Shared Custody Issues in the Context of Domestic Violence

Written by Barry Goldstein

Sunday, 25 August 2013 08:52

source: NOMAS

In a Queens New York custody case, the court appointed a prominent psychologist to evaluate a young couple. The psychologist was frequently used as an expert in the New York courts despite a fathers’ rights bias that included a quotation in a New York Times article supporting shared parenting. Throughout his testimony supporting the abusive father, the evaluator could not respond to any of my questions asking for research to support any of his claims. Finally I asked him if there was any research to support his belief that children benefit from a 50-50 division as compared to 70-30. He cited Judith Wallerstein, but could not cite a particular book or article. A colleague put me in touch with Ms. Wallerstein who sent me an email for my continued cross-examination of the evaluator. She said that earlier research had indicated shared parenting might be beneficial in cases where the parents are able to cooperate, but more recent research has demonstrated that shared parenting is in fact harmful to children. One of the problems in our custody courts is that this psychologist, like most experts relied on by the courts does not have the knowledge of up-to-date research or the ability to apply it to custody cases.

Shared custody, sometimes referred to as joint custody involves joint decision making by the parents and sometimes also requires something close to a 50-50 division of time with each parent. The equal time division is often important to parents wishing to avoid paying child support. Proponents of shared parenting say it is only fair that parents have the same rights to parenting time with their children and courts claim that they must treat each parent that comes to court equally. This seems fair unless we understand the unstated part that parents should be treated the same regardless of the quantity and quality of time each parent spent with the child before the separation. Research about primary attachment is not controversial and demonstrates that a child’s primary attachment figure is more important to the well being of a child than the other parent. Furthermore, although research supports the belief that children benefit from having both parents in their lives, this is not true if one of the parents is abusive. Nevertheless many courts think it is their obligation to treat each parent the same even when one is much more valuable to the child.

Custody When Neither Parent is Abusive

The concept of shared parenting was supported by an initial study that found a favorable response. Courts were delighted to support shared parenting because it served as a way to compromise a difficult issue and could remove many cases from an already crowded calendar. Abusive fathers who had little involvement with the children during the relationship strongly supported shared parenting as a way to avoid child support and maintain access and control over their victims.

The initial study was based on a very limited population and most favorable circumstances that included parents who enthusiastically supported the use of shared parenting, were able to cooperate and lived close together. Later studies that included larger populations and more long term effects of the arrangement demonstrated shared custody to be harmful to children, but these studies failed to dampen the enthusiasm for shared custody in the legal system and by abusers.

The studies found that children with two homes in reality had no homes. Children forced to bounce back and forth between their parents’ homes were denied a sense of security and continuity. They could not spend the time with friends that they wanted and often could not participate in a variety of activities because they had to be with the other parent when some of the events occurred. Children were often embarrassed when articles they needed for school or other activities were left in the wrong home. In other words, even when parents were able to cooperate, the shared custody arrangement placed added pressure on the children and made their lives more difficult. Their success in academic studies and social interaction was negatively impacted by the shared custody arrangement.

Shared Custody in Domestic Violence Cases

Many of the laws and proposed legislation seeking to promote shared custody purport to contain language to create an exception for domestic violence cases and sometimes for other cases in which the parties are unable to cooperate. There is a good reason to treat domestic violence cases differently as shared custody is particularly harmful to children when one of the parents is an abuser. A parent cannot co-parent with an abuser because it is unsafe to challenge him and compromise is impossible when there is unequal power. The fundamental problem, too often missed by courts is that abusers are willing to see their children harmed in order to maintain what they believe is their right to control or punish their partner. Most contested custody cases that courts mistakenly label “high conflict” are in reality domestic violence cases in which fathers use the common abuser tactic of seeking custody to maintain control of their partner or punish her for leaving. Children who witness domestic violence (including non-physical abuse) are more likely to engage in dysfunctional behavior when they are older. Depending on their age when they witness his abuse, their stage of development is disrupted. All batterers have been found to engage in harmful parenting practices including undermining the relationship with the other parent, teaching bad values (sexism) and providing a bad example. In other words, up-to-date research establishes that abusers are not appropriate candidates for custody or shared custody.

The benefit of an exception for domestic violence is limited because of the widespread failure of courts to recognize domestic violence in custody cases. Thirty plus years ago when domestic violence first became a public issue there was no research available. Courts, like other bodies developed practices and approaches to consider domestic violence without knowing what worked. At the time domestic violence was mostly focused on physical abuse. The assumption was that mental problems and substance abuse caused domestic violence and that women’s behavior contributed to their partner’s abuse. Courts therefore chose to use mental health professionals as experts although they had no training in the dynamics of domestic violence. Courts assumed that children were not harmed by domestic violence unless they were directly assaulted and his abuse would end once the parties separated. Up-to-date research demonstrates that all of this and many other assumptions still relied on by many professionals in the custody court system are wrong.

There is now a specialized body of knowledge about domestic violence, but too often judges and the professionals they rely on are overconfident in their own understanding of domestic violence and fail to consider up-to-date research. Judge Mike Brigner wrote in his chapter for DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ABUSE and CHILD CUSTODY that when he trains judges they often ask him what to do about women who are lying. When asked what they mean, they cite women who return to their abusers, fail to pursue petitions for protective orders, don’t have police reports or hospital records and the myth that women frequently make false allegations of abuse to gain an advantage in litigation (in reality this occurs only one-two percent of the time). None of these behaviors indicates the women are lying and in fact this is often the safest response they can make particularly when still living with their abuser. Similarly inadequately trained professionals often cite the fact that the children did not seem afraid of the alleged abuser when they observed them as proof the allegations are false. The children understand what the “experts” don’t that the abuser is not going to hurt them in front of others and in fact they could be punished if they demonstrated fear in public. Many professionals in the court system believe they have the ability to determine who is lying just from observation. In fact research shows that aside from a very few elite CIA and FBI agents, no one has been shown to possess this skill. Accordingly these professionals through this belief become more susceptible to abusers who are skilled manipulators. While the unqualified professionals often discredit allegations of abuse for these and other invalid reasons, they fail to look at the pattern of controlling and coercive behaviors that would help them see the pattern of abusive behavior.

