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.
Showing posts with label CUSTODY EVALUATIONS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CUSTODY EVALUATIONS. Show all posts

Saturday, October 19, 2013

WHEN MEN ASK FOR CUSTODY: WHO DO THEY THINK THEY ARE KIDDING?

Thank God I ended up with the residential custody of the children.  However, sometimes in my wildest dreams I imagine what might have happened if my ex had ended up with custody of the children. 
 
His scenario, from what I've gathered from the custody evaluation, was that he would continue to work and that he would have a nanny taking care of the children while I saw them once a month for a short visit. 
 
This would have been quite interesting to see, had it actually happened, because after knowing my ex for 25 years, I am aware that he is a workaholic and that even once he came home at night, he was very likely to have continued on working with the children running around the house unsupervised.  
 
Still, my attorney told me that I was within a hair's breadth of losing custody of my children and that I should be very grateful for his hard work. 
 
Of course, from my perspective I am looking at a custody evaluator and a GAL who actually entertained the idea that having three children in the care of a total workaholic would be a good idea.  Of course, I am not sure they even asked him how many hours he worked.  I think they spent their time looking at all the pictures he snapped during his parenting time. 
 
(I am not going to call it visitation, because there is something inherently wrong about referring the time fathers and mothers have with their children as time that they are visiting!) 
 
My bottom line question is, why do we have these custody disputes costing multiple thousands of dollars?  Shouldn't it be obvious that custody ought to go with the mothers who are the primary caregiver? 
 
Now before you start yelling at me all at once, don't start thinking that I am gender biased.  My own father was a very non-traditional man who never allowed himself to be limited by expectations of what men should or should not do. 
 
He was, in fact, a marvelous mother. 
 
He loved babies--he loved to rock them and hold them.  My mother used to tell me that he always thought they were "cheaper by the dozen." And as a young faculty member, he used to take my older sister to his class where students fussed over the baby while he delivered his lecture. 
 
My earliest memory of my father is of sitting next to him while he darned socks, in the days when people actually darned them.  And this was no easy feat.  My father was well over six feet and extremely large.  His hands were enormous, yet he would take this tiny little needle and repair a whole bundle of socks.  
 
He was also good, by the way, at making buttonholes, hemming seams, and doing all kinds of major clothing repairs on the Singer sewing machine we had stored in the closet.  I could go on about his excellent cooking, about how he collected buckets full of crabapples and turned them into delicious jelly in the summer, but I can only make this blog so long! 
 
My parents had a modern marriage in the 60s and 70s way before it actually existed.  My Mom had a full time job and worked when no other mothers I knew worked.  She would march to work every morning with her hair cut severely short wearing a polyester pants suit.  When her granddaughter asked her on a visit, "Why don't you bake brownies the way my other Grandma does?" my Mom responded, "I am not your brownie baking Grandma!"  My Mom took college classes, attended plays and operas, wrote poetry and published short stories throughout her old age.
 
With parents like this, how could I possibly advocate for the assignment of custody based on traditional gender roles?
 
The first reason is that these children came out of my body.  I risked my life and my wellbeing in order to have these children. 
 
In particular, after my first child I had damage to my reproductive organs that was extensive, consisting of both severe internal and external tearing and bleeding.  Sorry to gross you out, if that's what I've done.  I'm also squeamish talking about these things, but still facts are facts.  I had to wait three hours for the surgeon on call to make it to the hospital to care for me.  Afterwards, it took a considerable amount of time to recover. 
 
Subsequently, when I had the two additional children, things did not get better for me.  This means that I have physical damage to my body that is irreparable.  I did have surgery three years ago, but this could only repair so much, and the expectation is that it will require follow up work later on and that I will never fully heal. 
 
So every day that I get up I have physical problems that have resulted from my pregnancies which a man will never have to face in order to have children. 
 
Now, I am not saying I regret these children in any way.  In fact, every day I wake up I thank God for the wonderful children that I have.  I am only saying, that before any custody evaluator or GAL thinks about taking them from me, they should consider the price I've paid for them. 
 
And, of course, it doesn't just end there. 
 
What about the years of breastfeeding that I devoted myself to so that the children would be physically and emotionally healthy.  That adds up to at least four years of breastfeeding.  That's like a decade in my life during which time I was either pregnant or breastfeeding. 
 
Over and above that, can any of you ladies reading this blog recall when your body became your own again, when the kids stopped spontaneously jumping on your lap when they needed reassurance, when they stopped banging on the door nonstop when you tried to take a shower, when they stopped reaching out for you and hugging you at will, when they stopped jumping up and down asking you to pick them up--about years, I would say, and we have the ratty clothing and miserable hair cuts to show for it. 
 
