Search This Blog

Saturday, October 23, 2010

Facts about Parental Alienation

Below is from Dr, Jayne Major. 

Her reason for starting her blog mirrors mine and says it very well. I too am working and writing in hopes of making a difference in the future of our children.

She explains what parental alienation is, who does it and why. She also documents the corruption that takes place in the family court system. You MUST understand that the courts corruption is something you did not expect and yet the court will control what happens in your life and your children’s life’s.

I have been asked to write more about my case and I will. My case will document the corruption in the court system, attorneys and judges. Can I sue them? Yes, I have been told I have a good case against two attorneys but the commissioner, she will hid behind and be protected by judicial immunity. She can be openly bias in my case and rule against any and all evidence and there is nothing I can do about it…as far as my case goes. I have filed a complaint with the State and county officials because such a person as Lani-Kia Swanhart should not be allowed to rule in any manner. She is dishonest and rules on her own perception. She even is willing to suppress evidence that goes against her beliefs. Blain Connaughton is a trail lawyer who will lie to the court and to the bar association without remorse.
Anyway, lots of information in today’s Blog so take your time and follow the links!

Why I Began This Blog

I started this blog for my children-  
Our story is written as an Article 78 (the legaleze for when you sue a Judge) below on the right hand side. Use the magnifying symbol to enlarge the documents for easier reading. Don't shoot the messenger.. but guess what..

Many Court Rooms are corrupted by some not so honest judges!

Innocent or not..

In the blink of an eye.. you can lose your kids, your life savings, your inheritance, your house and or your mind!
That's why I've continued to post to this blog beause...

So many children are being destroyed by our wonderful system..

They've forced me to become a child/ family and civil rights advocate/activist.

I should thank them for the education I got out of this!

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Interview and Articles by Dr. Jayne Major on Parent Alienation

This is an interview with Dr. Jayne Major. She speaks very openly about Parent Alienation and Parent Alienation Syndrome.

This is a must watch!

If I can take one sentence from this interview and get it out there it would be...

That was my downfall!

Being passive is the problem of most if not all "target" parent's..

Are you going through a divorce with someone that you believe is "not playing with a full deck."

Are you going through a divorce with someone that seems "out of touch with reality?"

Are you going through a divorce with someone that has "aligned the children of the marriage with them self?"

Are you always being "undermined" in your parenting efforts or any other efforts, by your partner or in laws?

Do you often times find yourself wondering if it is "you" that has lost your mind.. due to the way your partner acts in situations?

More likely than not if you answered yes to these questions above you are involved with someone who is not in touch with reality.. someone who has a personality disorder and that means you are at HIGH RISK for losing your children to that person! Don't be an ass like I was ..

EDUCATE YOURSELF on Parent alienation- learn all you can- before it's to late!

Adult children that were separated from one parent.. were you alienated?

You may be suffering from the effects of being raised by the more disturbed parent.. please I'm pleading with you.. WATCH THIS VIDEO!

If you are reading this and were or are either an alienated parent or feel you may be a child that was alienated from the healthier parent - THERE IS HOPE - YOU CAN BE HELPED!

Please consider talking to a therapist!! Personality disorders can be worked through.. you can learn to think healthier - to live a more productive life- less drama- less self destruction- less self sabotage!

You may not be ready to hear this- but you must want to end the negativity in your life -no one but you and your therapist have to know what is going on in therapy!



Things in your life may not be the way you perceive them- you may be creating your own insanity- simply due to the way you were raised.. by a personality disordered parent!


Click the link below for more including the interview with Dr. Jayne Major-

Click here for more coverage on parental alienation.

Here’s an interview with Jayne Major, Ph.D., a Los Angeles psychologist and educator advocating means to stop parental alienation behaviors and heal the damage they cause. In the interview, she answers common questions about parental alienation.

She describes the range from mild bad-mouthing to sociopathic intent to brainwash children to hate the other parent.

She notes that in severe alienation cases, the target parents (those who are alienated against) must learn to stand up for the truth if they are to have hope of not losing their children permanently to the brainwashing of the alienating parent.

She notes that the most dangerous alienating parents often have one or more personality disorders:

"Few lawyers, judges, nor laypersons are able to recognize seriously disturbed people who look and often act “normal.” Yet, their numbers are large and the damage they do to other parents, their children, and society is staggering. Sociopaths are cruel—without moral conscience, empathy, sympathy, or compassion. Their purpose is to win by domination. Harvard psychologist Martha Stout, in her book The Sociopath Next Door, states that one in twenty-five people is a sociopath. Furthermore, there is an estimated 20% of the general population with personality disorders. Those individuals who are the most dangerous are described in the DSM IV, Axis II Cluster B. The descriptive labels of these disorders are borderline, narcissistic, histrionic, and anti-social."