The result of this and many other mistakes by professionals in the custody court system is that thousands of children are being forced to live with abusers and many protective mothers, who are wrongly dismissed as disgruntled litigants and denied any meaningful role in their children’s lives. Legislatures and courts should be focusing on using the available up-to-date research to protect the safety and secure the potential of children caught up in domestic violence custody cases. Today, shockingly, courts are getting a majority of domestic violence custody cases wrong. This is one of the reasons we recommend that all professionals receive not just general domestic violence training, but specific training in Recognizing Domestic Violence, Gender Bias and The Effects of Domestic Violence on Children. Until courts have and apply this information, our children will not be safe when courts decide their fate.

In domestic violence custody cases, the use of shared parenting does not save court time and resources, but rather only postpones extensive litigation at great expense to the parties and harm to the children. Abusers eventually contrive incidents as an excuse to seek sole custody or protective mothers are forced to seek custody because the abusers are hurting the children. Abusive parents with limited parenting skills use shared parenting to get their foot in the door while continuing to harass and abuse their former partners. Court professionals often pressure protective mothers to accept shared custody with their abusers and punish them for trying to protect themselves and their children. Over forty states and many other court districts have sponsored gender bias commissions that have found widespread gender bias. Gender bias is particularly hard to overcome because judges and other professionals engage in gender bias without realizing they are doing so. The studies have shown that in custody cases, mothers are given higher standards of proof, less credibility and are blamed for their abuser’s behavior.

When mothers seek to limit contact between their children and their abuser for safety reasons and courts routinely treat this as if she is trying to interfere with the relationship between the children and abusive father, this is an example of blaming mothers for the father’s behavior. Instead of courts pressuring the abuser to stop his controlling and threatening behavior, protective mothers often face retaliation and punishment for trying to protect their children. This is particularly common when courts fail to recognize domestic violence and then punish mothers who continue to believe their abuse allegations. Provisions in shared custody laws that purport to make an exception for domestic violence will continue to be ineffective as long as there is widespread failure to recognize domestic violence and to take it seriously. Accordingly shared custody laws are not beneficial in cases where the parties can voluntarily cooperate and create serious danger to children in domestic violence cases

 

See more at: http://americanmotherspoliticalparty.org/ampp-article-library-family-court-custody-abuse-dv/5-family-criminal-law-and-research-abuse-dv-child-custody/94-batterers-revenge-punishment-and-continued-abuse-via-court#sthash.OhT2CBag.dpuf

My Name is Bill Windsor, I am a Sexual Pervert -- Lawless America Cult

 

William M. Windsor - Lawless America

 

Sexual Deviant Bill Windsor

So Bill tried to co-op a real reporters story on rape and incest.  Bill used it as an opportunity to seek out people to tell him their stories involving rape and incest.  He can no longer be bothered by women with custody issues, but he is more than happy to hear a detailed sordid story of rape or incest.  He sent out this plea:

DO YOU HAVE A STORY OF SPOUSAL RAPE OR INCEST? (cuz I really get my rocks off reading it!)

I am communicating with a newspaper writer who is researching a story on spousal rape and incest. He is particularly interested in speaking with survivors whose abuse allegations were handledeither in criminal or family courts. If you would be interested in sharing your story, please email nobodies@att.net with the subject in all caps: RAPE.

Read the rest here - you wont believe your eyes

http://joeyisalittlekid.blogspot.com/2013/05/sexual-deviant-bill-windsor.html

This is the making of a rapist, A Pedophile. Someone who has erectile dysfunction and the ONLY way he gets his rocks off??

 

Yup you got it..... Sexual Predator.

Janice Levinson – Using the Blood of Battered Mothers and Children for Her personal Gain - Protective Mothers Alliance

 

Janice Levinson

She Will Lure You in and Mercilessly Slaughter You and Your Children

Stay as far away as you can from this very evil very deadly – as in she freely will give all your personal information to you and your child's abuser.

Obviously she is a fake always has been. I know she knows and so does Massachusetts in that this woman actually did claim abuse when none was there. FALSE ABUSE allegations that those who have been abused must over come because of people like her.

She set her husband up… she NEVER lost her children, HE NEVER kept her children from her….

Janice used the blood of REAL battered mothers and their children for her own personal gain and selfish agenda.

 

Beware….the Propaganda of Deception Janice Levinson. Protective Mothers Alliance and her Partner Bill Windsor Lawless America.

 

###

State Of Deception: Janice Levinson and Bill Windsor’s Propaganda

http://www.ushmm.org/propaganda/

Explore the Nazis' sophisticated propaganda campaigns and their legacy.

These two (Janice Levinson and Bill Windsor) are about all you need in hurting people.

Just like Bill, Janice in their sick twisted narcissistic minds try to turn tables back. Classic projection and delusional mind screwing. State of Deception.

Both do not care how many bodies they climb over, who they hurt or kill to get to their *perceived* top - whatever that might be.

I will not post that evil bitches blog.
But take a look over at joeys for the full article on the latest hell they are causing for more people.

Hitler and his sympathizers.
Bill Windsor and Janice Levinson

 

####

Huge "shout out" to the folks at joeys!

courtesy joeyisalittlekid

Bill's Blogs Are Trying to Attack Us

***Rolls Eyes up and back***

I have avoided this blog, but I guess we can no longer do that.
http://abusiveadvocates.wordpress.com/2013/03/13/protective-mom-bullied/

"Sheri Westover, a protective mom was recently attacked on Facebook…this is truly horrific, the Joe-PPers (Joeys + AMPP) actually write a letter to the children she has not seen in years, bashing their mother, calling Sheri a racist and openly supporting her alleged abuser and telling the children “we hope you are placed in a good home“."