This is a feat of giving in order to create a family that a man never has to consider providing. 
 
What shocks me, then, under these circumstances is that any court, any GAL, any custody evaluator could ever have only observed a hair's breadth difference between my ex and me when it came to the decision on custody. 
 
So why did it end up this way? 
 
Because I don't think anyone involved in the custody recommendation thought that this kind of information was important.  Our world is still very much a man's world, and so who even thinks to ask questions like that.  Yet these are very basic and fundamental questions that should be considered. 
 
For example, during the entire time that the kids were young, I never once saw my ex change a diaper. 
 
In the fourteen years that we were going to the pediatrician, my ex maybe saw the doctor two or three times. 
 
So since when did it turn out that he should be the one to get custody?  Because he takes good pictures?  
 
I have days when I think that men should have no involvement in custody issues whatsoever because they are simply clueless.  They have no idea what is going on with their own children, I can assure you, and then they go out making judgments on mothers in custody battles when they have no idea what being a mother is all about. 
 
My Dad was a lot different in so many ways, as I have said.  But he had a demanding job and he often had very late hours.  It was still my Mom who took the job that made her more available and that continues to happen nowadays for most people. 
 
So my Dad was not there to hear about my day when I came home from school; he did not instruct me on how to tie my shoe laces; he did not come to my room and check my temperature when I was sick and had to stay home from school; he did not walk me up the street to join the Scouting group at our neighborhood school, or sell girl scout cookies; he did not put my hair up in individual curlers when I was upset and then tell me how beautiful I looked once my hair was all done. 
 
Kids need their Moms, and anyone who thinks otherwise is nuts!

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

"MIKE DOE'S" TESTIMONY AT THE MARCH 25, 2013 51-14 HEARING BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT!


Thank you very much.  

               CHIEF JUSTICE ROGERS:  Thank you. 

               Mike Doe No. 1.

               (Pause in the proceedings.)

               CHIEF JUSTICE ROGERS:  Good morning.

               MR. MIKE DOE NO. 1:  Good morning, Justices --

               JUSTICE EVELEIGH:  Good morning.

               MR. MIKE DOE NO. 1:  -- and thank you for the opportunity to speak to you this morning.  The first thing I’d like to address is a proposed rule to be added to the Practice Book which limits the information about children which can be contained in divorce opinions. 

                In divorce proceedings, minor children do not have the same rights as those children involved in juvenile proceedings or parental right termination cases.  The children’s private information, including their names, birth dates, and other information is routinely published in divorce opinions.  These decisions appear on the internet.  They can be read by hundreds of millions of people.  Those people include sex offenders and identity thieves.

               Children of divorce have their personal information exposed and they are routinely stigmatized and psychologically damaged by the sometime salacious and other private information about their parents which is contained in the decision.

               In one recent case, a family law judge published a 28-page decision which contained the minor children’s names, their birth dates, their home addresses, as one as -- as well as one child’s psychiatric history.  It was lifted directly from a custody evaluation which the parents believed was for the eyes of the attorneys and the court only. 

               Since the publication of that decision, Your Justices, one child, he’s my child, has suffered uncontrolled anxiety and can no longer attend school on a regular basis.  Every time either one of my children Googles their name, that decision is the first thing that they read.

               My requested rule change is that matters involving child custody has to be automatically sealed.  They do it in the states of New Jersey; they do it in the states of New York.  All child custody evaluations must be automatically sealed.  The public cannot trust that these decisions are not going to contain information that damages our children so much.

               My second proposal is an amendment with respect to GAL, AMC, fees and the appointment of GALs and AMCs.  In the Stamford Judicial District, family law judges repeatedly appoint the same small group of attorneys as GALs and AMCs.  The majority of these attorneys are billing families at $500 per hour.  Many do not have GAL and AMC certification and, meanwhile, there are hundreds of GAL- and AMC-certified professionals now in our state who are willing to work for state rates but they are never appointed.

               In one Stamford case, the GAL billed $500 an hour.  His fees exceeded $160,000.  He spent a total of 4½ hours with the same two children whose public information now appears on the internet.  In addition, when he was criticized for not performing his duties, he succeeded himself and an attorney -- as an attorney, having an attorney appointed for him at the cost of another $500 an hour.  That attorney was then also appointed as AMC representing both the GAL, himself an attorney, and representing the children. 