Individual Questions in the Interview:

What is “parental alienation”?

Why do parents engage in parental alienation?

What type of parent is likely to engage in parental alienation?

How do I know if my spouse is actually committing parental alienation?

What is “severe parental alienation”?

How will parental alienation affect the targeted parent?

How will parental alienation affect my child?

How will parental alienation affect my child when he grows up?

How do I prevent parental alienation?

How do I cope with parental alienation?

What is “parental alienation syndrome”?

How does parental alienation syndrome affect my child?

How do I cope with a child experiencing parental alienation syndrome?

How do I stop parental alienation if it is occurring?

Articles by Jayne Major, Ph.D. on Parental AlienationParents Who Have Successfully Fought Parental Alienation Syndrome

Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS): Its Causes, Cures, Costs, and Controversies

The Macabre Dance of Family Law Court, Abnormal Psychology, and Parental Alienation Syndrome – Summary


Friday, October 22, 2010

Parental Alienation

Parental Alienation;

It’s been called the ultimate form of child abuse — parents brainwashing their children against an ex-spouse in order to win custody. They ARE harming your child emotionally and don’t care! Alienators teach their kids to be pathological liars. Parents should reach a truce, forget about revenge and money (child support) for the sake of the kids. But, most will they continue to battle it out in court and never consider what is best for the children and their future!

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Lani-Kai Swanhart, an unfit Commissioner

I have been very silent about my case for a long time and instead, posted information that would be more useful to all. I now must start posting the crazy behavior I have found in the court systems so that you will know what you are getting into. It will not be just a disagreement with your ex. It will become a full, down in the gutter fight with your ex, attorneys (both yours and your ex) and the family court system that you find yourself in.

I will start with the latest regarding just a simple signing of an order. I will explain more and post the formal complaint I filed against both this commissioner and the attorney who represented my ex Linda. His documented lies in the court room went unchallenged from commissioner Swanhart.

In fact, her ruling was based on false information where she did not allow any disagreement, investigation or input from the opposing side before she made her ruling. You will see the entire complaint in the coming Blogs!

Below is just a short complaint I posted on her court forum;

Lani-Kai Swanhart needs replaced. She has failed the families in Yakima county. She demonstrates a lack of fairness, reasonability and responsibility.

I have filed a formal complaint with WA State and with the Yakima County Commissioners for her destructive and bias nature. Such a person should never be in the position she holds.

To fully understand her ineptitude, you only need to sit in her court room for a very short time.

My case had been appointed to a real Judge and had been ruled on. Both parties had agreed to and signed a modification. My attorney took the order to be signed and entered but had the misfortune to encounter Swanharts court room. She then refused one of the most simple of task for her court. She delayed a lawfully decided action and wasted more court and attorney time with her petty prejudice that reflects her common discrimination in my case.

The short e-mail below from my attorney speaks for itself.
“I just wanted to inform you that your orders were not entered because Commissioner Swanhart has been on the bench and because of your complaint against her; she refused to sign the orders. We will need to get the orders in front of a different judge so that they are signed and entered.”

Lani-Kai Swanhart is a disgrace and should be removed!


Monday, October 4, 2010

Parental Alienation is Real and Harms Children

Action Alert: Tell Major Media Outlets, DSM Committee that Parental Alienation is Real and Harms Children

Short Version: A new Associated Press article covers the heated debate over Parental Alienation. We want you to write a letter to the DSM committee explaining that Parental Alienation is very real and needs to be taken seriously by our family courts–to do so, click here . Also, please write a Letter to the Editor concerning the AP article–click here and choose the email address of the appropriate newspaper(s).

Action Alert–We Want Your Participation

A new national Associated Press article discusses Parental Alienation and whether family courts should consider target parents’ claims of being alienated from their children by their ex-spouses. Led by psychiatrist William Bernet, a group of 70 mental health experts from 12 countries are part of an effort to add Parental Alienation to the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V), the American Psychiatric Association’s “bible” of diagnoses. To ensure that the DSM-V Task Force is aware of the scope and severity of Parental Alienation, thousands of our supporters responded to our Action Alert earlier this year to write to the DSM-V Task Force.

Our message got through–this week Dr. Darrel Regier, vice chair of the task force, told the Associated Press, “We’ve gotten an enormous amount of mail–more than [on] any other issue.” That “enormous amount of mail” was from you, our supporters.

The National Organization for Women, which seeks to suppress recognition of Parental Alienation both in family courts and in the mental health community, criticized our campaign and declared a counter-campaign against it.

We want you to write a letter to the DSM committee explaining that Parental Alienation is very real and needs to be taken seriously by our family courts–to do so, click here. Also, please write a Letter to the Editor concerning the AP article–click here and choose the email address of the appropriate newspaper(s).

Also, we urge you to join the debate in the comments section of the MSNBC version of the article by here.

