This is just a followup for all of you interested in the activities of the Shared Parenting Counsel and HB 6085. I was able to investigate further regarding this bill. As of January 25, 2011 this bill has been referred to the Joint Committee on the Judiciary Committee. I will continue to keep my eye out regarding the progress of this bill, as should you. Meanwhile, I urge you all to contact the sponsor of this bill and let him know about your opposition to this bill in no uncertain terms. As you know, HB 6085 is a bill which attempts to validate the hocus pocus concept of parental alienation and institute legal consequences should it be determined in court that a parent committed parental alienation.
The person you need to hold accountable for sponsoring this ridiculous bill in the State of Connecticut is:
Rep. Emil Altobello, (D-CT 82 District)
He can be reached at the following:
4015 Legislative Office Building
Hartford, CT 06106-1591
Phone: 860-240-8585
Fax: 860-240-0206
Email Address: www.housedems.ct.gov/Altobello/index.asp
Showing posts with label ESTEEMED OPPOSITION. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ESTEEMED OPPOSITION. Show all posts
Sunday, March 6, 2011
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
OINK! THE SHARED PARENTING COUNCIL OF WEST HARTFORD, CT and HB 6085
In our midst, folks, right in West Hartford, is an organization that has the potential to cause substantial problems for Protective Mothers here in Connecticut who are already suffering enough.
Let me just go straight to the point and let you know what the problem is with this organization.
In 2011, this organization is advertising its sponsorship and support for proposed legislation which is as follows: HB 6085: An Act Concerning Parental Alienation.
This is the wording of the proposed bill: Purpose: To establish an offense of parental alienation in order to protect a child from acts of one parent that are intended to break the emotional bond between the other parent and the child. Text of the bill: That the general statutes be amended to establish an offense of parental alienation, which shall (1) consist of, but not be limited to, acts of one parent to interfere with the parent-child relationship of the other parent by means of phone or electronic communication or interference with a child visitation schedule, and (2) constitute abuse against the child for the purposes of the general statutes, except that the penalty shall be one hundred dollars for the first offense and the loss of any right to sole-custody for the second offense.
As you know, the concept of parental alienation is a bogus concept promoted by father's rights groups as a way to attack protective mothers. A bill such as this has tremendous potential to be used as a weapon of harassment.
Furthermore, my understanding is that the concept of parental alienation is a debunked theory that was developed by Dr. Howard Gardner who, I understand, was a pedophile who eventually committed suicide. But before he died, however, he apparently testified as a professional expert witness regarding parental alienation in numerous court cases and caused substantial damage to women who were attempting to protect their children from harm.
I myself was terrorized by my GAL making false accusations of parental alienation against me and if such accusations can be invented and disseminated so easily and cause such extensive damage even though there is no basis for the accusations, legislation such as HB 6085 which is sponsored by the so called Shared Parenting Council is absolutely dangerous legislation and we are obligated to work as hard as we can to stop it.
Just to let you know a little bit more about the organization which is sponsoring this horrific bill, the mission of the Shared Parenting Council is "to obtain the presumption of equal parenting opportunities before the law regardless of gender." What the Shared Parenting Council states is that they are working towards presumed joint physical custody in the state of Connecticut.
The Council believes that "custody law in Connecticut should be oriented around the need to promote frequent and continued contacts between children and their mother and father" and it "seeks a framework that promotes active involvement of both parents in the lives of their children."
In general, I agree with goals that promote the relationship between children and their parents, but the idea of joint "physical" custody to achieve those kinds of results strikes me as tremendously disruptive to the lives of children. Also, here we can see how values that we would respect, such as promoting the relationship between parents and children, is used as a trojan horse into order to attack women and more specifically protective mothers.
The Shared Parenting Council is quite open regarding how it intends to achieve its goals. They say they intend to work "with the state legislature, [and] nonprofit groups" and they intend to lobby these groups in order "to promote change in Connecticut's legal and regulatory framework."
I tell you, friends, we need to be afraid, I mean really afraid of a group that intends to promote a fascist father's rights compaign against protective mothers on an ongoing basis here in Connecticut. And I say fascist father's rights to distinguish between those groups that are fighting in support of defending fathers who have legitimate concerns related to custody issues versus those who are conducting a hate compaign against protective mothers and their children.
