WHEN JUDGES PISS ON MOTHERS The option should be a legislative inquiry en lieu of appeals court, the goal a new standard called the Approximation Rule

It’s all in the Truth Commission Report.

The reporters, in their Findings and Solutions, are calling for legislative committees, or inquiries, to screen cases for mistakes and make corrections, outside the appeals process. They are recommending the Approximation Rule because BIOC, the current standard for determining custody, doesn’t work either.

Mothers everywhere, not just in Virginia, need to tell their legislators they want special legislative committees, or legislative inquiries, established that will address the issue of obscene decisions by judges in child custody litigation when family abuse is a factor. They need to demand a review of their cases outside of the appeals process because the appeals process doesn’t work any better than the “best interest of the child” standard. They need to demand a new way of doing custody. The new way, mothers should tell their legislators, is something called the Approximation Rule.

The landmark 2010 publication by Hannah and Goldstein incorporates the Truth Commission Report (or you can still retrieve the entire report on the Leadership Council website, http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/docs/Truth_Commission_2007.pdf).

Go to Chapter 8 in Domestic Violence, Abuse, and Child Custody: Legal Strategies and Policy Issues (best two websites, http://www.civicresearchinstitute.com/dvac.html and http://www.domesticviolenceabuseandchildcustody.com/) to know more about the Truth Commission Report. Use its Findings and Solutions to help you when writing your legislators. Consider pushing for a legislative committee, or legislative inquiry, and an approximation standard in your state.

The issue has been organized for us in these wonderful projects by Hannah and Goldstein. The many activist moms out there don’t seem to realize this is the case. We should stay focused on the contents in those projects. Aggrieved mothers won’t accomplish a thing until they start singing from the same hymnsheet.

So let’s learn the song to better work together on getting the pissing to stop.

~Veronique W.

PS - I visited my local public library with my copy of Domestic Violence, Abuse, and Child Custody: Legal Strategies and Policy Issues just last week. Mr. Barry Goldstein says we need to suggest the book to our librarians in our neighborhoods. I finally did just that. Let's all make that same suggestion. It won't matter if you don't own a copy of DVAC. Simply refer your librarian to the Civic Research Institute site for book details.

# # #

GAL ALERT! We can’t stop judges in Virginia from giving custody cases to bitches like Jennifer Newman, or siding with them, but we can stop judges...

Judge Carr passes in front of the COJ committee in December 2015, Judge Burgess in December 2017. Unless Carr and Burgess advance to another court, retire, die, quit or are fired before their interview date with the COJ, they remain eligible for re-appointment by Virginia’s general assembly and governor in those years. When citizen-consumers of legal services show up to speak to oppose a re-appointment, however, judges like Carr and Burgess are more likely to be removed from the bench. Remember COJ head Del. Dave Albo's famous words: "Unless people come to complain, the judges usually get re-appointed." So seek each other out and organize is my advice. It’s not too soon for the victims of the characters mentioned by Kerry in her submission below to start thinking about JII and to begin drafting their speeches. Never forget that Judge Gaylord Finch was ousted when Northern Virginia moms got together and confronted him at his re-appointment interview. Finch was a Zuckerman-sympathizer. The mothers, Zuckerman-victims. Kerry is not the first mother to come to me with a complaint against Newman. So you Newman-victims out there need to seize the opportunity. If your judge aligns with this bitch, find that judge in Richmond and give that judge an earful. And watch Newman become the newest “hot potato.” Business didn’t get better for Zuckerman; it won’t be a different future for Newman--not if protective mothers do their part. ~VW
# # #
______________
“Hi Veronique: I just came across your Mommy Go bye bye blog. Please add attorney: Mary Duty (in practice with Scott Landry) to your list of lawyers who support fathers in taking custody away from mothers. Also, please add Jennifer Newman (http://jennifernewmanlawfirm.com/), GAL in Richmond, to the list of GALs who take young children away from mothers. Also, please add Judges Gregory Carr and Harold Burgess to your list of judges who take children away from mothers. In my situation, the children's father left me and the children after abusing us all. Then, manipulated the courts with over $25,000 to take the children from me. This will be the first year I will not spend Christmas Eve and Christmas morning with my three babies. Mary Duty, my ex husband's lawyer (a woman!) has dragged me through t he mud. And she is not stopping the persecution. After Christmas, I am facing one criminal trespassing charge from my ex-husband, 3 counts of contempt of court from the GAL (Jennifer Newman of Richmond), and 5 counts of contempt of court from my ex husband (represented by Mary Duty.) At one point, I had Denis Englisby as an attorney, and he lost my custody case, and told me I was crazy. I asked him to withdraw, and he sued me for $5,000. So, the Englisbys need to be added to your list as well. Margaret Englisby, is his wife, and is a substitute judge in Chesterfield County, and their son Mark Englisby is also a lawyer in Chesterfield County. They all need to be added to your list of attorneys who work to persecute innocent mothers and children. … Kerry O'Brien Smith on December 24, 2011 {My children are 3, 4, and 5; my ex-husband left when my youngest was 1 and this has been going on since then.}
# # #
______________________________________________
Find everything you need to know about Judge Re-Appointment Interviews here,
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Judicial-Interviews-of-Incumbents-2010-Richmond-Virginia/138253656230064
______________________________________________

A Petition: “Protective Mother Wanting Custody of Children Back” ... Here’s Kerry’s story, which I have lifted from her petition site. By signing Kerry’s petition, you are helping to tell Virginia’s unscrupulous judges we want them to stop mucking up our lives, to stop bullying us, to stop evading the law where it says we mothers are entitled to have our dignity and resources preserved (http://mommygobyebye-virginia.blogspot.com/2012/01/on-preserving-dignity-and-resources-of.html), to stop ignoring THE PROVISION THAT ENTITLES LAW-ABIDING MOTHERS TO FEE AWARDS, to stop the bastards from stirring up litigation for the sole purpose of emotionally harassing us and of financially exhausting us by forcing them -- the abusive father -- to pay the lawyers we targeted mothers must hire to protect us from all the barratry in deliberations over the custody of children with the fee award provision to deter that malicious prosecution, and, finally, to stop ordering us to foot the legal bills of these SOBs. (The language is mine and if it displeases you, you need to come after me, Veronique Wyvell, because Kerry is in no way responsible for my behavior just as she, Kerry, is in no way responsible for the foul behavior of the father of her three children.)