Fathers and Families web site is located on this Blog,


Flaws in Child Support System

Ohio Dad’s Case Shows Flaws in Child Support System

October 4th, 2010 by Robert Franklin, Esq.

Here’s a good article (Columbus Dispatch, 9/27/10). It says a lot, both in the words it uses and in those it doesn’t. It’s about child support and the strange notion that child support should go to the child. I know that shouldn’t be such a strange notion, but often it is.

Dale Lovett had a brief affair with an unmarried woman about six years ago. She had his son for whom he dutifully paid support. But now the boy, who is five years old, has come to live with Dale, but for months, the state still took his support payment out of his paycheck and dutifully sent it to the mother. Lovett complained to a couple of different agencies to no avail. The mother signed an affidavit that said the child no longer lived with her, but Lovett still couldn’t get his payments stopped. He wrote to the governor; nothing. It took pressure from the Columbus Dispatch to make someone pay attention. Now Lovett has both his son and, as the article so pointedly puts it, his whole paycheck.

It’s the same old story that I’ve been griping about for longer than I care to remember. States make it easy to establish paternity (so easy, sometimes any guy will do) and issue a child support order, but try to modify that order and it’s the 13th labor of Hercules. Often enough, modification is sought because the dad lost his job. So what do states do? They require him to go to court to get the order changed; that usually means hiring an attorney which he can’t remotely afford and in any event it takes months to get a hearing. By then he’s deeply in arrears with no job and no way of paying. And of course, interest kicks in and with the steadily rising arrearages, he may as well just check into jail.

Does the process help the child? Well, if the goal is to provide support, it’s hard to see how a father sitting in a jail cell helps.

Dale Lovett’s case is different, but the result was similar - his child was denied support. The state of Ohio’s failure to provide summary procedures for altering child support meant that, even though his son lived with him, Lovett’s paycheck was still lighter than it should have been because he was still paying the non-custodial mother. Did that help his son? No, but if the media hadn’t taken up his cause, I suppose he’d still be paying.

The problem could be solved if states would simply hire special masters or magistrates who do nothing but decide issues of child support modification. As with most such courts, they would relax the rules of evidence and publish what a person trying to modify an order would need to show the court to be successful. In Lovett’s case, probably the affidavit of his son’s mother would have been sufficient. In court it’s hearsay and of no value. People like Lovett wouldn’t need an attorney; basically, they’d just go before the master and state their case; the other party would have an opportunity to be heard and a ruling would be issued on the spot. The whole thing would probably take 10 minutes.

That would be quicker, easier, cheaper and fairer than the current system. It would also allow children like Dale Lovett’s son to get the support they need.

But the lack of summary procedures, while important, isn’t the only problem. The other is the lack of equality.

Custodial rights automatically start with the mother when a child is born out of wedlock, as about 40 percent of Ohio children are. Child-support agencies can order support for her once paternity is established. But to terminate support or send it elsewhere usually requires a custody ruling in court.

As Glenn Harris of the Columbus Urban League told the Dispatch,

“When you’re not married, as a father, you have no legal rights except to pay the support,” Harris said. Anything else must be sought in court.

So equalizing the rights of unmarried mothers and unmarried fathers would be a place to start. As Harris said, single fathers are ordered to pay support by the state enforcement agency. But in Lovett’s case and countless others, the same is not true of single mothers. It’s one of the things the article overlooks, but, while Lovett was ordered to pay by the Ohio child support agency, the same thing didn’t happen to his son’s mother when the boy came to live with Lovett. Why not? We can only guess. Supposedly the child support agency cares about parents supporting their children, but in Lovett’s case, it completely ignored one source of parental support - the mother’s.

The other is that, again as Lovett’s case shows, as a single father, his access to his child is entirely controlled by the mother. She became pregnant, but the first he knew about it was “when a letter came from the child support agency.” By refusing to require mothers to inform fathers of the existence of their children before birth, we only make it harder for fathers to connect with and support them. All states should pass laws requiring mothers to tell the father about his child before birth. If she’s not sure who the father is, she should be required to tell all potential dads.

I’d say such a law “is just simple justice,” except that, in the field of fathers’ rights, justice rarely seems simple.

From the Fathers and Families website posted here.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Family court needs a over haul in the USA


The movement for Shared Parenting continues to gain momentum around the world. We are seeing more public commentary on the destructive effects of current laws and policies and an ever increasing awareness of inequities between mothers and fathers when it comes to their children. In this newsletter we bring you two articles and the text of a speech by England’s top family court jurist. Also included are preliminary results from a sampling of family law cases in Tennessee and a request for your stories for consideration in an upcoming book about the family courts.

Articles and Speech

Over the past 10 days several pieces of note have been published regarding shared parenting, roles of the court, and government’s role in undermining family stability.

