Today on Blogcritics
Home » Fathers’ Rights Activists Livid Over Airing Of “Breaking The Silence: Children’s Stories”

Fathers’ Rights Activists Livid Over Airing Of “Breaking The Silence: Children’s Stories”

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

“Breaking The Silence: Children’s Stories” is a documentary airing on PBS that brings much-needed attention to the plight of abused mothers who are trying to protect their abused children from their abusive fathers. The American Judges Association has reported that “studies show that batterers have been able to convince authorities that the victim is unfit or undeserving of sole custody in approximately 70% of challenged cases.”

Another fact: “Abusive fathers are far more likely than nonabusive parents to fight for child custody, not pay child support, and kidnap children.” [White, Ann C., The Florida Bar Journal, Vol LXVIII, No. 9, citing Hansen, Marsali, and Michele Harway, Battering and Family Therapy 175 (1993); Grieg, Geoffrey L. and Rebecca Hegar, “Parents Whose Children Are Abducted by the Other Parent: Implications for Treatment,” 19 American Journal of Family Therapy 215, 221 (1991); Zorza Joan, “Protection for Battered Women and Children,” 27 Clearing House Rev. 1437 (1994).]

Fathers’ rights activists have sent hundreds of angry letters, made hundreds of angry phone calls, and have written hundreds of angry e-mails to PBS in the hope that they would successfully have the documentary pulled, or that they would convince PBS to air their opposing views. As I reported in my previous Blogcritics article on this subject, fathers’ rights activists points of view are “full of unsupported nonsense about women being as abusive as men, women frequently “alienating” men from their children, and women lying frequently to get restraining orders to use as leverage in court in abuse, divorce, and custody cases. PBS is not required to present every side of an issue, especially a side that has no reputable resources to back its point of view. The fathers’ rights point of view already gets media coverage. Protective mothers who are seeing their abused children being given to their abusive fathers by the court don’t get much media coverage, and this documentary provides them with much needed attention. PBS has given attention to these moms and children that they desperately need.”

Fathers’ rights activists are not happy about that at all.

I also also reported that “Breaking The Silence” outs fathers’ rights custody tactics for the abusive behavior that it is, in particular the use of bogus syndromes like Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS). Despite not being recognized as a valid syndrome by the American Psychological Association, PAS, more generic forms of “alienation”, and friendly parent provisions are used to by abusers and the courts to take abused children from the mothers who are protecting them, and giving them to their abusive fathers. Professionals who make their living from these kinds of cases don’t want this documentary to air, because airing the truth about these ugly contested custody cases will put a big hole in their pockets.

Some would like to believe that these most men in fathers’ rights groups are not angry, vindictive bullies. Posts on Internet mailing lists and Usenet responding to the documentary have proven otherwise.

Here are some quotes by fathers’ rights activists about the documentary. The following quotes come from fathers’ rights mailing lists.

“If the Men’s Rights Movement had 10 Marc Lepines who walked into US Colleges with Suicide Bomber Belts and detonated them I guarantee you every US Policy Maker would crap their pants. Men have not reached critical Mass except the Marriage Strike. When Men take up arms and start shooting Law makers, Newspaper Editors, FemNag Activists or sawing off their heads change will come by force of arms. Since the money interests, Media, Politicians, Courts, Lawyers are too corrupt to make any change. And Decent Women are no where to be found. Women refuse to do a thing to stop the war against us. We have no Female allies only enemies.

Will major corporations, Law firms, Media companies give up their revenue streams for Men? Hell no. We don’t even have a voice. Our views are not even heard. Glenn Sacks is the only Mens Rights activist even heard in syndication. We are not even on the Radar Screen anywhere. The Conservatives have proved to be cowards and our enemies. They unanimously supported the VAWA. Time for War. TATP is the future of the Men’s Movement. Wish that wasn’t the case. But sadly it is.”

Here is another comment, from a discussion thread with the dubious title “The Fempire Strikes Back”:

“It seems like the Men’s/Fathers’ Movement can never catch its breath to accomplish the positive things that we must. We always seem to be reacting to the latest feminist outrage coming down the road. Their well-funded organizations can toss 1/2 million dollars into abominations like this, and we are forced to respond just to keep from being overwhelmed.

THIS PROGRAM IS THE FATHERS’ RIGHTS EQUIVALENT OF VAWA. WE HAVE TO CONFRONT THIS EARLY AND OFTEN. WE CANNOT LET THIS STAND.”

