By
Chris Heide
May 8, 2007
“You are a rude, thoughtless little pig.” This is the highly-publicized phrase that stemmed from a phone call actor Alec Baldwin made to his daughter Ireland just a few weeks ago. Despite the despicable nature of that comment, Baldwin has since tried to justify what he said by citing frustrations with his estranged wife, actress Kim Basinger.
According to Baldwin, the phone call was simply an inappropriately directed tirade against his daughter; he really meant to yell at Basinger, whom he claims has repeatedly violated terms of their custody agreement.
In an appearance on The View last week, Baldwin attacked Basinger, saying he was a victim of parental alienation and the courts were failing to protect his rights as a parent. This surely justifies calling his 11-year-old daughter names, right? Not so much.
Baldwin has brought a controversial subject into the media forefront. Parental alienation is a legal strategy where one parent tries to prevent the other from sharing custody, and in doing so, psychologically alienates the child from the second parent.
According to a Newsweek article, child psychiatrist Richard Gardner first introduced the concept of parental alienation during the 1980s. Father’s rights groups picked up on the idea and began trying it out in court.
However, parents accused of abuse have used this as a legal defense. Statistically, men are more often the perpetrators of abuse, so this legal strategy has been used more often by fathers. What is most disturbing is that alleged domestic abusers are using this defense as a justification for their abusive behavior, as in the Baldwin case.
It is sickening to think that a mother who tries to protect her children from an abusive ex-husband by asking for sole custody will be hit with the parental alienation claim in court.
According to a Harvard survey published in the Newsweek article, “54 percent of custody cases involving documented spousal abuse were decided in favor of the alleged batterers. Parental alienation was used as an argument in nearly every case.”
Victims often do not report abuse, making it harder to prove in court.
The parental alienation claim presents an immense catch-22 in our legal system. There is the old adage that a person who allows abuse to continue is just as bad as the abuser. But there might be reason to doubt that.
A person unable to escape a pattern of domestic abuse may do so for economic, psychological or emotional reasons. It is way too easy for an outsider to say that a victim of domestic abuse should just walk away. Unfortunately, it’s not always that easy.
It takes tremendous courage, time and energy for a victim of domestic violence to leave his or her spouse. Most often, victims will leave their partners to protect their children, after realizing that staying with their partner is unhealthy for the children. Parents are not the only victims of abuse; children are also victims, even if they are not directly abused.
The parental alienation defense in a custody battle gives the abuser a chance of continuing the pattern of domestic violence and abuse. Ironically, victims of domestic abuse who muster the courage to leave their partners in an effort to protect their children now stand a greater risk of losing their children in court.
Allowing such a currently prominent legal argument to be sustained is a disgrace to our legal system, which is supposed to protect victims and bring abusers to justice. Although it seems extreme, the rights of abuse victims deserve more protection than an abuser’s when it comes to custody battles. If this trend is allowed to continue, it is possible that fewer victims of domestic abuse will attempt to leave their partners and fight for sole custody in an effort to protect their children.
What is a victim of domestic abuse to do?
The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges have denounced the parental alienation theory as “junk science.” In addition, at least four states have passed legislation to curtail its use in custody cases involving allegations of domestic violence, according to the Newsweek article. Hopefully, these progressions will spark a greater trend in our judicial dockets and the conscience of all Americans.
Reach columnist Chris Heide at opinion@thedaily.washington.edu.
26 Comments
#1 Barnabus Palmatier
on May 8, 2007 at 11:30 a.m.(Van Nuys, CA | Unverified Name)
"Rude thoughtless little pig"
If this fits your concept of "abuse" then I abuse almost daily. The tenor of or familial repartee passed this rather harmless point almost as soon as tensions sprouted. If you are jumping on the "what terrible verbal abuse" ship you are either not a parent or are a liar. How a parent acts in his/her worst moments, if allowed to include "thoughtless pig", would introduce levels of puritan denouncing not previously seen in this sorry state of affairs.