Dr. Stephen Baskerville, author of ‘Taken Into Custody’ and former ACFC President, was quoted extensively in this article from The Philadelphia Bulletin yesterday. The article title; “No-fault Divorce Greater Threat to Marriage Than Gay Marriage” is a bit off the mark. Baskerville’s primary point is that government policies and resulting statutes and programming are themselves the source of society’s family breakdown problems. In inimitable Baskerville style he goes on to ‘connects the dots.’ While Baskerville chides conservatives for not properly understanding the underlying issues his message is one people of all persuasions should hear.

National Post columnist Barbara Kay is a long time friend of fathers and critic of Canada’s family law system. In an article last week she once again makes the case for shared parenting. The National Post is one of Canada’s top ten newspapers with a circulation of just under one million. At the link you will also find additional Barbara Kay writings on misandry (man-hating) and feminism.

Keep coming to this blog and I will keep giving you new information.

I will document the resulting problems with our family court in my personal case and the destructive outcome of out of control lawyers and Judges on our children.

Please post your comment, idea or story below;



Wednesday, September 22, 2010

Get involved to fight the wrongs of family court

A week ago Tuesday on September 14 the United States Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) hosted an all day conference at the National Press Club in Washington, DC.
The conference was titled: A New Era: Defining Civil Rights for the 21st Century. It was covered by C-SPAN. My first report to you is that our messages on Fatherlessness are getting through. The primary theme of the conference was the breakdown of the African American family. Crucial to the theme as a subtext was father absence. Not from the perspective of 'blaming' fathers for being absent but actually discussing how misguided government policy is contributing to father absence and declining marriage rates.

Links to a number of social policies which serve to devalue fathers contribution to the family were identified including; only considering fathers worth on the basis of their financial contribution, welfare programs encouraging the formation of female single parent headed households, a misdirected child support program and the negative impact NOW has had on family stability.

While panelists did not draw direct links to the family courts, it is inevitable that the role of juvenile, probate and family courts will come under closer scrutiny.

The various panel discussions are available for viewing online. This link will take you to a discussion of "The Role of Family Structure in Perpetuating Racial and Ethnic Disparities." I recommend forwarding the presentation to the 26:35 minute mark and listening to the comments of Heather MacDonald from the Manhattan Institute.

ACFC and its affiliated organizations will continue connecting the dots for legislators, policy makers and the public at large. Much of the commentary from panelist's throughout the day could have easily been coming from the likes of many of ACFC's directors, officers and advisors. For years Dr. Stephen Baskerville, Dr. Warren Farrell, Dr. Gordon Finley, Dr. Linda Nielsen and many other allies have been researching and communicating the correlations between, and effects of, fatherlessness and negative child outcomes.


Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Have fun today. See how the stuff below fits your life

A "paraprosdokian" is a figure of speech in which the latter part of a sentence or phrase is surprising or unexpected in a way that causes the reader or listener to reframe or reinterpret the first part. It is frequently used for humorous or dramatic effect.

• Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

• I want to die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather. Not screaming and yelling like the passengers in his car.

• The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list.

• Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

• If I agreed with you, we'd both be wrong.

• We never really grow up; we only learn how to act in public.

• War does not determine who is right -- only who is left.

• Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit; Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad.

• The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

• Evening news is where they begin with "Good evening," and then proceed to tell you why it isn't.

• To steal ideas from one person is plagiarism. To steal from many is research.

• A bus station is where a bus stops. A train station is where a train stops. My desk is a work station.

• How is it one careless match can start a forest fire, but it takes a whole box to start a campfire?

• Dolphins are so smart that within a few weeks of captivity, they can train people to stand on the very edge of the pool and throw them fish.

• I thought I wanted a career; turns out I just wanted pay checks.

• A bank is a place that will lend you money if you can prove that you don't need it.

• Whenever I fill out an application, in the part that says "If an emergency, notify:" I put "DOCTOR."

• I didn't say it was your fault, I said I was blaming you.

• Why does someone believe you when you say there are four billion stars, but check when you say the paint is wet?

• Why do Americans choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss America?

• Behind every successful man is his woman. Behind the fall of a successful man is usually another woman.

• A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory.

• You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to skydive twice.

• The voices in my head may not be real, but they have some good ideas!

• Always borrow money from a pessimist. He won't expect it back.

• A diplomat is someone who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that you will look forward to the trip.

• Hospitality: making your guests feel like they're at home, even if you wish they were.

• Money can't buy happiness, but it sure makes misery easier to live with.

• I discovered I scream the same way whether I'm about to be devoured by a great white shark or if a piece of seaweed touches my foot.

• Some cause happiness wherever they go. Others whenever they go.

• There's a fine line between cuddling and holding someone down so they can't get away.

• I used to be indecisive. Now I'm not sure.

• When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water.