Ummmm, what?  No we didn't.  We don't even know who she is....or care, much less start writing letters to her children.

Read the rest here....

Showcases how GAL's destroy mothers and children.

Please Share

Immunity for Guardian Ad Litem destroys Connecticut family

Read more: http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/heart-without-compromise-children-and-children-wit/2013/mar/1/immunity-guardian-ad-litem-destroys-connecticut-fa/#ixzz2MOeN5szj
Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter

Photo: Susan Skipp and her children

The following post is by guest author, Aine Nistiophain

This is part II of a two-part article.  Read Part I, Finding Ground Zero in Connecticut, here.

WASHINGTON, DC, March 1, 2013 - In Connecticut, the phrase “for the sake of the children” is often thrown around on custody cases involving child victims of violent crimes.  However, cases like 9-year old Max Liberti’s suggest that some family court appointees are more likely to favor the opportunity to continue billing families for unnecessary, even fraudulent services, over what is best for the child.

After all, children living in safe environments do not need Guardian Ad Litems (GAL), evaluations, or therapy to protect and rehabilitate them.  When Max disclosed that his father raped him, the GAL and other professionals charged his family a whopping total of $1.5 million for their services. Yet most of the 40+ professionals assigned to his case spent little or no time with Max, or did not know him at all before making recommendations that forever severed his relationship with his mother.

Often the court appoints a GAL to advocate for the child’s “best interests” instead of asking the children for direct input. The GAL then bills the parents for asking other strangers appointed onto the case what’s best for the children.  

In 2003, the Connecticut court decided that the GAL has the exclusive right to speak on the child’s behalf, yet there are no requirements as to how much time a GAL must spend with their ward.  To clarify the GAL’s role, the court drew the bright line rule that “Just as it is not normally the province of the attorney to testify, it is not the province of the guardian ad litem to file briefs with the court.” (In re Tayquon H., 821 A.2d 796 [Conn. Ct. App. 2003]).

While the Judicial Branch provides free certification trainings[1] for GAL’s, there is no central oversight process in place to review the quality of their work, yet they enjoy qualified immunity for their actions.[2]

What exactly is the Judicial Branch training GAL’s to do?

 

GUARDIAN AD WHO? THE SKIPP-TITTLE CHILDREN

When Susan Skipp’s daughter Gabrielle truthfully disclosed[3] that her father assaulted her family, Susan was ordered to use the majority of her income to pay the fees of various court appointed professionals she could not afford. Attorney Mary Brigham was appointed as the children’s GAL, and Dr. Kreiger[4] and Dr. Horowitz[5] were appointed to assess the family and provide them with therapy. A court issued an order forbidding Susan from speaking to the children about the litigation, seeking domestic violence support for them, or “disparaging” the father who allegedly assaulted them.

As GAL, Brigham billed the children’s home at a rate of $300 per hour to represent the children’s wishes and best interests. Billing records show that between September 2010 and November 2011, she billed over 196 hours, including only five meetings with the children.[6] It’s impossible to tell whether the children met with Brigham alone, how long these meetings were, or what was said.

Invoices show during this period, Brigham’s time was largely spent talking to other providers who barely knew the children or recently met them, emailing unnamed parties, speaking to Dr. Tittle and his attorney, and talking about billing matters. Susan was also charged for the time Brigham spent drafting, filing, and successfully prosecuting motions, including as many as three motions she personally filed seeking to hold Susan in contempt for nonpayment of GAL fees. Susan says that last July, Judge Robert Resha held her in contempt, then threatened to incarcerate her if she refused to immediately liquidate her teacher’s retirement pension to pay Brigham $20,000 in fees. 

Susan also saw Horowitz and Kreiger’s unorthodox billing practices as red flags that made her doubt the legitimacy of the appointments.

“My divorce agreement states that the parents will see Dr. Krieger for parent counseling. Instead, Dr. Krieger drafted up an agreement for co-parent mediation,” says Susan. This was improper she says, because “Mediation is a legal service that is not covered by health insurance and must be court ordered.”

Susan says that Kreiger charged Aetna for treatment, despite the fact that she was required to provide him with a $2,500 retainer and pay expenses out of pocket.  She questioned whether Dr. Kreiger was billing for treatments that were unnecessary or improperly performed.

“Dr. Krieger also performed psychological evaluations on the family,” Susan says. “Those need to be ordered by the court too, and were outside the scope of his appointment as a counselor.” Susan adds that one such evaluation had flawed results because it was done against medical advice immediately after her car exploded, leaving her hospitalized with head injuries.

When Susan requested copies of the records and bills, then questioned Dr. Horowitz and Dr. Krieger’s refusal to address the assaults or the father’s struggles with addiction and the law with the children, both providers recused themselves from the case.[7] [8]  However, Brigham then asserted privilege on the children’s behalf, thereby prohibiting Susan from obtaining documentation from either provider.[9]

“While Kreiger and Horowitz testified in trial that there was no domestic abuse, they both used domestic violence codes when billing Aetna,” says Susan.  Dr. Horowitz testified that he used one medical chart for 2 children, used the wrong billing codes with the insurance company, then failed to inform the parents and the GAL that he had diagnosed the children with serious mental disorders.[10]

Brigham decided it was “not in the children’s best interests” to have them testify at trial.

“ARE YOU HERE TO SAVE US?”

Once when their father refused to pick his children up for three days of parenting time, I had the pleasure of meeting Susan’s children. The children seemed traumatized not only by the violent crimes perpetrated against them, but also by the fickle will of the courts to intervene on a moment’s notice and upend their lives without including them in these decisions. Given their isolation and the infrequent, yet intensely hostile interactions between Brigham and the children, it was no wonder they sought answers from me the moment their mother left the room.