From the same thread:

“Trust mothers to be mothers, but don’t trust fathers –if a father wants to be a father he is “abusive?”

A father wants his children just to avoid child support yet a mother does not want the children to get child support?

Some stories were found of abusive fathers so generalize to all fathers who want custody of their children. Are they suggesting there are not abusive mothers out there? Of course, they are, but that is not true.

It is systematic abuse and vilification of men. The fact is that the pro mother bias that this articile evidences puts children in homes with bad mothers. Mothers get custody near all the time even bad ones.

The women’s movement started to oppose discrimination and stereotypes against women yet now they are in power they promote more discrimination and stereotypes against men than ever they suffered.

Women couldn’t vote. They might be discouraged from entering various professions, but they were never vilified by men as women now vilify men. Women the kinder sex. Nonsense. Absolute meanness.”

More, from the same thread. This one is especially ugly.

“To be a child abuser, you must have a penis.

It’s impossible for a human being with a vagina to be an abuser.

***clears throat***, please excuse me, I feel I need to say something here:-

I’M FUCKING SICK OF THIS BULLSHIT SEXIST LIES

Feminists don’t care about children who are abused, because they ignore the majority of abusers, and launch campaigns against the minority of child abusers.”

The following ugly comments were written on Usenet, in response to a favorable article about the documentary written by Times Union reporter Bob Port :

“This guy’s an “investigative reporter”???  This “story” is so blatantly anti-father, this guy should be shot.  I’m sure the script that PBS followed was written by a feminazi..  The “reporter” certainly is.

Fortunatly, this “senior editor” left his contact info at the bottom of the article…  Give’em an ear full – of TRUTH.

Another fathers’ rights poster on Usenet brought up what he calls the “Children’s Crusade” to insinuate that children supposedly are routinely manipulated to make false allegations of child abuse. This is definitely not true. Numerous researchers have found that only 2 – 8 percent of all all allegations of child abuse are bona fide false allegations.

“Since the Children’s Crusade it is well known that manipulated
children saying or doing things designed by the manipulator can have a tremendous appeal-to-emotions impact. ”

When a Usenet poster confronted a fathers’ rights activist, writing, “How is it possible that hearing “children’s stories” would do that? Are you afraid to hear what children have to say?” A fathers’ rights activist responded with this ugly comment:

“Stop with the witless taunts, you hate-bitch. As you read, it’s not about “children’s stories””

Fathers’ rights activists have made it clear that they are angry that abused women and children are finally being heard in the media. They claim that feminists don’t believe that men can be abused. Nothing is farther from the truth. Yes, men can be abused, but most victims of domestic violence are women. Bringing much needed attention to the plight of abused women does not negate from what abused men go through. Fathers’ rights activists are continuing their campaign to have PBS remove “Breaking The Silence: Children’s Stories” from the air, and they have not been successful. Their hostility is very apparent in their own public statements about the documentary. Their drive is to prevent abused women and children from getting the help they so desperately need. Thankfully, they have not been successful in squelching this documentary. The quotes I provided are typical quotes from members of the fathers’ rights movement. These men are not the beaten down dads who are victims of a biased court system that they pretend to be.

Powered by

About Trish Wilson

  • http://feminist4fathers.blogspot.com/ Teri In Cali

    Trish,

    How do you expect anyone to react when they are not given the same resources or consideration as someone of the other gender, when they and/or their children are in danger? We’re talking about people who have suffered devastating domestic situations.

    You seem to have so much sympathy or empathy for women victims and their children, yet I never see you offer the same to fathers and their children. You seem to be of the opinion, like so many “on your side” that it’s all or nothing, that we must be at war.

    Both genders batter. Parents of both genders want to protect their battered children from their abuser. Parents of both genders have suffered at the hands of the current family law system.

    You and I both want the same thing, basically. We both want children to be safe, happy and emotionally healthy, right?

    We both agree that the law that just passed in California (SB1088) is an example of the kind of reform needed nationwide, right?

    You are not describing the fathers and family rights movement accurately. You are pointing out instances where fathers in pain with no recourse have lashed out. I can go to several places online and find mothers saying things even worse than that. What’s the point?

    Families are suffering. Families, Trish. Not just battered moms. Families.