#2 Arla
on May 8, 2007 at 12:39 p.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
In response to Barnabas' comment: I agree with you to an extent. I also sympathize with Baldwin in that his comments really should not have been made public and he clearly is having a tough time dealing with all of this. But while it may be true that familial repartee like this is thrown around harmlessly in some cases, this is not one of those times. It wasn't just what Baldwin said, but the anger behind how he said it. We obviously don't know the whole story and the kind of relationship these people have, but I hope the courts do take into consideration Baldwin's comments which do, in my opinion, have abusive undertones.
#3 Janey
on May 9, 2007 at 8:53 p.m.(Ocala, FL | Unverified Name)
Hello...No one has ever said Baldwin was abusive when he was married, so your point is irrelevant. His ex-wife is nuts, and has legitimately done grave harm to his relationship with his daughter. Yelling at your kid and calling her some mildly offensive names is NOT abuse. Jesus, it's people like you who get HRS (or equivalent) involved when a parent punishes an ungovernable kid by smacking them- also NOT abuse. My parents said WAY worse than that to me for years- I was a wild teen- and they're awesome; we have a great relationship. I'm probably considered abusive to my close friends and siblings at times then, too; I can have a bad mouth. But I love them all to death, and they know it. You people need to learn to uncork your posteriors once in awhile; in fact, everyone in this country does. We are becoming so touchy we can't just let little things go anymore. Lighten up!
#4 Robert Gartner
on May 11, 2007 at 2:34 p.m.(Houston, TX | Unverified Name)
Chris Heide, the author here has no idea of what he speaks. He (or she) is parroting the same tired rhetoric of such demented organizations such as Justice for Children (JFC), with offices in Houston, Arizona, Michigan, Washington D.C. Just ask me I can tell you all about parental alienation and the sick victims of abuse turned abusers that somehow hide successfully behind the megabuck groups that retain free lawyers from the largest law firms in America like Fulbright and Jaworski, Llp and now Haynes and Boone. What I cannot fathom is how a lawyer like Randy Burton, founder can call himself a savior of children after leaving the employ of Children's Protective Services with a bad experience when he peddles rejection of probably the most insidious forms of child abuse around, call it PAS, PA or HAP... whatever term applies, it exists, its real, and it is at epidemic proportions and is facilitated not only by inept 'professionals' but also by the length of the court process.
Furthermore how does one explain away such a demon when there are specific and effective recovery programs that exist and have been opoerational for the past twenty years, one being the Rachel Foundation, www.rachelfoundation.org
My daughter, now twenty, is a severe level victim of PAS. She has not seen me for the past fourteen years thanks to JFC. She dropped out of high school and a year later made a baby. She still cannot pick up the phone to speak with me her father. Her mother was out commiting three major felonies while she was getting the free 'help' from JFC.
#5 Jordan
on May 11, 2007 at 3:07 p.m.(Bellevue, WA | Unverified Name)
Abuse, as defined by dictionary.com:
-to treat in a harmful, injurious, or offensive way.
-to speak insultingly, harshly, and unjustly to or about; revile; malign.
If verbal and/or physical reprimanding is not abuse, then what is?
Baldwin's comments were not in light of applying discipline to his daughter. He simply and unconstrucively attacked her character, and at the tender age of 11, such harsh comments can have a significant impact on one's psyche and self-confidence as well as her development into adulthood.
In response to Janey: You have a few illegitimate points, yourself. First of all, it is quite interesting that you rely on your argument that there is no evidence of Baldwin being abusive during his marriage, yet you jump to snap conclusions and assume that his wife was "nuts" during this time- where's the evidence for this? Second of all, whether or not you want to believe it, you were a victim of abuse; you, however, were simply diluted into believing that such behavior is acceptable, and feel no hostility toward your abuser. Those who abused you shaped your way of thinking; their behavior affected your character development in such a way that you are now desensitized to abuse.
In response to Barnabus and Janey: If Baldwin's comments were not abusive, then why did a California judge strip him of his visitation rights after he heard the phone conversation?
Clearly, the issue here is not the degree to which one should be punished based on the level of abuse, but the fact that Americans are truly and utterly desensitized to abuse in general. It is not the author who should wake up, but rather those of you who believe that Baldwin's comments were not abusive.
