|
|
| TITLE DIVORCE COURT SCAM FALSE ARREST MALICIOUS PROSECUTION POST "CONVICTION" PETITION |
Λ         Leon Koziol, JD; father's rigths advocate  R.K. Hendrick, father's rights advocate & author  The U.S. Suspreme Court In Re Troxel
|
CHILD & FAMILY, MYTHS
& STATISTICS
In
times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a
revolutionary act. - George Orwell When we look at life all of us hold a worldview, a perspective of the world and what it is. Our world view informs and sometimes tends to distort our perspective, we overlook facts that disprove it and note facts that support it. We tend to guard our world view as though it were a sacred text. However, our world view is not always based upon facts, and in extreme cases it is not even based on reality. The purpose of this page is to assist the reader in developing a more accurate world view as it pertains to children and families, and, to aid in the process of informing the public to the end that our laws are just and fair. With that said . . . 20
Organizations and Authorities Blast
PBS on "Breaking the Silence" Originally posted on 07 November 2005 15:12:31 by Roger
F. Gay MND EXCLUSIVE Pat Mitchell Dear
Ms. Mitchell: PBS
at one time enjoyed a well-deserved reputation
for accurate and high-quality documentary programming. It is therefore
not only
sad but shocking to see a respected media outlet lower itself and
journalistic
standards with “Breaking the Silence: Children’s Stories.” This
spectacle is not disinterested journalism but
closer to ideologically driven propaganda. To disseminate falsehoods
against
American citizens who have no platform to speak in their own defense
is,
frankly, beyond belief. Despite vilifying these fathers, no hard
evidence is
ever presented to prove the crimes of which they are accused on
national
television. Using the mass media to target defenseless groups and
divide
children from their parents is a practice familiar from the most
hideous of
dictatorial regimes. At a time when the American media is already on
the
defensive over questionable ethics, PBS, far from restoring the
public’s faith
in journalistic integrity, has descended further into the depths of
irresponsible
journalism. Beyond
the personal attacks are the larger untruths
throughout the film. There is no scientific basis for any of the major
assertions in this film. For example: “All
over America, battered mothers are losing
custody of their children.” “One
third of mothers lose custody to abusive
husbands.”
No
evidence is cited for these statements, and they
are not true. Though parents of both genders do lose custody unjustly,
it is
overwhelmingly fathers, not mothers, who are routinely stripped of
custody of
their children with no finding of wrongdoing: A
study published in the
peer-reviewed journal Future of Children estimated
that 85-90% of
custody awards go to mothers. Although
patterns may vary
from state to state,” concludes a study from the New York University
School of
Law, “it appears that, over all, mothers obtain sole physical custody
ten times
more often than fathers.” A
study in Arlington,
Virginia, found that over an eighteen-month period maternal custody was
awarded
in 100% of decisions. A
study of four states,
published in the Journal of Divorce and Remarriage,
found a clear
preference among judges for maternal custody. Sanford
Braver of Arizona
State University surveyed litigants: “Not a single father thought that
the
system favored them in the slightest, and three-fourths thought it
favored
mothers,” he concluded. “And mothers tended to agree that the system
was
slanted in their favor.” Had
PBS done a thorough and balanced investigation
of the family courts, rather than resorting to gender invective, they
would
have discovered the larger problem of systemic corruption that deprives
children of both mothers and fathers and sometimes both. “Batterers
are twice as likely to contest as
non-batterers. And they often win sole or joint custody." “75%
of cases in which fathers contest custody,
fathers have history of being batterers.”
Again,
no evidence is cited, and no such evidence
exists. Fathers are not
the
exclusive or even the main perpetrators of domestic violence. Again, a
balanced
and thorough treatment would have found that both genders are
responsible for
domestic violence: Martin
S. Fiebert has compiled a bibliography of studies published in the
peer-reviewed
journal, Sexuality and Culture that demonstrate
that women are as
physically aggressive against their partners as men. Recent
studies include those by John Archer and Murray Straus. According
to Mother Jones magazine:
“Women report using violence in their relationships more often than men “Women
are doing the battering,” writes feminist Betty Friedan, “as much or
more than
men.” Philip
W. Cook has documented this extensively in Abused Men: The
Hidden Side of
Domestic Violence. “Children
are most often in danger from the
father.” This
may be the most provocative and irresponsible
statement of all. Yet again, no evidence is presented, and in this case
the
precise opposite is true. The vast preponderance of child abuse is
committed by
single mothers, not fathers. A father’s presence reduces child abuse: The
Department of Health and Human Services found that women aged twenty to
forty-nine are almost twice as likely as men to be perpetrators of
child
maltreatment: “Almost two-thirds were females,” their report states.