               After an 11-day trial, it was determined that that AMC had never even met with or spoken to either of the children.  Her bill, $100,000.  The family, a family of modest means, now a family that is insolvent, paid GAL fees of $260,000.

               The rule should be amended, Rule 25-62.  We have the rules but they’re not followed.  It says that GALs shall be appointed pursuant to a branch fee schedule.  They should be.  I don’t know why they’re not.  We have the rule; it has to be enforced.

               Thank you for your time.

               CHIEF JUSTICE ROGERS:  Thank you very much.

 
FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THIS HEARING, PLEASE GO TO THE FOLLOWING LINK:

http://www.no-wackileaks.com/
  

 

Sunday, March 17, 2013

GUARDIAN AD LITEMS: RECENT REPORTS FROM THE OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH!

REPORTS OF THE OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH


ON GUARDIAN AD LITEMS
NOTE:
Cost
If you obtain a GAL through the program funded by the State the cost of a GAL is considerably lower based on the information in this report.  However, there is a needs based requirement for this program.
 
Accountability
Also, it appears that GALs provided by the State can be held more accountable through the office that hires them.  If you hire a private GAL, the only person you can complain to is the Judge and he or she is not likely to listen to you. 

For more information, please click on the following links:
 
OCTOBER 3, 2012
 

 

Sunday, January 6, 2013

HHS FATHERHOOD FUNDS USED IN CUSTODY SWITCHING SCHEMES THAT TRANSFER CUSTODY FROM PROTECTIVE MOTHERS TO VIOLENT AND ABUSIVE FATHERS!

I was speaking to some friends recently who told me that in the Magistrates Court in Hartford, representatives of Fatherhood Initiatives recruit clients right outside the courthouse doors. 
 
What is the purpose of these Fatherhood Initiatives?  Ostensibly, the purpose is to assist fathers in developing their job skills, to encourage them as parents and to provide them with peer support and improve their ability to meet their child support obligations. 
 
However, advocates have discovered a more suspect motivation for these contacts.
 
In a recent article entitled, "A Life Sentence" independent journalist Keith Harmon Snow spoke about how Family Court systems across America are taking children away from fit mothers and handing them over to abusive fathers in record numbers. 
 
The impetus behind this social trend arises from millions of dollars in funds handed over to the States by the Department of Health and Human Services.  I have seen different figures in terms of how much money is involved here, but I would guess that the best estimate is approximately $150 million per year in HHS money that is specifically designated to support fatherhood initiatives, plus around $4 billion designated for the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE).  Particularly advantageous to those interested in taking advantage of this financial windfall, fathers in these programs are not required to adhere to TANF deadlines or work requirements that are normally a standard for accessing these funds.
 
Furthermore, there is very little oversight of this money, which means that such programs have gotten away with using fatherhood funds to assist abusive and violent fathers in custody battles against protective mothers.  These fathers are told that they have two choices -- risk jail for failure to pay child support, or embark on a custody battle to take the children from the Protective Mother and thus eliminate child support altogether. 
 
What would you choose? 
 
Thus, fathers who have had little contact with their children for years, who have physically and/or sexually abused the children and their mothers, often fathers just being released from jail, end up fighting and succeeding in getting custody with the collusion of family court services and mental health professionals. 
 
According to Anne Stevenson, a freelance journalist, since eligibility for these programs is not needs based these fatherhood funds can be distributed not only to low income fathers, but also to middle and upper middle class fathers, even billionaires.
 
The moment a protective mother goes to trial court in order to obtain back child support, or bring financial matters of any kind before family court, these funds get dispersed to the fathers. 
 
High Conflict Divorces are a particularly excellent source of funds for family courts that have been corrupted by fatherhood funds.  High conflict divorces release funds to a broad range of family court services, GALs, custody evaluators and mental health professionals who then get involved in the case. 
 
As columnist Anne Stevenson describes it, the HHS policy of subsidizing the homes and legal battles of unfit, unwilling, and violent fathers has "created a new breed of dangerous Welfare Kings".  In these custody cases, at the beginning "only the offender is sick, but when one violent offender gets custody, the whole family needs treatment.  Consequently, it is also not uncommon for dozens of family court mental health and legal professionals to come onto such a case to sustain an abusive father's deadly custody rights through HHS programs."

The result is that everyone, sometimes even the judges, ends up getting a payoff. 
 
I have avoided discussing this matter simply because of the enormity of this situation.  How do you grapple with such a monolithic violation of the human rights of protective mothers, not only in Family Courts throughout the nation, but also here in Connecticut, in our own communities, right on our front doorsteps! 
 