    Teri
    Feminist4Fathers (and mothers)
    http://feminist4fathers.blogspot.com/

  • http://www.pippensqueak.blogspot.com gypsyman

    I’m goddamned tired of whinny privaleged men bitching about them being denied their rights. Holly crap, which right do they want, the one to beat the shit out of their wife whenever they want, the right to rape their daughters and sons if they feel the need?

    I know of too many battered women who have lost custody of their children becuase they have shown up in court brusied, scared and confused, while smug bastards in suits with money have stolen children who they don’t care about.

    I was raped by my loving father for eight damn years and he had the nerve to try and fight my mom for child support when he dumped her for another woman…These men who compalin about women or the aplogist women who stand up for them, should look at family law statistics before start whinning about female abusers.

    They do exist and should be dealt with in the same manner as any abuser, but unfortunately facts don’t lie and their are more men than women beating up partners these days and abusing children.

    Why should someone who abuses anyone have custodial rights? Do we give rapists the right to visit their victims after they’ve served their time? Do we allow people charged with criminal and bodily assuault to go back and take responsibility for people they beaten to a pulp?

    Neither men nor women should thing that just because they were involved with the birthing of a child that automatically entitles them to right of ownership no matter what their behaviour is like. If we are serious in wanting to protect the children in our society we need to rid ourselves of the myth that “family” is sacred.

    Some of the worst crimes against children occur within the family, and too many people hide behind their so called rights as a parent. This has got to stop.

    A parent’s right is to protect, nurture and raise a child as best they can. Anyone who breaks that covenant of protection should be stripped of the privalege of being around children.

    Ask yourself if these guy had really wanted their children in the first place would they have acted in such a way as to cause their wives to want to have nothing to do with them?

  • a witness

    What a pity. Fathers are the abused from the law and the land. I saw a father hang himself from his neck because he gave up his fight for custody. No one wanted to hear him. His wife was a child abuser, convicted for numerous felony and misdomeanor crimes, some against children. Her current arrests were thrown out despite police and civilian testamony because the prosocution was prosecuting him and had a ‘conflict’. Her affair with her attorney didn’t bat eyelashes. So, she was able to keep the kids. He even went to jail for three years because he was keeping his children away from this abuser, drug user, alcoholic wife. The kids were beaten, burnt with cigarettes, locked away by the wife. If a man had done this, he would have been locked up for life. She did this and he commited suicide by hanging. No one listened to him. No one cared about the man, only the poor innocent woman.

  • http://amnesty-4-families.com/ Mona Lena

    Trish,

    There are many mothers who support father’s rights movements. I am one of these women. I am also a foreigner. As well am I a mother who never took her ex husband back to court after enjoying physical custody of our children for almost three years. In the 10 years my Ex husband had full custody, never once did I think of kidnapping my children even though the pain was worse then losing my father in the same year.

    Most women who commit kidnappings also claim to have been beaten and abused. I believe that not even 10 percent of these claims are true including the ones which supposedly have been verified in court. It is a trend well abused!

    My Ex husband never abused me nor did he ever threaten me in any way shape or form, more so it was the girl friend >> a woman who pushed to win and protect her own financial goals as well did she inflict psychological damage upon my children, me and my ex husband as well all family’s involved. Therefore this woman should be prosecuted for it.
    I need men to protect my gender and my children, men fought in wars for not only their countries, they protect their families by doing so. They are born with instincts unlike woman.
    I fell into an abusive relationship later on.I had endured physical restrain like most children at home in order to bring rules and respect into a family, most of it I received from my mother.

    My abuser was a PAS victim himself. A child who was ignored by a young mother ( 16 ) who found herself to have a second child with 17 got a divorce and cut the father out of their lives. She then married a second time when she was 19 leaving two young boys to be raised mainly by themselves and an alcoholic stepfather, this mother ignored her responsibility!
    Maybe it is time to define domestic violence into a broader spectrum. We have a silent brutality within all of our family’s, this silent domestic violence we may call psychological abuse which needs to be recognized
    Also, any woman who has been sexually abused by her father needs to also learn to point fingers at the mother! It is the mother’s responsibility as the other parent to protect her abused child, if she does not; she as well needs to be punished for the same crime which was committed to her child. If she has no access to the child like so many fathers don’t have access to theirs baby’s then maybe you need to help change laws to stop the myths of abuse, it all can backfire into your own families.
    The mother/female needs to learn to take the same amount of responsibility in this ongoing blame game. If woman/feminists want same rights as the male gender
    They are to receive the same punishments regardless of their gender.