• You're never too old to learn something stupid.

• Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.

• A bus is a vehicle that runs twice as fast when you are after it as when you are in it.

• If you are supposed to learn from your mistakes, why do some people have more than one child?

• Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine.

Everyone needs to lighten up at times and smile, have a great day today my friends, the sun will come up in the morning :)


Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Child Protection and Family Court

 I couldn’t agree more with this piece in Lisa Belkin’s Motherlode blog at the New York Times (New York Times, 8/26/10).

It’s written by an attorney named Chris Gottlieb who defends parents in cases in which the child protection agency accuses them of abuse or neglect and wants to take their kids and put them in foster care. In short, Gottlieb works in the trenches of one of the most emotionally difficult areas of law, and, having done so, she’s got some things to say about CPS and the courts that adjudicate those matters.

And what she says is much like what I and so many others have been saying for years. Judges and caseworkers are supposed to figure out which parents truly are a danger to their children or are unable to care for them. No one pretends that that is always an easy job; it isn’t. But that job has morphed into second-guessing legitimate parental decision making. As Gottlieb says,

One judge wants more discipline; another wants less. I have heard caseworkers criticize mothers for everything from giving their children Chinese takeout food or Kool-Aid (the mother told me orange juice was too expensive for her) to having beer in the house to letting a child get wet under a sprinkler. A judge ordered one of my clients to take her child to the park every day. Every day!

As Gottlieb points out, there is nothing in the law that permits that type of micromanagement of parents by government officials be they judges or caseworkers. The Constitution doesn’t permit it, but it happens every day, thousands of times a day. The camel’s nose is under the tent and it’s not going away. At the rate we’re going, the beast will be sitting down to dinner with us any day now.

And what gave the camel its opening? “The best interests of the child,” that’s what. As Gottlieb points out,

[O]nce government intervention in family life is authorized, the legal standard often becomes “best interests of the child.” How do courts and caseworkers determine what is in a child’s best interests? The same way the rest of us do: subjectively, inconsistently, and often erroneously.

She said a mouthful there. As it happens, I’m currently reading a book by Canadian academic Paul Millar in which he quotes clinical psychologists W. O’Donahue and A. R. Bradley on the subject of “the best interests of the child,” thus:

There is no useful operational definition of what the best interests of the child actually are. There is inconsistency across states of legal criteria for assessing the best interest of the child. There is a lack of consensus within the field of psychology as to what the relevant variables should be… The validity and reliability of standardized tests for use in custody assessments are largely unknown.

That’s the state of psychology on “the best interests of the child,” and yet how often do judges, who know far less about the matter than do psychologists, intone the mantra as if there were some certainty about the matter?

As Gottlieb makes clear, the vast majority of CPS cases don’t involve any form of abuse; rather, they’re about neglect, some of which of course is serious, but much of which is of the “Horrors, you gave the child Chinese take-out!” variety.

Governments tend to arrogate power to themselves when they can, and the breakdown of the traditional two-parent family has given states a golden (literally) opportunity to do just that. They’ve seized on family breakdown, not just to intervene in families in which children are truly at risk, but to substitute their own decisions about childcare for those of parents. ( Yakima County Commissioner Swanhart) “Kool-Aid? No, I think orange juice is better.”

There’s a reason that strangers on the train criticize Gottlieb for holding her baby too close to a newspaper or not dressing him to suit them. The loss of the two-parent family has absolutely terrified us, and with good reason. Children overwhelmingly do better in intact, two-parent families than anywhere else. And when that family system broke down, as it did years ago, governments, primarily in the form of CPS agencies and courts, stepped in.

That may be understandable, but it’s not right. What’s right is for governments to educate people about the importance to children of parents staying together if at all possible. And when it’s not possible, governments must do all they can to promote equal parenting after the split-up. Those two things will do far more and be far cheaper than all the micromanagement of parents done by all the caseworkers and judges in the world.

...Pretty simple huh?
Until you involve lawyers that are only concerned about billing for their hours and Judges that have their own agenda and prejudices.  

Family court is huge business!


Wednesday, September 8, 2010

Court Trial

"In a desperate attempt to maintain a relationship in the only ways possible (identification and alliance) with the parent who is, at the end of the alienation process, the only parent from a psychological and sometimes physical point of view, the child will mirror the personality and the distorted perceptions of the alienating parent. The blame for anxiety consequent to the insecurity of attachments will be externalized and attributed to the other parent."--social worker Leona Kopetski

Last week I had to attend a full day hearing/trial on child support. My ex wife Linda had a motion for such at an earlier hearing and the same commissioner that stole my children from me granted it to her.

What were the issues?

Linda did not believe I have cancer. This would affect her child support payment.

Linda did not believe I am divorced. This would affect her child support payment and I think what upset her most is that, she no longer has a reason to stalk Jan in an effort to get child support from her.