#6 Doug Dante
on May 11, 2007 at 3:31 p.m.(Livonia, MI | Unverified Name)
I'm sorry, but your 54 percent statistic has been pretty well debunked. Reason magazine wrote:
"But the study, published in The American Journal of Public Health, was based on a nonrepresentative, self-selected sample of 39 women recruited by the Battered Women’s Testimony Project. Moreover, the “documentation†of abuse could be nothing more than a restraining order or an affidavit by the woman."
http://www.reason.com/news/show/11678...
You wrote:
"The parental alienation defense in a custody battle gives the abuser a chance of continuing the pattern of domestic violence and abuse. "
Unfortunately, so can the parental alienation ATTACK. So long as parents abuse their former spouse and abuse their children by corrupting their children's minds against the other parent, a court of law has a duty to consider that it's a possibility in a given case when it's alleged.
#7 Missy
on May 11, 2007 at 4:24 p.m.(Jacksonville, FL | Unverified Name)
The courts ignore proof of abuse! People covicted of domestic violence are not supposed to be able to get custody under law in my state. The courts ignored everything! Then my ex (the custodial parent) had the nerve to accused me of PAS! He was only allowing me to see our kids a few hours midweek and every other weekend. He was trying to terminate my parental rights altogether by claiming I was trying to alienate the children from him during the small amount of time I was with them. PAS is a weapon used by abusive and controlling men! Dr Richard Gardner is a quack who stabbed himself to death in May 2005. In his writings he cvlaims pedophilia is normal and beneficial for children! Maybe he killed himself because he was about to be discovered molesting children?
http://leadershipcouncil.org/1/med/ta...
http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/pa...
http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/pa...
#8 Missy
on May 11, 2007 at 4:31 p.m.(Jacksonville, FL | Unverified Name)
Kim Basinger did try to tell the courts that Alec was abusive to her and their daughter when she first filed for divorce from him! The courts ignore it and accuse the protective mother of parental alienation. We must alert all in the media about Richard Gardner and his sick writings! His suicide and writings that pedophilia is normal and natural and beneficial to children is sick, sick, sick! This man needs to be exposed for what he was before more children are put in harms way!
http://leadershipcouncil.org/1/med/ta...
http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/pa...
http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/pa...
#9 Missy
on May 11, 2007 at 4:34 p.m.(Jacksonville, FL | Unverified Name)
Did anyone catch the comment Alec made on the view about how when Ireland is with him and they are laying in bed and he is stroking her hair? What was that all about?
#10 dad4justice
on May 11, 2007 at 4:48 p.m.(Timaru, New Zealand | Unverified Name)
I just celebrated my sixth consecutive birthday, sitting at the table eating my parental alienation horse shyt cake desperately missing my two estranged sad daughters. This parental alienation crap is not a syndrome - it is a friggin disorder - as it stuffs up many dads’ big time! Resentment is high when loving fathers don’t or can’t see our children and many fathers see the family court as a court of injustice, because it obviously condones the manipulating, poisoning and brainwashing tactics employed by many unscrupulous custodial mothers.
Lawyers and psycho nut bars just love parental alienation disorders, as the family court provides them with an unlimited supply of unfortunate - bewildered clients. I thought that only hookers and accountants had clients, how ironic and fitting. Anyway twisted custodial mothers know full well that, the situation always favours the custodial mother, no matter what, even if she acts in a vengeful and vindictive manner – she will not be held accountable – perjury in the caring court is a laughable concept. Say what you like darling to the lovely judge, everyone else does – yeah-right bluetit – how far are these fathers to be pushed – their suicides give the answer!
The court holds zealously to the principle that there is no presumption of access, meanwhile mum plays her little game of using the vulnerable children as weapons of war in the pious corrupt world of de – family law! It is often a no win situation for dad and the children
#11 Don, the 14%er
on May 11, 2007 at 5:06 p.m.(Easley, SC | Unverified Name)
Chris Heide makes the mistaken claim, "Statistically, men are more often the perpetrators of abuse."
According to http://www.preventchildabusewi.org/pe... , "Data from 21 states indicate that 61.8% of (child abuse) perpetrators were female."