    Mona Lena USA

  • Sad Daddy

    When is all this gender based biased bullshit gonna stop, and people focus on the real issue…. The children, and what is best for them.

    All this mother father shit is just a side tracked issue, and it is quite an effective one at that, I mean how much positive has been done through the attacks on PBS? The point is a letter is a letter, however the massive amounts of energy put forth in attacking PBS, Sponsors, and even the groups who support such nonsense, is energy that could better be used directed to your legislators getting a bill introduced and passed.

    For 30 plus years the GOVERNMENT has stacked the deck against PARENTS and CHILDREN. THE GOVERNMENT HAS INSTITUTED GENDER BASED DESCRIMINATION IN THE PURSUIT OF FEDERAL FUNDING, and the reason progress can not and will not be made is simply issues just like this one.

    Do you really think it is a coincidence that P.A.S is finally starting to take on a face in the MSM? If so I got a bridge to sell each and every one of you, on both sides of this issue.

    In the last 2 years I have seen more progress made toward what is legitimately best for Children and the families that love them, by the actions of only a small handful of people than the entire movement has made in 30 years.

    You will never acheive change by the use of rage & attitude when your officials refuse to meet with you because you are known or defined as a loose cannon or simply put a hot head.

    Get real, Get focused, voice your opinion and move on, contrary to belief this is not the kind of attention that you want, however much like a very famous man once said….” I Have a Dream”.

    I mean realistically the numbers are there and they should have already been posted upon this page, considering that in excess of 60% of all child abuse is perpatrated by the Custodial Mother, and to further that when the children are granted to the Mother in 80% plus of all custody cases, how is it that Fathers are the villain in P.A.S? I fail to see the recent up to date correlation with the opinions expressed by the original author of this, and to go even beyond that I suggest that person do some real research using todays actual statistics as provided by the Federal Government, to make the argument even close to credible. I mean even my 5th and 8th Grade kids have more accurate research for their topics related to issues very similar to this, and the best part is it is their mother who helped them pick their topics, and find some of the best research material to use.
    Much like the heavily funded Gender wars in courts across America, P.A.S is simply and sadly being used now to further promote those gender wars because the status quo is being challenged with credible evidence, and undisputable truth.

    The SAD REALITY is while is sit here typing this another hundred kids lose one or both parents to an over zealous state government that only cares about the money it can extort as a result of having posession of the child in one way or another….

  • http://www.laryholland.org Lary Holland

    The comment posted by gypsyman and also of the author do not comply with the statistics that are actually proven by the National Incidence of Child Abuse and Neglect states in pertinent part that mothers are more likely to sexually abuse birth children while non-sexual type abuse was distributed somewhat evenly when only the birth parents were taken into consideration. I have attached the URL and a couple of excerpts from the Executive Summary of the Third National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect.

    from: link

    instances re: sexual abuse:
    —————————————
    Children were somewhat more likely to be maltreated by female perpetrators than by males: 65 percent of the maltreated children had been maltreated by a female, whereas 54 percent had been maltreated by a male. Of children who were maltreated by their birth parents, the majority (75%) were maltreated by their mothers and a sizable minority (46%) were maltreated by their fathers (some children were maltreated by both parents). In contrast, children who were maltreated by other parents or parent-substitutes, or by other persons, were more likely to have been maltreated by a male than by a female (80 to 85% were maltreated by males; 14 to 41% by females).
    —————————————

    instances re: among all abused children:
    —————————————
    Among all abused children, those abused by their birth parents were about equally likely to have been abused by mothers as by fathers (50% and 58%, respectively), but those abused by other parents, parent-substitutes, or other, nonparental perpetrators were much more likely to be abused by males (80 to 90% by males versus 14 to 15% by females). This general pattern held for emotional abuse, but was slightly different in the area of physical abuse. Children who had been physically abused by their birth parents were more likely to have suffered at the hands of their mothers than their fathers (60% versus 48%), while those who had been physically abused by other parents or parent- substitutes were much more likely to have been abused by their fathers or father-substitutes (90% by their fathers versus 19% by their mothers). For sexual abuse, the child’s relationship to the perpetrator made very little difference, since males clearly predominated as perpetrators, whatever their relationship to the child. Moreover, the severity of the injury or impairment that the child experienced as a result of maltreatment did not appear to bear any relationship to the sex of the perpetrator.
    —————————————

    The airing of “Breaking the Silence” is not a true documentary and it clearly demonstrates a more ferocious attempt to air information that slants public views and an attempt to gain more funding through discrimatory laws like VAWA.