“Are you here to save us?” Gabby asked. “Someone has got to help mom stop my father. We are afraid because he hurts us.”

“No honey,” I told them, “I’m just a journalist, I can’t save anyone.”

They begged me “Please write something to make Mary Brigham listen so the court will not make us live with my father.”

My heart was heavy because they too felt the inevitable, that darkness was coming for them, and they knew they were helpless to stop it.

With Judge Munro’s trial decision not yet issued, in September 2012 Dr. Tittle sought to permanently sever all of Susan’s parenting rights and access to the children. Judge Gerard Adelman heard testimony that the children refused to visit with Dr. Tittle for the stated reason that they feared for their safety. When Brigham refused to talk to them about these concerns, the children refused to get in the car with her. Brigham told the children she was unconcerned, then demanded they get in the car so she could bring them to Dr. Tittle’s [which they did not do.]  Consequently, Judge Adelman granted Dr. Tittle’s motion for sole custody with the caveat that the court would permanently terminate all of Susan’s parenting rights if she were even 5 minutes late for any future visits.

One week later, I attended the hearing on Dr. Tittle’s second motion to terminate Susan’s parental rights.  Judge Munro called Judge Adelman’s orders “draconian,” then criticized Brigham’s role in instigating the proceedings by acting outside the scope of her appointment as Dr. Tittle’s “taxi driver.” As we left the courtroom, Brigham informed me that she had filed her affidavit of fees a month ago. Subsequently, neither I nor the court staff were able to locate Brigham’s affidavit.

Ultimately, Judge Munro awarded Dr. Tittle sole custody of the children, then constructed a “set-up-to fail” parenting plan that effectively terminated Susan’s access to the children. Susan retains the right [on paper] to purchase a few hours per week with her children at Visitation Solutions, Inc.,[11] which is affiliated[12] with Horowitz and Krieger, and located over an hour away from the home she and her children once shared.

Judge Munro denied Susan’s request for alimony, then awarded Brigham $70,000 in fees, despite the fact that Brigham never filed an affidavit disclosing her billing. After Judge Munro recused herself from hearing Susan’s case, Brigham’s subsequent motions to garnish Susan’s wages were denied pending the outcome of Susan’s appeal.[13]

Since October 2012, Susan filed for bankruptcy and has not been able to afford to purchase time with her children. Dr. Tittle[14] has refused to allow the children any contact with their mother, and remains on criminal probation for driving under the influence, reckless driving, and evading responsibility (leaving the scene of an accident.)[15]

Brigham has scheduled a status conference for April 4^th to discuss payment of her fees, garnishment of Susan’s assets and tax returns.

Who’s best interests have been served?

 

IS THERE A COMMON DENOMENATOR?

Horowitz and Dr. Kenneth Robson often conduct the court’s “free” GAL certification trainings together with Judge Munro.  Court records show that when Dr. Kenneth Robson[16] and Horowitz[17] are involved and the State is paying, the parents are often ordered not to communicate with their children about the trauma they experience. The GAL exclusively communicates directly with Horowitz about the children’s care, and only the GAL will speak to the children about the litigation.

“One of the core issues is the qualified immunity GAL’s enjoy, which results in much of the judicial outsourcing to them,” says advocate Peter Szymonik. He points out that a major reason why parents cannot even find relief from excessive GAL fees in bankruptcy is that the court categorizes it as child support, which is nondischargable. “This leads to excessive and unnecessarily billings which permanently financially devastate parents.”

While Szymonik says the system is biased against fathers, Journalist Keith Harmon Snow has documented over 70 CT cases[18] where fathers who committed legal offenses, have gained custody of child victims. The mothers were often required to purchase parenting time through outrageously expensive, even corrupt supervised visitation providers, who extorted them out of relationships with their children. Now permanently destroyed and bankrupted by abusive, often deadly State sponsored litigation, these families have no recourse.

“GALs are, in fact, paid by judges even ahead of child support,” says Szymonik. “This translates into a multi-million dollar fraud and state sponsored corruption which is financial devastating families and parents, harming children, and fleecing taxpayers.”

To additional documentation related this journalist’s investigative report on the Connecticut courts:

http://www.scribd.com/JournalistABC

REFERENCES:

(1)        2-22-2011 Transcript re: Liberti v. Liberti:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/126529767/Liberti-v-Liberti-Transcript-of-2-22-2011-Hearing

(2)        CT Resource Group Contract With CT Judiciary re: Court Staff Education:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/125730813/Dr-Howard-M-Krieger-s-Contract-With-Connecticut-Judicial-Branch-re-Professional-Trainings

(3)        CT Resource Group Court Invoices Part 1:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/125725460/Connecticut-Court-Billing-Invoices-Part-1-Dr-Howard-M-Krieger-and-Dr-Sidney-S-Horowitz

(4)        CT Resources Group Court Invoices Part 2:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/125730381/CT-Court-Billing-Invoices-Part-2-Dr-Howard-M-Krieger-and-Dr-Sidney-S-Horowitz

(5)        Dr. Horowitz’s Testimony re: Medical Billing Irregularities (Tittle v. Tittle):

http://www.scribd.com/doc/126272714/Dr-Sidney-Horowitz-Testimony-re-Medical-Billing-Irregularities-Shawn-Tittle-v-Susan-Skipp

(6)        Dr. Horowitz’s Bills re: Boyne v. Boyne:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/126239188/Dr-Sidney-Horowitz-s-Billing-Records-PART-3-Boyne-v-Boyne

(7)        Dr. Kreiger’s Documentation re: Tittle v. Tittle:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/126588063/Skipp-Kreiger-Documents

(8)        GAL Mary Brigham’s Invoices re: Tittle v. Tittle:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/125759601/Attorney-Mary-Brigham-s-Billing-on-Shawn-Tittle-v-Susan-Skipp-Case-Middletown-CT-FA10-4022922-S