The Harvard study Heide quotes has been proven wrong as well. Heide is wrong in several other ways too.
Any judge or social worker can tell you that women commonly use false allegations of abuse to gain an upper hand in many custody cases.
Don, the 14%er
#12 Robert Gartner
on May 11, 2007 at 7:55 p.m.(Houston, TX | Unverified Name)
For those of you who would say that Alec Baldwin is the bad guy here and worthy of scorn or that because Richard Gardner may have committe suicide I have this to say: Place yourselves in thier shoes. Should Ireland, Baldwin's dughter, have been 'allowed' to have an equal share in the life of her father, things might have been quite different today. As I have stated in other forums, there are limits to what a human being can take. I am not apologising for any action by Baldwin and indeed he shamed his daughter, not a good thing, but who are any of you to speak to his actions? Who knows what he has suffered? I have been in a place where even the judge cant see or does not give a ... Its a crazy making atmosphere especially when we are raised in a 'judge judy' environment which is a total fallacy and our government refuses to intervene with healthy alternatives. I do not condone what he did. But to be busy about applying sexism to this dialog or to comdemn either parent is useless to the conversation. The same applies to Richard Gardner. The man wrote some great work. Period. It does not matter that he may have committed suicide. His work stands by itself and it is applicable. There are a lot of people I would rather hang out with, who others would judge as being on some fringe. These poeple have taught me a lot. I suggest that you learn more about parental alienation. As I said above it is here and it is a heinous thing.
#13 Jim Untershine
on May 11, 2007 at 10:15 p.m.(Long Beach, CA | Unverified Name)
A private voice message from a father to his daughter was released to the media by the mother. The daughter was publicly humiliated by her mother and now she is being further humiliated by the press. The radical feminist perspective put forth by this piece is very formulaic.The voice recording captures a father talking to a machine, but the entire message is transcripted and every word scrutinized as if it made to the daughter personally or as if it were a press release or a speech before Congress. A perfect segue into suggesting Parent Alienation Syndrome (PAS) is junk science and that Father's Rights groups are desperately trying anything to allow parents (who happen to be men) to be part of the lives of their children.
The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) aired a documentary entitled "Breaking the Silence" which also attempted to prove that all custodial fathers are child abusers. The show was sponsored by the Mary Kay Ash Foundation and it violated every code of ethic and standard of proof that PBS had always been respected for. The same thing is being tossed out by this author, who feels a duty to disregard a small child's privacy and her right to love her father and use it as a platform to further the agenda of the National Organization of Women (NOW).
Kim Basinger and Alec Baldwin are both forced to prove that the other is an unfit parent to the California Family court - to "win" the right to be part of Ireland's life. Although Kim Basinger has put evidence into the court that Alec Baldwin should not be allowed to be alone with his daughter, I'm sure before long Kim Basinger will fall into the same category and the State of California will "win" custody of Ireland.
Nobody can be told what Family Law is - you have to experience for yourself. If Family law were a sport it would be Championship Wrestling
See "Alec Baldwin and Parens Patriae" by Stephen Baskerville, http://www.lewrockwell.com/baskervill...
see my article "Did PBS ‘Break the Silence’ or ‘Break the Wind’?", http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/...
#14 Shatteredmen
on May 11, 2007 at 11:39 p.m.(Ypsilanti, MI | Unverified Name)
This article does have some merit. " 54 percent of custody cases involving documented spousal abuse were decided in favor of the alleged batterers"
I agree but I do think these figures are a bit low. You see, the alleged batter that gets full custody is most often, MOM!
As the director of Shattered Men, I have often heard of fathers who have solid proof of abusive mothers who still see these mothers get full custody in divorce. I contend that many "child protective services" should actually be called "mother protective services" because their concern is more with keeping children with mothers then protecting the children. Remember that two thirds of ALL child abuse is by the mother. The next highest rate is with live-in partners.
I notice that because PAS is not officially recognized, some say it does not exist. I ask, did it talk an "official" recognition for PTSD to exist? The evidence is there, it simply needs to be looked at from an unbiased view. Munchausen by proxy is said to not exist although hundreds of parents have been caught on hidden video doing it. Of course, the reason it "does not exist" is that by far the majority of those doing it are....moms.
