Author: afla2016
Our Family Court System contributes to the problem of alienation in children
Parental Alienation Course Outline
Topics covered in this course will include:
- How alienation begins
- How children’s difficulties with transitions between parents can lead to psychological splitting and alienation
- How our current system contributes to the problem of alienation in children
- The signs of alienation and how to spot them
- The psychological and emotional changes that create pressure on parents and children
- The history of alienation and how social changes increase the likelihood of it happening to our children
- High conflict separation and the risk of alienation for children
- How alienating parents operate
- How neuroscience is contributing to a deeper understanding of alienation and how to treat it
- how to keep sane when your child is rejecting you
- The importance of keeping fit and well
- When to make strategic retreats
- How to differentiate between the type of alienation your child is suffering
- The importance of understanding your own parenting style
- The impact that family history has upon the alienation
- How to recognise and reverse an alienation reaction in your child
- How to manage severe cases
for more information please go to:-https://fnf.org.uk/2-uncategorised/92-coping-with-parental-alienation-2-day-course
Source: Coping with Parental Alienation – Parental Alienation
Related articles
Narcissism and Parental Alienation Syndrome | The Recovery Expert(standupforzoraya.wordpress.com)
What Is Parental Alienation and How Can It Affect Custody?(legallykidnapped.blogspot.com)
The Alienating Parents’ Tool Of Choice(standupforzoraya.wordpress.com)
New Book: Tamara Sweeney Story Targets Parental Alienation and Court Corruption(leonkozioljd.wordpress.com)
Parental Alienation Syndrome Isn’t in the DSM…Yet(aflasite.wordpress.com)
One is True – The Other is False(standupforzoraya.wordpress.com)
Family Access-Fighting for Children’s Rights(floridafamilylawreform.wordpress.com)
Fatherhood tips(homepaddock.wordpress.com)
Call in Congress for Family Court Reform(propublica.org)
Professional Misunderstanding of Parental Alienation(psychologytoday.com)
Share this:
Unwed biological fathers are often told they have no rights when it comes to their infant children
Unwed Father’s Rights Need Safeguarding!
By Jeffery Leving | Leving’s Divorce Magazine
Unwed biological fathers are often told they have no rights when it comes to their infant children when placed for adoption. 
The fact they fathered their child is not considered important when the mother decides, on her own, to give the infant child up for adoption in certain circumstances.
But, this gender disparity in equal protection and due process in parental rights is changing.
Recently, the State of Utah adopted House Bill 308 that is designed to safeguard unwed paternal rights in regards to children six months or younger from being adopted. This law would require unwed fathers to be issued official notification of the mother’s intention to give their infant child up for adoption in certain circumstances. Once received, the father would then have 30 days to assert his rights as a parent and petition the court for custody. This closes a loophole which had allowed mothers to circumvent notifying the biological father and thus committing the ultimate act of parental alienation – terminating the father-child relationship forever.
Common sense and fair play would argue that if an unwed mother decides to give up her rights to a child, then the biological father would automatically be given the opportunity to take custody of his child. Instead, a stranger can be given the right to adopt the child, often without the father even knowing he will never see his child again.
Share this:
American Family Courts and 1st Amendment violations of free speech
Part II — A Voice for Men
The tyrannical nature of Family Courts and their impact on fathers and children
Guy Mann recently penned his observations on the tyrannical nature of Family Courts and their impact on Fathers and Children.
Here we bring you the second and final part of his exposé. ~ Via American family courts, the First Amendment, and violations of free speech: Part II — A Voice for Men
Share this:
Non Payment of Child Support Indigent Defense | Turner v. Rogers
Turner v. Rogers and its Importance in Indigent Defense
| Criminal Law & Psychology Blog
I wanted to take some time out of my schedule to discuss Turner v. Rogers while it’s still recent and I remember my thoughts on the matter. First, I will provide some basic background on the case. Then, I will discuss the basic legal and policy arguments of the case. Finally, I will turn attention to my predictions and the importance of this case for indigent advocacy in general.
I. HISTORY OF THE CASE
What is this Turner v. Rogers case I’m talking about? The answer, thankfully, is rather straightforward. This case involves two indigent parents involved in a dispute over child support. The mother, Ms. Rogers, brought a straightforward court claim against Mr. Turner for child support he owed to their daughter. So far, nothing out of the ordinary.
The noteworthy aspect of the case is that Mr. Turner is indigent, a formal term for a person who is poor; presumably below the poverty line. In terms of full disclosure, both Ms. Rogers and Mr. Turner were indigent parents.
The court in this case held Mr. Turner in contempt for failing to pay for his child support obligations. A proper defense to this failure is an inability to pay based upon lack of necessary income. If that’s the case, why did the judge hold Mr. Turner in contempt? There is both a broad and specific answer. The broad one is that the poverty defense is an affirmative one — one that a defendant must prove in order to avoid being held in contempt. The specific answer is that Mr. Turner lacked an attorney, who would have certainly asserted this defense.
In these situations, a person can typically be held in either civil or criminal contempt, the specifics of which vary by jurisdiction. This case occurred in South Carolina, where a person facing civil contempt may be incarcerated as a result. That’s what occurred with Mr. Turner, who was sentenced to serve jail time for being what most us know in lay terms as being “a deadbeat dad.”
Mr. Turner appealed his case all the way up to the South Carolina Supreme Court on the grounds that he was entitled to have an attorney appointed for him since he could not pay for one on his own. The South Carolina Supreme Court disagreed with his claim and, as a result, he petitioned the US Supreme Court to hear his case.
Share this:
Alternatives that respect free speech and the open arena of ideas
As many of you know, we just had a magnificent conference on men’s issues in London, England. It was a brilliant event that went off without a hitch.
