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 BARRY GOLDSTEIN. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BARRY GOLDSTEIN. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 7, 2015



For those who are interested, Barry Goldstein will be on Channel 8, WTNH news this evening at 11:00pm to talk about the murder of Aaden Moreno. I hope everyone will take a moment to switch on their TVs and listen to Barry's remarks. The State of CT needs to learn from this completely unnecessary death and not sweep it under the rug. We must hold our representatives responsible for this terrible tragedy. We testified in droves last year about judges behaving exactly with this kind of indifference and disrespect in response to our pleas on behalf of our children and in return Senators and Representatives laughed at us and ridiculed us as "angry" and "disgruntled" and attempted to slander our spokesperson, Rep. Minnie Gonzalez. This is the end result of that kind of irresponsible and disrespectful behavior at a time when concerned citizens of CT sounded the alarm and warned Representatives that this day was coming.



"You are probably aware that in a recent two year period we found news stories about 175 children murdered by abusive fathers involved in contested custody.  And like this case many of the other murderers were given the access by the courts to kill their children.  Dr. Dianne Bartlow wrote a chapter in for my next book with Dr. Hannah.  She interviewed judges and court administrators in the communities where the tragedies occurred.  The question she asked is one we should be asking now.  Did the courts create any reforms in response to the tragedy to better protect children.  Surprisingly the answer was no because the judges thought the murder in their community was an exception.  This murder in CT is not an exception but part of a pattern.  

Whatever we want to say about this judge [Judge Barry Pinkus], if he knew what was going to happen he would have given the mother the protective order.  He didn't know because the courts are not using practices that make the health and safety of children the highest priority as it should be.  For every child who is murdered, thousands more suffer significant harm but don't make the headlines because they are alive.

The solution is the Safe Child Act which would require that the health and safety of children must be the first priority in all custody and visitation decisions.  And it provides reforms so judges can recognize the danger.  This tragedy can be an opportunity to say never again.  Our side needs to unite behind the Safe Child Act and not divide among many other ideas some of which are helpful but ultimately not the solution that would have saved this baby."

Friday, May 15, 2015



The mission of the Stop Abuse Campaign is to stop abuse.  First, there is the right of every single victim is not to be a victim at all.  Victims rights for us should start before victims are even made.  

In regard to adverse childhood experiences--you only need two. One being separated from your mother, two your father is an alcoholic, and your chances of being an alcoholic are doubled.  Five incidents improve the chances that a person will be an intravenous drug user.  

Adverse childhood experiences lead to incredible damage for children.  

Stop them before they start.  

Our website produces blogs each day on prevention of abuse.  We advocate for changed public policies.  We have an enduring belief that abuse and neglect can be prevented by changes in public policy.  

Today we do know what to do, the science exists, i.e. The Quincy Solution, The Child Safe Act.  These approaches will stop the nonsense going on in family courts today.  The programs we advocate for, everyone of them is evidenced based.  They are researched.  The problem with abuse and neglect can stop.  All we have to do is change public policy.  

F.Y.I., in two weeks we hope these policies will be introduced in New York.  

Prevention is a local business.  It isn't something for which you can go and knock on the federal government's door.  Each state has to pass this legislation.  We need to go community by community.  

The relationship between domestic violence and child abuse is very close, so when you limit DV, you limit the other.  

So how can you help?  Here is what you can do.  We have put together a basket of public policy, sort of a manifesto, and now what we have to do is sell it.  Because when we enact that, abuse stops, including DV.  

What we need is your help and money.  If you can, go to our website.  If you can make a donation on a recurring monthly basis, we can start budgeting it.  This includes marketing brochures, etc.  A small contribution every month is better than one large one.  

There's different kinds of volunteer work you can do--you can do P.R., mail chimp, word press--or else you can lobby or just spread the faith.  Evangelize the news to as many people as you can, share with them on social media.  The more you share, the less we have to spend on promoting them.  

Recruit your friends--have tupperware type parties but on instead share the Stop Abuse Campaign.  Talk about the sexual abuse problem we have in this campaign.  Talk about how abused mothers who will find it difficult to parent because of the abuse.  Then pass a hat and get ten dollars from each person and we'll take care of it very well.  

