PLEASE NOTE: This blog is a bigotry free zone open to all persons, regardless of age, race, religion, color, national origin, sex, political affiliations, marital status, physical or mental disability, age, or sexual orientation. Further, this blog is open to the broad variety of opinions out there and will not delete any comments based upon point of view. However, comments will be deleted if they are worded in an abusive manner and show disrespect for the intellectual process.

Sunday, May 3, 2015


I've pretty much covered all the significant points that were in the Savino custody evaluation.  But there were a few additional areas of investigation that are worth reviewing before we continue on.  

For example, just so all of the curious know, at the end of 2011 when Dr. Sidney Horowitz was conducting the custody evaluation with Colleen Kerwick it looks as though she was ambulating well.  Ken was ambulating well too.   You wouldn't want any bad ambulators around.

Further, both were "oriented in all spheres."  I mean if either had one of the spheres excluded and didn't bring it up to speed, we'd definitely have a problem, I am sure.  

Doesn't look as if either had any dysmorphic features--I mean God forbid.  

Both appeared to have euthymic affect.  Hmmmm.  

No thoughts of killing themselves or others.  Glad to hear that, or it would be rather alarming.  

In short, both Colleen Kerwick and Kenneth Savino appear to have the exact same mental status.  Like I said, in the "both are wrong" world, everything kind of goes bing, bong, ding, dong.  

Ambulating forward, I do take note that apparently Colleen has "a relative weakness in visual motor integration."  Oh. my. God!!!  Do you think this will affect her parenting skills?  

But, wait a minute, look at that Kenneth!  Dr. Horowitz has offered that "a relative weakness in his nonverbal abilities is noted!"  

I mean without nonverbal abilities, I'm feeling very ambivalent.  I mean a Dad without proper nonverbal abilities--can you really trust him around a very young child?  This is, indeed, something we must carefully consider.  

And, under the circumstances, one must balance out the relative importance of visual motor integration problems versus nonverbal communication skills.  In the scheme of things, perhaps it would be better to have a parent who is better at nonverbal communication skills even though that parent isn't so great at visual motor integration problems.  

But then again, we mustn't take these features out of context as Dr. Sidney Horowitz states in his "caveat--redux" in the section on Kenneth Savino where he again repeats that "the psychological test interpretations presented herein are hypotheses, etc. etc." 

Again, ambulating along, based upon the Hooper Test, looks like both parents have a very low likelihood of neurological impairment in regard to vision--so looking good, looks like when they are diapering the baby they will both be able to identify where to plant the diaper.  

Score for Colleen Kerwick!  It looks as though she does not have any learning disabilities.  

However, the CTMT for Kenneth brings us some more problematic results.  

Specifically, "the results suggest that Mr. Savino is functioning in the average range on the easier trails, but shows a huge disparity ranging from the 6th percentile to the 62nd percentile on more difficult trails."  

What this means is that "The aforementioned "relative weakness" in the perceptual domain coupled with what will later be described as an underlying anxiety, may account for his performance on the test."  

But that doesn't mean he has any anxiety at all as Dr. Sidney Horowitz reassures us, "That said, there is no indication of a formal underlying neuropsychological deficit per se."  

Whew!  I am glad to hear that or I would have been worried.  

I think everyone reading this blog will also be glad to hear that the results of the Slosson Oral Reading Test - Third Edition - indicate that both Colleen Kerwick and Kenneth Savino both know how to read at the high school level.  

I mean, what would we do if Colleen, an aviation attorney who has passed the bar couldn't read at a high school level.  What would we be required to do?  Revoke her law degree?  And as for Kenneth, no more wealth management for you, bad boy.  Not reading on the high school level, you should be ashamed.  

Ok, that was just an imaginative scenario.  But seriously, if it turned out that, say, Kenneth, didn't know how to read, would they truly deny him custody?  Is there some rule out there stating that literate parents are superior and more effective as parents than non-literate parents--is there some body of research we have out there which proves the value of reading in parents over non-readers?  

Finally, there were some very interesting parent/child observations, one with Colleen Kerwick and also with Kenneth Savino.  