http://www.change.org/petitions/protective-mother-wanting-custody-of-children-back will also take you to the narrative as it appears below. Another classic, oh-so-classic, case of the transfer of custody of the children from a fit, loving, non-offending mother to an abuser…because IT PAYS TO DO SO. ~VW
# # #
______________
I was a stay at home mom, and gave birth to three beautiful children, Aislinn, now age 5, Kristin, now age 4, and JB, now age three. My ex husband worked outside of the home and traveled often. There was also occasional domestic abuse in our marriage. The police were called a few times, and my husband always told the authorities that I started the dispute. After the police started to believe him, I could not call the police anymore for help. So, I tried to pretend as if everything was normal, and just waited until he left for work everyday. My children were my life. I had been a teacher previously, and it was my dream to home-school the children. I baptized the children Catholic, and tried to raise my children, while fending off my husband's abuse in the evenings. When my son was 6 months old, my husband left for a month at Christmas time. He came back, and then left 8 months later for good. He left me with the house and kids, and I could not have been more happy. Until he filed for custody, and I had to give the kids to him every other weekend and Wednesday evenings from 5-7 p.m. I then got a lawyer, and filed for child custody myself. When we went to court, he requested a GAL. I was given primary physical custody, and we had joint custody. Giving the children to him every other weekend was hard because the children screamed and cried that they did not want to go with Daddy. Six months after the GAL was assigned, my husband show caused me for obstructing visitation, and told the GAL I had mental issues and could not take care of the children. The GAL then increased my husband's time with the children to every other weekend, and Wednesdays from 5 pm to 8am on Thursday morning. The GAL then instructed my husband to move to a 2 bedroom apartment instead of a 1 bed room apartment. I was living in our 4 bedroom house with the children. On the first midweek overnight, my oldest daughter, Aislinn, who was 4 at the time, told me her Daddy was touching her private area with a stick. I called the police, got an emergency protective order, and contacted CPS. Aislinn had a forensic exam, a video-graphed interview, and the CPS investigation came back as an unfounded sexual abuse allegation. Her father's visitation resumed, and then they started to tell me that I was a liar, and that I was poisoning the children against their father. Six months later, my husband was awarded sole physical and legal custody of all three children, he enrolled them in a daycare center, and gave me visitation of Wednesdays from 4-7 p.m. and every other weekend, and gave me 30 days to vacate the home. I am not employed, and accumulated almost $20,000 in credit card debt after he left, so I thought I was going to be homeless. I petitioned the court to rehear the issues, and the judge refused. I was able to get a 1 bedroom apartment after filing a claim on my engagement ring and surrendering it to the insurance company. My 4 year old Kristin is now saying her Daddy is touching her. Daddy also has a girlfriend who the children say kisses Daddy all the time. She often spends the night. I am not even allowed to talk with my children by phone. I appealed the custody decision and it was affirmed in the Circuit Court, and most of my testimony was determined to be incredible. They would not believe me that the children were sexually abused, or that I was physically abused. They would not even look at the pictures of the bruises or admit into evidence the medical reports from my OB of the physical abuse that occurred while I was pregnant with my third child. They just wanted to proceed as if it was a no-fault divorce, with no complications. In the final divorce, my husband was awarded with the house, physical and legal custody of the three children, sole legal custody of all the bank accounts and assets. I was awarded my car, and that's it. I had to put all of my children's childhood belongings, furniture, toys and possessions into a storage unit because I can't fit it all into a 1 bedroom apartment. In the last 9 months that the children have been living with their father, they have been seen by doctors 10 times each in the past 9 months. Currently, they all have respiratory infections that cannot be cured by antibiotics. They are dispirited, sad and depressed all the time. I can go to their preschool to see them, but even the preschool personnel will only allow me to be there at certain times. I have appealed the Circuit Court decision in the Virginia Court of Appeals, and while I am waiting for its review, my husbands attorney and the GAL have issued several show causes of contempt of court on me for not signing over the deed for the house, and not paying child support. I have no job and income, and have no means to pay child support. I was also ordered to pay my husband's attorney fees. I fear for the survival of my children. They are so sick now, and their spirits are just about drained. It is as if they don't have the will to fight anymore, because no one listened to them when they were fighting. I need your help. Please sign this petition to help me get custody of my children back, and my home.
# # #

On Preserving the Dignity and Resources of Family Members in Child Custody and Visitation Deliberations in the Courts of the Commonwealth of Virginia

_______
“The procedures for determining custody and visitation arrangements shall...preserve the dignity and resources of family members” -Paragraph A in § 20-124.2 of the Code of Virginia


Re Paragraph A in § 20-124.2 of the Code of Virginia

Troy Deel gave Lisa Ferry sex while I lived with him and -- with my $65,000 in savings -- kept house and cared for our baby, under his roof.

Troy Deel gave me and our baby no money but a lot of violence.

I paid Troy Deel's legal bills, twice. Judge Arthur Vieregg told me to give $2,400 to Deel's attorney, Sandra Havrilak. Judge Jonathan Thacher, however, told me nothing. Without notice, Judge Jonathan Thacher swiped $7,862 in bail bond money to give to Deel's attorney, Sandra Havrilak. The $7,862 were never returned to my brother Chris (even though I appeared in court) because the Supreme Court of Virginia said Sandy should keep the money Jonny stole from my relative to give to her.

I couldn’t afford to post my own bond because what remained of the $65,000 in savings, after borrowing from it to care for Troy Deel, his house, and our baby while Troy Deel was having sex with Lisa Ferry, got used up to pay lawyers to protect me from all the barratrous judicial proceedings Troy Deel hired Sandra Havrilak to inflict upon me.

A deputy sheriff arrested me in my home because I stopped showing up in their courts after feeling sick and tired of all the judges doing nothing to stop Deel’s crazy lawyer, this Sandra Havrilak, considering it’s the law, in Virginia, that custody and visitation deliberations should “preserve the dignity and resources of family members” (Paragraph A in § 20-124.2). Hence, the bond posting and seizure.

Troy Deel never paid my legal fees.

Miss Lisa is raising my daughter.

And my brother can’t stand me.

Isn’t that nice?

~Veronique Wyvell, devoted mother of Brigitte, young victim of lawsuit abuse and foul play in the custody courts of Virginia

(See you in December!)

Some history, for interested readers and fellow victims of illegal bond forfeiture in the courts of the Commonwealth of Virginia:

http://mommygobyebye-virginia.blogspot.com/2007/12/mark-e-rubin-senior-advisor-to-governor.html

http://mommygobyebye-virginia.blogspot.com/2008/06/same-judges-do-it-uneven-amount-debt.html

http://mommygobyebye-virginia.blogspot.com/2009/01/how-i-became-opportunity-tort-against.html

IN THE MATTER OF BONDS

Second Printing of STOCKBROKER/KIDNAPPER LISA DEEL ACCUSED OF MANIPULATION, OBSTRUCTION, NEGLIGENCE, WILLFUL & REPEATED BREACH & ‘A FAILURE TO EXECUTE’ IN 2008 CBOE CASE {This post was first published on 29 September 2009. The Loudoun County circuit court case against Investment Advisor Lisa Ferry Deel has since settled out of court. The Bond-Breaking Ms. Lisa Ferry Deel no longer handles other people's money. She teaches golf full-time and remains the primary handler of my daughter Brigitte.}
______________

The French reserve for such people... a special noun...


...Garce











SOURCE>> Claimant v. Lisa Ferry Deel, Katherine M. Owens, A.G. Edwards; Chicago Board Options Exchange; #07NM001; 6/27/08; https://www.cboe.org/Legal/arbitAwards.aspx*

SUMMARY>> Stockbroker and Financial Advisor Lisa Ferry Deel of Ashburn and Belmont Country and Golf Club, in Virginia's Loudoun County, is accused of manipulation, obstruction, negligence, willful and repeated breach, and “a failure to execute” in a 2008 case before CBOE, or the Chicago Board Options Exchange. Deel is the same woman who 10 years ago began taking away, with intent to abduct, the daughter of the creator of the Mommy Go Bye Bye blog by force and by use of manipulation, obstruction, negligence, willful and repeated breach, and “a failure to execute.”

SCOOP>> Lisa Ferry Deel had, among other things, closed the Claimant’s account by making unreasonable demands, and threats, which allowed him to recover less than a third only from his total initial investment records show.

Records also show Ms. Ferry Deel, current wife of Troy Deel, has kidnapped my daughter Brigitte by making use of, yes, manipulation, obstruction, negligence, willful and repeated breach, and “a failure to execute,” which is allowing me to recover absolutely nothing from the very exceptional, enviable even, bond of love I once shared with my only child.

While I was building that bond with my newborn, and living with my baby's father, Troy Deel, because I thought it would be nice for Troy to bond with his new daughter too, Miss Lisa Ferry was screwing him.