Andrew Willis is not a lobbyist, but still the Stop Abuse Campaign needs to find ways to get the program funded.  

We need at least two protective mothers who can act as administrators in groups on Facebook.  

Working together we should be able to stop these problems.  

We are looking for professionals.  

We are working on grants and sponsorships from businesses.  

We are putting together consistent, regular, content online regarding adverse childhood experiences.  More people need to hear about what we are doing.  Up to 20,000 - 30,000 are visiting our website per month, and we need more.  

So we are counting on you!  Every single one of us here at the Conference is capable of making change happen.  And I know that.  All of us.  I know that because we are doing that in New York with a group of activists who have no background in politics.  

So many of us have no experience in changing laws, but we are going to do it now.  Each one of us has a sphere of influence, people in positions of authority, others who have considerable finances available.  Let us know about these folks and we will help you to connect with them so they know how important our work is.  

I have reasonably high hopes that we can succeed in this work.  We have activists in states everywhere, i.e. Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Florida, Ohio, etc. Together, we can make this nonsense stop.  

Barry Goldstein adds:  We need to tell media when violence occurs that The Quincy Solution could have stopped the domestic violence.  

A few years ago we were in Washington, D.C. intending to lobby at the House of Representatives when they decided to shut down government.  We were concerned we couldn't meet with political leaders.  Around that time, we noticed an article indicating there was a problem with poison ivy in the parks around town.  Apparently, goats love to eat poison ivy and were positioned in parks to control the plant.  However, when the government was shut down, then the goats had to be sent home.  

Goats protect their kids, just as we protect our children.  Since that time, we have taken on the symbolism of these goats.  They do what everyone should do which is protecting their kids.  At the conference, we honored the Netherlands for protecting Holly Collins and her children.  The ambassador from the Netherlands said, "It is really very simple.  We must protect the kids.  And this is what we are here for."  


Monday, March 16, 2015


Testimony in support of Assembly Bill 5505

Submitted by Barry Goldstein and Melanie Blow of Stop Abuse Campaign

On December 1, 2014, I said goodbye to a dear friend, minutes before

she got picked up by the van that was taking her to federal prison.

My friend kidnapped her daughter to keep her from a father who abused

her and let a convicted sex offender spend the night with her.

I advocate for child abuse survivors. I know so many adults who would

have loved to have the kind of mother my friend is. She was willing to

protect her daughter from anything, including a

very harmful custody decision.

Neither my friend nor I will defend kidnapping a child, ever. Nor will

we defend allowing a system to be so broken that perpetrators of domestic

violence are routinely given custody of their children in a divorce. We will

not defend giving an overburdened DCF the de facto role of court evaluator,

costing taxpayers money with every investigation and forcing children to

suffer instance after instance of abuse. We won’t defend allowing a parent

accused of sexually abusing their child to win custody of that child 85%

of the time, when those accusations are deliberately false 2% of the time.

The crisis in Connecticut’s, and America’s, family courts started with the

belief that women and children were the property of their husband/father.

As we started to learn about domestic violence, little was done to help

family courts protect children better. The Adverse Childhood Experience

research of the late ‘90’s proved that all child abuse even abuse that doesn’t

result in severe physical injuries impacts a child’s future health, meaning all

abuse is a matter of life and death. And we still haven’t fixed the system.

Assembly bill 5055 is remarkable for taking some solid steps to fix the situation.

The Saunders’ study from the U.S. Department of Justice proves many

evaluators, judges and lawyers don’t have the specific knowledge necessary

to recognize and respond to domestic violence and related abuse. True

reports aren’t believed and Connecticut’s children aren’t protected. Many

professionals defensively try to justify their errors and retaliate against

moms like my friend who are trying to protect their children. Assembly

bill 5055 seeks to provide some accountability for the professionals. And

it seeks to make the health and safety of children the first priority in all

custody and visitation decisions. I cannot understand how any other standard

can be tolerated when so many children are being jeopardized by

outdated practices from the 1970s.

As I said goodbye to my friend in December, she told me how proud she

is of the advocate I’ve become. I told her how proud I am of the woman

and mother she is. Both of us want to save children. She went up against

a court system for a few days to protect her child from a hellish life. And

now I am asking the Connecticut state legislator to protect the thousands of

children in your state who are suffering from preventable, predictable,

court ordered abuse.