(9)        Maureen Murphy’s billing re: Liberti v. Liberti:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/126246491/GAL-Maureen-Murphy-s-bills-re-Liberti-v-Liberti-Guardian-ad-Who

(10)      N.J. Sarno’s Billing re: Liberti v. Liberti:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/126246254/NJ-Sarno-s-Billing-Invoices-Robert-Liberti-v-Sunny-Liberti

(11)      Dr. Robson’s Court Invoices:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/122480531/Dr-Kenneth-Robson-s-payment-records-obtained-from-the-CT-Judicial-Branch

(11)      Dr. Robson’s Billing re Liberti v. Liberti:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/126252311/Dr-Kenneth-Robson-s-Bills-re-Liberti-v-Liberti

---

[1] http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/news/AMC_GAL_Training_Poster.pdf

[2] http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/rpt/2013-R-0098.htm

[3] http://www.scribd.com/doc/126588063/Skipp-Kreiger-Documents

[4] http://www.scribd.com/doc/126588063/Skipp-Kreiger-Documents

[5] http://www.scribd.com/doc/126272714/Dr-Sidney-Horowitz-Testimony-re-Medical-Billing-Irregularities-Shawn-Tittle-v-Susan-Skipp

[6] http://www.scribd.com/doc/125759601/Attorney-Mary-Brigham-s-Billing-on-Shawn-Tittle-v-Susan-Skipp-Case-Middletown-CT-FA10-4022922-S

[7] http://www.scribd.com/doc/126272714/Dr-Sidney-Horowitz-Testimony-re-Medical-Billing-Irregularities-Shawn-Tittle-v-Susan-Skipp

[8] http://www.scribd.com/doc/126588063/Skipp-Kreiger-Documents

[9] http://www.scribd.com/doc/126588063/Skipp-Kreiger-Documents

[10] http://www.scribd.com/doc/126272714/Dr-Sidney-Horowitz-Testimony-re-Medical-Billing-Irregularities-Shawn-Tittle-v-Susan-Skipp

[11] http://visitationsolutions.com

[12] http://www.collaborativedivorceteamct.com

[13] http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail/PublicCaseDetail.aspx?DocketNo=UWYFA104022992S

[14] http://www.newstimes.com/local/article/Danbury-man-charged-with-DUI-

[15] http://www.jud2.ct.gov/crdockets/CaseDetail.aspx?source=Pending&Key=371c238b-8016-481a-ab71-61ede4040160

[16] http://www.scribd.com/doc/122480531/Dr-Kenneth-Robson-s-payment-records-obtained-from-the-CT-Judicial-Branch

[17] http://www.scribd.com/doc/125730381/CT-Court-Billing-Invoices-Part-2-Dr-Howard-M-Krieger-and-Dr-Sidney-S-Horowitz

[18] http://www.consciousbeingalliance.com/2013/01/summary-of-connecticut-court-judicial-abuse-cases-january-2013/

Read more: http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/heart-without-compromise-children-and-children-wit/2013/mar/1/immunity-guardian-ad-litem-destroys-connecticut-fa/#ixzz2MOeN5szj
Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter

Showcases how GAL's destroy mothers and children.

Please share!

Immunity for Guardian Ad Litem destroys Connecticut family

Read more: http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/heart-without-compromise-children-and-children-wit/2013/mar/1/immunity-guardian-ad-litem-destroys-connecticut-fa/#ixzz2MOdzG8MU
Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter

joeyisalittlekid: William M Windsor: An American Terrorist

In domestic law on February 21, 2013 at 2:11 am

This is the ‘go to blog’ for updates about the twisted psychopath Bill Windsor and his fake “Lawless America – con game”. Daily updates sometimes twice daily – open comments each post gathering in excess of over 200 un moderated comments. If you want to know — this is the place to go. http://joeyisalittlekid.blogspot.com/2013/02/william-m-windsor-american-terrorist.html

Kudos to joeysalittlekid and many other blogs, video mixers and so much more. WE ARE the people and we invite free thinking. I am sure that some dictators could be good… but his Fuher Bill y Windsor is most definitely not good for anyone but him self.

This entry is just one of many – one that needs reposted and shared.

William M Windsor: An American Terrorist

So I have been doing some reading up.  First, on the latest over at Quatloos about Billy:

http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=7690&hilit=windsor&start=40

As you can see, these guys have been following him along with a hoard of other characters they all call a part of the Sovereign Citizen Movement.  This got me to really thinking back to when Windsor devoted an hour of filming to his buddy Carl Swensson of the Birther Movement.  Then I ran across this article:

http://www.salon.com/2009/04/01/birthers/

Did you catch that?  He pulled this citizen grand jury on the very day, April 1st, that Billy has announced he will do his own version on.  Obviously Carl is advising him on this.  Windsor is trying to learn from the mistakes Carl did in limiting it to just the Birther movement.  The Why isn’t important, its the end result that matters.  This is why Windsor is allowing any and everything into his fake movie.  We can go from a guy who wants his cybersquatting rights, to mothers trying to get their kids back, to a guy trying to make his own currency and then to a slum lord trying to put up big billboards wherever he wants.  There is nothing that connects these people other than theyagree with Billy’s preamble that the court system is broken and needs to be fixed.  As long as you agree to that tenant, you are on his team.  Your particular issue matters not, just the end goal.

But lets get back to this Sovereign Citizen Movement that all these characters seem to fit under.  The FBI considers the SCM a domestic terrorist group and a growing threat to law enforcement. http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/september-2011/sovereign-citizens

"They could be dismissed as a nuisance, a loose network of individuals living in the United States who call themselves “sovereign citizens” and believe that federal, state, and localgovernments operate illegally. Some of their actions, although quirky, are not crimes. The offenses they do commit seem minor"

"However, a closer look at sovereign citizens’ more severe crimes, from financial scams to impersonating or threatening law enforcement officials, gives reason for concern."