Speaking of bonds, Mrs. Deel with her husband, who benefits from a top secret government clearance (which didn't stop him from rigging our transcript--the changes to my court record are so glaring that they couldn't have been accidental nor free), blocked Brigitte's uncle, my brother Chris, from recovering his (bail) bond of seven thousand eight hundred sixty two dollars ($7862) then seized, and pocketed, the entire sum for their own personal use only after they watched him invest, and lose, another eight thousand dollars ($8000) in legal proceedings to recover his bond.

Chris Wyvell still waits to see his niece, again, and his bail money.

My brother last saw Brigitte on October 13, 2004. Our father had been cremated that morning. It was Brigitte’s 7th birthday. She was allowed thirty (30) minutes with her uncle because he had agreed to the terms and conditions of the visit demanded and dictated by her stepmother, Lisa Ferry Deel, and her father, Troy Deel: Chris should not speak my name, never mention me, nor refer to me in any way in the presence of Brigitte if he insisted on seeing his niece that day. They met at a McDonald’s in Ashburn. Chris Wyvell kept his promise.

Our father was dying, and the Deels were quietly scheming to take away from us control of the Trust he established for Brigitte. Mr. and Mrs. Deel had intervened to conceal from us the fact that our father was gravely ill and to cut us out of our father’s will. The estate of Donald Wyvell had been valued at seven hundred thousand dollars ($700,000). Chris and I never saw our inheritance money. And the Trust remains in the improper possession of the Deels.

We, my brother and I, still wait to recover the Trust our father had designated for his only grandchild. There was no marriage, and Troy Deel had never adopted Brigitte.

Speaking of adoptions, money-grubbing schemers and children-haters Lisa Ferry and then-boyfriend Troy Deel entered into an agreement with ex-girlfriend Carmen Shimer that terminated his parental rights to the son Deel and Shimer had together. Ferry and Deel had arranged for the adoption of baby Jeffrey by Shimer's new husband as a means of extinguishing child support obligations, financial and emotional.

While Miss Carmen Shimer was pregnant with Troy Deel’s baby, Miss Lisa Ferry was screwing him. Lisa Ferry and Troy Deel first met and began to date just four years after she had secretly given birth to a son in a catholic convent where she hid from her father for the duration of her own pregnancy. She was in her mid-twenties. In the convent, she terminated her parental rights by giving up the newborn for adoption as a means of extinguishing child support obligations, financial and emotional.

Baby-rejecting child-abductors Deel and girlfriend Ferry (ever-present at transfers, in litigation, and for Zuckerman) took me to court to have me incarcerated, to have me supervised, to have my Mother’s Day weekend eliminated, my summer vacations blocked, my visitation terminated (ask them about 9/11) and my brother robbed. Our newly-wedded Deels even took me to court to have my visits with my toddler confined and restricted to Fair Oaks Mall across the street from their marital home. By her fourth birthday, my little girl, the baby Deel urged me to abort, had endured four different dangerous and debilitating visitation schedules in less than three years. Custody changed three times. Con artists Lisa Ferry Deel and husband, in their litigious and paranoidal rampage, finally took Brigitte. I may one day recover my daughter, but I expect never to recover my one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) which were wasted in those courtroom games that were instigated by these two cons, these two thieves.

Home invaders Ferry & Deel had also burglarized my condo and had taken from it the social security card, the birth certificate, and the passport belonging to my fourteen-month-old, a paternity paper signed by her father, and every picture I owned of me pregnant with Brigitte.

Jeffrey was eleven when his mother died prematurely. I often wonder who cared for him after his loss. I know Deel didn’t. I don’t have information on Ferry's son. Worse off? I doubt it. (The death of Jeffrey's mother is based on unconfirmed information.)

In France, we reserve for special people such as Lisa Ferry Deel a very special noun:

Garce.

-Veronique Wyvell

“…you may have been shown, or given for your files, custody papers that are not in order.”
-Brigitte’s mother to Belmont Ridge Middle School

*SEQUEL>> Plaintiff v. Lisa Ferry Deel, Katherine M. Owens, and A.G. Edwards; Loudoun County Circuit Court in Virginia; #CL00051880-00; 9/25/08; Status Active

_______
“Integrity is not a commodity. It’s the most rare and precious of personal attributes. It is the core of a person’s — and a company’s — reputation.”
-John Stumpf, Chairman & CEO, Wells Fargo, past employer of LFD

GOOD DADS DON’T ACT LIKE TROY DEEL Haunted by the truth this chronic trespasser on my motherhood says he will sue in email without subject, substance,

...and spellcheck.
_______
...

People don’t want to believe it. -DL
_______

Subject:
From: tadeel@comcast.com
Date: Thursday, July 22, 2010

Veronique,

Please do not show up on Saturday. This is not the way to get back into Brigitte's life. If you embarish her on Saturday, this will further deminish any chance of ever being a part of her life. Brigitte has grown into a wonderful person whose feelings you seem to not care about. You have been gone from her life for over six years. If you really want a chance with her you must start communicating with me and only me without hostility or anger. I will not allow you into her life unless you seek and continue for a sustained period of time certified physicological counseling and medication.

Furthermore, you are not allowed into Belmont. If I find you inside the gates I will have you arrested for tresspassing. These words should sound familiar as these are the last words you said to me the last time you saw Brigitte at your home July 4th weekend of 2004. You said to me "You and Brigitte are never allowed on my property ever again and if you do it will be tresspassing". You should remember this, I have. Up until that time I made every attempt to insure that Brigitte got to see you during your scheduled visitation. You were a no show on many occasions and several times I brought Brigitte to your home. I do not know what took place that holiday weekend during your visitation with Brigitte, but you must understand that Brigitte has never asked to come back to your home since that weekend. If she had, I would have brought her. Unless you take serious what I have said above your chances to have a normal relationship with Brigitte will not happen.

You have defamed and libeled my wife and I in public for several years now. Please stop. Do not send emails to Lisa's employer, my employer, my employers associates or anyone else connected to me or my wife. Any further defamation will cause me to take action. Please remove Lisa's name and my name from your blog. Your linkage to Shivani's Face Book must also be removed. Your public posting of Brigitte's picture without asking her did not sit well with her or her friends.

There's a good chance this email will only enrage you. It is my hope that it does not. It is my hope that you take what I have said above very seriously and seek help.

Sincerely,

Troy

14 July 2010 at Rivercrest Pool

“Brigitte has a mother who loves her very much.”
And after six years of separation, I have
a daughter who still loves me.

TROY DEEL CAN GO JUMP IN A LAKE.

____________________________
comments and commentaries...

This comment by Anonymous can be found at, http://misconductinvirginiafamilycourts.blogspot.com/2010/07/brigitte-deel-of-ashburn-va-is-taken.html or, Brigitte Deel of Ashburn, VA is taken captive by her Sociopath Father Troy Deel:

It is just like the emails from my abusive X who through lies and accusations of me abusing our son with the help of his unethical attorney got custody. Not making much money, I have been unable to fight. After taking custody, he and his wife abused and neglected my son. He was expelled from school, not fed, not clothed and did not receive medical care for his TS. Then they pressed not once but three times assault charges on this young man and refused to give me custody of which I have been fighting in the courts for. Now do to the confusion and hysteria and abuse in the courtroom, my son is with DFS just rotting away. I had medical appts scheduled, clarinet lessons, etc and live in the best school district and residence possible in Maryland. Sadly his dad is in Fairfax. I have never experienced such horrible [male chauvinism] ever. It is horrible. The GAL and others just poster and say anything they want to say about me and get away with it The judge never asks for authentication of their comments etc and argue and yell at me in front of my son! I am a respected member of the community and a teacher and my X abused me and now my son and the judge and others will not see it. It is truly a man's world in Virginia and almost like a police state too! It is incredible. My son has been destroyed. He was ready for a top college and now he has not had the chance to even attend HS the past few years. I am sick from this He and I love each other so much. The dad and attorney did PAS on him and made him believe the lies and tried to alienate him from me but our love was too strong. Even though they continue to say they do not want him they refuse to drop the custody fight even though it is destroying his only son.
I have so many crazy emails from him bordering on psychopathology also sounding so very similar. Wonder if he found this website and copied it!