In the parent/child visit with Colleen Kerwick, the child went on a search for toy trucks and began to whine when he couldn't find the trucks.  Ms. Kerwick attempted to redirect the child's attention away from the trucks, asking him to read books instead.  

[Of course, I, zee grrreat doktor had hidden away all zee trrrucks, but that is my secret!  Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!]

Still, no matter what Mother did the child continued to express the fact that he wanted to play with trucks.  Trucks being effectively a symbol of the masculine, clearly the child had a specific need to identify with that masculine activity as opposed to the feminine activity of reading a book.  

Mother's refusal to play with trucks probably reflects her inability to come to terms with the masculine in her life and in the life of the child.  

Dr. Horowitz plans on paying close attention to the child's truck playing for the future.  I mean, if mother cannot accept trucks as a legitimate toy playing activity, it may not be appropriate for her to be the primary parent.  

This is a serious consideration.  

As for the father, during his parent/child activity, he was able to find some cars in the toy box which the child was very happy to play with.  Both father and son practiced using the word "poopy" in a he man type way which was reminiscent of burping games young men play in local bars, so clearly a very healthy father/son type activity.  

I'm sorry folks, when it comes to game playing and letting boys be boys, father as primary parent is looking a little bit better than mother.  Repeat after me, "Mommy is a sissy."  Mommy is a sissy..."

[Vat are you crrrying for, young man, big boyz don't do zee crrrying!]

To be continued...


  1. I sure hope you have obtained signed release forms from both Colleen Kerwick and Kenneth Savino that allows you to release confidential information from Dr. Sidney Horowitz about his patients. Furthermore, I see no value in having this information published for all to see, including children who may stumble onto this blog when they google any of the parties names. You call yourself a journalist but I wonder what your ethics are. Shame on you! This interpertation of a custodal evaluation by you as a journalist is beyond belief. I would like to know, is your background and degree in psychology that allows you to perform your evaluation of these people? If not, shame on you again!

    1. This is what corrupt evaluators rely on that their work will remain private and never see the light of day. They think that they will have complete immunity from accountability. I think you are hypocritical speaking about what children will stumble across when they google considering how the CT Judicial Branch routinely publishes private psychiatric diagnoses of both children and parents online in memoranda of decision, plus information on where they live, what schools they go to, etc. etc. I make my observations in regard to the documents I observe. If you disagree with me fine. Anyway, I need to ambulate to the store, so talk later.

  2. Ambulate? Never heard this used as a verb. I think you have used it in the wrong context. Look it up.

    1. Are you sure you are oriented in all spheres?

  3. I guess your lack of response to the point of being ethical means your not or would have defended yourself instead of giving garbage as to what others have done. You certainly cannot hold your head high. No respect!!!!

    1. There are times when I actually drop my pen and do other things aside from this blog. Hard to believe, but it happens...

  4. My ex husband ordered the custody evaluations in this public case.

    1. How does your ex husband make an order of the court? I think you mean to say the court ordered the custody evaluation. That is of course if your ex husband is a judge!

    2. I think what she probably means is that Budlong & Barrett ordered the judge to order the custody evaluations because pretty much this attorney firm instructs the judge to do what he or she is told. That firm is much more powerful than any judge any day of the week. I don't know how they came to wield such power, but wield it they do.

    3. Kenneth Savino, via counsel, moved the court for a custody evaluation in this public case. I don't believe they serve any purpose in Family Court (as opposed to Juvenile Court) cases, other than to give greedy vendors tools to increase conflict. The vendors saw he is controlling and competitive and used this to fuel his war against the mother of the child by telling him he could parent as well as she can. He had always said (according to public exhibits in this case) that she is an "Extraordinary Mother" until she asked to separate.

  5. If you are are smart as you purport to be you would know that no individual or attorney can order custody evaluations. Only the court can-shows again your total distortion of the facts.

    1. Yes, I misspoke. What I meant was that Budlong and Barrett asked the judge to order the custody eval, and in general what B & B ask for they get because it is a firm with an inside track to the judges in CT Family Court. Thanks for allowing me to clarify. This is not about being smart. This is about justice. Only the attorneys in these cases are playing ego games. The rest of us are just trying to live in peace with our families without being bullied and harassed by family court corruption.