To grasp the extent of it, try typing variants of the words  "Fatherhood Initiative in Connecticut" into google--you end up with hit after hit. 
 
One of the top results I obtained when I started my investigation on google was the "John S. Martinez Fatherhood Initiative of Connecticut" which operates apparently under the auspices of the Connecticut Department of Social Services. 
 
Under this initiative, according to information sheets the Initiative provides, funds are directed towards assisting fathers in connection to custody.  For example, the sheet "Financing Fatherhood Programs" states that "Welfare funds can be used to assist never-married parents to develop joint parenting plans, develop marriage and relationship building skills, or for mediation services." 
 
Under "Building Services to Help Fathers" the information sheet says, "TANF dollars can be used to support a variety of services for fathers--employment assistance, counseling, parenting plans,  mediation, parenting education, substance abuse and domestic violence." 
 
According to Anne Stevenson, what this amounts to is that, for the purpose of switching custody from protective mothers to abusive fathers, those fathers who agree to engage in custody  battles are provided with free attorneys, free housing, free groceries, free car maintenance, gas, and other transportation costs, free healthcare and dental care, plus cash, while having all their child support obligations suspended. 
 
This information sheet further advises "policymakers", which I assume includes legislators, to "use the budget process to direct funding for the development of fatherhood programs and services." In addition, it advises them to "Use TANF funds to make competitive grants to local programs that operate fatherhood programs." and "Direct agencies to use TANF funds to assist fathers." 
 
With all these millions and millions of dollars directed towards supporting fathers, what chance do protective mothers have?
 
And these information sheets caution, "States are not spending millions of dollars in TANF resources" that are still waiting and available.  Plus, not only are there millions and millions of dollars in TANF resources out there that still need to be used, States can tap into more fatherhood funding if they approach other resources like WtW and Title XX block grants. 
 
Can you see that this is so mind boggling that I have delayed reporting on it?  I just couldn't even begin to comprehend such a monstrous situation. 
 
What this does, of course, is make me look back on my own family court case and on the many cases I have discussed on this blog and ask:  Were fatherhood funds behind each of these custody battles?  I have only just begun my investigation of this subject matter, and will continue to write more about it.  But if anyone has a comment and/or any personal experience with this issue, I would be interested in hearing from you.

Tuesday, January 1, 2013

HOW THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH EXCUSES CORRUPT CUSTODY EVALUATORS FROM ACCOUNTABILITY

There are so many battles to fight once you get into a high conflict divorce that you really have to choose which ones you want to get involved in.  However, for a brief period I considered reporting my corrupt custody evaluator to the Department of Public Health. 
 
To my dismay, what I found out is that it is almost impossible to get the Department of Public Heath to investigate a corrupt custody evaluator. 
 
Why? 
 
Because in order to determine what kind of wrongdoing a custody evaluator may have done, the Department would have to have a chance to take a look at the custody evaluation and they state that they are unable to do that unless they have permission from both parties. 
 
Their reasoning, for what it is worth, is that they would be violating the confidentiality of the other party if they reviewed the custody evaluation without his or her permission. 
 
Of course, what with the way high conflict family court cases go, the contents of the custody evaluation may be posted on the internet in the Memorandum of Decision on the case, but that is of no consequence to the Department of Public Health. 
 
The end result is that, with a policy of this kind in place, there is no way that the Department of Public Health can investigate any custody evaluator because it will be an extremely rare situation where both parties are going to agree that the custody evaluator committed some kind of wrong doing.  Because whichever party benefitted from the wrongdoing isn't going to agree to have it investigated, naturally enough. 
 
It is not only custody evaluators who then get an exemption from oversight and accountability.  The same issue arises if you have a psychologist who is involved in treating the family through the family court system.  Again, both parties would have to agree to have a review of the treatment records. 
 
And the same would occur with a Co-Parent Manager, because again you'd have to have the agreement of both parties for the review of records. 
 
So literally, any mental health professional who works with families will be able to avoid the consequences of violating their professional ethics because there is no way to hold them accountable. 
 
Recently, Protective Mother Susan Skipp reported the psychologist, Dr. Sydney Horowitz for fraudulent billing practices and received a response from Jolanda M. Gawinski, a supervisor in the Investigations Section of the DPH, stating, "At the advice of the Attorney General, the Department of Public Health is required to obtain releases from both custodial parents prior to obtaining information/records required to investigate complaints involving shared custody."  Since they were unable to get that from Susan Skipp's ex husband, the Department declined to investigate the complaints.
 
