents face. It’s a total front.”
We ponder theses questions as well, Can you support a portion of something and not the whole shebang? It’s a small pool relatively we are in, some 20% of Divorce cases fall into the categories of Domestic Violence Divorce called: High Conflict (same % as Sociopaths in society). These clever blokes who are charming, and very convincing. Hard to resist for desperate mothers who need help. When we started on facebook we were very careful, we were dealing with abusive fr groups and mothers groups, and once you are friends with someone who is friends with someone, (and many FR’s hide behind women’s skirts) after a while you give up. Sadly, the mothers so traumatized, can be bullies with big egos, spread rumors if you don’t agree with them. It’s all confusing. Glad Janie is trying to flush this out.
Some organizations have chosen to concentrate on rights of children to take the gender pressure off, and hairpin trigger of abusive father rights extremists. It also allows them to receive funding that otherwise would not be available to a mothers organization addressing Domestic Violence and protection for children (no federal motherhood funding). There are also advocates who are not mothers and as paid professionals do not see the harm that is being done by joining the shared parenting and neutral gender campaign. In the beginning some mothers chose boycotting as an answer to the premier showings of this film. Some have used it as opportunity to educate the public with op-eds, showing up and sharing stories and bringing attention to the real problem and propaganda by showing the film “No Way Out But One“, the Holly Collins Story.
We agree joining them is not the answer. one mother responded with, “Deconstructing the mess so that lawmakers, advocates, and the pubic at large understands the issues is hard enough. IF they would identify the fact that SOME fathers are abusive AND that MOST victims are telling the truth, they might actually support protective parents, men and women alike. BUT since they don’t… all they do is identify there is a bunch of money being made off of people who can’t afford to lose.” Frankly, you would have to hold me down, I can’t be nice about it anymore, either. I get that some people think education is the answer, That’s how I approach most problems. Educate, Educate, Educate. I’m a teacher and I will always approach issues with varied strategies, with stories, examples and statistics. I never give up, but we are often dealing with B Cluster Personalities and there is no convincing them. Truth, you can not educate people with a closed mind set on false beliefs. This false belief is very rewarding, financially and professionally. It’s Carrot or a Stick that is going to improve the outcomes for children and their mothers. We need to hold Judges accountable, train young professionals, audit courts and federal programs while incentivizing trauma informed, child centered custody programs. For true child protection and humane treatment of children we must dismantle CPS and rethink the fostercare system.
The ‘Bureau of Misinformation and Deception’ is well at work and emphasized in this recent film and on websites about father’s rights. Myths about the custody of children still abound. Most people still believe that the courts favor mothers over fathers, that fathers are discriminated against in the Family Courts because they are men and that this is how it’s always been. Specifically, the myth that custody decisions invariably favor women needs to be challenged. The secondary training of Judges and Lawyers continue to defraud the courts with false allegations and PAS, designed to shift blame on to the reporting party (most often mother), putting children in danger and robbing mothers of their access to Justice. The public needs to know the truth , but these folks at the table know exactly what they are doing. There may be a few ignorant or arrogant folks coerced into going along, not knowing the underlying truth. Majority do know, lawyers and professionals fanning the fire for increased billable hours, pecuniary interest. Follow the money.
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. Edmund Burke” Any film or organization that is gender neutral on issues of abuse are feeding the beast.
While they break down the money laundering and financial scheme well, and the tactics to bilk Americans of every dime while destroy America families. This is where we separate, money is not necessarily the great equalizer: while men and women can get on the same page on this issue of ‘scorched earth litigation‘ , lawyer driven, devastatingly costly and emotionally exhausting, there are some gender issues. Women make up 70% of pro se litigants in Family courts with incomes unequal to men, while Judges refuse family code 2030 which states that the court shall level the playing field. This failure to provide protection for ones rights in a Pay to play court has a predictable outcome. Access to justice is clear - Women lose custody to men who file for full custody 70% of the time. Further, income of the parents in the Best interest standard is an indicator for custody.
I too had a conversation via emails about the Seat at the Table, a concept I feel strongly about. I disagreed as well with ‘this chair’ that is hardly open, I noticed that the roster of speakers had few women 4 to be exact (don’t know if that changed) out of 30 participants and wondered if more women could shift the thinking or if they will be the same gatekeepers we often encounter in women supporting the patriarchy. I have great respect for these women but this is My response to wanting to change ‘their minds’,
“All of us getting on the same page about the money issue and funding isn’t enough”-
“Good Fathers do not file for full custody when the mother is fit and attached to the child. Trying to convince these men who are fearful, angry, and punishing who are going for the money (and the jugular) despite the adverse effects on children can not be educated at the table. We need policies to control litigants and attorneys who use the courts to continue abuse from marriage through divorce court and protection for parents who report abuse in good faith. We need courts to uphold protective orders and DV codes and better understanding of Domestic Violence Divorces.”
