Well, the argument is it’s both!
In the case of my ex wife Linda Clark, she in fact was put on medication for depression and anti anxiety. She referred to them as her happy pills. So it is documented that she suffered from a mental illness where she was unable to leave the house, and her mother would have to go with her to the grocery store that was only a mile away. So, again, in this case mental illness had to play a part.
Evil? Let me tell you what has happened in the past couple of weeks and you tell me what you think with your e-mails and comments.
As you all know I have cancer. I have kept this fact from my two alienated sons for a reason, I know their mother. I could not bear to think about what she would say to them when she learned the news. (how I got what I deserved in the end, how I’m probably making this whole thing up to get sympathy, or perhaps I’m saying this in an attempt to reduce child support payments.) I didn’t what to deal with that stress. But, sometimes it is unavoidable. My mother, who I dearly love, called and spoke with Dakota on or after his B day. In the conversation she asked him how I was doing and must have said something about my cancer. Well Dakota did not know anything and so I’m sure Mom told him what was going on. That was fine, that was ok.
But what happened next was EVIL. Linda made a call back to my mother and chewed her out for upsetting Dakota. This type of crazy behavior is what Linda has always done. You would think that a normal person would have some compassion for mother whose son has cancer. Not Linda, 1st thing she did was to call her sons Grandmother back and tell her how to never say anything to upset HER sons again. She went on to disturb my 75 year old mother very much during her phone rampage. Is this Evil? Is this a mental condition? I think it’s both. They go hand in hand when you have a person like Linda making a phone call like this. There can be no doubt but what she is alienating Dakota and Colton from anyone in my family. She wants them to have no contact with anyone but her. Linda is very insecure and feels a relationship the boys have with any other family members or friends of mine, is a direct threat to her position with the boys. She will do whatever it takes to protect those boys from the truth. That means to stop and cut off all contact with anyone that knows the truth about what has gone on. This is apparent and even documented. The boys would not enter the church services that we used to attend together because “of the people in there”. That was a comment they made to me because I had support from church members. No one there said one bad word about their mother in any statements. That was not asked for nor offered. Unlike Linda, descent people do not go around running down or making negative comments about other people. The boys, by court order, where not to see any documents, statements or have their parents ,making comments about the court issues. Well, Linda has never been very good at following sound advice. She “knows better” she doesn’t have to do anything she doesn’t want to and will not have someone telling HER what she can or cannot do, she will show them. This is the reason she fought so hard to keep the boys from seeing the Doctor.
Evil? After hearing that I have cancer, Linda called Colton’s Orthodontist.
I have paid for all my sons braces with no help from Linda. In her defense, I never asked. Yet though the documented lies she has told and the negative, brainwashing influence, Linda has stopped me from having contact with my sons. She has (with the help of a corrupt attorney) are extorting almost $1,900 a month from me in child support. Yet with that much income coming from me for those boys, she refuses to even finish paying for Colton’s braces, It would be only a small portion of the childsupport, $130 a month. Yet She called the dentist and told him to send me the bill that is now 90 days past due. I will pay the bill, because if Linda will not show any responsibility, then again, I have to pick up where she fails. What bothers me about this is what I can hear her telling the boys (your father is to cheap to pay for your braces. He wants me to pay for them. He only cares about himself and doesn’t give a rip about you boys, his own sons) Yes, I know she has made those kind of comments, she has a history of it and her behavior has be reinforced and emboldened by the court, she will not change.
So the result is, I pay over $2,000 a month for two sons that will not even call me when hearing that I have cancer.
Linda can’t seem to spend that money on her sons but again, she is back out on the town, drinking and gambling. But now, she has money to take her married boyfriend with her.
Evil? Yes, without a doubt. Sick, yes without a doubt.
As the Doctor told the court investigator, “it’s one of the worse cases I have ever seen. Over the top BAD”
....
Richard A. Gardner, M.D.
ReplyDeleteNew York -- With increasing child custody disputes has come a growth in "parental alienation syndrome," Dr. Richard A. Gardner said at a meeting of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis.
Abetted by one parent, the child develops an obsessive, irrational hatred of the other, who is "viewed as the incarnation of evil," said Dr. Gardner, a child psychiatrist at the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York.
Ninety percent of the time, the father is the victim; but in 10% the roles are reversed. There is no history of abuse. "To call it brainwashing would be an oversimplification...the child jumps on the mother's bandwagon...but adds his own scenario," he said.
In the typical presentation, which may arise within days of the announcement of custody conflict, the child obsessively denigrates the father, with no empathy and little guilt. The denigration has a litany quality; every altercation of the past is used to justify his hatred.
Lack of Normal Ambivalence
When asked why he never wanted to see his father again, one little boy said that "he chewed too loud" and added, "He used to say, `Don't interrupt.' "
Bizzare charges, condoned by the mother, may be made. One child said that his father had murdered his grandfather, who had actually died, at age 85, in the hospital. The father "was the kind of person who would do it," the boy declared, supplying details of the crime.
When asked what she thought, the mother said she didn't actually believe the murder had happened, adding "but I wouldn't put it past him," Dr. Gardner said.
A hallmark of the syndrome is the child's lack of normal ambivalence toward both parents: He can find nothing he dislikes about his mother and nothing he likes about his father.
The hatred may extend to the father's family; grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins with whom relations had previously been good are now viewed as despicable, Dr. Gardner said.
Evidence that might counteract the distortions is met with rationalization and delusion. Asked about a photograph from happier times in which the family was together at Disney World, one boy explained that "if I didn't smile for the picture, he'd beat me."
He believes the syndrome has arisen as a result of social and legal changes of the last 15 or 20 years. In the mid-1970's, the presumption that the mother is the de facto preferred custodial parent gave way to an "egalitarian" commitment to determine the child's best interests in a gender-blind fashion.
Custody disputes burgeoned and the erosion of the mother's position deepened in the late 1970's and early 1980's with the increasing popularity of the joint custody concept...
In severe cases of parental alienation syndrome -- the alienating parent is unamenable to therapy and so filled with rage, paranoia, and delusions that a virtual folie a deux has developed with the child -- the only hope is court ordered removal of the child to the other parent's home. In this case, the primary psychological bond is strong but "sick," he said.
In more moderate cases, the bond must be respected but the child induced to see the other parent. "Being respectful of the child's wishes won't work," Dr. Gardner said.
To give the child no choice but to see the father provides an excuse that allows him to protect his relationship with the mother ("I still hate him, but the judge says I have to").
In moderate and milder cases, truncating custody litigation is probably more therapeutic than any intervention in resolving the syndrome. "Once the threat is gone, there's no need for the scenario," he said.
The syndrome may be seen at any age past 3 or 4 years. When a couple in their fifties divorces acrimoniously, a variant may occur in children in their twenties.
“Bless those who curse you. Pray for those who hurt you.” (Luke 6:28, NLT)
ReplyDeleteOur tendency is to curse those who curse us and to damn those that hurt us! But, none of us are perfect; God’s plan is for ALL of us to be saved – even those that curse us or hurt us! The next time you feel like getting “even”, stop and ask the Holy Spirit to intervene. Soften your heart and use love to overcome hatred! Have a blessed day!
Your Friend in Christ,
False accusations and Parental Alienation are terrible acts and all states should have a significant civil
ReplyDeleteremedy for it. The article below discusses a New Jersey case where apparently that is going to
happen.
From Henry Gottlieb's "Exes can sue over ruined ties to couple's children" (New Jersey Law Journal,
12/1/08):
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 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.