# # #

This commentary is by The Leadership Council,
http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/pas/DVP.html or,
Domestic Violence (DV) by Proxy: Why Terrorist Tactics Employed by Batterers Are Not "PAS":

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 [in] a parent with a history of using domestic violence or intimidation, [who] 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.

This is very different from "parental alienation syndrome" as described by the late Richard A. Gardner. Dr. Gardner described PAS as an internal process by which a child aligns themselves with a preferred parent to protect themselves from the divorce conflict. “PAS” is conceptualized as a psychological process of identification with a parent who, according to the theory, encourages this identification at the expense of the other parent.

PAS inducing parents, according to Gardner, are often unconscious of what they are doing to encourage the identification. In contrast, perpetrators of DV by Proxy are very conscious of what they are doing. Controlling, coercive, illegal acts often done by abusive and controlling people, usually men, are not subtle, and do not encourage an identification with a parent. Criminal, fraudulent, coercive acts are visible and obvious. These behaviors encourage compliance by threats and fear. Behaviors involved in DV by Proxy are deliberate and often illegal. These behaviors include: battery, destruction of property, locking children in rooms to prevent them from calling parents, falsifying documents, along with other similar overt behaviors.

The most dangerous aspect of Gardner's PAS theory is that that the alienating parent's behavior is theorized to be so subtle as to be unobservable. In other words, the behaviors that are supposed to cause the alienation are assumed to be happening without any proof that they have actually occured. As many women have discovered this makes a charge of "alienation" almost impossible to defend against.

While Gardner's theories regarding PAS have been shown to be overly general and have not been supported by careful research, behaviors seen in DV by Proxy can be readily observed. Behaviors involved in DV by Proxy are deliberate and planned; many are illegal, and if the child is given the freedom to talk, will be described in great detail by the child.

If the child's formerly favorable view of the victimized parent changes when exposed to tactics like this over time then it is more likely a form of "Stockholm Syndrome" or traumatic attachment to the abuser, rather than the alignment with one parent and negative reaction to the other that Gardner described as "alienation".

A recent and comprehensive article on PAS and its use in the court system, by Jennifer Hoult can be downloaded here.

# # #

MARSDEN MUM on Issue of Remaking Virginia Law Affecting Family Dissolution, Children to Curb Litigation, Protect Rights of Caring and Involved Parents

.....
Hello Mr. Albo.... I am writing you because I have had no reply from Mr. Marsden. Legislators must get a lot of emails. Never easy to read and then answer every bit of it. I know because I get a lot of emails too. Most of the people who write me are parents, most are mothers, a few fathers. The message, however, is always the same. I hear over and over again that *BIOC* isn't working. But I think Virginia legislators know this. I think if Virginia legislators were more diligent about reading and responding to mail from their constituents who are innocent, and honest, parents in difficult legal situations because *BIOC* isn't working, my own mailbox would see less of it. People find me because I blog on the issue...I am hoping you might be open to considering, and pushing for, a new approach. This new approach is discussed below in my email for Delegate David Marsden. It's called THE APPROXIMATION RULE.
-Veronique Wyvell wrote Dave Albo on Dec. 7, 2008


----- Original Message -----
From: Veronique WYVELL
To: DelDMarsden@house.state.va.us
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 11:57
Subject: THE APPROXIMATION RULE (1 of 2)

Re: THE APPROXIMATION RULE

Section 2.08. Allocation of Custodial Responsibility

(1) Unless otherwise resolved by agreement of the parents under Sec. 2.06, the court should allocate custodial responsibility so that the proportion of custodial time the child spends with each parent approximates the proportion of time each parent spent performing caretaking functions for the child prior to the parents’ separation or, if the parents never lived together, before the filing of the action, except to the extent required under Sec. 2.11 or necessary to achieve one or more of the following objectives:

(a) to permit the child to have a relationship with each parent which, in the case of a legal parent or a parent by estoppel who has performed a reasonable share of parenting functions, should not be less than a presumptive amount of custodial time set by a uniform rule of statewide application…

{Source: The American Law Institute, PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF FAMILY DISSOLUTION: ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, Soft Cover Edition 2003, Chapter 2, Page 178} [FN1]

Attn: Dave W. Marsden
Virginia House of Delegates 2008
41st District - Fairfax County (part)
9322 Jackson StreetBurke, VA 22015
Phone: 703.323.4733
Email: DelDMarsden@house.state.va.us

Dear Delegate Marsden,

Good morning.

We met last December outside House Room C in the General Assembly Building the day of Judicial Interviews. You asked me, “What do you want?” Before I could answer, however, you told me to put it on ONE piece of paper. I said to you that it was too late now to propose legislation (for the 2008 session). And you shrugged your shoulders. I had traveled to Richmond that day to join a small group of parents who share a concern about how child custody gets done in Virginia, and why it gets done that way. Some of us were standing in front of you that day in December, outside Room C. You might remember. I hope you remember.

At the very top of this email message for you, please see the legislation that I hope you still can and will consider, and deliver, to the 2009 session on behalf of the many, many parents in Virginia who know that *BIOC* isn’t working. Many, many reputable people in reputable places have been writing and speaking on “The Best Interest of the Child Standard”--specifically, on the need to replace it with “a better way” because it isn’t working.

The legislation I would like proposed is taken from page 178 of PRINCIPLES [FN1]. I read that The American Law Institute devoted 10 years to compiling the information contained in this study and this presentation of model codes and “restatements” [FN2].

Relevant Virginia officials, however, appear to be paying absolutely no attention to this wonderful work, and effort, by ALI. I had no answer from Delegate Teri Suit when last year I invited her to join me for “State of the Family 2007.” The University of Richmond / School of Law / National Center for Family Law was hosting in September, 2007, its first ever national family law symposium. Elizabeth Scott and Robert Emery presented. Both scholars spoke at sessions devoted to making the case for an “approximation” standard, devoted to making the case for doing away with the “best interest of the child” standard [FN3].

Although Professor Scott is no longer at the University of Virginia, Dr. Robert Emery is still there as professor of psychology and director of The Center for Children, Families, and the Law. You can find his personal, professional, and contact information on his UVA web pages [FN4].

I think the Virginia General Assembly would benefit from listening to Dr. Emery speak on the value of The Approximation Rule, especially if repealing *BIOC* is too scary for them [FN5]. My own calculations show that it is possible that at least 7000 Virginia children each year join the thousands upon thousands of children already caught in never-ending “abuse & custody” cases (high-conflict separations and divorces almost always contain histories of family abuse). NOT repealing *BIOC* is too scary for me. The number of Virginia children in foster care is fixed at about 7000, I believe. Good attention, after all, is given to the foster care “crisis” afflicting so many, and so why should we not think about giving some “good attention” to the custody “crisis” afflicting so many more?

The presumptive amount of custody time mentioned in 1(a) in the above proposed legislation can be easily satisfied with Utah’s Minimum Schedules for Parent-Time [FN 6]. My own research has confirmed that the Utah Minimum Schedules follow the recommendations of our most respected experts on age-appropriate and developmentally-appropriate residence and parent-time arrangements for children with parents who live apart. Mr. David Levy of CRC told me way back that the Utah schedules were actually designed by a female administrator with CRC. The schedules are not new in Utah.

