Judges merely redirect the dysfunction of one parent as a means to achieve an equitable settlement without regard for children. Prospective lawyers to become judges practice under a code of ethics where they are only allowed to have regard their clients and not the children. A prospect practices under these rules of engagement for 20-30m years before a simple letter of appointment to the bench. They can in no way be expected to have regard for children after this indoctrination. The code of ethics for those lawyers practicing family law needs to change before anything gets better for children. Just know the enemy of your children are the lawyers and judges themselves. https://youtu.be/gYwrJHxfWgQ?list=PLED6CE6FEA630E99E
Knowledge is power, but wisdom is knowledge used for the good of humanity, and what better place to use this knowledge than defending our children and families!
Here is how some of our members obtained the knowledge to fight for their children. For each course bought, $50.00 will be donated to one of our supporters 2016 Florida State Senator Campaign: How to Win in Family Court
The Dysfunctional Family Court System Organizational Chart:
See Power Point (follow links by right clicking on text) and PDF charts. If you doubt this is actually going on, please watch Divorce Corp. documentary to dispel all doubts, and find out about one of the greatest scams in American history:
What we do in this life will echo forever in eternity! Don’t give up the fight for your children and your family. It will pay off eternally.
Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.
Removing the winner-gets-the-kids concept would also remove the incentive for parents to focus on each other’s faults, and to “dig up dirt” on each other. It may not be reasonable to expect divorcees to co-parent blissfully, without conflict, but getting off to a less acrimonious start, one that encourages cooperation rather than competition, would certainly seem to have a greater chance of serving the interests of children than the existing system has.
Two hundred lawyers wrote an open letter in her support on the eve of the MJTC.
Just a day after the Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission censured Gorcyca, she was applauded in her courtroom.
According to one court-watcher who was present, “I was in Gorcyca’s courtroom this morning (her first day back). It was packed…and loud. Never saw it like that before. Attorneys everywhere…even filling the juror box and standing because seats full Then when they said “All Rise for Judge Gorycyca” huge eruption of applause. She had a bouquet of flowers. She thanked them and then told them to get back to their hearings. They laughed. Then 90% of them left and as they left, shook David Gocyca’s hand at the door like a receiving line.”
The week before, Judge Daniel Ryan found that Judge Gorcyca violated several canons of judicial ethics.
Specifically, Judge Ryan found that Judge Gorcyca did not apply civil contempt properly, “It is a disciplinary action which stands for the singular proposition that if a judge is going to use the inherent power of contempt, the ultimate “tool in the tool box” after years of “frustration,” the judge may wish to consult the owner’s manual to make sure that she or he are using the tool properly before employing one of the 34 penultimate tools of inherent judicial power, a contempt finding, to deprive any individual, or children in this case, of their liberty,”
This is not the first time members of the legal profession, specifically those who are likely to practice in front of Judge Gorcyca, have come to her defense after she became the subject of international derision for sentencing the three Tsimhoni kids to juvenile hall for not having lunch with their father.
At its core, the shared parenting bill that overwhelmingly passed the Missouri Legislature and heads to Gov. Jay Nixon is common sense: Children need two parents, not just one, especially in instances of divorce.
What’s more, HB 1550 doesn’t stop at common sense. It’s based on a growing body of evidence showing that children desperately want and need shared parenting, not the current status quo of sole custody, when their parents divorce.
Plus, this bill represents a solution for all. It doesn’t favor women. It isn’t partial to men. Instead, it’s family-friendly and encourages judges to give children what they most want and need — shared parenting. With shared parenting, the roles that mothers and fathers both play in their children’s lives receive equal respect, and rightfully so.
Dad, I love you for an infinite number of reasons.
I feel so blessed to have you as my father and I’m thankful for the wonderful life you have given me. In honor of Father’s Day, I would like to celebrate you: a magnificent man, a loyal, loving husband, a devoted father, and a true friend.
Please know that my list of gratitude is endless and continues to grow with each passing day.
Thank you for falling madly in love with Charlene Campo and marrying her 41 years ago. Thank you for showing me that news headlines are not the norm; men can actually love women faithfully and unconditionally – for a lifetime.
Thank you for knowing you wanted to be a father.