Because ignoring the experts and research translates to ignoring the

battered mothers, their children and their suffering.

Saturday, March 7, 2015


Question: Mr. Sorrentino, you and your ex-wife share joint legal custody, correct?

Answer:  Yes.

Question:  And you've also alleged she's violated the spirit of joint legal custody?

Answer:  Yes.

Question:  In other words, she doesn't confer with you about decisions surrounding your son?

Answer:  Yes.

You will note that, Attorney Kevin Finch, father's attorney doesn't ask about Kathi Sorrentino's adherence to the letter of the agreement.  The question might have been much harder for Mr. Sorrentino to answer without lying had the letter of the agreement been in question. 

But how are you supposed to defend yourself about questions in regard to the spirit of the agreement.  What is that, truly?  Either you do or do not confer--yes or no.  Kathi Sorrentino has stated that she did confer and she has the evidence to prove it, while Sam Sorrentino does not.

We have already seen how Mr. Sorrentino misrepresented what was going on in regard to Storm applying to private high school--Notre Dame.  The email record confirms that Mr. Sorrentino was perfectly well informed regarding what was going on with the plans for private school. Where else did he have complaints?

He complained that he was not getting information about school events in a timely fashion, "I would find out after the fact about activities, parenting--parent conferences, things of this nature."  Again, this is simply not true because the evidence Kathi Sorrentino provided indicates that she provided him with full information.  But lets put that all aside.  You see, this is the thing.  You have joint custody meaning that both of you bear equal responsibility for being on top of school matters.  Ms. Sorrentino is not your Mommy.  So if you, Mr. Sorrentino, want to know what is going on in school, you need to speak to the Principal or the secretary in the main office like every other non-custodial parent in the United States so that you receive all of the school notifications.

You yourself were fully aware of this, Mr. Sorrentino, because in your testimony you stated, "I had indicated this to Ms. Sorrentino that I need to be aware of these things.  She--her response was that I need to work it out with the school."  Exactly, you need to work it out with the school!  It is not as if the school system has never ever dealt with a non-custodial parent before!  My ex has signed up with each school my kids have been in and they send him an exact duplicate of every flyer, notification, and school bulletin that they send to me.  They even call him and tell him of every snow day and school delay, even when he is out of state and can't do anything about it.

But this is the spirit of the thing, since we aren't talking about the letter.  If Mr. Sorrentino wants to know what is going on in school with his son, he is well within his rights to obtain the emails of every last one of his child's teachers, the guidance counselor and the principal and he can request regular weekly updates from each one of them.  Furthermore, he has the option to volunteer at the school.  He could actually volunteer to be a member of the local parent teacher organization.  Nothing stops him!  Unless, the point is not to co-parent, but instead to sit on your duff and complain, point fingers at your ex wife, and spend your time legally stalking her through the court system!

This is where we return our attention to Dr. Eric Fraser, graduate of Miami Institute of Psychology, and PAS Tzar. Here we have a GAL who is determined to prove that Kathi Sorrentino was alienating the children from the father. 

But you see, again, here's the thing, I have in front of me a notarized letter written by Ms. Willie Brevard, a mental health professional, stating, "I do not find Kathi to be an alienator."  And also Brevard states, Kathi always encouraged the relationship between Storm and his father and continues to do so.  Storm loves his dad and has always spoken highly of him.  Kathi has always put the well being of her children first." 

This doesn't sound like a person with parental alienation syndrome to me! 

Then there is the problem of the abuse.  At one point, Mr. Sorrentino allegedly threatened to commit suicide in front of his ex-wife and children.  Sounds like, by doing that, he did a good job of alienating himself!

Predictably, at a later hearing Mr. Sorrentino claimed that he had never threatened to kill himself in front of Kathi or his children.  When Kathi Sorrentino pointed out that his testimony was contradicted by a letter of apology he himself wrote to Kathi stating that he was sorry that he had made those threats to kill himself, he denied that he wrote the letter and declared that it was a forgery.  The bad news for Mr. Sorrentino, however, is that a handwriting expert confirmed that he did, in fact, write it. 

In addition to threatening suicide, Mr. Sorrentino was reportedly sexually inappropriate with the older daughter (aged 15 when it happened) to the point that at the time of the divorce she was allowed to visit or not visit her father on her own terms. 