Linda had no evidence or facts to present to the judge and while not sworn in, continued to lie about the situation and facts. Bi polar disorder was very apparent as she attacked me.

She had her married live in boy friend and her girl friend that lied in statements to the court with her. They huddled together at recess like vultures circling to pick the last meat from a dying carcass.

These people are just low life scum that for what every reason have very low self esteem and by talking bad about or putting down someone else, seem to get a rush or boast to their egos in some twisted way.

Even as I was leaving the court room her boyfriend, that has destroyed him own marriage and family by bedding down Linda, mumbled this words to me; “thank god for the IRS.” I did stop and ask him what? What did you say? Like the worm he is, his head dropped and his mouth didn’t seem to work anymore. Trash gathers trash.

If your ex is like mine, protect all your love ones and do not think that the courts will be fair. You fight tooth and nail from the start with no holds barred because this will not be a fair fight and right will not win by default.


Tuesday, August 17, 2010

What can love and respect do?

A child is a parents greatest gift from God...
If you have ever watched a video, watch this one.

If you have ever been hurt by your child, understand that only God and a willing heart can mend the pain.

Remember all the best, cut lose the rest and learn to live like you were dying.

Enjoy this video!

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Take away the money and the kids will be the winners!

False accusations and Parental Alienation are terrible acts and all states should have a significant civil
remedy for it. The article below discusses a New Jersey case where apparently that is going to

From Henry Gottlieb's "Exes can sue over ruined ties to couple's children"

For the first time in New Jersey, a judge has recognized the right of parents to collect
damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress when their relationships with their
children are poisoned by former spouses.

Superior Court Judge Maurice Gallipoli ruled on Nov. 21 that a man can sue his ex-wife
and her parents for allegedly turning his children against him by making false accusations
that he had committed sexual misconduct.

The central legal issue in the Hudson County case was whether the emotional distress
claim was a disguised complaint for alienation of affections, a cause of action New Jersey
abolished in 1935.

By then, America no longer believed cuckolded husbands deserved damages from their
wives' lovers or that the father of the bride should be able to sue the scoundrel who jilted
his daughter.

As recently as two months ago, defendants have invoked the law that abolished such actions
— the Heart Balm Act — to win summary dismissal of tort claims alleging that
parents and their children had been alienated by ex-spouses or other individuals.
But Gallipoli said an emotional distress claim is separate and distinct from the abolished
claim of alienation of affection. "Here, plaintiff is alleging that defendants' alienating
conduct has caused him emotional distress," he wrote in Smith v. Smith, Hud-L-1837-08.

"Thus emotional distress, not alienation of affections, is the predicate cause of action."

The decision creates the potential for a showdown in the Appellate Division...

Vincent and Rose Marie Smith were divorced in 2007 and though their two children live
primarily with her in Guilford, Conn., he is entitled to parenting time at his home in

The damage suit alleges that the ex-wife and her parents, Daniel and Barbara Marese,
began alienating the children from the father during the predivorce separation in 2006.
The defendants falsely told the children, court-appointed psychiatrists and law
enforcement officials that the father was a sex addict and had molested the children in the
past, the suit says.

And it says the children are afraid to sleep at their father's house because they have been
told they are in danger of being sexually abused.
The wife and her parents denied the allegations and argued in motions to dismiss the suit
for failure to state a claim that the Heart Balm Act had eliminated the cause of action.
Indeed, they pointed out, the term "alienating the children" is what the complaint calls the
alleged wrong.

The defense supported its motion by citing three rulings in which courts had relied on the
Heart Balm Act to throw out damage claims involving children.

Gallipoli brushed aside two of the precedents as irrelevant from a factual or legal
standpoint. The third, Rand's decision in Segal, was on point but wrong, Gallipoli said.

In dismissing the father's claim in Segal, Rand wrote, "To sustain a claim for such
damages would result in a revival of evils not unlike those banned in 1935 and would be
an exceptionally ineffective technique for resolving matrimonial differences or custody

In recognition of the family court's role, Gallipoli ruled that if Smith wants to seek
damages from his ex-wife he must do it in a post-judgment proceeding in family court. It
would still be a damage claim and the family court has the power to arrange jury trials.

Because the grandparents were not parties to the divorce action, the case against them can
continue in the civil court, the judge ruled.

Plaintiff's lawyer Resnick says suits like his have been rare because parents and their
lawyers have been content to fight for equitable relief in custody battles.
"They feel the ultimate sanction of a transfer of custody is enough," he says.
"But it's not enough because they still do it," he says of parents who make false
accusations to get the edge in custody battles. "They are never afraid of losing custody, so
the only other thing to do is hit them in the pocketbook or the wallet."

What do you think? Is PA over money? Is the custody fight over money? If not, is it just evil Evil?