And this policy is coming right from the top, from the Attorney General of the State of Connecticut!
 
A policy of this kind pretty much guarantees that mental health professionals working with Family Court in the State of Connecticut have complete immunity. 
 
Personally, my experience has been that it doesn't even matter if you have joint medical records which limits access to the evidence you need to assertain whether there is any culpability.  I had the experience of submitting a complaint against an unethical Co-Parent Manager and did not need medical records of any kind to prove the wrong doing.  The Department sat on the Complaint for a full year before dismissing it in a two sentence letter. 
 
The bottom line is, the Department doesn't want to involve itself in cases where Family Court professionals are involved.  The end result is that these mental health professionals show a blatant disregard for ethical practice and have a cavalier disregard for the clients' constitutional and due process rights, as well as their rights as mental health clients. 
 
In essence, the Department of Public Health has opened up the hen house and invited all the neighborhood foxes in for a feast, and when you look at the sums of money involved, it truly is a feast.  I paid $14,000 for the piece of shit custody evaluation in my case.  How much did you guys pay?  I'll bet that much and more. 
 
The comment section is below!  Tell me YOUR war stories! 

Friday, September 16, 2011

CUSTODY EVALUATIONS: WHAT THEY DON'T TELL YOU!

I was recently browsing through the web, checking out google and yahoo and having a great time looking up the term "custody evaluations".  There's all sorts of information out there regarding custody evaluations--condemnation of the evaluations, advise on how to beat them, suggestions for making a good impression if you undergo one. 

I can still recall the day when I sat with my former (eventually fired) attorney and discussed the custody evaluation.  What interests me now is the fact that I was never informed that I actually didn't have to have a custody evaluation.  I know many couples who dispute custody and yet do not follow through with a custody evaluation.  Why didn't I think of that?  Like many, I just did what my lawyer told me to do. 

Anyway, I was just reviewing a brief summary of what a custody evaluation is and how it is conducted on the website for CT Legal Aid.  It was a really nice overview full of great advice and sensible commentary.  But there was one, really, really, really, important fact that they didn't include.  When a mental health provider conducts a forensic custody evaluation ordered by the Court, the resulting study is not in any way confidential.  So if you and your family are the subject of a forensic custody evaluation, you do not have the right to confidentiality or the right to privacy guaranteed by the constitution.  In essence, you waive those rights. 

Now, before you go ahead and agree to a custody evaluation, if you have the choice--some people don't have the freedom to choose as I did--think about that.  I don't know about the custody evaluations carried out by family relations.  Since there isn't a whole lot of money available there, those evaluations are probably pretty short and limited in scope.  However, if you are talking about a private custody evaluation, these can be pretty lengthy--mine was almost forty pages long and single spaced--and detailed. 

Mine included a complete biography of both my ex husband and me, including very intimate information which I would never want public.  It discussed each of our children and their particular challenges and talked about our parental relationships with them. 

It made statements about my ex husband's attitude towards them which I would never want them to know, or which  I would have liked to have revealed to them myself if it became the subject of discussion when they became adults.  So that opportunity was taken out of my hands. 

The report included teacher's comments about my children which I would never wish them to find out, comments that could be quite hurtful, particularlly since they were not true. 

It also included quotations from the results of psychological reports conducted on each of us combined with the psychiatrist's personal take on those results. 

The report overall was small minded, mean spirited, derogatory and humiliating and all of it was fully available to the public for anyone to read because, again, you have no right to privacy, no right to confidentiality when you agree to a custody evaluation. 

Tell me, did you know that when you agreed to YOUR custody evaluation?  Did anyone tell you about that?  They sure didn't tell me!  Where is it written?  How would you know? 

This means that if the judge chooses to use extensive quotations from that custody evaluation in his Memorandum of Decision in your case, they are then made available to everyone in the world if it ends up being posted on the internet, which it very likely will, if you have a high conflict divorce case. 

And the justification for that?  Well, we need to maintain transparency within the judicial system.  God forbid we have any opacity or anything, particularly when there are children involved whom you might want to protect. 

One way to protect yourself in this situation is to keep the damn thing out of your file and off the record by mediating a custody agreement rather than taking it to trial.  The other option is to request that the Judge seal the report so that the public is not allowed access to it when they look at the file.  The only limitation there is that any judge can still browse through the custody evaluation when he is adjudicating any other post judgment issues that arise. 

It's a bummer folks.  But don't think that the Court sympathizes with you on this issue.  When I brought it up, the judge said, "That's what you agree to when you enter into a custody battle."  Of course, as so many women know who are victims of domestic violence, that statement is totally wrong for all sorts of reasons.  Be that as it may, be warned. 