On a more positive note, I truly believe that the members of the Shared Parenting Council, in their right minds and provided with sufficient information to expand their vision, would shift more in our direction and become allies in the fight to support protective mother's and their children. In many ways, they are asking the right questions. See the article on their website entitled "Children and Custody in Connecticut: Conflict vs. Co-Parenting" by John M. Clapp & Brian Patterson. Do I agree with all that is said in this article--no--but I respect the views expressed and the time and effort that went into formulating the article.
The Shared Parenting Council invites comments on their website. Take the time to go there and let them know what you think, and be sure to be respectful of a group that clearly has good intentions, but is heading in the wrong directions. Their website address is as follows: http://sharedparentinginc.org/
Let me just go straight to the point and let you know what the problem is with this organization.
In 2011, this organization is advertising its sponsorship and support for proposed legislation which is as follows: HB 6085: An Act Concerning Parental Alienation.
This is the wording of the proposed bill: Purpose: To establish an offense of parental alienation in order to protect a child from acts of one parent that are intended to break the emotional bond between the other parent and the child. Text of the bill: That the general statutes be amended to establish an offense of parental alienation, which shall (1) consist of, but not be limited to, acts of one parent to interfere with the parent-child relationship of the other parent by means of phone or electronic communication or interference with a child visitation schedule, and (2) constitute abuse against the child for the purposes of the general statutes, except that the penalty shall be one hundred dollars for the first offense and the loss of any right to sole-custody for the second offense.
As you know, the concept of parental alienation is a bogus concept promoted by father's rights groups as a way to attack protective mothers. A bill such as this has tremendous potential to be used as a weapon of harassment.
Furthermore, my understanding is that the concept of parental alienation is a debunked theory that was developed by Dr. Howard Gardner who, I understand, was a pedophile who eventually committed suicide. But before he died, however, he apparently testified as a professional expert witness regarding parental alienation in numerous court cases and caused substantial damage to women who were attempting to protect their children from harm.
I myself was terrorized by my GAL making false accusations of parental alienation against me and if such accusations can be invented and disseminated so easily and cause such extensive damage even though there is no basis for the accusations, legislation such as HB 6085 which is sponsored by the so called Shared Parenting Council is absolutely dangerous legislation and we are obligated to work as hard as we can to stop it.
Just to let you know a little bit more about the organization which is sponsoring this horrific bill, the mission of the Shared Parenting Council is "to obtain the presumption of equal parenting opportunities before the law regardless of gender." What the Shared Parenting Council states is that they are working towards presumed joint physical custody in the state of Connecticut.
The Council believes that "custody law in Connecticut should be oriented around the need to promote frequent and continued contacts between children and their mother and father" and it "seeks a framework that promotes active involvement of both parents in the lives of their children."
In general, I agree with goals that promote the relationship between children and their parents, but the idea of joint "physical" custody to achieve those kinds of results strikes me as tremendously disruptive to the lives of children. Also, here we can see how values that we would respect, such as promoting the relationship between parents and children, is used as a trojan horse into order to attack women and more specifically protective mothers.
The Shared Parenting Council is quite open regarding how it intends to achieve its goals. They say they intend to work "with the state legislature, [and] nonprofit groups" and they intend to lobby these groups in order "to promote change in Connecticut's legal and regulatory framework."
I tell you, friends, we need to be afraid, I mean really afraid of a group that intends to promote a fascist father's rights compaign against protective mothers on an ongoing basis here in Connecticut. And I say fascist father's rights to distinguish between those groups that are fighting in support of defending fathers who have legitimate concerns related to custody issues versus those who are conducting a hate compaign against protective mothers and their children.
On a more positive note, I truly believe that the members of the Shared Parenting Council, in their right minds and provided with sufficient information to expand their vision, would shift more in our direction and become allies in the fight to support protective mother's and their children. In many ways, they are asking the right questions. See the article on their website entitled "Children and Custody in Connecticut: Conflict vs. Co-Parenting" by John M. Clapp & Brian Patterson. Do I agree with all that is said in this article--no--but I respect the views expressed and the time and effort that went into formulating the article.
The Shared Parenting Council invites comments on their website. Take the time to go there and let them know what you think, and be sure to be respectful of a group that clearly has good intentions, but is heading in the wrong directions. Their website address is as follows: http://sharedparentinginc.org/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)