Thank you for providing me with a never-ending sense of physical safety and emotional security whenever I’m with you, even if we are with my husband.
Thank you for constantly showering me with heartfelt hugs and kisses. And to this day, thanks for squeezing my cheeks so hard I sometimes yelp, “Ouch, Dad!”
Thank you for crying in front of me when I was 9 years old when you found out your father had died.
Thank you for encouraging me to play on the boy’s baseball team because there was not a girl’s baseball team for my age group.
Thank you for leaving work early to watch me play sports, and thank you for always cheering so loud that I knew it was undeniably your voice emanating from the bleachers.
Thank you for teaching me the importance of health and exercise.
Thank you for being an overprotective father from the time I was an infant until present day. For the record, there was no way I was going to fall into the Grand Canyon; we were on an observation deck! However, the grip you had on the back of my T-shirt still impresses me to this day.
Thank you for teaching me the power of humor and how to effectively tell a joke.
Thank you for teaching me the significance of “knowing my audience”, and when appropriate, the power of dropping a well enunciated f-bomb in proper company.
Thank you for changing the massive surgical bandage after my surgery because Mom could not stomach the site of the stitches, the dried blood, the swelling, and the black, purple and yellow discoloration.
Thank you for always telling me I am beautiful.
Thank you for working two jobs for 18 years to provide our family with a comfortable lifestyle. Thank you for always kissing me on the cheek to say goodnight when you came home from your bartending shifts at 2 A.M.
Thank you for teaching me the importance of humility, and the remarkable power of emotional and financial generosity.
Thank you for stressing the importance of education. When you went back to college for your second master’s degree, you showed me that it is never too late to change careers.
Thank you for telling me to “shake it off” when you knew I was not in dire physical pain.
Thank you for embarrassing me and Liz when you picked us up for spring break during our freshman year of college. The image I have of you incessantly yelling, “Girls, daddy’s here!” for the entire length of Evergreen Drive—with half of your body leaning out the station wagon window—is permanently seared into my memory.
Thank you for teaching me about politics and political parties. Thank you for resisting the urge to convince me to vote for your candidate.
Thank you for never lying to me.
Thank you for loving your brother and teaching me the importance of loving those who are not like you. Thank you for showing me that a person’s sexual orientation is part of their soul and should never affect the love you have for them.
Thank you for loving and accepting Uncle Joe’s husband.
Thank you for loving and accepting my husband.
Thank you for loving and accepting me and always making me feel like I am good enough.
Thank you for showing me what is means to be a good man, a great teacher, an extraordinary husband, and an outstanding father for the past 37 years of my life.
The Cause “Stand Up For Zoraya” celebrates the love fathers have for their daughters, inspiring them to embrace the important role they hold in their daughters’ lives and to provide the love, nurture, and emotional support that only they can give.
Stand Up For Zoraya is the voice of the child Since January of 2009, we’re happy to populate the Internet with information that is helpful, supportive, and conducive to fostering father-child relationships, reducing or eliminating Parental Alienation, for the betterment of our children’s psychological and emotional health, and for the future health of our families and societies.
In addition, Stand Up For Zoraya hopes to shed light on and reform an antiquated loopholes in our Legal Adversarial system in Family Law that degrades a father’s role. My fight my battle is not mine alone. I will not stoop to your level God knows my heart. I refuse to live in sadness I know God will make things right. I leave it in God’s hand.
Power UP for national Parents Day holiday – IT’S THE LAW!