Again, this is the point, even among PAS advocates, it is well recognized that the presence of abuse rules out the diagnosis of parental alienation syndrome. 

Why didn't Dr. Eric Fraser bring up some of these issues in his report to explain where Ms. Sorrentino was coming from?  Clearly, because he didn't want any inconvenient facts to get in the way of his pet PAS theories in connection to this good mother.  Then when Ms. Sorrentino attempted to bring these issues up in court, Judge Corinne Klatt refused to allow the information onto the record even though she didn't have any solid, legal basis for that denial. 

If the court is going to censor all the information that comes before it and edit anything out of the record it doesn't want to hear, then naturally you get the kind of inappropriate ruling that this Court ended up with. 

I also want to point out that not only was there the presence of interpersonal abuse, there was also economic abuse at play in the Sorrentino case.  Again, this would rule out the diagnosis of parental alienation disorder in this case.

Originally, at the time of dissolution, Sam Sorrentino was required to pay $1000.00 per week in child support and alimony with the express intent that Kathi Sorrentino would use that money to pay off the mortgage on her home which was in his name.  However, not long after the divorce, Mr. Sorrentino had his child support and alimony reduced to $204 per week so Kathi was unable to pay that mortgage. 

Then, around 2009 even though the bank was not taking the home to foreclosure yet, Mr. Sorrentino filed a motion for contempt against Kathi for failure to pay the mortgage. While the bank was willing to work out a plan, Judge Gould, who was considering the motion said the process would take too long, ignored the bank and ordered Ms. Sorrentino to pay the back mortgage or else sign an agreement that required her to assume more of her ex-husband's debts. 

When she refused to do so, Judge Gould put her in a maximum security prison in Niantic, CT for a week. 

So this is a case where Mr. Sorrentino has freely taken advantage of his superior legal position in Family Court to bully, harass, and legally abuse his ex wife.  And then he goes around complaining, poor me, my kids don't like me and it's her fault.  I don't know that there are many children who are going to like the kind of father who would put their mother in jail, particularly when they have a mother who is as devoted to their welfare as Kathi Sorrentino is to hers.

Then, to add insult to injury, Kathi Sorrentino tried to defend herself from the Court's threats to put her in jail and impose unwarranted debts on her by going on the Lisa Wexler Radio Show to explain the situation.  Like many victims of family court she hoped that the pressure from local media would force the Court to act properly.  While she was being interviewed, the children were kept in a sound proof room where they were unable to hear the show.  Nonetheless, Dr. Eric Frazer used that situation also as the basis for his claim of Parental Alienation Syndrome stating wrongly that the children were in the room with Kathi when she was being interviewed.  Well, no, the record shows that they were not in the room and, in fact, Dr. Frazer was simply speaking carelessly if not outright lying.

But the bottom line is, this incident took place in 2010 and the hearing on custody took place in February and March of 2014.  That was a whole four years prior and was hardly relevant to the case at present.  In fact, I question the legality of even bringing it up.  In my view, the only reason  the Court allowed information on the Wexler show into evidence along with the inaccurate speculations regarding what happened at the show was to punish Kathi Sorrentino for having the nerve to try to defend herself or speak out publically about her plight. 

This is how the Connecticut Judicial Branch has succeeded in shutting off the flow of information to the public regarding the many Protective Mothers who have unjustly lost custody of their children, by silencing these mothers with threats of jail, loss of their children and other equally vicious punishments.   

Monday, November 11, 2013


Barry Goldstein, of the NOMAS Child Custody Task Group states the following:
"Mothers and domestic violence advocates have been complaining for many years about problems in the custody court system that have resulted in large numbers of children being sent to live with abusive fathers while safe, protective mothers are denied any meaningful relationship with their children.  Courts have tended to dismiss the complaints by referring to the mothers as “disgruntled litigants.”  As more concern about the problem has been expressed and more research performed, the mothers’ complaints have been confirmed.  Early in 2010, a new book co-edited by Dr. Maureen T. Hannah and Barry Goldstein, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ABUSE and CHILD CUSTODY will be published and end any doubts that there is a pattern of mistakes made in the custody court system.  These mistakes have caused thousands of cases to be mishandled and placed the lives and well being of battered women and their children in jeopardy."
To read more of this article, please click on the link below: 