From FATHERS: WHO NEEDS THEM?
By Karl Zinsmeister
Frequency of visitation by Divorced Fathers; Differences in Reports by Fathers and Mothers. Sanford Braver et al, Am. J. of Orthopsychiatry, 1991.) "Overall, approximately 50% of mothers "see no value in the father`s continued contact with his children...." (Source: Surviving the Breakup, Joan Kelly & Judith Wallerstein, p. 125)
Only 11% of mothers value their husband's input when it comes to handling problems with their kids. Teachers & doctors rated 45%, and close friends & relatives rated %16.(Source: EDK Associates survey of 500 women for Redbook Magazine. Redbook, November 1994, p. 36)
I have seen many commercials and other media outlets that tell children they do not need to listen to "dad" because he does not have a clue as to what is going on. Deny it as you may, but this IS PAS! From Mr. Zinmeister's statement above we can PAS has been around for a long time. Instead of trying to deny it exist, why not hold each parent responsible for their own actions and tell both parents that alienating either parent from their children will not be tolerated.
It will only be when we give these women permission to say "I need help" that we can resolve some of these problems. If we convince mothers that mothers never abuse their children then those who find they do will not likely seek help.
One last thing…who would have had more to gain to make sure Mr. Baldwin's statement got leaked to the media? It sure was not in his best interest nor was it in Ireland's.
I find it very interesting to note that Ms Heide has talked about domestic violence but this is yet another area a reality check is in order. According to unbiased research half of the victims of domestic violence are….men. Even the Department of Justice states that men make up about 39% of the victims yet there is not one dime of services to these battered men. The Violence Against Women Act was written with a great amount of input from feminist sources but no one from the other side were invited to the table in any of the three times it was enacted into law. Would this not be like writing Racial relationship laws and asking only the KKK for their input?
Public Broadcasting Service gave its stamp of approval to Breaking the Silence: Children's
Stories. PBS ignored the criticisms by PBS' own ombudsman, Michael
Getler, who wrote that the program comes across as a one-sided,
advocacy program and there was no recognition of opposing views.
This is of course in line with many gender feminist organizations who
state that the only reason men want custody of their children after a
divorce so they can continue abusing them. Why is it that this
would not apply in reverse also?
Is it not time to value ALL our people? Truth can only be found when we listen to ALL sides.
Pastor Kenneth Deemer
Director Shattered Men
P.O. BOX 166
MARION INDIANA 46952-0166
shatteredmen@...
JUNE is Domestic Violence Against Men Awareness Month
Web site: http://www.shatterdmen.com
Interactive Group: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/...
#15 BLULAZRIES
on May 12, 2007 at 3:25 a.m.(Worcester, MA | Unverified Name)
It comes as no surprise that PAS could be so easily discounted . It, like so many other obvious answers to include the well being of children, shared/equal parenting, false allegations would eliminate all to many travesties that effect children and families, therefore taking financial incentives and any meaning of being from the courts. Funny how it is that controlling, perjuring alienating parent that is all to quick to lead that march to shut down any thought that PAS exists. Wake up you Alienators, you are causing irreversible harm to the children that you claim to LOVE. Why?,
#16 Robert Gartner
on May 12, 2007 at 6:01 a.m.(Houston, TX | Unverified Name)
Blulazaries (above) is onto something. Read Anne Wilson Schaef's book When Society Becomes an Addict, Harper anr Row, 1986. Examples: Only a sick, terminally addicted system would 'award' a child to one or the other parent. Only a sick, addicted system would give the kids 84% of the time to the female. Only a sick, addicted system like a Bar Association of North Dakota, or a DHHS director of North Dakota would form even committees to viciously oppose a shared parenting legislative bill brought by 'the people' for 'the people'. Yes Blulazries, our very government is terminally ill today. In like manner, resistance to or rejection of recognition of parental alienation is no less than a sick system trying to keep the 'drugs' flowing and keep recognition of itself, off of itself. Its almost like we are taking our problems to The Alienators! Who would The Alienators give the kids to? Answer: One of their 'own'. Some of the symptoms here: grandiosity, control, and pointing the finger somewhere else. This scenario is part of the reason there has been so little progress over issues of custody.