And they conclude with this:

"Although the sovereign-citizen movement does not always rise to violence, its members’ illegal activities and past violent—including fatal—incidents against law enforcement make it a group that should be approached with knowledge and caution"

Lets look at what the Anti-Defamation League has to say about this movement and the similarities we can see in Billy:

http://archive.adl.org/learn/ext_us/SCM.asp?xpicked=4

"The key distinguishing characteristic of the sovereign citizen movement is its extreme anti-government ideology, couched in conspiratorial, pseudohistorical, pseudolegal and sometimes racist language. Many extremist movements in the 20th century have been anti-government in the sense that they opposed governmental policies, but few have been so purely anti-government that they challenged its very legitimacy"

This sounds like our guy doesn’t it?

"Members of the Posse Comitatus believed that the county was the true seat of government in the United States. They did not deny the legal existence of federal or state governments, but rather claimed that the county level was the "highest authority of government in our Republic as it is closest to the people." The basic Posse manual stated that there had been "subtle subversion" of the Constitution by various arms and levels of government, especially the judiciary."

Uh huh, this is why he wants people in all 3,300 counties across the nation to bring the charges at the county level.

Paper Terrorism

"Yet despite a pattern of violent activity, the preferred weapon of members of the sovereign citizen movement is what has come to be called "paper terrorism." Paper terrorism involves the use of fraudulent legal documents and filings, as well as the misuse of legitimate documents and filings, in order to intimidate, harass and coerce public officials, law enforcement officers and private citizens"

There is our boy Billy to the T.  And don’t forget his illegal use of a 501c3 non-profit.

"One of the first tactics of the resurgent sovereign citizen movement was the formation of vigilante "common law courts." Members of these courts used them as a forum for grievances against the "de facto" government or for assistance in attempts to harass their enemies"

Yep, this is exactly where we are headed with this next phase in the Lawless Terrorist Network.

"The filing of frivolous lawsuits and liens against public officials, law enforcement officers and private citizens, on the other hand, has remained a favorite harassing strategy. These paper "attacks" intimidate their targets and have the beneficial side effect of clogging up a court system that sovereign citizens believe is illegitimate."

OMG, just stop it, this is way to accurate and telling.

So, as you can see, this is who Bill Windsor is, and this is also where we are headed.  When the lemmings file their made up charges against law enforcement officials, they will be engaging in domestic terrorism along with Bill.  And it needs to be overstated that everyone involved with Lawless America is connecting themselves with terrorist activities specificity delineated by the FBI.  Ignorance is no excuse.  You either wake up now, or finally figure it out when you are behind bars.  The Pied Piper is leading you down a patch of certain destruction.

Hop on over to joeyisalittlekid and read and leave a comment!

En Re: Bill Windsor - Endangering Domestic Violence Victims and Survivors

“Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the Oppressed. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere.” -Elie Wiesel, Holocaust Survivor

“How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world.” -Anne Frank

"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry. "
-Thomas Paine

 

American Mothers

Political Party

Any cause, is good when always -- in all that you do, you maintain your honor, dignity and self respect. Life’s guiding tool. I learned this from my Romanian grandmother and Father who survived the death camps in Auschwitz and then Dachau – when finally they were liberated by the US - my grandfather - 2^nd wave of Normandy. The reason I exist is because of the way humanity works when the heart is in the right place.

We can learn about ourselves all throughout history. I encourage this as it is besides being interesting, it is repeated. I have had to learn that by abiding to the simple human rights of humanity that we can, or will, ‘’Rise a Nation’’ in a good cause, or even at minimum, because this is the good battle, the high road, the ultimate justice.

I watched a very good miniseries today, World Without End. Throughout it, I kept thinking of ‘the very notable parallels’ of the sudden 180 turn by Bill on so many people, and in doing so, the use of my website to hide behind for ‘his own’ actions.

Throughout my almost two decades of being involved in a inhumane civil society that rewards for ‘criminal violence’ and continues to perpetrate atrocious human rights violations against any people, usually a ‘category’ of people -- in what I do and with the countless mothers I have personally worked with – is a ‘category’ of people, a holocaustic hatred towards mothers and their children when they try to regain their Human Rights to be free of torture -- only to be tortured further by their tormentor in yet One More Battleground of an already full arsenal. Family Court.

I do not usually ‘feed’ into those who are so driven with all their time, to try to hurt a ‘category’ of already oppressed people. Real humans know this, so no words are needed, those who do not, no words are adequate. Besides, quite simply, I don’t do drama.

In order to carry on -- although Bill has hurt so many through black mail, coercion and has threatened the safety of so many mothers and their children by sharing their intimate and confidential information on the non real world of face book – a dangerous place anyways, because ‘he thinks’ something - and his excuse for ‘his’ own actions and behavior is to ‘hide’ behind American Mothers Political Party website (AMPP). I would ask, “Why would someone do this?” However, I long ago stopped asking that and worrying about those types of people who feed on the frailty of vulnerable people.

So with that, I will simply state that American Mothers Political Party (AMPP) and I -- are one in the same. My 1^st and last (and imo to much) but if it will cease your obsession of endangering mothers or any one for that matter, my statement (and I am being nice - most get a ‘two word’ statement from me when they act like you have)

I, Claudine Dombrowski or AMMPP (again only I am AMPP) state that everything you Bill have said about AMPP is and has been and likely to remain “intentionally distorted and inaccurate.” Let the record be clear, I, and I alone maintain the website www.AmericanMothers.PoliticalParty.org Bill, you know this – and always have.

Bill, I have not threatened you, I have not, nor do I have the power to stop your goal. No copy right violations (I do know them, just ask PBS). I had thought, the concept of LA was a good idea, is why it saddened me (when, although I have broad shoulders) that you systematically began removing mothers who have been ‘battered’ by the fathers of their children, in horrendous ways, because you- 'gave them' (bill almighty) a chance to disengage with American Mothers Political Party or to ‘tell’ their side of story, wow!! Talk about demanding and classic black mail - and you do, hold that power - 'control' of fear over them with their personal, sensitive and life threatening information, entrusted to you, a power which you have misused and freely wield.

