Judge Weissmuller got back to business and apologized to Dr. Keith Roeder and stated that he is not trying to cause him trouble, but personally he (Judge Weissmuller) gets a lot of questions regarding his own billing and has no problem providing that information. Judge Weissmuller was just interested in Dr. Roeder's opinion on the sliding scale and is not forcing him to answer.
Dr. Keith Roeder responded that his charges are not the issue at stake. The question is how do you make mental health services affordable for all people. He thinks people should look at the range of services provided and ask the question what can you do about bills which families can't pay. There is a controversy about bills and how they are applied.
Attorney Sharon Dornfeld stated that the percentage of never married parents in conflict regarding custody disputes is increasing. The never married population is increasing and they don't like each other very much. What do you do about that group?
Dr. Roeder stated that the never married population is increasing and they don't like each other and see no benefit to the child having contact with the other parent. Yet children benefit when they have both parents involved regardless of whether the parents were ever connected. The degree of co-parenting increases if they like each other. At least the strength of marriage is that there was some compatibility and a willingness to work together in a constructive way, at least at some point. Sometimes friends can't live together, but they can work together on behalf of their children.
When asked about same sex marriages, Dr. Keith Roeder did not want to comment on them because he does not have much familiarity with the subject, but he stated that Freudian considerations would be the same in such couples.
Dr. Roeder said that he is not sure of the prevalence of high conflict divorces with PAS, but he would say that it takes a long time to resolve. He believes that with early intervention the vast majority do well.
Attorney Linda Allard stated that with a greater degree of dysfunction, it takes longer to resolve. Sometimes mental health professionals won't be successful and the intervention must be significant. Attorney Allard further stated the cross variable is that the isolation of the Dad is not necessarily alienation but due to the Dad's lack of involvement. Is he isolated or working? If he is isolated, whose fault is that? There isn't always an alienator there.
Judge Weissmuller stated that it is important to craft judicial orders to minimize conflict and to keep parties out of court, with a focus on transfer (access) which includes quick hearings. Is the party allowing access? Yes or no. People are not seeing their children. When a person is not transferring (allowing access to) the children to the other parent, what do you do? If you have co-parenting in a high conflict situation, how does that work?
Attorney Dornfeld stated that the term is "transferring custody" in Washington, but in Connecticut the term used is "access"--parental access.
Dr. Keith Roeder stated that perhaps the word "access" is a less threatening term than "transfer of custody". He stated that after a prolonged period of no-contact, people become rigidified in a number of ways which makes it more difficult to reestablish contact, thus the sooner there is an assessment the better. It is the therapist's job to engage that person in a therapeutic environment and they (the offending party) must want to be involved. There are concerns that the parent who is left out will withdraw. You don't always put people in the same room at the same time. You can send them but it is the therapist's job to engage them.
[I can't say that I agree more. This business of blaming litigants when their therapists mistreat them and abuse them has got to stop!]
The primary goal is to engage the parents in the therapeutic process and to form an alliance. You cannot do this with parents if they don't think you care. [That means engaging in collusion with the opposing attorney to the litigant, or conniving with the GAL to deprive that litigant of custody of his or her child under the guise of "therapy", probably isn't a good idea. I'm definitely on the same page here!]
There are two parts to resolving this problem, according to Dr. Keith Roeder. First, assessment should be earlier. We need the tools and techniques necessary to recognize that the situation exists. The earlier the assessment, the better.
Treatment comes next.
Some alienated parents, Dr. Roeder stated, will just withdraw and become passive in response to rejection. If Dad didn't have space, time and energy with the kids, he will withdraw and become marginalized.
"Disney Dads" feel marginalized. So how do you identify that Dad.
Representative Minnie Gonzalez asked, "What do you think of a situation where a parent requires supervised visitation, a forensic study or therapy, but the parent can't afford it so they can see their kid. Isn't this an abuse of the parent? [And I would add of the child?] She further stated that contact between parent and child must be established for the child's sake and steps need to be taken to ensure this. Even when there is domestic violence the kid wants to see the parent. If the parent is taken out of the life of the child, it will cause some kind of dysfunction in the life of the child. It is a logistical issue and something should be done about it.
[That may be true, but demanding a child who has been a witness to domestic violence have visits with the perpetrator without proper protections to the child both emotionally and physically, I think that is totally, totally wrong. I think it is unrealistic to think that if the child has seen violence or verbal abuse directed by one parent to the other, that the child will not be extremely fearful regarding his or her safety in the presence of the perpetrator, no matter how much that child might wish to connect with the offending parent. Let's not be unrealistic and go around with stars in our eyes about the very adult emotional struggles young children live through in domestic violence situations, and I say that from having had my own personal experiences of it as a child. That's where I get my passion for this subject matter that I discuss on this blog.]