#17 Tony
on May 12, 2007 at 11 a.m.(None, None | Unverified Name)
You guys have to be kidding. Baldwin hasnt only terrorized his daughter, he has pisssed off most of NY. You really need to find yourself another leader because no one will take you or your cause seriously. You guys sound hysterical. some of your rantings have nothing to do with the article and you sound a bit hot headed yourselves. Maybe Baldwin is the right spokesperson for you after all.
#18 dad4justice
on May 12, 2007 at 1:56 p.m.(Christchurch, New Zealand | Unverified Name)
Parental alienation is real, as it is heartbreaking and often fatal for the paternal side of the family. R I P mum. The manipulation of the children to turn against dad often cause him great difficulty in access matters, for example my 157th de- family court hearing to try and get meaningful access initiated last week was marginally successful. The frustration expeiernced by non- –custodial fathers is understandable and hardly fair, as victims of ill –will they are unable to do anything as the media is lighting quick to try and demonise them as angry deadbeat dads.
I would not wish parental alienation on anyone, as it is far more heart wrenching than cancer !!
#19 Dave
on May 12, 2007 at 2:31 p.m.(None, None | Unverified Name)
Do any of you have jobs or do you all sit and write long winded speaches to each other all day? In order to have a good relationship with your children you need to have a good relationship with your ex. The anger goes away if you stop annoying them. When you annoy them with this garbage then blame them thats not alienation, its a cop out.
Pay your support, stop harrassing them and you will see your kids, and have a better happier and more productive life. Your kids will too. Maybe in your own little fathers rights world you have a point, but the rest of the world sees you as angry, immature deadbeats looking for an excuse. Unless you are all very young teen fathers, you need to grow up.
#20 dad4justice
on May 12, 2007 at 6:41 p.m.(Christchurch, New Zealand | Unverified Name)
Dave , often fathers are the victims of false allegations and get dragged into a huge bush fire they did not start . Maybe it is you who needs to grow up ! Often malicious women shut the door on father/child relationships from ever reaching a stable /loving bond . Fact - end od story - stop trying to play philosopher and get a grip on a worldwide problem called parental alienation , remember Dave real men do cry and do have feelings !!
#21 Shatteredmen
on May 13, 2007 at 12:57 a.m.(Ypsilanti, MI | Unverified Name)
Dave, you said "Pay your support" and you called father's dead beats.
New flash for you....fathers do not see it as all about money as you apparently do.
Information from multiple sources show that only 10% of all noncustodial fathers fit the "deadbeat dad" category: 90% of the fathers with joint custody paid the support due. Fathers with visitation rights pay 79.1%; and 44.5% of those with NO visitation rights still financially support their children. (Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173).
Additionally, of those not paying support, 66% are not doing so because they lack the financial resources to pay (Source: GAO report:GAO/HRD-92-39 FS).
The following is sourced from: Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Income Security Policy, Oct. 1991, Authors: Meyer and Garansky.
Custodial mothers who receive a support award: 79.6%
Custodial fathers who receive a support award: 29.9%
Non-custodial mothers who totally default on support: 46.9%
Non-custodial fathers who totally default on support: 26.9%
In reality there are far more dead beat moms then there are dead beat dads. My own brother-in-law has full custody of his child and his ex has not paid one dime of child support in over a year. He has still not prevented her from seeing their child.
Go back and read my message above and see what the most common reason fathers do not see their children after a divorce. Many of these men do pay their child support and they do jump through all of the hoops but they still can not see their children.
I suggest you and Tony ask the gals at your next NOW meeting if they too would not be angry if the situation were totally reversed. Actually, I would too because children need BOTH parents but I only see one side that is doing their best to keep the status quo...it is the said that claims the only reason a MAN would want custody of HIS children after a divorce is so he can keep abusing them. Ummm...why would this not apply to MOMS who want custody too?