How do you share custody with an abuser? With so many judges giving shared custody to the batterer or identified molester, how do you now share custody with the rapist…How do you friendly parent when your child begs you not to send them? and if you protest you are now an Unfriendly Parent giving yet another reason to take custody from the mother.
“Forcibly taking a mother’s children, and then controlling her emotionally by withholding contact must be publicly recognized as one of the greatest forms of ‘mis-use’ of the American justice system and one of the greatest hidden vehicles for wide-spread socially approved physical and emotional abuse and control.” Coral Anika Theil
It was clear from the beginning what the Divorce Corp agenda was, by using William Farrell and Glenn Sachs to report about false allegations in the film, they tipped their hand. Divorce Corp and Shared parenting is dangerous fatherhood propaganda. They failed to mention that if issues of domestic violence, child sexual abuse, or child physical abuse are brought up in court, typically results in a loss of custody and/or visitation for the parent trying to protect their child from abuse. Legitimate child abuse victims are routinely being handed over to their perpetrators in record numbers. While False Allegations are made in these cases 2-5% of the time, the perpetrator is believed 98% of the time to be not guilty. These cases often result in the protective and non offending parent losing custody and all contact and the child is left alone with the identified perpetrator.
For many of us who live in states with 50/50 presumed in custody, we want you to know that it does little to protect the rights of mothers and the bond with children. A father fighting for full custody will win custody 70% of the time. In these Domestic Violence Divorces they win 85% of the time regardless of the mountain of evidence and common sense. Abusive men disregard or have no understanding or empathy for the needs of children and court professionals are looking the other way for profit. For the sociopath removing a child from an attached mother holds no weight with them, other than the joy derived from the pain it will cause the mother.
The flood gates were opened with the removal of the Tender years doctrine replaced by The Best Interest Standard- a father friendly program with a Carrot…increased custody time for lower child support. What we need is to protect the relationship between the attached parent child bond for the health and welfare of the developing human child, and protection for their safety.
We need child friendly policies that are trauma informed in family law that acknowledges pre-separation parent child time and Why she left. Uphold family codes that protect victims of Domestic Violence. Custody courts should be overseen by people with education and understanding in the areas of child development and family violence.
The carrot or the stick….Daniel Sanders in a report to Justice in 2012 addressed the issue of gender neutrality being a Trojan horse, by ignoring the truth about Domestic Violence we fail to protect Women and children of Divorce. At the heart of these issues is the mistrained and Biased professionals that fails to provide access to justice. Preferring to disbelieve women and children this institutional bias against single mothers keeps the power of the family in the hands of Dangerous fathers. Failing to provide protection for mothers and their children is the result of the archaic institutional patriarchal rule. It is connected politically to why we pay fathers higher wages and create programs to return fathers to the family to address children and poverty. Dr. Sanders recommended incentives to State Family Courts to improve the outcomes for Mothers and Children of Domestic Violence Divorces. We also recommend fair and equalizing programs including fair wages and equal access to funding for single mothers.
We all know good fathers who have been screwed by the system, and with empathy we can be compassionate and understanding, these men are sacrifices to a patriarchal system and provide the cover for the true intent, Screw the Bitch.
In a fair court concerned about the needs of children, and all things being equal than good enough fathers would not get full custody of children over attached good enough mothers, and dangerous parents should not have access to children.
The idea that a father’s pain is equal to that of a mothers or of more value is inconceivable. No man could feel the same pain as a mother who gave birth to a child they are now fighting to protect and retain contact with.
The strategies in Domestic Violence Divorces should be considered hate crimes which are being committed in secret courts across America. This ‘terrorizing of women and children’ should be addressed under domestic policies as war crimes and recognized by the United States President and Congress who have declared war on Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan for these same crimes. Where’s our Geneva Convention? and United States Senators who signed a resolution to bring children back who were kidnapped in Uganda… Shame on you! How many times must we come to Washington begging, pleading, demanding that you help our children trafficked through the courts and held ransom? Until women have an equal voice under the law, and stand together to demand our rights we will continue to be violated and our children taken and tortured.
It is our mission to bring public awareness to the fact that children who report abuse, particularly incest, are regularly given into the custody or unsupervised visitation of their identified perpetrators. Children are being trafficked through the courts. 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/1/med/PR3.html
Thanks for breaking this down Janie and asking why? I hope Janie asks next, ” Why are you calling it Parental Alienation?” and helping the FR’s? When this is what they falsely accused you of, now you are alienated from your children as a result of the fraud upon the court. Mother’s alienated from their children are helping to legitimize their claims. We must call it what it is, a Hate Crime. To take a child from a mother and brainwash them. We are Mothers alienated from our children. Falsely accused mothers who are being tortured along with our children. We can call it Maternal Deprivation, Maternal Alienation, anything but help them legitimize their false claims.