    There is no doubt that there are truly abusive relationships out there in both directions, but the reality of it is, it’s more likely the result of bad decision making skills and unhealthy interdependence.

    There should be a study of how many daughters grew up without fathers around so they don’t know how to engage in a healthy relationship (bonding to any man that pays them attention) and the same for boys growing up with “moms” who probably themselves had been exposed to multitudes of mom’s poor relationships. What’s the problem? I bet it has more to do with the parents of the last two generations bearing the fruits of non-committment and “free love.” Lets get real and attempt to solve the problem that really is the social injustice… parental irresponsibility and teach healthy interdependence.

    Lets stop with the abuse excuse of the extreme feminist position and focus on the next generation…our children.. and help them realize that the best parent is both parents and install programs for the women making bad decisions with relationships as well as men before our next generation grows up even more dysfunctional than the last.

    Lary Holland
    http://www.laryholland.org

  • http://dianahartman.blogspot.com/ diana hartman

    the pbs program addresses the way children are affected by domestic violence…it isn’t nor does it have to be about abused spouses, men or women, in order to present a credible perspective of domestic violence…it presents the largest slice of the domestic violence pie: children…the majority of those children were abused by fathers as were their mothers…that the program includes abused mothers of the abused children does not detract from the reality of abused fathers or abusive mothers…it merely allows for the fact that the majority of abused children are parented by abused mothers and abusive fathers…those who would argue that the makers of this program should have presented a more balanced picture should first look at how unbalanced the picture is: there are significantly more children than adults affected by domestic violence, and the majority of adult victims of domestic violence are women
    if someone wants to make a documentary about abusive women and the men they abuse, they are welcome to do so…they will have a hell of time coming up with a proportionately dire program…until then, the majority of the light will continue to shine on those who make up the majority of victims: children and their mothers…
    argue all day long for abused fathers, the fact of the matter is that they are in the minority…what makes this particular aspect of domestic violence harrowing is that an abused father is even less likely to come forward on behalf of his children than would an abused mother…even as a victim, it is his choice to come forward or not…that beaten and bedraggled women have chosen to come forward on behalf of their children despite their peril and the risk involved in doing so doesn’t bode well for the “victim” stance of any man who chooses to keep quiet…the possibility of public shame and humiliation be damned, you either care more about your children than you do yourself or you don’t…among those of us who did choose the hard way out and know all too well how difficult it is, we still have only a limited amount of sympathy for those who continue to choose the mire…
    frankly, i don’t give a rat’s ass what accusatory men who haven’t been abused think of abused fathers and neither should abused fathers…if you’re an abused father and your children are at risk, do what you have to do to get yourself and those children the hell out of there…call the police, keep track of the reports, file that paperwork, frame that protective order, take pictures, hide video and tape recorders, line up allegiances with friends and family, and tell, tell, tell…keeping it secret for your own protection does nothing but make it worse for your children — and it doesn’t protect you from losing anything you can’t later retrieve…your children will grow up someday and they will likely confront you about what you did or, more importantly, what you didn’t do about their mother abusing them and you…if you didn’t do everything in your power to put their safety and welfare needs ahead of your ego then you will have lost something you can never regain: their allegiance, love, and respect…personally, i wouldn’t want my nursing home picked out by the child i didn’t protect…

    those who assert that mothers are the majority child abusers define domestic violence without the inclusion of child sex abuse nor do they include those statistics wherein the abused is both mother and child…put it all together and fathers are the majority abusers…this is not to say abusive mothers should be let off the hook, it is to say that when asserting the realities of domestic violence, every facet of violence is to be included…there is no need to break it down unless you’re trying to twist facts to favor an untrue assertion…abusive mothers are a reality as are their victims so there is no need to twist anything to prove it…using a separate reality, abusive fathers being the majority abusive parent, to minimize or strengthen any argument is counterproductive to the safety and welfare of the most important and majority consideration of domestic violence: children…