Most male
perpetrators were not fathers. The
Third National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect from the
Department
of Health and Human Services found that “women (the majority of whom
are
natural mothers) murder children 31.6 times more often than do natural
fathers.” “Contrary
to public perception,” write researchers Patrick Fagan and Dorothy
Hanks of the
Heritage Foundation, “research shows that the most likely physical
abuser of a
young child will be that child’s mother, not a male in the household.” A
study published by London’s Family Education Trust found children are
up to 33
times more likely to be abused in a single-mother home than in a home
with a
father present. “The presence of the father…placed the child at lesser risk for child sexual abuse,” a study in the refereed journal Adolescent and Family Health concluded.
“The protective effect from the father's presence in most households
was
sufficiently strong to offset the risk incurred by the few paternal
perpetrators.” “Parental
Alienation Syndrome (PAS)…has been used in countless cases by
abusive fathers to gain custody of their children.” “PAS
continues to be used in family courts as a
defense for why a child is rejecting the father.” PAS
“has been thoroughly debunked by the American
Psychological Association.” No
compilation of cases suggests either that
fathers invoking PAS are “abusive” or that such a defense is especially
effective in court. Yet whatever we call it, children are
systematically taught
to hate their parents (most often, though not exclusively, fathers) and
used as
informers against them with the backing of the courts. The systematic,
government-backed
turning of children against their parents is another practice familiar
from the
bureaucratic dictatorships of the last century. If “Breaking the
Silence” had
tried to do an honest investigation of PAS, it would have informed
viewers
that: The
Association of Women Psychiatrists (a professional group unaffiliated
with the
APA) takes PAS seriously enough that their Fall 2003 newsletter printed
an
article asserting "The Denial and/or Discrediting of the Parental
Alienation Syndrome Harms Women." A
longitudinal study by Stanley S. Clawar and Brynne Valerie Rivlin,
published by
the American Bar Association in 2003, followed 700 "high conflict"
divorce case over a 12-year period and found that elements of PAS were
present
in the vast majority of the cases studied. Rhea
Farberman, Executive Director of Public and Member Communications of
the APA
says, “The American Psychological Association does not have an official
position on parental alienation syndrome (PAS) -- pro or con. The
Connecticut
Public Television press release (Breaking the Silence) is incorrect.” “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.” “To
win custody of the kids over and against the
mother’s will is the ultimate victory…short of killing the kids.”
In
divorce cases involving children, it is the
mother who files for divorce in 67-91% of cases. So in effect it is
mothers who
are inflicting pain and declaring “domination” by taking custody away
from
fathers. As for “killing the kids,” as noted above, most child murders
are
committed by mothers. Sensational cases such as Susan Smith and Andrea
Yates
reflect, unfortunately, a statistical reality. The
show also contains internal inconsistencies and
sleights-of-hand. An attorney claims, again without evidence, that many
cases
of abuse by fathers go unreported. This amounts to a presumption of
guilt. This
attorney has no way of knowing that these citizens are guilty of crimes
in the
absence of a jury trial, without which, under our constitutional
system, they
must be presumed innocent. No
dissenting opinion is heard anywhere in the
film. Your producers contacted ACFC, SAFE-NH, and others to create a
fair and
balanced account. But at some point a decision seems to have been made
not to
produce a fair and balanced account. We
also question the aim of airing this broadcast
now. Only two years ago, PBS presented a similar 7-hour blitz entitled
“Domestic
Violence.” That work also distorted the truth, attacked the innocent
with no
right of reply, and made no attempt to understand the background, but
it was
not nearly as poisonous as this one. Such saturation coverage indicates
that
PBS is aiming not to understand a social problem but to use sensational
propaganda to push a political agenda. Political
propaganda, let alone hate-mongering, has
no place in taxpayer-funded media. The United States Information Agency
and
other broadcast outlets are precluded by law from disseminating
propaganda
within the United States. And the charter of PBS prohibits it. At a
time when
PBS is already accused of political bias, this production leads more
Americans
to question the propriety of government-funded mass media. At
this point we believe that simple inaction will
not suffice. Either the accusations in this film are true or they are
not. If
large numbers of proven criminals are physically assaulting women and
molesting
children why are these men not being arrested, tried before a jury,
convicted,
and sentenced to prison terms? On the other hand, if evidence does not
exist to
arrest and convict these men, why are wild and unsubstantiated
accusations
being leveled against them in the mass media? And why is there less
concern
that proven criminals are at large than that they are retaining custody
of
their own children? The obsession with child custody in “Breaking the
Silence”
is an open admission that the hysteria over domestic “violence” is
being fanned
not to apprehend criminals but to further disadvantage fathers in
custody
cases. In
light of these questions, we appeal to PBS to