Why do the courts award money as a reward?
If the parent loves and wants custody, why do they need paid more than an adoptive parent would receive?
So, it is about money. Money for the parent conducting PA and money for the attorney aiding in the process.
Anyone see where the children’s welfare is really addressed?
Anyone see where time and money was spent investigating the best environment for the children?
Does anyone care about anything but money in family court???

The system is just broken and the kids are the ones who suffer and whose future is changed forever…based on ones fight for money…


Monday, July 5, 2010

Yakima WA family court system

Many people have wondered how such a thing could happen to me. To them, as it was to me…the whole concept of the allegations and court decision is inconceivable to them.

Below is from the court forum website and is the grading and comments on the commissioner that ruled in my case.

Take a look and fully understand that with a mother crying about abuse and threats, how the court can just ignore the evidence, Swanhart had a predisposed judgment in my case (perhaps she did not like my cowboy appearance) and it was clear to all the attorneys present in the court room. I have been there many times and many times, attorneys have spoken to me about my case and my chances of making a change in Swanhart court room.

Read below and understand;

24 complaints have recently been made against this commissioner Lani-Kai Swanhart and are available at the court forum site. 17 times they not only completed the survey of this commissioner but also left the comments below from attorneys, witness, staff members and litigants;

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

This Commissioner is completely clueless. I watched her now for a few years, and the best interest of children somehow always is never taken into consideration, and by the way she ruled, she was probably a less than adequate parent. This commissioner appears to lack any understanding of running a business, and therefore, she makes a complete idiot of herself on the bench. She has a strong biased towards men. She should not be on the bench, as her personal past, gets in the way of her ruling fairly. I give her a failing grade.

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

This commissioner, was extremely biased towards me. Because of her lack of knowledge, she took the easy way out....This commissioner should not hold the position she does. Clearly, she also does not like the male figures, that have gone in front of her....I have sat in her court room several times and watched her, put the screws to men, time, and time again.

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

Commissioner Swanhart makes decisions with broad brushes and fails to understand or be able to cope with the complex dynamics involved in family law proceedings. She make rushed decisions, misunderstanding things and placing them in inappropriate categories and then doesn't want to hear things that do not fit into the model of the situation she has constructed. It is as if she is saying, "Don't bug me with facts, I have made up my mind." I also do not appreciate the way she treats people in general. She treats people as if she is an aristocrat and everyone before her, especially small and confused people, with little to no respect. In some instances, this is exemplified by pointless and cutting remarks directed at poor, misfortunate, people in an emotionally charged situation they are having difficulty understanding. Commissioner Swanhart is a fairly intelligent person, it is too bad she stoops to these cheap shots at people before her. In my opinion, she is burned out and has outlived her utility as a Commissioner and should move on.

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

I have been in Commissioner Swanharts court room for many months now and have observed her rulings on issues that goes against evidence that was presented before her. It is personally appalling to me to see the court system abused in this manner. Many times she shows a pre conceived notion and bias towards and in favor of women. I have seen documents submitted for her review ignored in her decisions. I have witnessed a tongue lashing of a man accused of abusing his children and custody completely changed based on an interview of alienated children without any attempt by her court to investigate the allegations. In this case where the children were ordered into counseling with a Dr. and the mother refused and indeed violated 3 court orders for the mother to take the boys to treatment, Commissioner Swanhart did not find the mother in contempt. Commissioner Swanhart ordered for the mother to again seek treatment for the children with the Dr. and then, put situations on the Dr. and how he could conduct his sessions in his private practice. This was to appease the mother that did not want the Doctors finds or report to be submitted to the court. For commissioner Swanhart to limit a Doctors standard means of treatment after she ordered the children into treatment with him is outrageous behavior from a court commissioner. It seems that the input from a professional in child psychology is not permitted in her court room. Commissioner Swanhart shows no regard towards men, evidence or their side of any story. Indeed, she limits that input and refuses to rule in an unbiased and professional manner. Commissioner Swanhart is one of the reasons that common citizens have a deep mistrust of our court system.

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

In this family case with extensive domestic violence and evidence to support it, Commissioner Swanhart found the mother in contempt for revealing the social workers, counselors, GALs, and other "friends of the court" were unethical, unprofessional, and noncompliant of court orders. It is a matter of litigants "keeping your mouth shut" when it comes to revealing the corruption running rampant in Yakima County Superior Court. Constitutional Due Process is something that she regularly ignores. The best interests of the children is a standard that she regularly ignores and, contrary to other postings, she is not biased just toward men. If a woman steps over the commissioner's line, she throws the gavel at her as readily as she would a man and will threaten with loss of custody if someone has the gumption to reveal the corruption of the courts to anyone.

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

Irresponsible, unparctical, and above all, biased, towards men in her court room. Swanharts, constant doodling, and unpleaseant personality, brings great concern to our Yakima county, Judicial system. Quite frankly, it is time for this commisioner, to step down, and seek, other employment.