    trish’ comments did come across as incorrectly grouping all men into one abusive category and used isolated comments to further this assertion…nonetheless, the facts remain: men make up the majority of abusive spouses, more children than adults are the victims of that violence, children are victims of the efforts on the part of the abuser to keep the children in the violent situation, and they are victims of an abusive parent even when the abuser only abuses the other parent…
    refuting trish’ comments with yet more isolated comments and conditions serves only to shift the focus away from the most important part of the equation: more children suffer with domestic violence than anyone else…efforts by caregivers to get the children out of these situations are becoming increasingly thwarted by the abuser…the abuser is more often a man than a woman and the abused caregiver is more often a woman than a man…again, argue all day long for something or someone else, it will still detract from caring for the majority of victims of domestic violence: children…

    contrasting a witness’s post of one incident is gypsyman’s personal experiences coupled with his knowledge of many
    women having been further abused by the system’s allegiance to the abuser’s ability to appear and litigate sans personal injury to body, mind, and financial resources…
    yes teri, it is about families, and both genders batter…the rest of the story is that families are no less families for the absence of an abusive father and both genders do not batter each other in equal numbers as one batters significantly more than the other…while i would not subscribe to trish’ apparent all-or-nothing approach, i also cannot subscribe to the idea of approaching education and prevention from the angle that both genders fill the roles of abused/abuser equally when clearly they do not…

    an abused man with little or no resources or recognition crying out against documentaries like the pbs program is reacting from the stance of a victim — which he most certainly is if he is being abused by anyone, woman or not…it should surprise no one to find out he was also an abused child…further, his victimization started with the pain of domestic violence in his childhood having been obviously ignored else he wouldn’t still consider himself a victim…
    the goal of the pbs program is to insure the needs of these child victims, male and female, are no longer ignored even if one of the parents is a victim also and to insure the children’s best interest is not thwarted especially by the abuser…

    the majority of domestic court cases begin with a presentation of evidence that the father was abusive and in the majority of cases that abuse is later substantiated…that there are contests, appeals, and deliberately deceptive efforts made to overturn the outcomes of those cases doesn’t negate the fact that the abuse took place…while the numerous rulings against abusive fathers make it easy for some to assume the courts are thus biased, it’s no excuse for believing as much when the facts continue to prove this simply isn’t true…

    the pbs program presents the majority plight and points out the fallacies that currently exist that serve only to further victimize those who are already victims…those who would contest the realities of domestic violence (specifically who does what to whom) would do well to spend their next few days off in family court and/or volunteer in a shelter and/or an emergency room rather than jumping into the middle of the fray and opining from their limited point of view…

  • http://dianahartman.blogspot.com/ diana hartman

    larry, that’s not what the american bar association says, or the international child abuse network when addressing statistics in america, or the national center for ptsd

    in fairness, and because your findings so seriously contradict mine, i’m going to look further into this to see if i can find anything else that coincides with the study you cited from the u.s. dept of health and human services…

  • Chris

    I don’t why a bunch of knuckle-dragging men would so upset about a film that tries convince America that men are vicious and rage-filled, that they should be forever removed from thier childs lives forever. Never mind the fact that this film refuses to allow the truth to get in the way of it’s message. However, I do believe that the father of those 3 boys, floating in that Bay next the the ‘City of Liberal Enlightenment’, might have some serious disagreements with the topic of this film, and the false premise it tries to support. I suppose even the lives of our might vulnerible children are acceptable fodder in the battle to socailize America. How many more children will die, before the left finally learns that they are wrong?

  • Robert Brown

    Dear Ms Wilson:
    You should contact Teri in Cali. She has much unbiased information on this topic that you might benefit from studying.

    We are all well aware that women and children are being battered and abused by men. It took many, many years for battered women to be taken seriously.

    It is now proven by many studies that women can be/are as violent as men. The only difference is that women’s abuse and violence towards children and men is excused by women’s groups, the media and those with an agenda to demonize men.

    This PBS show does absolutely nothing to help those women who are abusive. Do you know of any programs for female batterers? There are none. So, these abusive women are never held accountable and never receive the help they need and continue battering their spouses and children. Many boys battered by their mothers turn out to batter their spouses and children.

    And as far as your quotes from father’s rights sites, I could point you to many bitter, anti-male radical feminists sites on the web. The SCUM Manifesto is much quoted on various sites.

  • kevin

    Gee like your sources are reputable.Trish Wilson is a one-sided person just like i imagine the documentary is……

  • http://www.copss.org Cal Law

    you’ve got to be kidding!