Saturday, April 2, 2011

FACTORS CONSIDERED IN AWARDING CUSTODY IN CONNECTICUT

In the way distant past when I first started to discuss custody with my attorney, the first point he mentioned was the question of "Who is the psychological parent? (see Item #2 below)"  When I inquired further what he meant, he said, "The psychological parent is the one the children run to if a fire broke out in the house."  


Now I say, of course, that would be me.  But when I started my divorce, I was so beaten down and demoralized that I wasn't sure whether I was the psychological parent or whether my X was.  Now I am totally confident that I am the psychological parent, but then I wasn't at all.  It just tells you what a bad marriage can do to a person.  


In regard to the factors considered in awarding custody in Connecticut, there are around 17 factors that play a role and they were established by the court in the late 70s and early 80s, just around the time when women started to lose custody of their children in greater numbers.  I'm not sure if that had something to do with the development of these factors, but it is an interesting coincidence.  I'll go over each factor one by one.  They are as follows:  


1) Parenting skills, i.e. making proper meals, keeping the house and the children clean, making sure they make it to school and that they receive proper discipline.  


2) Parent's relationship and psychological or emotional ties with the child, i.e. the burning house example--would they run to you or your X if the house caught fire.  


3)  Parental character with respect to willful disobedience of court orders, i.e. are there a bunch of contempts out there on you.   This also has to do with have you ever been involved in criminal activities, did you commit adultery (yes, quaint, but it still counts), have you been caught in lies--stuff like that.


4) Willingness to facilitate visitation with the other parent.  This, I'm sure, is a very controversial factor to consider and it is one that mother's rights advocates must struggle with all the time.  Essentially, it puts you at risk as the custodial parent if you attempt to limit your children's rights with your X who may be abusing you and your children.  


5.  Past behavior as it relates to parenting ability.  I guess this means you can't just show up after filing for divorce with excellent parenting skills.  You need to have shown them over a period of time.  If this factor were truly adhered to, women who had been at home mothers wouldn't be so much at risk of losing their children, but they are.  So I'm not sure if this factor is truly considered, but it is on the list, so I'm presenting it.  


6.  Recommendations in the Family Relations report.  This is pretty much open and shut.  If you lose on the custody evaluation, you will lose in court.  


7.  Advice of the attorney for the child (GAL).  Again, if you lose the GAL, you will lose in court.  


8.  Credibility.  This speaks for itself.  Do the custody evaluator, the GAL, the court, the parents' attorney believe what you say.  If not, you are totally scr**ed.  


9.  The parent's manipulative or coercive behavior through efforts to involve the child in the marital dispute.  If it looks as though there is any parental alienation going on, (and I'm not saying I consider PAS a valid syndrom) and you may be considered the source of it, then you are, again, scr**ed.  


10.  The parent's behavior and its effect on the child.  If any of your behavior is wacky and inappropriate and it is deemed harmful to the children, then you are in trouble (a variation of scr**ed).  


11.  Continuity and stability of the environment.  If you and the children have lived in Pleasantville, CT for the last ten years and your X now wants to move the children to Timbucktoo--forget it--not going to happen.  


12.  The flexibility of each parent to best serve the psychological development and growth of the child.  This could be anything really, anything like, girls should be brought up by the parent of the same gender, to the fact that you are a stay at home parent makes you more available to the children.  It's a giant catchall that can provide an excuse for a broad range of justification.  


13.  Which parent is more willing and able to address medical and educational problems of the child and to take appropriate steps to have them treated and corrected.  I would assume that if the children have special needs this category gives either parent the opportunity to shine. If you have been the one to take the children to all their doctors's appointments and if you are the only parent who goes to school to meet with their teachers, this would qualify you as the better parent according to this measurement.


14.  A stable and familiar environment with love and attention from the grandparents.  While grandparents do not have rights in Connecticut, it certainly does make a difference if you have grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins, etc. who are willing and able to remain involved in the lives of your children.


15.  The psychological instability of one parent posing a  threat to the child's well being.  I guess that is mental illness or substance abuse.  If you have a mental illness, you are at risk of losing your children, pure and simply, even though this is not an absolute.  I know of folks with serious mental illness who are complying with their treatment programs and doing well who were able to maintain their custody of their children.  However, this issue can be deadly if wielded by a hostile lawyer hired by an abusive X.


16.  The recommendation that one parent immediately commend in-patient treatment.  This criteria most likely addresses the issue of substance abuse, if not mental illness.  If you are abusing, you can plan on losing.