Thursday, October 17, 2013


Preface:  The California Protective Parent Group recently met with our representatives in Washington, D.C. to submit documentation regarding the damage protective mothers experience as a result of HHS funded access and visitation programs.  The following is the cover letter to that material as well as the documentation.  See below:
October, 2013

RE:  Wasteful programs through Department of Health and Human Services/Administration of Children and Families
Dear Congress Member:
During this time of sequestration and fragile economic recovery, it is important to eliminate wasteful Federal funding for useless or harmful programs. We are concerned that certain Department of Health and Human Services, Administration of Children and Families programs under the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program not only waste taxpayer dollars, but lead to fraud and may harm the very citizens whom the programs are designed to assist.
On July 17, 2013, a hearing titled “What Really Works: Evaluating Current Efforts to Help Families Support their Children and Escape Poverty” was held by the Subcommittee on Human Resources of the Committee on Ways and Means.  
Congressman Dave Reichert (R-WA) said, “[I]n some cases, high-quality evaluations have revealed that some programs previously believed to be effective actually had no impact. In other cases, social programs expected to improve the lives of low-income adults or children actually caused harm – meaning those who did not receive the service or benefit avoided the detrimental effects caused by the program because they did not participate.”
Both failings identified by Chairman Reichart are amply demonstrated by the Healthy Marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood programs under Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (part A of Title IV; 45 CFR Section 603), and Office of Child Support Enforcement (part D of Title IV; 45 CFR Chapter III).
Marriages and divorces have been steadily declining in the same ratio to each other since 1975, ( according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( There is no evidence that Healthy Marriage Promotion funding has made any difference whatsoever in improving marriages, despite massive federal spending since 1997.  None of the well-intended funded programs seem to have shown any real or lasting effect, including public advertising campaigns and education on the value of marriage; marriage skills training, divorce reduction programs, marriage mentoring programs, and reduced disincentives to marriage.
This $75 million grant program is a waste of taxpayer dollars and should be eliminated.
On the other hand, active harm has resulted from the Responsible Fatherhood Initiative. Social engineering programs designed to turn irresponsible fathers into good fathers have failed to benefit, and unintentionally endangered, children.  Despite the goals of promoting responsible fatherhood, enhancing relationship skills, controlling aggressive behavior, disseminating information on the causes of domestic violence and child abuse, education, counseling, encouraging child support payments, providing work services, a massive media campaign for fatherhood and a special and questionable focus on ex-prisoners, there is no evidence that children are better off. In fact, there is evidence that children are being increasingly harmed by the interventions.
Although some programs may help fathers get jobs and pay child support, other programs appear to encourage fathers to get custody and receive child support. These are not ordinary good fathers being encouraged to become involved with, and get custody of, nursing infants and small children. These are drug abusers, batterers, child abusers, rapists, convicted pedophiles, convicted child pornographers, and other dangerous felons. One of the irresponsible fathers who received support from fatherhood initiative funded programs was John Mohammad, the Beltway Sniper. These fathers cannot be turned into upstanding citizens by uniting them with their children. Nor can children be expected to turn them into good fathers.
Such irresponsible and violent fathers appear to be referred to aggressive attorneys by some programs, and successfully receive custody and child support 70% of the time, according to research. The mothers are frequently not represented. The purpose of the fatherhood funding is to improve the lives of children, but being removed from a safe primary parent and forced into the care of an abuser or criminal is not an improvement. Custody litigation has become a multi-million dollar industry that encourages fraud due in part to large fees charged by unregulated private professionals appointed by courts. Children’s human rights are being violated and many are maimed and killed by irresponsible fathers. The long-term negative consequences to these children create exponential costs to society, in suffering of children, in dollars and cents and in the health of our society.  
This $75 million grant program is a waste of taxpayer dollars and does harm, and should be eliminated.