    I can’t speak for the other posts (which don’t seem far from the truth at all), but I can say that in my marriage I (the husband) was the “victim” of domestic violence (DV) on a few occasions. One time my wife threw a bottle of skin cream at me because I was teasing her. Another time she carved up my face with her fingernails because, when we were at the beach, I playfully carried her to the water and she did not want to get wet. Maybe it was my fault and she just overreacted. Needless to say, I didn’t report her to the police. I learned my lesson though, and avoided provoking her in the future. [Note: I never hit or cheated on my wife]

    I can also say from experience that when I worked in the family court (three years) I saw a significant number of men come in as victims of DV. Some had marginal injuries, others had knife wounds, black eyes, and one had a chunk of his hand bitten off. In a few instances, male clients told me that they tried to come in before, but the officers at the metal detector turned them away saying things like “come on, you’re a guy, you don’t need to come here,” but they came back anyway. Overall, there were very few men and women coming in with serious injuries, most just meeting the legal definition of DV

    Over time, I have learned that “definitions” can lead to unnecessary confusion and debate. I’m assuming that you, like me, think of DV in layman’s terms (i.e., a partner got beat up bad one time, or a spouse has had repeated low impacts leading to Battered Spouse Syndrome). The legal definition is quite different however. The family court works with a very broad definition, which includes things like “emotional abuse”, “verbal abuse”, “economic abuse”, “paternity fraud”, “non-existent-but-perceived abuse”, “fear or anticipated abuse”, and the kicker: responding to a provocation or self-defense -if you are the stronger person (I think that is called “primary aggressor”).

    For example, I helped a woman get a DV restraining order because her husband called her fat. In addition to being true, it was considered to be verbal abuse. I also helped a woman get a DV restraining order for her and her son because her boyfriend threw a deflated soccer ball at her when he came home and caught her talking with another man -she actually didn’t want to get the order for their son, but she said that after reporting it, Child Protective Services (CPS) got involved and they told her if she didn’t include their son, CPS would take their son away from. Another time, I helped a woman get a DV restraining order because she had a flat tire on her day of court, and, although she didn’t see anything, she was convinced that her ex did it out of spite. “Fat”, “deflated soccer ball”, and “flat tire” don’t meet my definition of DV, but it does count for court, and probably the people who generate statistics.

    So one of the first questions I would like to know is what definition you are using?

    On a separate issue –DV sexism, I have a cousin who got pissed-off at her husband, and punched him in the face, I don’t know whether or not he deserved it, but I know he didn’t report it. Oddly enough, his mother did report my cousin, but lucky for her, the police didn’t do anything to my cousin. On the other hand, a few months after getting divorced, they had an argument in which the ex pushed my cousin as he was leaving (he was mad that she didn’t want to let him see their son). About a half hour later my cousin wanted to teach him a lesson so she called the police. He was arrested about an hour after that. Then, all of a sudden, she was sorry because she didn’t expect the police officers to take it so far. I have seen and heard of many more situations where this pattern is repeated.

    Again I can’t speak for others, but from my own experience, and this is just a sample, I have seen that:
    1) women can be just as aggressive as men,
    2) in order to avoid unnecessary disagreement, it is important that both parties to the discussion are using the same definition,
    3) although the written DV laws don’t support sexism, in practice it is not at all uncommon, and
    4) it would be naive or insincere to suggest that a double-standard for men and women does not exist.

    So, if this PBS show is in any way trying to skew DV as a “only men commit DV” show, I’d liken it to Dan Rather’s career-ending report on Bush, and say that the Rush Limough’s of the world are accurate when the speak of a biased reporting media.

    By the way, I did read about 70 pages of “Why Does He Do That”, besides being boring; it seemed to cater to a subjective audience driven by emotion. I wouldn’t recommend the book unless you want cover your own shortcomings by blaming someone else. It was a gift from a gorgeous attorney I was dating, who couldn’t understand why I wouldn’t commit to being her boyfriend until she grew-up, and reciprocated my fidelity. As a footnote, after I stopped seeing her, she met some guy, who she married, but continued to attempt to persuade me to come over for a bootie-call when he was away. Lousy book.

  • http://www.nancm.com NANCM

    I’m in complete agreement that the entire “gender” war needs to stop and FAST.