#22 BARRY GAYNOR
on May 15, 2007 at 11:45 p.m.(Sheffield, United Kingdom | Unverified Name)
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Katheryn Yetter <KYetter@ncjfcj.org>
To: barry gaynor <gaynorbarry@yahoo.co.uk>
Sent: Tuesday, 15 May, 2007 7:52:04 PM
Subject: Re: your inquiry on PAS
Dear Mr. Gaynor:
If you would like to read what The Family Violence Department of The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges has asserted regarding "parental alienation syndrome' in its publication titled Navigating Custody & Visitation Evaluations in Cases with Domestic Violence: A Judge's Guide, you may do so by accessing this link:
http://www.ncjfcj.org/images/stories/...
The Department has not used the term "junk science" to refer to parental alienation syndrome in any of its publications or curricula.
Thank you for your inquiry,
Katheryn Yetter
Katheryn Yetter, JD
Attorney
Family Violence Department
National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges
PO Box 8970
Reno, NV 89507
775/327-5326
fax 775/784-6160
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
NCJFCJ - 1937-2007: Celebrating 70 Years for Children and Families!
* Join NCJFCJ! For more information on membership with NCJFCJ, please visit our website at: http://www.ncjfcj.org.
* 70th NCJFCJ Annual Conference - July 22-25, 2007, San Francisco, California
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>>> barry gaynor <gaynorbarry@yahoo.co.uk> 5/8/2007 6:55 AM >>>
Having read the following article by Chris Heide:
http://thedaily.washington.edu/articl...
I note the following statement:
The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges have denounced the parental alienation theory as "junk science."
Can you please comment, as far as I was aware you held no such view and within your documentation have only given an example of PAS used in the negative?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your free account today.
#23 reno nv
on June 2, 2007 at 5:24 p.m.(Reno, NV | Unverified Name)
i am a 19 year old man who is already feeling stressed out because my x girlfriend is all ready telling me that i have no rights when our baby is born and no matter what i do the courts will side with her and i will only see my daughter when she alows me to. i want so much to be a part of my daughters life when she is born. the courts are not fair to fathers.
#24 Neb-Maat-Re
on February 7, 2008 at 12:56 p.m.(Sydney, Australia | Unverified Name)
Dave
I do not harass my ex. I am not able speak to her at all as her current de facto de jour offers to beat me up for asking to speak to her on the phone about access arrangements.
I pay my child support, regularly and on time, despite the best efforts of the agency that administers the process to use their own inept bungling to prove a case that I don't.
I haven't seen my daughter for 5 1/2 years. Please explain to me in simple terms how your wonderful theory works again?
#25 Star
on February 28, 2008 at 11:37 a.m.(Ann Arbor, MI | Unverified Name)
It's curious how all the men our coming out in defense.Like this is football.This is about our kids feeling safe and unharmed.Not left indangerous situations.Gogs our taken away from there abusers.No questions aked!Not all the mumble jumble language.The just know.If uyour a good parent you know you are.End the cyle of abuse!It's time.At least step up to the plate for this!
#26 Keeping Families Connected
on April 16, 2008 at 9:42 p.m.(Portland, OR | Unverified Name)
Chris,
Most professionals argue about whether or not this is a gender issue, or if there even is such a thing as Parental Alienation Syndrome.
Regardless of what has transpired in the Baldwin case, can any rational person really reach the conlusion that ALL parents that complain about PA are abusers or pedophiles?
Than what conclusion must we reach when a mother like Susan Smith drowns her children because she is tired of raising them? That ALL mothers are useless murderers? Of course not!
Any more than ALL parents that have lost children to alienation are abusers...
Here’s what DOESN’T matter to a child that has been stripped of a loving parent.
1. If it was their “mother” or “father” that selfishly abused them by separating them from the other parent.
2. What the doctors, attorneys or anyone else calls it.
Here’s what DOES matter to them.
1. They “lost” a parent that loved them, protected them and cared for them from the day they were born. That parent is a part of them.
2. Now they are taught to fear, and in many cases hate or ridicule that same parent, just so they can survive the abuse and brainwashing of the Alienating parent.
I hope that this will cause others to more closely examine their motives and actions regarding their need to hurt the other parent at the expense of their own children.
Post a comment