We need to face it women and children are prey and the coercive controllers and predictors are working it! They change the names of their groups but their plan remains the same. I have asked this question before, what have they done for you lately? If you believe they care about mothers, show me the money! Wake up ladies, you are being manipulated into joining the other side and while you wait around for the crumbs, their well oiled propaganda machine gets bigger and stronger. Where is my Motherhood.gov?
“Hypocrisy can afford to be magnificent in its promises, for never intending to go beyond promise, it costs nothing.“
Janie McQueen is a career journalist and author of four books, most recently Hanging On By My Fingernails: Surviving the New Divorce Gamesmanship, and How a Scratch Can Land You in Jail. She writes for www.hopeafterdivorce.org, www.LAFamily.com, and www.FamilyShare.com. She is also considered an expert on juvenile literature, as the author of The Magic Bookshelf.
I call this “Fathers’ Rights 101″ because it was MY 101. It was and is the yardstick by which I measure what I see going on in the Fathers’ Rights movement, and it shook me so when I started learning about it, that I’ve never wavered from my conviction that FR and anything connected to it is already rotten, no matter how many layers of frosting and rewording and flashy fireworks are applied. I thought I’d reprint it in the case you or someone else might be moved by it too.
Excerpt from Hanging On By My Fingernails: Surviving the New Divorce Gamesmanship, and How a Scratch Can Land You in Jail by Janie McQueen, copyright 2012
SHARED PARENTING AND LOWERED CHILD SUPPORT
Another scenario is that when domestic violence moved from the social realm to the criminal—and, therefore, legal—arena, men may have recognized they had a distinct advantage: They usually had more resources to fight. This not only involved money, but support from other men ranging from those in high places, to other fathers who shared the same issues. “Fathers’ rights” organizations, which originally emerged in the 1970s, began gaining strength in the 1980s with more pro-female legislation, and now ironically wield real power in response to VAWA.
Two pillars of the fathers’ rights platform are the concept of “shared parenting,” and the intense crusade to lower child support. Shared parenting, or joint custody, is a collaborative agreement in which the care of the children is equal (or at least more equal than a normal primary-custody arrangement, in which the child lives with one parent and has visitation with the other). A shared parenting arrangement between the biological parents follows a plan to which both parents agree. While a shared parenting plan does not prohibit child support, the implication is there may be a lesser amount assigned if the child spends time with each parent more equally.
Kim Gandy, former President of the National Organization for Women (NOW) has contended “presumptive joint custody” only furthers the extent to which an abuser can continue to exploit. “It creates an unparalleled opportunity for belligerent former spouses to carry on their personal agendas or vendettas through the children—and with the blessing of the courts,” she said in an article by former Michigan NOW President Gloria Woods. “Attorneys often referred to it jokingly as the `lawyer protection act’ because repeated trips to court over minor issues kept the fees rolling in, and the mothers were more likely to suffer.”
The fathers’ rights movement is arguably the strongest force working against VAWA and related laws designed to protect women. We are not referring to fathers like Steven who fight for custody because they need to protect their children, and truly believe they will thrive better in their father’s care. We are talking about a bullying “man versus bitch” mentality, in which the man wants the divorce and all the spoils (or to share fewer of the spoils, whether it is with his ex-wife or his children from the marriage). The fathers’ rights organizations claim they simply seek a way to try to get the courts to more evenly consider a custody case, and “not always defer to the mother.” They argue that historically, courts did not view each situation in the true best interest of the child.
Regardless of whether this is true or not, the fathers’ rights movement has become a militant movement. Men are coached publicly on using the most malicious tactics possible to accomplish what seem like sinister goals: to remove or at least significantly reduce their financial obligations to their children, and return to positions of power, not only in their current lives but with their ex-wives.
Author Lundy Bancroft says the problem is more pernicious than just the existence and influence of the fathers’ rights groups. “Abusers are more and more getting fed by these father supremacy organizations, the whole father supremacy movement which calls itself the father’s rights movement,” he told us. “Let’s call it what it is.”
He goes a step further in typifying these men. “These guys are very, very obvious male supremacists when you read their stuff.”
We read their stuff:
From fathersrights.org Free Aggressive Tactics Page:
TRICK OF THE TRADE
“When you stand up for your rights (including custody), spouses who think they can run over you, and take your kids, house and money, suddenly face the possibility that they may lose custody and be required to pay child support. Suddenly they become more reasonable. Do not begin settlement negotiations by being reasonable. Demand everything just like she does! In negotiations you can only compromise down. If your first offer is reasonable, where do you go from there? If you do not ask for sole custody several of the tactics in this book will not be as effective. ALWAYS file for custody, even in support matters.” ________________________________________
To Read more - http://janiemcqueen.com/fathers-rights-101-a-few-pages-from-my-book/