Section 2.06, which is also mentioned in the above proposed legislation, is referring to parental agreements. PRINCIPLES, the complete volume, can be viewed on Westlaw and in most law libraries. I have found it convenient to own my own softbound copy, however. You may look at it, if you wish.

I think it might take up to 3 years to pass The Approximation Rule in Virginia, that is, if we begin to introduce the concept during the GA session coming up, in 2009.

There has simply been far too little organized activity and far too little organized focus on the very real Racket that *BIOC* has now become. The hidden victims? Children [FN7].

Thousands upon thousands of Virginia’s children.

Can you and will you still help?

Thank you.

Veronique Wyvell
VWyvell@patriot.net
Private citizen
McLean, Virginia

[FN1] “ALI Publications Catalog: Principles of the Law of Family Dissolution: Analysis and Recommendations” found at,
http://www.ali.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publications.fpage&product_code=1FAMDISOTS

[FN2] “Press Release: AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE PUBLISHES PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF FAMILY DISSOLUTION” sent by VW as separate email message

[FN3] “State of the Family 2007 brochure” found at, http://law.richmond.edu/news/NCFLBrochure.pdf

[FN4] “Robert E. Emery biographical information” found at,
www.virginia.edu/ccfl/emery.php

[FN5] “Custody Disputed: The guidelines judges and psychologists use to decide child custody cases have little basis in science. The system must be rebuilt on better research by Robert E. Emery, Randy K. Otto, and William O'Donohue” found at,
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=custody-disputed

[FN6] “Utah Code Section 30-3-35.5. Minimum schedule for parent-time for children under five years of age” found at,
http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE30/htm/30_03_003505.htm
and,
“Utah Code Section 30-3-35. Minimum schedule for parent-time for children 5 to 18 years of age” found at,
http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE30/htm/30_03_003500.htm

[FN7] “A Critical Assessment of Child Custody Evaluations: Limited Science and a Flawed System by Robert E. Emery, Randy K. Otto, and William T. O'Donohue (Editorial by Eleanor E. Maccoby)” found at,
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/index.cfm?journal=pspi&content=pspi/6_1


----- Original Message -----
From: Veronique WYVELL
To: DelDMarsden@house.state.va.us
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 11:57
Subject: THE APPROXIMATION RULE (2 of 2)

[FN2] “Press Release: AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE PUBLISHES PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF FAMILY DISSOLUTION” sent by VW as separate email message

PRESS RELEASE

IMMEDIATE

Michael Greenwald
800-CLE NEWS, ext.1626

AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE PUBLISHES PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF FAMILY DISSOLUTION

(Philadelphia) – The American Law Institute (ALI) has published its first comprehensive work in the field of family law: Principles of the Law of Family Dissolution: Analysis and Recommendations. With this innovative and groundbreaking new volume, the Institute completes more than a decade of work on the legal consequences of family dissolution, including those involving domestic partners. These Principles cover such vital issues as the allocation of custodial and decisionmaking responsibilities for children, child support, distribution of marital property, compensatory payments to former spouses, and the legal effect of agreements between the parties.

.....

Responsive to the enormous changes in society that have taken place over a half century during which divorce rates climbed and the traditional roles of men and women were challenged, this innovative volume moves beyond the traditional formulations that were often framed in such general terms as to give nearly unbounded discretion to the decisionmakers charged with implementing them. The Principles provide family law with the conceptual clarification and improved adaptation to social needs that has long been the ALI’s hallmark. It makes a major contribution to the better administration of justice in an area too often marked by inequity.

The work is described as "Principles" rather than "Restatement" because "Principles" is the better designation for a project that carefully explores and clarifies the fundamental assumptions—about the best interests of children, fairness to divorcing wives and husbands, and the legitimate economic claims of unmarried partners—upon which the legal rules must rest. Many of these Principles, nevertheless, restate and clarify present law, while others recommend directions for implementation by courts, legislatures, and other appropriate decisionmakers. The result is a coherent legal framework, sensitive to both the traditional value systems within which most families are formed and the nontraditional realities and expectations of other families, a framework the earlier drafts of which have already begun to influence both courts and legislatures...

continued...


----- Original Message -----
From: Veronique WYVELL
To: DelDMarsden@house.state.va.us
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 10:51
Subject: The Approximation Rule...

Hello Mr. Marsden,

On 11 November 2008, I sent you:
THE APPROXIMATION RULE (1 of 2),
and,
THE APPROXIMATION RULE (2 of 2).

If you did not receive those two email messages,
I can re-send them.

If you received my messages,
I would like to know that you received them.

If you received them,
and if you are not interested in supporting such legislation,
please let me know you are not interested.

If you do not answer this message,
I will re-send the original two.

I understand that you might be very busy,
the 2009 session will be here soon.

Thank you.

Veronique Wyvell, RN
Private citizen
Fairfax County, Virginia

Cartoon at top} by David Klein,
Wall Street Journal, Jan. 26, 2009, Text added

. . .
ADDENDA

West Virginia passes the Approximation Rule:
§ 48-9-206. Allocation of custodial responsibility.

Iowa Supreme Court in Hansen v. Hansen (2007) acknowledges, validates the Approximation Rule:
http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/Supreme_Court/Recent_Opinions/20070615/06-0191.pdf

[This post was first published on 31 December 2008]

THE JUDGE AS BATTERER (NO WONDER MORE WOMEN IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASES ARE ON THE RUN): A SAMPLING OF 25 YEARS OF SUPPORTING LITERATURE

_______
70% of abductions are by mothers

By Caroline Marcus
SYDNEY MORNING HERALD
March 4, 2007

MOTHERS are responsible for seven out of 10 international parental child abductions, an Australian study has found. And the most common reason for the abduction is flight from an abusive relationship.
The findings of the International Social Service Australia (ISS) report present a sharp contrast to the 1970s, when fathers were overwhelmingly the perpetrators of parental abductions.
The key findings of the paper, titled Learning From The Links Between Domestic Violence And International Parental Child Abduction, were released to The Sun-Herald ahead of the report's publication later this month.
The results revealed a huge cultural shift over the past three decades, ISS executive director Maria Brett said.
"In the 1970s, it was a different time and a different environment, and we saw a lot of unhappy men wanting more contact with their children resorting to abduction," she said.
"These days, there are more women in domestic violence cases abducting their children and taking them overseas."
In the 1970s, fathers were responsible for 80 out of 99 cases analysed in a previous study drawn on by the report. The mother was the abductor in 18 of those cases.
Yet in 1999 women made up 70 per cent of abductors in an analysis of 1080 applications under the 1980 Hague Convention, an international treaty set up to deal with child abductions.
Men comprised 29 per cent of abductors and the remaining 1 per cent included abductors of both sexes - grandparents or another relative.
In 78 per cent of cases, abducted children were younger than nine years old.

This article can be found at:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/70-of-abductions-are-by-mothers/2007/03/03/1172868811287.html#
...

...

THE JUDGE AS BATTERER

A Sampling of 25 Years of Supporting Literature
_______

“Each time that I appeared in court, the system reinforced his dominance over me by preserving his parental ‘rights’ without regard to my safety. I felt totally undermined by the court.” -PW in Justice Denied

[ Chesler, 1991, 1986 ] MOTHERS ON TRIAL: THE BATTLE FOR CHILDREN AND CUSTODY. The book. Mothers were not rescued from individually violent men by policemen, social workers, lawyers, or other family members. Judges did not rescue mothers from violent men either. On the contrary, the (large number of) domestically violent fathers, including those who kidnapped their children, were not imprisoned, fined, or custodially punished. Of the 12 percent of the mothers who kidnapped their children (Table Two), 80 percent were imprisoned, fined, or custodially punished ... Sixty-two percent of the fathers used violence to win custody. They physically battered, psychologically terrorized, and physically ejected mothers from their homes; they kidnapped, and, with the help of mother competitors, brainwashed children ...