You see, I need no public support, the truth is self-sustained. I will not hurt others to prop myself up. I will not alter, nor publish or intimidate others so basically I just ignore you. As I have with others like you throughout the last two decades, as I am sure will be others in the next two decades. I will not drop everything because you or any other ‘demands’ it. I will not defend myself against ignorance or ‘play’ into the need for self absorption.

I will not engage in your feeding frenzy obsession and with American Mothers Political Party as simply, I try to spend my energy doing what I always have, keeping my energy focused on the positive and future real change, for all - as well with a ‘special’ heart held dream of freedom for that 'category' of people - battered mothers and their children.

Anyone with any inclination, can research easily, any ones ignorance towards these mothers and the issues surrounding them. For those who do not, no amount of dialogue is possible to change their mind, nor their narcissistic - attention seeking behaviors.

So perhaps, maybe you can come back down to reality and realize that all the good you have done you are destroying – hiding behind the ‘hatred of myself and my website American Mothers Political Party’. I have always told mothers, fathers and grandparents and cps victims that there is no ‘messiah’ or any –one sure way to regain so many freedoms lost on top of the already human rights freedoms that Domestic Violence Victims have and continue to endure.

It’s just not important to society, dead women and children, terror and fear of those - perpetrated by their most intimate partner, lover and at one time friend. It is a terror a betrayal that is more than just a crime. Simple Human rights.

I have not looked today what fear and terror you have stricken in others in the name of yourself, behind the skirt of American Mothers Political Party, but from a email post that you say you received (although was meant for me/ AMPP) and the oddly twisted cognitive thought process to assume that out of that email, you deduce ‘your own’ mantras of what ‘you think’ I said, what you ASSume...

I alone, own, operate and maintain www.AmericanMothersPoliticalParty.org I alone, no one else. Simple enough?

Now, you know as do others. Come after me and leave everyone else alone. You can no longer hide behind the ‘skirts’ of amp as to why, with your twisted excuses, of why you are hurting these mothers.

Bill - you have already posted my address, email along with so many others. You know where to send your law suits.

Southern Poverty Law Center on the Fathers' Rights Movement

Listed as a HATE Group e.g. Skin heads, Westborough Baptist Church, Neo Nazi’s etc…

· AMPP Home

· AMPP Article Library

News and Events

§ American Mothers Political Party Denounces “Dominick’s Law” In Michigan

§ Monsters In the Closet - Domestic Violence From a Child's View

§ Parental Alienation: A 'Mythical Legal Argument'

§ PRESS RELEASE: HISTORIC US SUPREME COURT CASE

§ It’s Not Angst Over Custody: Fathers Kill Their Children to Punish Their Ex-Partners

§ “Hearts Across America” -- Million Mom March Mother's Day 2011, at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Washington, D.C.

§ Cut $500 Million from the Fatherhood Initiative and Hold Congressional Hearings

§ Family Courts Helping Pedophiles, Batterers Get Child Custody

§ UN Mothers UNiTE to End Violence Against Mothers And Their Children Campaign

§ Mothers Of Lost Children Rally In Washington, D.C. FEBRUARY 13th and 14th, 2011

§ Parental Alienation and Domestic Violence

§ Battered Women, Abused Children, Child Custody A National Crisis

§ Ms.Mag and Reality Check SLAMM HuffPo’s Censorship Protecting Abusers Tool by Dr. Warshak

§ Failures of U.S. Courts Forces Mothers to Turn to International Law

§ PRESS RELEASE: AMPP Stands Behind Christian Coffey HIS Mother and All Their Supporters

§ Melinda Stratton: Another Mother 'Hunted' Down

Multi Media

Documentaries Of Importance

§ Dr. Phil Exposes the Crisis in Family Court

§ INTERVIEW WITH DOMINIQUE LASSEUR, PRODUCER OF “BREAKING THE SILENCE: CHILDREN’S STORIES”

§ Family Court Related Research and Articles

§ MISTAKES MOTHERS MAKE in Child Custody Litigation

§ Top 5 HHS Programs Endangering Women and Children - Billions Of Your Tax Dollars Fuel The Genocide Against Mother's And Her Children

§ U.S. FAMILY COURTS SACRIFICING MOTHERS & CHILDREN all the usual suspects; Guardian ad Litem’s, Psychologists, Case Managers, Custody Evaluators, Access Visitation Supervisors, Parenting Coordinators, and *Therapeutic Jurisprudence

§ Endless $tupidity: Domestic Violence Victim Advocacy For Supervised Visitation Centers

§ U. S. Department of Justice v. Custody Court System

§ WHEN BATTERED WOMEN LOSE CUSTODY: Dangerous Parents or Systems Failure?

§ Dear Custody Court Judge: EXTREME CUSTODY DECISIONS THAT RISK LIVES

§ PAS as a Religion - Parental Alienation Syndrome

§ What is Fair for Children of Abusive Men?

§ Want To Be A Good Dad? Support Mom And Avoid Father’s Rights Groups

§ Insanity? Nope, it’s Family Court

§ 175 Killer Dads: Fathers who ended their children's lives in situations involving child custody, visitation, and/or child support (USA)

§ Batterer Manipulation and Retaliation; Denial and Complicity In the Family Courts

§ A Cancer Spreading in the Custody Court System

§ Some Concerns About False Allegations of Abuse Are Accurate

§ How Many Children Are Court -Ordered Into Unsupervised Contact With an Abusive Parent After Divorce?