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

Lani Kia Swanhart...I have been in this game for years, and it is always an unpleasant part of my day, to enter your court room. I would ask you to start reviewing the audios, of your bench time. I use a hearing device, that easily picks up everything you are saying, when you are on the bench. Your quiet, little conversations with these attorneys, is improper, and most of disgusting! Yakima county's SR judge should remove you, immediately. Your past, has clearly haunted you, over, and over. People ( men ), should not have to suffer, due to the infidelity, surrounding your personal life. You are washed up, your appearance is less than professional, as are your biased rulings.

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

Where do I begin!! I went with a friend that was going infront of this Judge....I got an eye opener that day!!! I must say, this Swanhart Judge is a poor excuse for our legal system....she is with out a doubt, a man hater, incompitent, and just a flat out poor excuse for a human being. I have heard stories of our Judges here in Yakima county, but I had no idea, it was this bad. I can say one thing is for sure, if Swanhart acted like that out in the real business world, she would be holding a sign, like the people on the street corners. As I watched people go infront of Swanhart this day, I felt such sorrow, for the familys that this Judge was affecting.....Two things come to mind, either this Judges childhood was severly scorned, or her adult life, has been riddled with failure. The sight of her turns my stomach now, as I know how wicked, and evil she is. I give her an F!!!!

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

Yakima Counties Sr. Judge, needs to look into the practices of this Commissioner. Her blatant disregard for fairness, is overshadowed by her extreme biased behavior towards the male figure. Her rulings are, impractical, and are very damaging to family's involved, especially children. This Commissioner, undoubtedly, needs to be reviewed by the Judicial review board.In the future, I will avoid this Commissioner, as much as possible. I have given Commissioner Swanhart, a failing grade.

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

I appeared before this commissioner recently. Not only was she overloaded, she was quite annoying, to say the least. Her draconian behavior, and oversight of facts, are all to familiar, to the pompous attitude of Yakima county courts. I have failed this commissioner, and enough, is enough, to say the least!!

Made by: Staff/Personnel This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

Words cannot properly describe the arrogance, of this Females disposition.

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

The games this commissioner likes to play with peoples lives. Every time I am around her, she makes me sick!!!

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

Inconsistent, up and down, this commissioner is all over the place! Speaks down at you, has a negative outlook towards men, and was completely biased...Swanhart, you have made a mess of my kids life!!

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

I had heard allot of negative things about this commisioner over the past 6 months, but had not been infront oif her, untill a while back. Saddly everything I had heard, is true. I witnessed parents loosing parental rights, one after the other, in simple divorce cases.....I have come to understand that ccommisioners are basically hired/appointed by our Supior court Judges. November 2012, could be a chance to bring

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

She is an embarrassment and an example of all that is wrong with the court system! I appeared before and she not only did she not read the information in my case, she did not even have my file! In her own words, in her court, in front of everyone she stated “I don’t have the file but in this case I don’t think I need it.” This is a court? This is judgment made on information before her? I don’t think so. She has made her decision before reviewing the case. Unbelievable! Get her out!

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

Well, this idiot gave me a contempt and totally does not seem to understand what the true meaning of contempt is. She is sexist and rascist against Fathers. Definantely helps her county/state make money off of father's who are made into slaves of the system. Its time for men to step up and overthrow a crooked and corrupt system of slavery.

This respondent did not approve of this judge. Comments made by respondent:

This commissioner has to go. Yakima and the family court system would be much better off without a court, then with this commissioner destroying families and lives. After having to set and listen to her belittle the men she has contact with, I found myself sick, sick in my stomach for those men that are having her biased rulings rammed down their throats while their male attorneys just feed them to this female wolf. I understand the attorneys not wanting to be on the bad side of this commissioner but how in the world can they let this injustice continue? Is the revolving money door that important? The last time I was in this court, this sad excuse for a judge was totally out of control on the very 1st case. The attorney was stating his case when Swanhart interrupted him and said his client had a credibility problem. This caught the attorney off guard and you could hear him say “What”. Swanhart responded with a smirk laugh “what, am I mumbling today?” This is outrageous and yet knowing the man she was accusing, made this totally unbelievable. I myself sat down at the court computer and went through that whole case. This commissioner Swanhart is totally off base on the whole case. No reasonable person could look at the documentation and come to the same conclusion as she stated at the hearing. IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT SHE HAS A PERSONAL VENDETTA AGAINST THIS MAN AND PERHAPS MEN IN GENERAL. If she was elected, we could vote her out. As it stands, she needs fired as an out of control employee!

Do you understand now how the courts can aid in PA and destroy a family?

If you don't get anything else from this blog, understand court has nothing to do with fairness or what is right!