17.  Visitation having an adverse effect on the child at the time.  If your child or children act out or become upset after spending time with you, this will be a clear indication that you should not have custody of that child.  If they return neglected and poorly attended to, that doesn't look good for the parent who had them.


Rightly or wrongly, all of these factors are generally part of the conversation as you, your attorney, your X, his attorney, the custody evaluator, the GAL and the judges involved in your case attempt to negotiate a final custody agreement.  In preparing for these sessions, you should write down how your manner of daily living, your relationship to the children, etc. meet these standards far better than your X does.  By doing so, you will be prepared to advocate forcefully for your own case.

The cases where these factors were developed were as follows:  Cappetti v. Cappetti, 196 Conn. 10 (1985); Seymour v. Seymour, 180 Conn. 705 (1980); Hall v. Hall, 186 Conn. 118 (1982); Stewart v. Stewart, 177 Conn. 401 (1979); Simons v. Simons, 172 Conn. 341 (1977); Yontef v. Yontef, 185 Conn. 275 (1980); Faria v. Faria, 38 Conn. Sup. 37 (1982); Ridgeway v. Ridgeway, 180 Conn. 533 (1980)

Friday, October 29, 2010

MENTAL ILLNESS AND CUSTODY

If you are a woman and you are reading this blog, you have very likely been in therapy. After all, therapy is what we women generally do, not just because we are a traditionally oppressed group and oppression generates depression, but also because we like to grow and change and fulfill our potentials and spend a lot of time talking about it while we are at it. The down side is that anyone who is or has been in therapy very likely has a diagnosis of one kind or another and that can be a problem during a high conflict divorce.



The fact that you are or have been in therapy and have a diagnosis can often be used against you, particularly during a custody dispute. It gets even more difficult if you have a diagnosis such as bipolar, schizophrenia, or borderline personality disorder--the latter is often described as "the diagnosis from hell" because therapists hate to work with patients who have it because it is often difficult, though by no means impossible, to treat.



If you are a mental health client, your ex may attempt to take custody of your children from you or attempt to prevent you from seeing them at all. Let me say right away, as a mental health consumer you have the constitutional right to parent your children just the same as everyone else. You cannot be automatically denied custody or access to your children based upon the fact that you have a mental health diagnosis. There has to be due process and there has to be a careful consideration of the circumstances.



If you have a mental health diagnosis and your ex brings up your diagnosis in order to take your children from you this is what you can do:



1. Don't panic. Just because the issue of your mental health has come up, you still have rights. You are a good mother and, if you do the right things, you will be able to prove it. Now is the time to project an image of calm, confidence, and maturity. Practice this every day in front of the mirror. I know many people with mental health diagnoses, with biopolar disorder, etc. who still ended up with the custody of their children at the end of a high conflict divorce. If you play your cards right, it will work out just fine for you as well;



2. Make sure that, at this time, you have a good relationship with your therapist. Now is not the time to point out any areas of dissatisfaction you have with his or her work with you. Make sure that you are cooperating fully with your treatment program, particularly in regard to complying with any medication you are required to take. Now is not the time to see if you would do better without medication, and now is not the time to verbalize any intention you might have in the future to stop taking your medication;



3. Because of stigma, in a high conflict divorce where a mom has a mental health diagnosis, lawyers and mental health professionals often seek to make character the basis of the discussion regarding custody. It is your job to switch the conversation from the issue of character to the question of who is doing the job of parenting.



When you meet with the custody evaluator, point out to him or her who changes the children's diapers, who feeds them breakfast, lunch and dinner, who picks out their clothing and makes sure they are dressed properly, who takes them to medical and dental appointments, who meets with their teachers and mental health counselors, who helps them with their homework, who comforts them when they fall and hurt their knees, who gets them off the bus, and who puts them to bed at night, etc. If you are like me, 90 percent of the time mom is the one who does these things.



Also, if you are doing most of the parenting, the next question is, are the children ok or what is known as "good enough". If you did most of the parenting, and they are OK, then it is probably because of what you did, and if what you did led to "good enough" results, you must be "good enough" to remain as the custodial parent.



So every time a lawyer or a mental health professional wants to talk about custody in the light of character, i.e., "mother is inflexible" or something of that nature, you need to keep everyone's attention on, "mother does most of the job of parenting, does the following jobs which constitute parenting, and the kids are OK."



Keep on directing the conversation towards what are you doing, rather than wallowing around in vague judgmental assessments of who you are as a person which are hardly relevant.