There have been multiple audits of the $16 billion TANF program. In June 2012, GAO director Kay Brown wrote:
“In fact, in fiscal year 2011, federal TANF and state expenditures for purposes other than cash assistance totaled 71 percent of all expenditures. This stands in sharp contrast with 27 percent spent for purposes other than cash assistance in fiscal year 1997, when states first implemented TANF. Beyond the cash assistance rolls, the total number of families assisted is not known, as we have noted in our previous work…While states have devoted significant amounts of the block grant as well as state funds to these and other activities, little is known about the use of these funds. Existing TANF oversight mechanisms focus more on the cash assistance and welfare-to-work components of the block grant. For example, when states use TANF funds for some purposes, they are not required to report on funding levels for specific services and how those services fit into a strategy or approach for meeting TANF goals. In effect, there is little information on the numbers of people served by TANF-funded programs other than cash assistance, and there is no real measure of workload or of how services supported by TANF and state TANF-related funds meet the goals of welfare reform.”
We need a full GAO fiscal and performance audit of past Healthy Marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood $150 million grants to determine if tax dollars were wasted, if fraud has been committed, and if children were placed at risk with abusive fathers as a result of these expenditures.  Are TANF goals met by such items as a media campaigns or home maintenance counseling, for example? It seems unlikely. Is marriage promotion appropriate and, if so, is there measurable success? It appears not.  Are job programs, domestic violence and parenting programs provided by other programs? It appears these are duplicative programs. This is not good governance.
In most, if not all states, the amount of a child support award is directly influenced by custodial time share, thus making children into financial commodities.  Child Support Enforcement, in turn, creates a perverse financial incentive to use children for financial gain, since an increase in parenting time for a non-custodial parent equals a decrease in his/her support obligation.  Likewise, a decrease in parenting time for the non-custodial parent equals an increase in child support to the custodial parent.  This linkage of child support and custodial time share instigates custody litigation for financial gain, often leaving children in custodial situations that are not in their best interests.  This outcome not only wastes resources, but greatly harms children and families.
There is a simple solution to this problem. Federal funding should be withheld from any state that does not pass laws to terminate the linkage between child support and parenting time.  Such laws would reduce costs for Child Support Enforcement, save taxpayers money, and benefit children and families by reducing custody litigation.  
Citizens presume the Federal government will use taxpayer dollars wisely, to do measurable good and not do harm. We expect an efficient, effective government. We expect our taxes to be well-spent. We are shocked by the lack of oversight and accountability in these programs and strongly urge you to disallow funding.  
We call for a thorough investigation into the waste, fraud and abuse of these Department of Health and Human Services programs through the Office of the Inspector General, along with Congressional oversight hearings on the systemic failure to ensure custodial safety of abused children.

Wednesday, November 10, 2010


I have spoken on this blog about our natural allies--folks such as the Protective Mother's Alliance, Lundy Bancroft, and Dr. Susan Weitzman who has documented upscale abuse.  Another person you might consider investigating is Attorney Barry Goldstein of New Jersey.  

Barry Goldstein has been working on behalf of the victims of domestic violence for around 30 years, so he has a great deal of experience.  He has also worked with the Community Change Project of the Volunteer Counseling Service counseling abusers.  I have spoken to other advocates about Attorney Goldstein and have heard only good information regarding his involvement in the area of domestic violence and the services he has provided, often pro bono.  

He has a website which can be located at the following URL:  

His website is not supposed to be taken as legal advice, but it does provide extensive information regarding the legal issues so many of us in high conflict divorces have to deal with.  He also provides information on up-to-date domestic violence research which can be helpful in developing strategies in your case.  

Upfront I will tell you that Barry Goldstein is no longer practicing law as a result of retaliation by the corrupt judicial system in New York.  However, I'm sure that he could provide a good deal of advice which, although by no means legal advice, could be helpful in helping you move in the right directions.  He can be contacted at:  

Also, Attorney Goldstein has recently published a new book entitled "Scared to Leave, Afraid to Stay:  Paths From Family Violence to Safety" which tells the story of ten women as they left their abusers seeking a better life.  These are real stories, but Attorney Goldstein has changed their names in order to protect their identities.  The book talks about the courage of these women as well as the kind of legal issues that affected their flight towards freedom.  The book has been published by Robert D. Reed Publishers and is available in bookstores and I recommend it highly.  

It is important to become informed and investigate all of your options and potential supporters.   I located Attorney Barry Goldstein during one of my research sessions on google and found his website really helpful.  Give it a shot, and let me know what you think!