[ Ducote, 1992 ] POST-SEPARATION FAMILY VIOLENCE RELIEF ACT. The legislation. The legislature further finds that the problems of family violence do not necessarily cease when the victimized family is legally separated or divorced. In fact, the violence often escalates, and child custody and visitation become the new forum for the continuation of the abuse. Because current laws relative to child custody and visitation are based on an assumption that even divorcing parents are in relatively equal positions of power, and that such parents act in the children’s best interest, these laws often work against the protection of the children and the abused spouse in families with a history of family violence. Consequently, laws designed to act in the children’s best interest may actually effect a contrary result due to the unique dynamics of family violence ...

[ American Judges Association, 1996 ] DOMESTIC VIOLENCE & THE COURTROOM. The article. Studies show that batterers have been able to convince authorities that the victim is unfit or undeserving of sole custody in approximately 70% of challenged cases ...

[ United States Congress, 1997 ] SAFE HAVENS FOR CHILDREN ACT OF 1997 - FINDINGS. The bill.
(1) Family violence does not necessarily cease when family victims are legally separated by divorce or otherwise not sharing a household.
(2) According to a 1996 report by the American Psychological Association, custody and visitation disputes are more frequent when there is a history of domestic violence.
(3) Family violence often escalates following separation and divorce, and child custody and visitation arrangements become the new forum for the continuation of abuse.
(4) According to a 1996 report by the American Psychological Association, fathers who batter mothers are twice as likely [as non-violent men] to seek sole custody of their children. In these circumstances, if the abusive father loses custody he is more likely to continue the threats to the mother through other legal actions.
(5) Some perpetrators of violence use the children as pawns to control the abused party and to commit more violence during separation or divorce. In one study, 34 percent of women in shelters and callers to hotlines reported threats of kidnapping, 11 percent reported that the batterer had kidnapped the child for some period, and 21 percent reported that threats of kidnapping forced the victim to return to the batterer.
(6) Approximately 90 percent of children in homes in which their mothers are abused witness the abuse. Children who witness domestic violence may themselves become victims and exhibit more aggressive, antisocial, fearful, and inhibited behaviors. Such children display more anxiety, aggression and temperamental problems.
(7) Women and children are at an elevated risk of violence during the process of separation or divorce.
(8) Fifty to 70 percent of men who abuse their spouses or partners also abuse their children.
(9) Up to 75 percent of all domestic assaults reported to law enforcement agencies were inflicted after the separation of the couple.
(10) In one study of spousal homicide, over 1/2 of the male defendants were separated from their victims.
(11) Seventy-three percent of battered women seeking emergency medical services do so after separation ...

[ Supreme Court of Virginia, 2000 ] GENDER BIAS IN THE COURTS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA. The study. [There is also a]n apparent lack of recognition by judges in both Juvenile & Domestic Relations court and in Circuit Court of ... (ii) the abuser’s use of legal processes to continue to manipulate and control the family. In fact, many abusers appear to be manipulating the court. In such cases, it is not sufficient to look only at the context painted by the abuser; it is necessary to view the proceeding currently before the court in the light of the other proceedings involving the parties (e.g., where the abuser constantly sues the victim, harasses her attorney and others who help her, threatens witnesses, or uses child visitation, custody and support issues as an excuse to bring the family back into court many times a year.) ...

[ Silverman, 2001 ] AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION - THE IMPACT OF FAMILY COURTS ON BATTERED WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN IN CASES OF DISPUTED CHILD CUSTODY AND VISITATION: PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF THE BATTERED MOTHERS’ TESTIMONY PROJECT. The paper. Family courts are frequently reported to promote the endangerment of battered mothers and their children through awarding child custody or unsupervised child visitation to batterers, even in cases involving batterers’ continuing abuse of the mother, and/or outstanding allegations of child abuse involving these men. Previous analyses of court records have documented biases against battered women by the Massachusetts Family and Probate Court in such cases. This systemic mistreatment of battered women and their children has received little attention relative to other DV issues, despite an expanding literature describing the risks to children from battering men. This presentation will review the goals and methodology of the Battered Mothers’ Testimony Project, a collaboration of public health researchers, battered women’s advocates and human rights workers to examine the impact of family court systems on the health, safety and well-being of battered women and their children in cases of disputed custody/visitation. Preliminary findings from semi-structured interviews with 50 battered mothers regarding (1) experiences of abuse against themselves and their children, both during the relationship and since separation; (2) whether and how the batterer has continued to intimidate/abuse her through family court litigation; (3) experiences with state actors of the family court system (e.g., judges, custody evaluators); and (4) other concerns regarding their treatment within the family court system (e.g., discrimination based on race, sexual orientation, and/or socioeconomic status) will be presented. Plans for dissemination of information, organizing and activism to reform state policies and practices based on these findings will also be discussed ...

[ Supreme Court of Virginia, 2001 ] INFLUENCES ON JUDGES’ DECISIONS IN CHILD CUSTODY DISPUTES IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA. The study. “Pages 4, 6, 7, 20, 21, 23, 24, 29, 30, 38, 39, 40, 41, 53, 55, and 57 of this Supreme Court of Virginia 2001 study are especially relevant to the current trend of awarding custody of children to fathers who are abusive, violent, and dangerously controlling men, narcissists, and sociopaths …” -VW

[ Bancroft, 2002 ] THE BATTERER AS PARENT: ADDRESSING THE IMPACT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ON FAMILY DYNAMICS (CHAPTER FIVE). Impeding Recovery: The Batterer in Custody and Visitation. The book. Batterers win custody of their children with greater frequency [than] is generally realized. Although it is widely believed that family courts have a bias in favor of mothers, custody studies have demonstrated that since the 1970's, fathers have been at a marked advantage in custody disputes. There is a general reluctance among family courts in the U.S. and abroad to consider a man's battering as a reflection on his parenting or a factor in determining custody ...

[ BMTP, 2004 ] BATTERED MOTHERS’ TESTIMONY PROJECT - Researchers Say Massachusetts Family Courts Fail to Protect Battered Women and Their Children; Study Applies Human Rights Analysis to Child Custody Cases Involving Domestic Violence. The project. “Battered mothers face a perilous irony,” said Silverman. “Authorities push these women to leave abusive men in order to protect their children. But women who can make this break then face family courts, another authority that often ignores this history of abuse as a threat to children’s safety and, perversely, concludes that women’s attempts to protect their children from these men actually demonstrate their own lack of fitness as mothers” ...

[ Jaffe, 2005 ] JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR FAMILIES, CHILDREN & THE COURTS - PARENTING ARRANGEMENTS AFTER DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: SAFETY AS A PRIORITY IN JUDGING CHILDREN’S BEST INTEREST. The article. Perpetrators [of domestic violence] may use perpetual litigation as a form of ongoing control and harassment. The family court can inadvertently become a tool for batterers to continue their abusive behavior. Litigation exacts a high emotional and financial price for abused women already overwhelmed with the aftermath of a violent relationship ... Indicators that this misuse is occurring include an investment in custody and/or access that is out of keeping with a parent's previous involvement in child rearing ...