Also, what do we mean by OK. Do we mean perfection? No. We mean the kids are getting to school most of the time, they are dressed well most of the time, they are clean and well fed most of the time, they are well behaved most of the time.



If you try really hard and still don't get custody, this is not the end of the world. You still have the right to see your children regularly on weekends and during the week, and I would take full advantage of that. If things end up worse and you have supervised visitation, still take advantage of it.



In everything you do and everything you say, remain calm and confident and reasonable. Make THEM feel bad. Make THEM doubt their reality, when they see the strength and dignity you show under the most difficult of circumstances.

Ultimately, your children will grow older, they will understand your dilemma and they will have respect for your struggle. But it will be hard for them to do so if you let yourself fall apart.



Also, remember, a custody evaluation is only current for a single year. After that you can request another evaluation, or request changes and improvements in your custody agreement based upon an additional period of time in which you have continued to show how outstanding you are as a parent. Custody is the one area of divorce law where there are ongoing opportunities for changes and improvements, so never lose hope.



Also, remember stigma is alive and well, so if you have to fight a custody battle because of a mental health diagnosis, this is nothing to be ashamed of. It's not personal. It has nothing to do with you. It's just the territory. It's just like being black in the pre Dr. Martin Luther King south. It has nothing to do with your value as a human being. Keep on fighting and keep on standing up for yourself and remember that within the context of the history of the oppression of people with mental health diagnoses, your struggle is meaningful and you ARE making a difference both for yourself and others.

Saturday, September 25, 2010

CUSTODY EVALUATIONS

The first thing you want to know about custody evaluations in Connecticut is don't have one. What this adds up to is trial by psychiatrist, and the bottom line is that this means a trial by an individual therapist's opinions, intuitions, personal biases and prejudices along with a dash of psychobabble to make it sound legitimate.

Keep in mind that when a guy like your ex disputes custody, 70% of the time they get it.

Once a report is written, it is highly unlikely that a court will ever dispute the results and the report will be in your court file for the remainder of the litigation that occurs in your case. Yes, it will be sealed--sealed from the public--but not to the judge who will review it every time he or she has a question about you. And if the custody evaluator determines that you are a person of bad character, no matter what issue you bring before the court, no matter how clearcut the rightness of your position, the judge will rule against you. Sorry guys, that's just the way it goes.

If you want an excellent review of how custody evaluations are conducted, how men position themselves to win them, and what you need to do to prepare for them, again, I can't emphasize enough go to www.deltabravo.net, the most detailed and effective website for divorce and custody issues as men are advised to see it.
 
And folks, you need to know what your abusive ex is thinking and how your abusive ex is conducting his strategy in order to develop your own strategy for beating it. Believe me on this one!

Many people advising you on custody evaluations will tell you to "Just tell the truth." Don't be so silly. Think about the truth, but spin it your way, and if the truth doesn't benefit you don't mention it unless you are asked. Plus, keep in mind, most people like your ex are abusers who are highly practiced and manipulative liars and your truths will pale in comparison to his lies and you will lose, lose, lose. So, the truth thing is good, but be darned cautious about it.

Another good point that is really important is that, if you can avoid it, never go into a meeting with the custody evaluator without your lawyer. If you can't take your lawyer, tape record every session, and if you can't do that, immediately after each session sit down and write up every last thing you can remember about what was said and send it to your lawyer for his file only. This way, if anything shows up on your evaluation that you don't like, you can challenge it with your documentation.

Once the custody evaluation has been completed, unless the evaluator loves you and your custody is assured, schedule a deposition in order to examine the custody evaluator and undercut any of the negative points he or she made about you that could cause you trouble later. You will live to regret it if you don't do an immediate deposition of the custody evaluator--you will big time regret it. Oh, and if the custody evaluator receives any letters or written reports as the basis of the evaluation, make sure you get a copy of all of them so you know exactly what was said. Also, if you think a witness misdirected the custody evaluator, make sure you get the facts out to prove that person wrong, either through a deposition or through documentation that you have that refutes the son of a gun's testimony. (I'm saying "son of a gun", but you know what I really want to call that person)

Finally, cruise google, print out a few of the guidelines for custody evaluators so you respond to the process in a sophisticated way and shut the evaluator down if he is doing something he shouldn't be doing.

And, last but not least, I don't know what it is, but the majority of custody evaluators I hear about my friends going to in the State of Connecticut are in their 70s. Try someone younger. I mean, in the days 70 year old clinicians were in medical school Freud was king. Is that what you want??? I don't think so! So good luck. Let me know how it works out for you.