Tag Archives: children

Tactics to Maintain Separation of Mother & Child: E-Mail Abuse & Impersonation

How sad, and pathetic really, that some fathers are so desperate to harm their ex-wife, and keep her separated from her child, that they would go so low as to use the son’s e-mail (with some assistance from a more literate “friend”) to try to get her to hang herself.

I recommend asbestos exposure….Asbestos is a simple carcinogen and not a proverbial weapon of mass destruction or some other kind of death sentence. You need something somehow miraculously unregulated and/or easily available and effective. If you want I could set up a fundraiser to provide funding for carcinogen exposure.”

“I think radiation is cool because it’s practically infinite when you get it started and cost efficient! Never mind that it works by itself anyway!”

Please contract a terminal disease at your earliest convenience. I look forward to reading your epitaph, though I won’t be paying for it.”

Sadly, cancer just isn’t humane enough and it isn’t gonna work. I’m sure there are many alternatives for your consideration. One old standby that practically everyone is familiar with is hanging. Almost everyone knows how tie a knot. Rope is easy to find, and much more definite…It should be easy for you to figure this whole suicide thing out.”

“I think drop hanging would be preferable to suspension based hanging due to your prodigious weight, lack of dexterity, and longstanding disinclination towards physical labor. It’s easier!”

Radio Interviews

The freedom for all network…Blog Talk Radio, The Captain

Lisa Nadig, Michael Volpe & Doreen Ludwig discuss corruption in her “family” law case in Cook County Chicago

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/thecapt/2015/09/24/the-captains-very-special-guest-lisa-nadig

 

 

Widely Anticipated Article Confirms Court Mistreatment of Protective Mothers, Pt. 1, by Barry Goldstein

Part 1

For decades, protective mothers have been complaining that family courts are tilted to favor abusive fathers and that they face corruption. Court officials have tended to respond defensively and dismissed the domestic violence victims as disgruntled litigants. Over the years an ever growing collection of research, media investigations and preventable tragedies have supported the mothers’ position, but in a form of confirmation bias, court officials have ignored inconvenient findings.

In my first book with Mo Hannah, Sharon K. Araji and Rebecca L. Bosek wrote an interesting chapter in which they looked at surveys of protective mothers in five states which showed consistent court failures to protect children. It might be easy to dismiss the research because mothers with bad outcomes might be biased, but the authors compared the mother’s complaints with credible research and found the findings supported the mothers. The courts were routinely treating the mothers as if they were not credible but the scientific findings supported other research that found protective mothers rarely make deliberate false complaints.

The ACE (Adverse Childhood Experiences) Studies from the CDC demonstrated that domestic violence and child abuse are far more harmful than previously understood and that physical abuse is not required to ruin children’s lives. In other words the courts have been minimizing the seriousness of DV and child abuse and basically ignoring non-physical tactics. Despite the research, courts are still not focused on reducing the fear and stress from abuser tactics that cause children so much harm. And most of the standard court practices undermine the needed healing.

The Saunders’ Study was designed to consider the knowledge and training about domestic violence possessed by evaluators, judges and lawyers. The Study found many of these professionals do not have the specific knowledge necessary to respond to domestic violence. Those without the needed training tend to focus on the myth that mothers frequently make deliberate false reports and unscientific alienation theories. These mistakes lead to outcomes that harm children. Five years after the release of the Saunders’ Study these mistaken assumptions continue to predominate. Saunders also looked at harmful outcome cases in which alleged abusers win custody and safe, protective mothers are limited to supervised visitation. These decisions are always wrong and based on flawed practices but remain common in the family courts.

Widely Anticipated Article Confirms Court Mistreatment of Protective Mothers

The Narcissistic Father During and After Divorce, by Lisa Thomson

“What happens to grown children of a narcissist father during and after divorce?

This is important to consider because after you’ve left the Narcissist far behind and relieved yourself of the pain, your children continue to deal with him.  It’s not a pretty picture.  As the healthy parent, understanding the Narcissist, knowing what to expect and providing tips for the children will lessen the pain for everyone….

During a divorceco-parenting with a narcissist can be dangerous.  They will go to great lengths to possess the children.  They will fabricate or distort the truth in order to maintain allegiance from their children.  Deep down a Narc is highly insecure. Parenting after divorce becomes a popularity contest for the Narc.  They have to ‘win’ the children at all costs. Their ego is vulnerable and causes them to lash out at the person who has rejected their idealistic view of themselves.

If you have asked for the divorce you can bet their wrath will be focused on you.  So what begins as a type of possession can escalate into a destructive pattern of parental alienation.  It is fair to say, a Narc parent is more likely than a regular parent, to use parental alienation as a method to retaliate. What begins as possessive and nonstop attention from the father inevitably turns to rejection as the children enter adulthood.”

The Narcissistic Father During and After Divorce, by Lisa Thomson

Why Family Courts and CPS Target Fit Parents, by Patricia Mitchell

By Patricia Mitchell

Rich, poor, middle class – no child in America is safe. These words of award-winning investigative journalist Keith Harmon Snow (author of The Worst Interests of the Child) refer to the abusive practices that regularly occur within the Family Courts and Child Protective Services (CPS) Courts. On their watch, each year hundreds of thousands of children suffer from abuse (including rape and prolonged torture) that would not have happened without this court system’s initial invasion and subsequent entrapment.

Removing children from their homes, separating children from parents, and creating conflict within the family unit is good business for the judicial officials and has become what the Family and CPS Courts do best.

Court officials heavily profit from these induced conflicts. They have learned how to milk the system for financial gain, by targeting the protective (fit) parent instead of the abusive (unfit) parent, resulting in children getting placed with pedophiles, sadistic sociopaths, and narcissists, in life-threatening environments. Although “the State” will pay the court officials if a low income or poor family is involved, the system forces protective parents who are middle class or wealthier to foot the bills for all court services. Either way, rich or poor, court officials have made a big business out of family conflicts, using children as currency.

Why would the courts target a fit parent instead of an unfit parent? Because there is no money to be made off of the unfit one. The Family and CPS Courts require one parent willing to participate with them, to care about the child’s well being and, most importantly, to make a commitment to the courts. Protective parents will do anything and everything the courts demand of them. Whereas abusive parents are more likely to give in after the court system’s first hurdle, demand, or when he/she sees the bills, simply saying, “Fine, take the child.”  Why Family Courts and CPS Target Fit Parents

In the Case of California Mom Roisin Cassidy: Did Jennifer Ani Fail Her Client, from Divorce In Connecticut

“In the end, Roisin Cassidy paid at least $50,000 in legal fees to defend her right to parent, all of which led to nothing. Why?  Because Attorney Jennifer Ani simply abandoned her client, lied about her client, and then attempted to withdraw from the case while inflicting the maximum damage possible, all in violation of her professional ethics.  As Roisin said to me, “How could this happen?” We’d also like to know the answer to that question as well.”

Did Attorney Jennier Ani fail her client, Roisin Cassidy?

Mother’s Day Celebrations

One of my Mother’s Day gifts this year is having my files organized in preparation for lawsuits for the countless violations of my civil rights in Rolling Meadows Cook County Family Court.

Happy Mother’s Day!