Mothers Day, Fathers Day, etc….. but PARENTS Day is the most powerful of all for family rights, by express command of federal law! Parents Day is an official federal holiday, just like New Years Day, Presidents Day, Christmas, and the rest. Every federal holiday is based on a particular federal statute authorizing/enacting said holiday… The *entire* statute for Parents Day is short and sweet, yet ultra-powerful for… See More
From the notion which a) ignores the rigid definition of their roles and b) insists they are culturally favored. From the tendency to evaluate themselves and each other by the degree to which they meet an impossible ideal. From conditioned competitiveness and the fear of sharing failures, anxieties and disappointments with one another. From a mistrust of their feelings and instincts and an over reliance on logical thought processes. From the notion that violent action confirms and enhances their manliness. From a relative ignorance of their bodily functions and disdain for their body’s warning signals. From their conditioning to pacify and protect women, thereby inhibiting them from expressing their true feelings. From the pressure to be what they are not in preparation for their success role. From an over reliance on their jobs for a sense of identity. From conflict between their polygamous sexual conditioning as youths, and society’s expectation that they will overcome that conditioning after marriage. From preoccupation with sexual technique and from imperatives to concentrate on satisfying their partners sexually, seemingly at the expense of their own sexual pleasure. From the social barriers and pressures which stand in the way of their establishing close emotional friendships with other men. From the inclination to turn their wives into permission giving mother figures. From the need to prove their worthiness as protectors and providers. From feelings of inadequacy in matters of child care and child rearing. From feelings which inhibit them from developing a closer more emotional relationship with their children. From divorce laws which presume the naturally superior capabilities of women to care for children and which stereotype men as wallets. From national conscription practices which play on their traditional role as protector of the family and society. From harsher treatment under law for criminal violations than the treatment accorded to women in matters of arrest, conviction and sentencing. From the notion that as a class they oppress women any more than women as a class oppress them, or than society in general oppresses both sexes through stereotyping.
Please remember my life has been turned upside down and I never had a vote. I don’t have a rulebook to negotiate waters totally unfamiliar to me. It is really hard for me to understand that my family has broken up. I feel scared that I will loose one or both of you. I don’t know what to do with all the bad feelings I have. It would really mean a lot to me if you could do a few things to help me with the land mines I seem to be stepping on. Thanks for taking the time to listen.
1. Remember Your “ex” is my Family!
I now have the best and worst of both of you. I don’t get to divorce anyone. Whatever you didn’t like about your spouse, I now have to deal with all by myself. I don’t know how, so I am going to have to figure that out without a rule- book. Your “ex” is my Dad or Mom so if you can’t help me have a good relationship, please don’t make things more difficult.
I am not your messenger. Do not interrogate me. I don’t know what will upset you. I am going to have to figure the “what information goes where” thing and that in itself is pretty crazy for my age. Do not “dump” your anger at your “ex” on me please. When I start to look, sound, and have mannerisms, like my parent your “ex” don’t be surprised and don’t blame me. You at one time wanted me to be a combination of both of you, remember!
When you interrogate me to get information about what is going on in “the other house” and you use that information for your “ex” issues, I will probably get in trouble. Make it safe for me to come to you to be able to talk about and get tools to handle things I don’t know how to handle in “the other house”.
“Changing a child last name (away from the father’s) is an act of venom”
After hearing the testimony of the Petitioner, reviewing the documentation and supplements, and having received no responsive testimony, substantive documentation, or other evidence from any of those cited officials, the Committee finds that the Petitioner was wrongly denied by the Family Division all visitation with his child contrary to N.H. law and his constitutional rights for approximately 13 months.
1. Made unlawful recommendations to the Court in her 2/11/11 guardian ad litem report including suspension of all visitation with his son with no findings of fact that it would be detrimental to the child and with no findings of abuse or neglect contrary to RSA 461-A:2;
2. Posited as fact the psychological condition of the minor child without being an expert herself, and with no expert psychological findings or report, and apart from any testimony that is the product of reliable principles and methods contrary to RSA 516:29-a;
3. Recommended the imposition of extrajudicial conditions on reunification contrary to RSA 461-A:2, RSA 461-A:6 and contrary to the presumption that fit parents are presumed to act in the best interests of their children;
4. Recommended unlawful prior restraint of Petitioner’s free speech by restricting him from talking with his son about the subject of love (see RSA 461-A:6 I(a);
5. Recommended as a condition to see his son, that Petitioner enroll in a parenting class and separately in individual therapy which is contrary to the Troxel presumption that “fit parents are presumed to act in the best interests of their children,” (Troxel v. Granville, 530 US 57);
6. Did not complete the duties ordered by the Court in her stipulation;
7. Failed to comply with Family Division Administrative Order 2011-03 by not filing a final report with the Court and not submitting her final bill by the deadline;
8. Failed to comply with Supreme Court Administrative Order 17 by exceeding her court-ordered fee-maximum and not requesting a hearing to do so;
9. Fraudulently filed a stalking warning letter with the Dover/Laconia police departments in response to pro se Petitioner’s court-related correspondence for actions that do not qualify as stalking;
10. Failed to comply with GAL Ethics Rule 503.06(a)(1) by not recusing herself as requested after reporting that she was “fearful” of Petitioner; and,
11. Improperly recommended suspension of all of Petitioner’s visitation and parental rights with only allegations, but no findings of abuse or neglect per RSA 461:A-5 III.