seriously reconsider whether it is appropriate to continue to air this
one-sided film without proper balance or opposing viewpoints. ~~~
But
we want to do more than protest the distortions
of this film. Equally grave is that PBS has missed a valuable
opportunity to
investigate and understand a larger and very real social ill. It
appears we
can agree that serious abuses are indeed taking place in family courts
throughout America, resulting in a massive social disaster. If PBS
could
discard its ideological blinders, reflected in the insistence that only
mothers
are victims of courts that routinely seize children from both mothers
and
fathers, PBS could be conducting a valuable public service. We can
provide you
with documentary evidence of systematic and serious violations of the
most
fundamental constitutional provisions and rights, including almost
every
article of the Bill of Rights, against both fathers and
mothers. In
particular: The
right of parents to supervise the religious,
moral, and civil upbringing of their children routinely is abrogated
without
cause. Children
are routinely separated from parents
against whom no charges of wrongdoing are made. Parents
are incarcerated without trial, counsel, or
formal charge. Knowingly
false allegations against parents, for
which evidence is not presented, are treated as fact, overturning the
presumption of innocence, and not punished when demonstrated to be
untrue. Government
agents enter the homes, seize the
property, and examine the private papers and effects of parents who are
suspected of no wrongdoing. Bureaucratic
police are authorized to issue
subpoenas and arrest warrants against parents, contrary to due process
of law. Parents
are ordered by government officials to
separate from and divorce their spouses, on pain of losing their
children. Parents
are forced to pay the fees of court
officials and private practitioners they have not hired and whose
services they
have not sought or used, on pain of incarceration. Parents
suspected of no wrongdoing are burdened with
punitive and impossible expropriations of their property and income,
sometimes
at gunpoint, and intentionally reduced to penury. A
campaign of vilification against private American
citizens is being sponsored in the mass media by their own government,
and our
nation’s highest political leaders use their offices as platforms to
verbally
attack private American citizens, who have no right of reply or
opportunity to
defend themselves. Increased
measures of police and government
surveillance over private citizens under the guise of collecting child
support. Children
are forcibly removed from the protection of
responsible and loving parents and placed in environments where they
are in
greatly increased danger of physical and sexual abuse. Children
are used as informers against their
parents. Children
are instructed with animus against their
parents with the backing and even the active participation of
government
officials. The
creation of forced labor facilities specifically
for parents. Children
are used as leverage and as weapons to
silence parents who speak out publicly against these abuses. Official
court records, including hearing tapes and
transcripts, are doctored and falsified with the knowledge of court
officials,
and evidence is fabricated against the innocent. Reports
of parents who have been jailed without
trial being beaten, in at least one case fatally, and denied medical
attention
and medication while in police custody. Reports
of these practices have appeared in
reputable national and international publications, including
peer-reviewed scholarly
journals. Among them: the Washington Times, Washington
Post, Boston
Globe, Orlando Sentinel, Catholic
World Report, Crisis,
Insight, Liberty, Women's
Quarterly, World Net Daily,
Family Policy, American Spectator,
The American Enterprise,
Human Events, Salisbury Review,
Journal of Law and Family
Studies ,Political Science and Politics, Journal
of Epidemiology
and Community Health , Independent Review,
Society, and
others. Were
PBS to investigate these practices, you would
understand why the misinformation in “Breaking the Silence” contributes
to,
rather than challenges, the abuse of government power. Americans look
to the
media to be watchdogs of the government, but PBS has allowed itself to
become a
lapdog. We
are prepared to work with PBS to develop a
thorough and balanced investigation of improper, illegal, and
unconstitutional
practices in America’s family courts and social service agencies. We
can supply
documentary evidence and direct you to individuals with personal
experience of
these courts. We
challenge PBS to observe the ethics of its
charter and the standards than once made American journalism, including
PBS,
among the best in the world. We
look forward to your response. Sincerely yours, Stephen Baskerville, PhD Mark Rosenthal, Policy Analyst Reena Sommer, PhD Glenn Sacks Warren Farrell, PhD Jack Kammer Susan Wolpin Gordon E. Finley, PhD Marc Angelucci, President Stephen D. Finstein, LCSW, LMFT, LSOTP Steve Cloer, President James Hays, President Daniel Lee, President Dr. Michael Ross Dr. Charles E. Corry, President John Kral, President Jim Loose, Chairman Thomas Golden David Buchanan
Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, Chairman of the Board Representative Fred Upton, Chair References Custody by Gender Joan Kelly, "The Determination of Child Custody
in the USA,” Future
of Children, vol. 4, no. 1 (Spring/Summer 1994). Geoffrey P. Miller, “Being There: The
Importance of the Present Father
in the Design of Child Support Obligations,” New York University School
of Law,
Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series Working Paper No. 22, July, 2000, p. 11, n. 17.