[ Kiewra, 2005 ] HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH - HARVARD PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEW: MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. The article. The 40 women came from towns across Massachusetts and from all walks of life, yet their stories were the same -- shocking tales of battering and harassment at the hands of abusive ex-partners. Long after separation or divorce, the women said, their torment continued, aided and abetted by judges who gave unsupervised visitation and custody of their children to violent & controlling men …

[ Legal Momentum, 2005 ] LEGAL MOMENTUM ADVANCING WOMEN’S RIGHTS - DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND CHILD CUSTODY. The kit. In no other area of family law are battered women and their children inadvertently subjected to greater physical and emotional harm than in the child custody and visitation context. Battered women are often forced to participate in custody arrangements that require mediation, unsupervised custody and visitation, and other types of exchanges that leave them and their children vulnerable to continued abuse and control at the hands of their batterers. Women who try to protect themselves and their children by seeking sole custody or modifications in custody arrangements such as cessation of visitation, supervised visits, or who flee with their children are penalized by having custody taken away and given to their batterers. Despite the perception that mothers always win custody, when fathers contest custody, they win sole or joint custody in 40% to 70% of the cases. Indeed, even in cases where abuse is reported, a batterer is twice as likely to win custody over a non-abusive parent than in cases where no abuse is reported …

[ Neustein & Lesher, 2005 ] FROM MADNESS TO MUTINY: WHY MOTHERS ARE RUNNING FROM THE FAMILY COURTS--AND WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT. The book. "A groundbreaking new book that is perhaps the most highly readable scholarly work I’ve encountered in my 14 years in academia ... The very first to provide the historical and contextual chronology of this system’s steady decline into chaos and corruption over the past two decades. It is eminently accurate and rigorously documented -- a book that will hit scholars, professionals, and lay persons right between their eyes. This is the book that mothers have been waiting for ..." -Dr. "Mo" Hannah

[ PBS, 2005 ] PUBLIC BROADCASTING SERVICE - BREAKING THE SILENCE: CHILDREN'S STORIES. The documentary. One of the most effective ways an abusive father can inflict pain and declare his domination is to take custody of his children away from their mother. As Joan Meier, an attorney and professor of clinical law, explains, “To win custody of the kids over and against the mother’s will is the ultimate victory ... short of killing the kids.” While there may be a perception in society that the family court system has a maternal preference, statistics show that, in the past twenty years, fathers are more often being awarded custody. Furthermore, in family court cases where mothers allege battery, fathers are given custody two-thirds of the time ...

[ Griffin, 2006 ] PROTECTIVE PARENT REFORM ACT (Conceived and Drafted by Richard Ducote, Esq.). The legislation. In the state of Maryland, courts have committed grave errors in cases in which molested children have sought protection from an abusive parent. By failing to follow basic rules of procedure and evidence – in essence, by failing to follow due process of law – these courts have often ignored compelling evidence of abuse and – conversely – have allowed hearsay and other inadmissible evidence presented by children’s attorneys, custody evaluators, mental health professionals, mediators, screeners, and other such persons traditionally participating in child custody and visitation cases to guide the court in their custody and visitation rulings. In so doing, courts have too often inadvertently and tragically placed children in the hands of their molesters. Thus, reform is required in the state of Maryland, by way of the Protective Parent Reform Act (“PPRA”). This act is meant to ensure that a parent who reasonably believes that his or her child is threatened by child abuse perpetrated or allowed by the other parent is not punished by a Maryland court, or penalized by loss of custody, or limitation of contact or visitation ...

[ Hannah, 2007 ] FOURTH BATTERED MOTHERS CUSTODY CONFERENCE - TRUTH COMMISSION FINDINGS AND SOLUTIONS. The report. [T]here is a widespread problem of abusive parents being granted custody of children and protective parents, [primarily mothers], having their custody limited or denied, and/or being otherwise punished ... [O]nce abusers gain custody, they then isolate and estrange the children from the protective parents. Courts seldom punish the abusers or switch custody back to the protective parents ... The court system has failed to respond appropriately to domestic violence and child abuse cases involving custody. The Commission found many common errors made by the courts and the professionals they rely upon which contribute to these tragedies ... Sanctions against abusers and the courts must be used to prevent abusers from using legal tactics to continue their abuse through the courts ...

[ Saunders & Oehme, 2007 ] VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN - CHILD CUSTODY AND VISITATION DECISIONS IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASES: LEGAL TRENDS, RISK FACTORS, AND SAFETY CONCERNS. The article. It may be hard to believe that an abusive partner can ever make good on his threat to gain custody of the children from his victim. After all, he has a history of violent behavior and she almost never does. Unfortunately, a surprising number of battered women lose custody of their children (e.g., Saccuzzo & Johnson, 2004). This document describes how this can happen through uninformed and biased courts, court staff, evaluators, and attorneys and how the very act of protecting ones' children can lead to their loss ...

[ Bowen, 2008 / also Ruiz, 2008 ] VOICES OF WOMEN ORGANIZING PROJECT - REPORT: ABUSED WOMEN SEE DANGER IN FAMILY COURT. The articles. Susan Lob says it's simple: Good mothers should keep their children. But Lob, director of the New York-based Voices of Women Organizing Project, says that doesn't always happen in the New York family court system when it's women who have been abused by their children's fathers. Instead, in a report released today, Voices of Women says family courts retraumatize battered women by forcing them to confront men they fear and granting custody to abusers 37 percent of the time despite the women's roles as primary caregivers. "What struck us was the impossibility of women losing custody to the men who abused them," said Lob. "That just seemed unbelievable." The group laid out four recommendations … Authors issued specific suggestions for each of the four recommendations, including increasing accountability for judges by halving 10-year judicial appointments to five-year terms and seeing children in courtrooms at least once a year to ensure custody decisions are benefiting them …

[ Meier, 2008 ] THE WASHINGTON POST - WHY THIS MOTHER WAS NOT HEARD. The editorial. Contrary to stereotypes, most divorcing mothers do not seek to deprive the children of their father. Most settle out of court. Only about 20 percent of cases become "contested custody litigation." It's not surprising that a large proportion of these "bitter custody disputes" involve violent or abusive fathers. It is time courts faced the truth: Custody litigants frequently have a history of abuse. Men who abuse their partners often pose a threat to their children. Most women seeking to restrict fathers' access to their children are doing so out of legitimate fear for their well-being. And too many children are delivered to dangerous fathers by family courts that prioritize fathers' "rights" over children's safety …

[ NCJFCJ, 2008 ] NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT JUDGES - A JUDICIAL GUIDE TO CHILD SAFETY IN CUSTODY CASES. The bench cards. This tool is designed to maximize a child’s safety as you determine issues of custody and visitation and can help you … This tool will also assist you in conducting a thoughtful exploration of the child’s safety risks when abusive behavior has been part of the family fabric. Sometimes, the parties may not articulate clearly either the abuse or the child’s safety risks during litigation. Indicators may be present that require you to explore the possibility that one parent is putting the other parent or the child at risk of abuse. Because the abused parent might not directly raise issues of physical abuse or other forms of control, you will want to be aware of indicators of abusive behaviors that may alter the dynamics of the litigation process. This tool will explore the various behaviors that you might encounter, both from the controlling and abusive parent, and from the controlled and abused parent. Organization of the Bench Tool: This supplemental guide and the attached bench cards follow your decision-making from the initial filing through drafting and enforcing the order. While much of the material is presented in procedural order, there are also bench cards and chapters devoted to topics and issues that can arise throughout litigation. The authors suggest that you first read the cards as an introduction to the topics addressed. This supplement, to which the cards are keyed, offers additional information and suggests further resources at the end of the guide, and in footnotes ...