The Committee finds that Marital Master Nancy Geiger also contributed to this when she:
1. Conducted a hearing that affected Petitioner’s parental rights without proper judicial notice per Duclos v. Duclos, 134 NH 42 – NH: Supreme Court 1991, quoting Morphy v. Morphy, 112 N.H. 507 – NH Supreme Court 1972;
2. Wrongfully recommended the suspension of Petitioner’s visitation and parental rights with no findings of abuse or neglect and no expert testimony;
3. Compelled Petitioner to finance the “therapeutic reunification” with his son in a forced contract contrary to Hale v. Henkel 201 U.S. 43;
4. Utilized what she knew to be false and/or incomplete GAL report testimony of GAL Tracy Bernson in arriving at her decision;
5. Refused to admit Petitioner’s properly authenticated telephone logs as exhibits at trial; and,
6. Issued a parenting plan that does not comport with N.H. RSA 490-D:9, requiring the signature of a judge accompanied by the judge’s sworn oath.
Further the Committee finds that Judges Ned Gordon and Brackett L. Scheffy also contributed by:
1. Approving a Marital Master’s wrongful orders, therefore failing to provide proper review or oversight; and,
2. Approved a parenting plan that does not comport with N.H. RSA 490-D:9.
The Committee finds that Marital Master Leonard Green also contributed when he denied Petitioner due process of law by declining to issue orders on Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration and; finally, that Administrative Judge Edwin Kelly failed to provide adequate oversight and supervision of marital masters and judges in the Hooksett Family Division by permitting ongoing malfeasance to occur after Petitioner notified him of it in a lengthy letter to which same judge, with the power to fire Marital Masters at will, responded that he had no authority to intervene.
The Committee therefore recommends that legislation be introduced to so amend our laws as to:
1. Eliminate coerced contracts and/or stipulations with guardians ad litem;
2. Make clear that there is a presumption that fit parents will act in the best interests of their children;
3. Provide greater supervision and accountability of guardians ad litem, marital masters, and judges in the circuit court family division;
4. Permit courts to deviate from equal parenting time distribution only in cases where there is clear and convincing evidence of abuse or neglect by one or both parents or it is requested by party receiving the lesser proportion of time;
5. Adopt strict rules of evidence for the family division;
6. Require advance notice for any and all hearings; and,
7. Investigate whether impeachment proceedings should be initiated to remove Judge Edwin Kelly, Judge Ned Gordon, and Judge Brackett Scheffy. Vote 8-2.
Rep. Alfred P. Baldasaro for the Majority of the Committee
Persuasive Rhetoric The Tool of Choice for the Alienating Parent
Persuasive Rhetoric refers to using language in an emotionally laden manner with the purpose of convincing the audience of some particular perspective.
Persuasive Rhetoric is a tool for selling ideas, beliefs and positions on a given topic or subject. It is unrelated to truth. It only refers to the spin, the story and the goal of winning over the audience. Nothing in the message requires truth.
In the case of Parental Alienation, this concept is useful in that it describes a favorite modus operandi that the alienating parent uses to vilify the targeted parent.
In this context, the alienating parent will allege something either entirely untrue or grossly distorted regarding the targeted parent. It is done with such emotion and tenacity, that the audience is typically drawn into its message. Then the alienating parent does the same thing with another listener. Now there is a group of three who all believe the same either untrue or grossly distorted thing.
There are now three voices in this chorus, and the intensity level tends to increase with the volume and the numbers of those involved. Then someone in this group of three relates this to another person, who questions it but is told that several other people told them the same thing, so it must be true. This new “convert” to the distortion then unwittingly spreads the distortion to someone else, and to someone else, and to someone else.