William Dolan, “Empirical Study of Child
Custody in Divorce Decrees in
Arlington Country, Virginia, 7/1/89 – 12/31/90,” in Robert Seidenberg, The
Father’s Emergency Guide to Divorce-Custody Battle (Takoma
Park, Maryland:
JES, 1997), chap. 1. Leighton E. Stamps, "Maternal Preference in
Child Custody
Decisions" Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, vol.
37, nos. 1-2
(2002), pp. 1-11. Sanford L. Braver, Divorced Dads:
Shattering the Myths (New York:
Tarcher/Putnam, 1998), chap. 5. Domestic Violence by Gender Martin S. Fiebert, “References Examining
Assaults by Women on Their
Spouses or Male Partners: An Annotated Bibliography,” paper presented
at the
American Psychological Society Convention in Washington, D.C., 24 May
1997;
published in Sexuality and Culture 1 (1997), pp.
273-286 and vol. 8,
nos. 3-4 (2004), pp. 140-177. John Archer, “Sex Differences in Aggression
Between Heterosexual
Partners: A Meta-Analytic Review,” Psychological Bulletin,
vol. 26, no.
5 (September 2000), pp. 651-680; Murray A. Straus, “The Controversy
over
Domestic Violence by Women: A Methodological, Theoretical, and
Sociology of
Science Analysis, in X. B. Arriaga, and S. Oskamp, Violence
in Intimate
Relationships (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, forthcoming). Nancy Updike, “Hitting the Wall: After 20 Years
of Domestic Violence
Research, Scientists Can't Avoid Hard Facts,” Mother Jones,
May/June
1999. Betty Friedan, It Changed My Life:
Writings on the Women’s Movement (Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard, 1998), p. 126. Philip W. Cook, Abused Men: The
Hidden Side of Domestic Violence
(Westport, Connecticut: Praeger, 1997). Child Abuse by Gender Child Maltreatment 1996: Reports from the
States to
the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (Washington, DC: US
Government Printing Office, 1998), pp. xi-xii. The Third National Incidence Study of Child
Abuse
and Neglect (Washington, DC: Department of Health and
Human
Services, September 1996). Patrick Fagan and Dorothy Hanks, The
Child Abuse Crisis: The
Disintegration of Marriage, Family, and the American Community (Washington,
DC: Heritage Foundation “Backgrounder,” 3 June 1997), p. 16. Robert Whelan, Broken Homes and
Battered Children: A Study of the
Relationship between Child Abuse and Family Type (London:
Family Education
Trust, 1993), p. 29. David L. Rowland, Laurie S. Zabin, and Mark
Emerson, "Household
Risk and Child Sexual Abuse in a Low Income, Urban Sample of Women,” Adolescent
and Family Health, vol. 1, no. 1 (Winter 2000), pp. 29-39. Parental Alienation
DIVORCE COURT SCAM FALSE ARREST MALICIOUS PROSECUTION
- - - - CHILD DEVELOPMENT TITLE IV-D MYTHS & STATISTICS CHILD & FAMILY RIGHTS GROUPS PARTING THOUGHTS
|