Thanks to the work of Mike Buchanan it was a full house, wall to wall with amazing people.
The only downer of the entire event was that I had to make the announcement during my speech that the A Voice for Men Facebook page was deleted by the management there. Also, at this point I can say that my appeal to have the page reinstated has gone ignored. 35,000 followers dismissed by Facebook for not towing the feminist, politically correct line.
This is part of a now quite familiar trend of social media platforms, which are essentially the modern equivalent of what we used to call telecommunications companies, controlling the expression and even the ideas of their customers.
Every time one of these events happens on Twitter, (and again) Facebook or other popular outlet, we see people in the comments lamenting the dogmatic discrimination and suggesting that “someone” needs to create an alternative platform.
Here’s your chance to reclaim free speech
They’re right. Someone needs to create alternatives that respect free speech and the open arena of ideas. So we did.
It’s now located at socfreespeech.com.
Using Reddit open source software, we have created a platform where current events and self-published ideas can be discussed without the interference of political correctness.
As you will see in the terms of service, there is a very narrow range of postings not permitted. They are as follows:
Share this:
Kangaroo (Family) Court Corruption Commission
Judicial Conduct Commission Renamed Kangaroo Corruption Commission | Leon Koziol.Com
It’s been awhile since Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas depicted family courts in America as “Kangaroo” operations, see In re Gault, 387 US 1, 27-28. But Abe never came across New York’s Commission on Judicial Conduct. Now that’s a kangaroo commission if there ever was one. Its members are appointed by corrupt politicians such as Sheldon Silver (now in federal prison), Dean Skelos (convicted of federal crimes) and Andy Cuomo (currently under federal investigation). Governor Andrew Cuomo prematurely dissolved his own corruption commission when testimony (i.e. me) began implicating the politicians who created it.
Another entity, the Joint Commission on Public Ethics, was created by the same trio of politicians in 2011 as part of a “Clean-Up Albany Act.” 
By 2015, state legislators were decrying it as “J-Joke” for its impotence. The chair of that Commission was recently named Chief Justice of New York’s high court by the same Governor Andy Cuomo who created both commissions. That should have all people visiting or doing business here very concerned.
Yeah there are so many taxpayer financed commissions these days that the public cannot figure them all out. Hell they all sound good, but what are they accomplishing? The third one (featured here) has kicked legitimate complaints against judges to the curb faster than its kangaroo sister commission in California (reported to have rejected more than 90% filed). It’s a nationwide epidemic calling upon the citizenry to make a stand. A rally has been set for September 17, 2016 at Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C. Be there !
As a result, this Judicial Conduct Commission has been renamed the Kangaroo Corruption Commission (KCC) by victimized litigants to accurately describe the entity’s true character.
Okay it’s not official yet, but we commoners who pay taxes and put up with their circus show like to be graphic with what’s really going on. We’re not so easily duped into believing that a catchy title with elite law firm members verify a genuine commitment to public service. They’re the foxes watching the chicken coup. So we call it as we see it.
Today I received yet another letter from “Jean M. Savanyu” clerk of the Commission advising me once again that Lewis County Family Judge Daniel King (“Dan King” as he introduced himself to my family court opponent on the phone) is just a-okay. Now for our 6,000 followers, you all know this can’t be right. Dan King has committed so much misconduct that anyone coming into “his” court should bring along a recorder (since he caused one of my secret custody proceedings to be unrecorded so his misconduct could be concealed).
Appealing such clear misconduct is equally impotent. 
In my case, the “honorable” Nancy Smith of the Fourth Department denied recourse against King when he issued a support violation order impossible to comply with because it required support payments to an agency without legal authority to accept it.
Dan King was simply abusing judicial office in retaliation for my (accurate) public criticisms of his incompetence (see listing below). Nancy is the only judge above trial level ever to be slapped on the wrist by the KCC for giving a glowing reference to a person she never met for personal and political gain as a judge. Does anyone seriously think she could be impartial here?
Share this:
Lawyers and Politicians Actually Want You and Your Children To Suffer
Why Lawyers & Politicians Actually Want You and Your Children To Suffer
You might have noticed that the theme of our most recent publicity messages center around “sharing the truth”.
And there’s a reason for this: we’ve been seeing a rather robust effort on the part of our opposition to blatantly lie to the Public in an attempt to thwart Family Law reform.
In reality, this is not new. Because they’ve been doing this for the last forty years or so.
Never the less, you’re probably seeing a ridiculous talking point come up a lot lately. I’ve seen it all over, and it’s probably best described by a Facebook post I saw in the Love and Iron newsfeed from NC Fathers. Here is the opening post:
“In speaking w/ a NC Legislator yesterday, she exclaimed that in many cases the only reason a non-custodial parent would want shared parenting or joint custody is so that they could lower child support payments.”
I then followed up with a post to that thread describing my disgust with National Organization for Women (NOW) and other anti-equal parenting lobbying groups; because it’s become apparent that this is one of the universal talking points that’s being injected into the public commentary – I’m simply seeing it all over. Basically, here’s what they’re saying:
Share this:
Families will be destroyed under the guise and by immunity bestowed upon Family Court Judges
PRESS RELEASE: Bill Scheidler, candidate for representative, district 26, position 1, states his platform | Corrupt Washington
This is the vicious cycle of corruption, which can be illustrated as follows.
Until VOTERS want an honest government where the rule of law prevails, taxpayers will be asked to pay for incompetence, corruption, over regulation, poor schools, substandard wages, dwindling jobs …; families will be destroyed under the guise and by ‘immunity bestowed upon child protective services, court ordered guardianship, probate and bankruptcy …; individuals will be abused by prosecutors, police and local government entities; and business will be regulated OUT OF BUSINESS.
Civil Rights in Family Law Florida 