Ms. Jennifer Veraneault then asked a good question, "Is PAS a form of abuse and neglect and should there be a change of custody should it be found?"
Dr. Keith Roeder responded by saying there are multiple factors in custody disputes that are relevant. PAS is a tough one. First, there must be an assessment to see if there was PAS. If upon assessment it is determined that there has been PAS, it is important to ask what can be done to explain to the parent who is alienating. He stated there should be a change of custody of it is truly there. PAS is abuse and neglect in that it could be damaging to the child's future development. On the other hand, if you remove a child from an alienator's care as Dr. Richard Gardiner suggests, that could be damaging to the child as well.
[I understand the concern regarding PAS, and I have seen specific cases where I have been absolutely shocked. However, I believe of equal concern, and also I believe having equal if not greater prevalence, is the way abusive, psychopathic men use the accusation of PAS in order to persecute their ex wives, drag them through long and drawn out custody proceedings where they lie and deceive and make false allegations against their ex wives as a means to obtain a custody switch and ultimately their actual goal, which is to deny mother all access to the children. This is what I find most puzzling about PAS advocates. Their solution to PAS is to do exactly what they accuse the alienating parent of doing--remove that parent entirely from the lives of those children. The punishment PAS advocates have in mind for alleged perpetrators of PAS mirrors what they accuse the so called alienator of doing, and would ultimately have the same damaging and destructive effect on the children since, again, those children would be denied that nurturing relationship with that other parent. That is identically abusive and neglectful of the needs of the children involved, and it is happening in case after case after case as I have fully documented on this blog. This is the most ironic and ridiculous consequence of PAS theory to the point where I role my eyes in exasperation.]
Ms. Jennifer Veraneault stated that GALs are not doing enough to combat PAS.
As a followup, Judge Weissmuller stated that in the GAL training Judge Linda Munro talked about the punitive method, should the judge flip custody, i.e. transfer custody to the other parent, or else, as a therapist at the GAL training talked about solve the problem by increasing access. Denial of access is really unfortunate, so the courts need to address it and evaluate why it is happening. Then they need to resolve the issue. Flipping custody may not solve the problem.
Attorney Sue Cousineau stated that it is unconscionable for parties to wait a year for the problem to be resolved while one parent cannot see the children. When there is an ex parte application filed by one party, the courts do not make accommodations for access to the children with these motions.
Attorney Allard says it takes four months to do a family relations study and then three months additional time is necessary for the trial. She states that it is important to expedite the process in order to ensure access. Attorney Cousineau suggested that it is possible to get a motion in to the court to address this.
Representative Gonzalez asked, if there is a situation where a child is sent to one parent and the child does not want to be with that parent, and develops problems because he misses the other parent, what kinds of concerns does that raise for you?
Dr. Keith Roeder responded, The answer comes from immediate assessment. If the child develops problems is it because he misses the other parent or what? I would need to understand the dynamics. Is the child experiencing alignment or enmeshment with the other parent. Where the child is resistive to separation that is not healthy for the child. Perhaps there needs to be a stepwise change. we need to know what is going on. A healthy child will develop and will have a healthy, positive, ongoing relationship with both parents.
You'd have to ask whether one parent is doing something emotionally abusive to the child. You can't put a child with a parent who is emotionally abusive.
Ms. Veraneault asked, How many mental health professionals have the expertise to handle high conflict divorces? There should be some kind of overall effort to find out who would be best at this.
Dr. Keith Roeder responded, Perhaps a board certification would be good. I am a member of a large group which meets to discuss the current research regarding family systems and child development.
Ms. Veraneault then asked, "Do you think a person should be referred out of state for services?"
Dr. Roeder responded, if so, I would have to assume there is no one in state who could do it. That would create stress on the family which may not be good and it would increase resistence.
Ms. Veraneault stated the Sidney Horowitz made such an order in the Mastrangelo case.
Dr. Elizabeth Thayer again went into her nonsense that this is not a witch hunt. [Yes, it is, the deliberate lack of oversight has allowed doctors such as Sidney Horowitz to abuse and persecute litigants in family court. That doctor conducted a witchhunt against Gerry Mastrangelo--make no mistake!] Thayer continued to say, The point is to base solutions on family systems theory and child development theory, not to malign individuals.
Ms. Veraneault did not take this nonsense in silence and she stated, this task force is intended to remove professionals who have taken advantage of vulnerable people.
[Again, I would say, I am hearing all about PAS and access and the denial of access. I am not hearing about how the system refuses to acknowledge when a litigant is suffering from domestic violence and other forms of abuse. I will refer you to my GAL who responded to my report of abuse by stating "They all claim abuse." If there is no meaningful acknowledgement of the grim reality of spousal abuse, there can be no meaningful assessment of PAS.]