Socrates, the story goes, is approached by a man who wants to tell him some urgent news. Before he does this, Socrates stops him and says he would first like to ask him three questions before he tells his story. The man agrees.
The first question is, “do you know the person to whom this news occurred?”
Answer: “No, but I know someone who does know them. “
Question two: “did you witness the event yourself?”
Answer: “No, but I spoke to someone who was there.”
Question Three: ” Is the news good or bad?”
Answer: “It would be considered bad news.”
Socrates reviews accordingly, “You do not know the person to whom this happened, you only heard about it from someone who says they were there, and it is bad news. Thank you, but I think I would rather not listen to this news.”
Rightly or wrongly, we humans do tend to be herd animals. Due to our wiring and our evolution, when the herd is exposed to some message that is potentially dangerous or at least negative, we do tend to give it extra weight, and then pass it on.
This is a self-protective reflex that is easily exploited by the alienating parent in their mission to obliterate the targeted parent in Parental Alienation cases.
Since the words “Parental Alienation” were first uttered within a family court room, it comes as no surprise that the echoes emanating from adversaries within both the mental health and legal environments have blurred and tarnished the very concept and, at times, left it unrecognizable. The side opposing an assertion of Parental Alienation is tasked with discrediting, disputing and demeaning it, hoping to convince the court to ultimately reject it. The adversarial process within the family court will predictably batter the concept about a good deal. Consequently, much misinformation, partial information and outright untruths and fabrications emerge and begin to fester.
When one considers that arguing attorneys and family law judges typically learn about Parental Alienation via arguments, examinations and cross examinations in court, it should not be surprising that such understandings are usually limited to the facts of a particular case, and are not necessarily characteristic of specific knowledge acquisition. In other words, the understandings about Parental Alienation as born through litigation are anecdotal and unique, far from a balanced and complete instruction. Judges and attorneys may hear about Parental Alienation from expert witnesses who have essentially been hired to discredit it or to assert it, and their information may be distorted or contaminated by the need to persuade (i.e., biased). In other words, the adversarial environment where it is argued is ripe for distortions and partial truths. What is important to know is that there have been specific arguments created to discredit it that can be shown to be absolutely false. For example, the argument that it is not accepted by the professional community can be shown to be absolutely false. The argument about its presence or absence in the DSM-5 can be answered completely and affirmatively. The argument that it is “junk science” can be shown to be completely unsupported by the scientific literature.
The two day course offered by NAPAS is designed not only to provide a full and complete picture of parental alienation but to impart practical strategies to attorneys representing either a rejected parent or an alienating parent and the course material is supported by the scientific literature and professional consensus.
It is important to prepare your clients for PPTEs, especially if there is either known or suspected Parental Alienation going-on in the case. These evaluations are complex and can be stressful for your clients.
Here are 5 Common Behaviors of Alienating Parents. The literature provides many more behaviors of Alienating Parents, learn to recognize them by joining us on April 1, 2016 for a 2-day symposium “Effective Litigation of Parental Alienation” more info…more
Today we are pleased to announce the launch of the National Association of Parental Alienation Specialists. Frequently we are asked by parents, “Do you know any attorneys who are knowledgeable about parental alienation in our area?” Unfortunately,…more
In today’s information-saturated, internet-driven world, parents going through divorce have the ability to be more informed than ever before.
The Science of Misperception and Parental Alienation: is Parental Alienation a Syndrome?
“Children’s Rights” is not just about Fathers, it’s also about Children, Mothers, Families, Public Advocacy, Civil Rights and Liberties. This Children’s Rights Facebook Group, Page and Cause have been created for positive outreach, networking, distribution and discussion of information related to our cause.
CHILDREN’S RIGHTS • A continuing relationship with both parents.
• Be treated not as a piece of property, but as a human being recognized to have unique feelings, ideas, and desires consistent with that of an individual.
• Continuing care and proper guidance from each parent.
• Not to be unduly influenced by either parent to view the other parent differently.
• Express love, friendship, and respect for both parents: freedom from having to hide those stated emotions or made to be ashamed of such.
• An explanation that the impending action of divorce was in no way caused by the child’s actions.