§ Child Custody and Visitation Decisions in Domestic Violence Cases: Legal Trends, Risk Factors, and Safety Concerns

§ Family Court and Fathers’ Rights = A Deadly Combination

§ Mother’s Day Proclamation at the White House 1870 and 2010

§ NIMH - Monkey Brain Scans With and Without Mom

§ Confirmed: Protective Mothers Were Right

§ Justice is biased!! The laws play Russian Roulette with children’s lives

§ 138 Killer Dads: Fathers who ended their children's lives in situations involving child custody, visitation, and/or child support (USA)

§ High Conflict Cases Likely Have History of Domestic Violence

§ Family Law Act Aids Abusive Fathers, Imperils Children

§ Federal Fatherhood Initiatives

§ TANF Fraud Diverts Billions To Dangerous Unfit Fathers. Healthy Families Initiatives, Responsible Fatherhood Initiatives, Access and Visitation Initiatives

§ U. S. Fatherhood Initiatives - Control of Women and Children Under the Guise of "Responsible Married Fatherhood"

§ Attention Judges and Lawmakers: This is the REAL AGENDA of the Father’s Rights Movement

§ Maternal Deprivation Inflicted on Battered Women and Abused Children

§ Senate Judiciary Chairman - Response to Proposed Changes to Child Custody Law

§ Hearing to Review Responsible Fatherhood Programs

§ The National Fatherhood Initiative: Supporting a Misogynistic Agenda

§ Family / Criminal Law and Research

§ Southern Poverty Law Center on the Fathers' Rights Movement A Known HATE Gruop

§ "Just Say Good-Bye" New Study -- Fathers Kill Children For Revenge On Their Mothers When The Women Leave Them

§ One More Battleground: Domestic Violence, Child Custody, and the Batterers’ Relentless Pursuit of their Victims Through the Courts

§ Mothers On Trial: The Battle for Children and Custody. Motherhood Under Siege

§ ABUSIVE FATHERS ARE MORE LIKELY TO SEEK SOLE CUSTODY IN CHILD CUSTODY BATTLES

§ Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life

§ Whores Of The Court and the Rape of American Justice

§ Domestic Violence, Abuse, and Child Custody

§ VAWA, Parental Alienation Syndrome, Fathers Rights

VAWA - Title II - The Entire MISSING Section of the VAWA Identifying Use of PAS Legal Strategies as Violence Against Women Which Endangers Children

Report Details Sabotage of Birth Control

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/health/research/15pregnant.html

February 15, 2011

Report Details Sabotage of Birth Control

By RONI CARYN RABIN

Men who abuse women physically and emotionally may also sabotage their partners’ birth control, pressuring them to become pregnant against their will, new reports suggest.

Several small studies have described this kind of coercion among low-income teenagers and young adults with a history of violence by intimate partners. Now, a report being released Tuesday by the federally financed National Domestic Violence Hotline says 1 in 4 women who agreed to answer questions after calling the hot line said a partner had pressured them to become pregnant, told them not to use contraceptives, or forced them to have unprotected sex.

The report was based on answers from more than 3,000 women, but it was not a research study, those involved said.

“It was very eye-opening,” said Lisa James, director of health at the Family Violence Prevention Fund in San Francisco, which worked with the hot line on the report. “There were stories about men refusing to wear a condom, forcing sex without a condom, poking holes in condoms, flushing birth control pills down the toilet.

“There were lots of stories about hiding the birth control pills — that she kept ‘losing’ her birth control pills, until she realized that he was hiding them,” Ms. James added.

One respondent described having to hide in the bathroom to take her pill. Another said that when she got her period recently, her partner was “furious.”

The hot line’s report did not include a comparison group and did not gather information about the participants, who were questioned anonymously; nor was it published in a peer-reviewed journal. It was based on answers to four questions posed to 3,169 women around the country who contacted the domestic violence hot line between Aug. 16 and Sept. 26, 2010, who were not in immediate danger and who agreed to participate. About 6,800 callers refused to answer the questions.

Of those who did respond, about a quarter said yes to one or more of these three questions: “Has your partner or ex ever told you not to use any birth control?” “Has your partner or ex-partner ever tried to force or pressure you to become pregnant?” “Has your partner or ex ever made you have sex without a condom so that you would get pregnant?”

One in six answered yes to the question “Has your partner or ex-partner ever taken off the condom during sex so that you would get pregnant?”

The questions were devised by Dr. Elizabeth Miller, an assistant professor of pediatrics at the School of Medicine at the University of California, Davis, whose earlier papers on reproductive coercion prompted interest in the subject.

“It’s really important to recognize reproductive coercion as another mechanism for control in an unhealthy relationship,” Dr. Miller said. At the same time, she added, younger women and girls dating older men may be confused by the pressure to become pregnant.

“If you can put yourself in the shoes of a 15-year-old dating an 18- or 19-year-old man, which is not an unusual scenario, and he says to her, ‘We’re going to make beautiful babies together,’ that’s pretty seductive.”

But Dr. Miller said more research was needed to understand the men’s motivations.

“One of the things that comes up a lot is: What are the guys thinking?” she said, adding that her own research suggested some answers.

“Some have an intense desire for a nuclear family, and many who had experiences of a dysfunctional family home want something better,” she said. Some young men, she said, “want to leave a legacy, and say, ‘I’m not sure how long I’m going to be around.’ Gang-affiliated young men want the status that comes with having babies from multiple women.”

Dr. Miller’s paper, published last year in the journal Contraception, reported that at five family planning clinics in Northern California, one-third of 683 female patients whose partners were physically abusive said the men had also pressured them to become pregnant or had sabotaged their birth control. Of 191 women who reported birth control sabotage, 79 percent also reported physical abuse, the study found.

The associations help explain why young victims of violence by intimate partners are at an increased risk for unplanned pregnancies and for sexually transmitted diseases.

Ms. James, of the Family Violence Prevention Fund, said that despite the new attention to reproductive coercion, she doubted it was a new phenomenon.

“I just think not enough people have been asking the question,” she said.