[ NOW, 2008 ] NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN - CRISIS FOR WOMEN IN FAMILY COURT: WHAT TO EXPECT AND HOW TO FIGHT BACK. The brochure. There is a crisis for women and their children in many of the family law courts of this country. Affirmed by experts and skilled court watchers, the existence of this crisis is verified by women in every state who report injustice in their divorce and custody cases. This is true especially for battered mothers trying to protect their children from abusive fathers who aggressively litigate against them, using family courts to stalk, harass, punish, and impoverish their former partners and children. Some fathers are aided by friendly judges and court-appointed personnel …

[ BWJP, 2009 ] BATTERED WOMEN’S JUSTICE PROJECT - DEVELOPMENT OF A FRAMEWORK FOR IDENTIFYING AND EXPLICATING THE CONTEXT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN CUSTODY CASES AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR CUSTODY DETERMINATIONS. The project. BWJP has been invited to apply for a grant from the USDOJ Office on Violence Against Women for a demonstration project to develop a framework to guide custody and visitation decisions in cases involving domestic violence. Research on custody and visitation determinations provide troubling evidence that procedures currently in use in family courts often fail to identify, contextualize and account for the occurrence of domestic violence in these cases, and if identified, its presence seems not to consistently affect the court’s recommendations regarding custody or visitation arrangements … The desired outcome of this project is to provide family courts with a process by which the violence occurring in these families is made visible, its context and the related safety issues are more clearly understood, and as a result, its implications for custody and parenting plan arrangements can be taken into account more effectively to protect the emotional and physical well-being of the litigants and their children. The project will be funded for two years and is scheduled to begin in the summer of 2009 …

[ Bancroft, 2009 ] CHILD CUSTODY JUSTICE. The tutorial. An abused woman can be vulnerable in family court if she comes in with unfounded expectations. Perhaps the most widespread myth is the belief that mothers are favored by courts in custody disputes, which stopped being true decades ago. It is true that for roughly the first half of the 1900's the "Tender Years Doctrine" was influential, and mothers had some advantage in gaining custody of young children. (Prior to about 1900, mothers had no rights regarding custody at all.) But in the 1970's the tide was turning back, for various reasons, and by the 1980's fathers were winning at least joint custody in a majority of the custody battles they undertook, and winning sole custody more often than mothers, a situation that remains today. And the fathers who are taking advantage of this imbalance are largely abusive ones; researchers have found that abusers are twice as likely as non-abusive men to seek custody …

[ Eddy, 2009 ] HIGH CONFLICT INSTITUTE - HANDLING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN NEW WAYS FOR FAMILIES. The institute. Domestic violence is an area of growing concern in family courts, as highlighted by the 2007 Wingspread Conference and Report sponsored by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) and National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ). Differentiating among at least four different types of domestic violence is recognized as very important, yet in reality the adversarial court process often clouds these issues more than clarifies them … Historically, family law professionals have not recognized the significance of domestic violence risks in some cases and have exaggerated concerns in others. In the process, some partners and children have been seriously injured or killed, while other children have lost a meaningful relationship with one of their parents because of unnecessarily-restrictive parenting orders …

[ Cuccinelli, 2010 ] OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA - CUT OUT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: WHY DO VICTIMS STAY? The fact sheet. People often believe that victims of domestic violence will be safe if they just leave the batterer. But a battered person is not free to separate from an abuser at any time and there are many barriers to leaving. The biggest reason that a victim of domestic violence stays in an abusive relationship is fear. Victims believe, and the evidence has shown, that leaving is potentially the most deadly time … Barriers also may include: Fear that the children will be taken away – Batterers threaten that they will take the children (either legally or illegally) if the victim dares to leave the relationship …

[ Hannah & Goldstein, 2010 ] DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ABUSE, AND CHILD CUSTODY: LEGAL STRATEGIES AND POLICY ISSUES. The collection. “Women trapped in relationships with abusers come to expect horrendous misbehavior from their partners. What they cannot fathom is the maddening reinforcement commonly provided to abusive men by the justice system and the public at large ... That key abuse collaborator is the custody judge. Of all of the actors in a battered woman’s life, none wield more power over her children and financial future. It is beyond infuriating when women discover that their custody judges lack understanding of DV and are colluding with abusers to take away women’s financial resources and, even worse, their children.” -MB ( Available April 2010 but here's a preview )

... My mother is a formerly battered woman who is the first American to receive asylum in Europe. My brother and I were abused children who were failed by ... -Jennifer Collins

Veronique Wyvell, RN
Member, Fairfax County Network Against Family Abuse
Founder, MOMMY GO BYE BYE: Mothers Against Unjust Law
7831 Enola Street, #TA7, McLean, Virginia 22102

MAUL (Mothers Against Unjust Law) Goals:
Rebuttable PRESUMPTIONS Against Custody for Batterers
PPAs (Parenting Plan Agreements) before Litigation
Moratorium on CCEs (Child Custody Evaluations)
MINIMUM Parent-Time Schedules (UTAH Code)
JURY Trials (in Domestic Relations Cases)
PROTECTIVE Parent Reform Acts
DIGITAL Courtroom Records
ALI's Approximation Rule
TERM LIMITS for Judges
_______

'Exit brilliantly' with a little help from Va. guru of divorce Zarozny because not even Sen. Janet Howell will give a hoot if your case goes all wrong

............Thursday, January 7, 2010
iReport — She helps people "get unmarried" and manages a website called Brilliant Exits.


The Washington Post has written about her and so has Fairfax Woman. Her name is Sharon Zarozny, her business divorce counseling and divorce coaching. I highly recommend that anyone wanting to leave a marriage in Northern Virginia call her before they call that attorney. She's going to try to keep you out of court or at least try to keep you safe if not going to court is not an option. (She is not for you if an all-out custody war is what you are craving.) She will warn you that many attorneys are "in it to win it."

"They don't have to care about what's left of your family," Ms. Zarozny told Amanda Long last August during an interview for First Person Singular. She's right. And it's a rare divorce lawyer who doesn't consider a monied, narcissistic professional a "good catch." I've seen family lawyers prostitute themselves and throw ethics to the wind to satisfy the narcissistic urges of a wealthy abuser (and how often are narcissistic urges "family-friendly?"). I've seen judges go along, even seeming to "enjoy the show": How the Bench Stole Christmas. Click, read and see how I have tried hard to solicit the support, and concern, of my state senator. Janet Howell didn't care, doesn't care still.*

People like Sharon care. She's a good find. We mothers, especially, are lucky to have her. I am cautioning you: nobody will give a hoot if your case goes all wrong (not even the state senator for your district whose most important responsibility as your elected public servant is to appoint good people to the bench). So don't let it happen, do your homework, get informed. Get "court smart."

See Sharon, and make yours a brilliant exit.

~V. Wyvell, Mommy Go Bye Bye blogger, CNN iReporter

A CNN iReport: http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-378969

Women often don’t know how to safeguard their rights, nor can they circumvent corruption that’s built into the legal and judicial professions
[ Source: U.N. Tackles Universal Problem for Women: Divorce ]

______________________

_______________________________

*Paid for by Citizens for Janet Howell. Authorized by Janet Howell.



I

lived

with

domestic

abuse

for

11

months.



I

have

lived

with

judicial

abuse

for

11

years.



State Senator Janet Howell says she
"has been a tireless crusader for the victims of domestic violence."

State Senator Janet Howell says she
"is a leader in the fight to prevent family violence."

State Senator Janet Howell says she
"wants to break the cycle of domestic violence and child abuse."


I am abused by judges who were

screened, appointed, and confirmed

by State Senator Janet Howell.


~ Veronique Wyvell ~
How I became an opportunity