• Not to be the subject and/or source of any and all arguments.
• Continuing, honest feedback with respect to the divorce process and its impact on the changing relationships of the family.
• Maintain regular contact with both parents and a clear explanation for any change in plans and/or cancellations.
• Enjoy a pleasurable relationship with both parents, never to be employed as a manipulative bargaining tool.
• The obligation of being a parent does not end after a divorce.
It is extremely important to understand that the bond of marriage is completely different from that of parents. This is the most common downfall in today’s society, as a dissolution of marriage takes place so does that of parenting.
A WORD ABOUT SELF REPRESENTATION ~ The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution has been interpreted to provide EVERY AMERICAN with the CONSTITUTIONAL right to self-representation, if they so choose. That privilege, like all other constitutional rights, should be enjoyed without fear of harassment, prejudice, or abuse.
Furthermore, no law, regulation, or policy should exist to abridge or surreptitiously extinguish that right. Self-Represented Litigants have no less of a right to FAIR and MEANINGFUL due process under the federal and state constitutions as those individuals who choose to utilize an attorney for their legal affairs and issues. In fact, NOWHERE in any state or federal constitution does it specify that the hiring of a lawyer is a prerequisite to exercising one’s due process rights.
Democratic principles dictate that we have the right to freely choose between self-representation and hiring a lawyer to handle our legal matters without suffering humiliation, prejudice, or penalization. After all, it is the parties to the litigation that ultimately have to deal with the consequences of the case’s outcome, and not the judge or the lawyers involved in the matter.
Contrary to the view of certain judges and lawyers, those who opt to litigate their own legal matters without an attorney are NOT second-class citizens deserving of contempt and injustice. Instead, they are BRAVE CITIZENS with an inalienable right to have their legal causes adjudicated objectively and justly — with or without a lawyer.
Self-representation can be a difficult, time-consuming, and often frightening experience, especially for those burdened by demanding work schedules, family responsibilities, and other obligations of day-to-day living.
Accordingly, those who engage in the difficult task of self-litigation should be REVERED for their COURAGE and DEDICATION, not scorned or abused.
We also need to amass momentous opposition against those persons, agencies, and institutions who, in the interest of protecting huge profits, careers, and prestige, subject self-litigants to a hostile and often abusive litigation atmosphere calculated to suppress self-representation and force people to become completely and financially dependent on lawyers to gain “paid” access to a taxpayer-funded legal system.
Be the first to know when FFCA Live opens for our National Families and Fathers 17th Annual Conference, and stay up-to-date on on other news and promotions.
This week, we will announce our full online conference schedule… Over the past several years, we hosted virtual attendees from Japan to Ireland, Pakistan to Colombia, Russia to Africa, Hawaii to Brazil, Australia to America and of over 90 nations!
2016, Can’t make it to the conference this year? No problem! You can watch every session — including Q&A’s, plenary sessions, workshops and other exclusive content — on-demand from the comfort of your office or living room…
Courts empower alienation in divorce child custody battles when they deprive a parent of the ability to exercise their equal parental rights and time with their child. This leads to parental alienation syndrome.
Parental alienation occurs when a parent intentionally does not honor the other parent’s visitation rights. Oftentimes the child(ren) are taught to become unjustly obsessed with negative qualities of the other parent. Both the parent and the child share antagonistic views of the other parent. The child sometimes will tell the parent that he/she does not want to visit with the parent. This is usually done by the child at the insistence of the other parent.
Oftentimes visitation (time sharing) becomes chronically interfered with. The one sabotages the relationship between the other parent and the child. The parent must take action through the court. Contacting a family law attorney as soon as possible to discuss the problems is imperative. The parent should keep a diary of all the denied visitations (time sharing) as well as the denied telephone calls, holiday visits that were denied, denial of the parents ability to partake in the medical, educational and welfare of the child(ren).
Our Family Law System preys on the Parent-Child relationship to increase the business of the courts. We want to educate our legislators to correct this wrong.
Good, …””FIT”…, caring, and loving parents who are cut off from their kids are unable, and most times, do not want to communicate with the “child-contact interfering (alienating) parent” because anything they say will only be twisted and lied about.