    WHO FREAKING CARES WHICH GENDER HAS “MORE” ABUSERS?????? In every single case there is a CHILD involved that is being emotionally and/or physically scarred for life from the situation!

    I honestly don’t see how all of these self proclaimed intelligent reporters and authors and whatnots can’t see the forest through the trees and realize the the longer they focus on GENDER the more children will DIE!!!

    Knock it off already!!!!!!!!!

    The entire court system is a money churning cog-wheel that continues to suck money out of EVERYONE’S pockets (male AND female). One win to the “Fathers Rights” side just to piss of the Moms. Then the system will give a win to the Moms side just to piss off the Fathers Rights side again and keep them fired up.

    WHEN WILL WE FINALLY BE ABLE TO JOIN FORCES???????????

    If the Fathers Rights Movements don’t think they are making an impact, think again. (And yes, in some ways I this is good). Less than a year ago I started an emotional support group for Mothers who have lost custody and in less than a year I’ve spoken with, e-mailed with, and posted on my boards with THOUSANDS of Mothers who have lost custody. NO DRUGS, NO ABUSE, just lost custody to the Father because he requested it. Most of the Fathers simply had more money, more power… WHATEVER.

    But the problem is, these Fathers are NOT doing any better of a job than the MILLIONS of selfish, egotistical, and controlling Custodial MOMS who keep the children away from the Dads.

    Why does it have to be an “all or nothing” mentality to the Custodial Parent?

    When will divorced couples learn to co-parent?

    When will divorced couples quit using the children as pawns?

    There are so many more important issues that need to be addressed and resolved than “which gender abuses children more often”.

    I just wish the people who are in positions to write articles, produce television shows and get publicity for child custody issues would focus on issues that could MAKE A DIFFERENCE FOR THE CHILDREN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Beverly Morris
    President & Founder
    NANCM, Inc.
    http://www.nancm.com

    (A NON gender-biased support group for Mothers AND Fathers who may need emotional support dealing with not having custody of their children). NANCM believes in SHARED PARENTING when (and only when) both parents are fit and loving.

  • http://feminist4fathers.blogspot.com/ Teri In Cali

    Thank you Nancy, for pointing out that children and parents of both genders suffer because of the inadequate adversarial family court system.

    Teri
    Feminist4Fathers (and mothers)

    Shared Parenting Works
    “86% polled favored the presumption of equal physical and legal child custody”

  • http://www.nancm.com NANCM

    And thank YOU Teri for continuing your efforts for BOTH sides… which is what will ultimately help the children the most.

  • http://feminist4fathers.blogspot.com/ Teri In Cali

    “those who assert that mothers are the majority child abusers define domestic violence without the inclusion of child sex abuse nor do they include those statistics wherein the abused is both mother and child…put it all together and fathers are the majority abusers…”

    Not true. When you look at child sexual abuse FATHERS are the LEAST LIKELY TO ABUSE. The most likely male to abuse sexually is Mommy’s new boyfriend.

    When you look at child physical abuse and neglect mothers are the offenders a little more often than fathers.

    But that’s not the point!

    You want children protected. So do we.

    You think presumptive equal custody will put children in harm’s way. We believe it protects them.

    You have painted us with your own brush because of your past experiences with your perpetrators. We are not those men. We don’t support abusers in any form.

    We support, or are, good, fit, responsible, loving parents and grandparents who have not received adequate services from the family court system, just like you.

    Teri
    Feminist4Fathers
    http://feminist4fathers.blogspot.com/

  • http://feminist4fathers.blogspot.com/ Teri In Cali

    Thanks Bev. We’ll show them how to work together. Someone has to do it. ( :

    Teri

  • dad4justice

    I would like to state the fact my two daughters and my twin sons are all the victims of parental alienation syndrome. It is real and sad but in the end truth and love can only repair the damage to the children . Good Fathers need faith to overcome the insidious affects of PAS . The system must address PAS now before we lose a generation of vulnerable children.Ask my kids about PAS if you don’t believe me . 4 the children – dad4justice

  • Shark

    Hopefully — at some point — the new epidemic, Meth Moms is going to wake up judges and legislators, and turn the tide in the inherent discrimination against men.

    ======

    BTW: re gender as determiner of a good parent:

    There are no absolutes. Anecdotes can cover monster men and monster women pretty equally, I would guess.

    (Of all the situations I’ve known personally, the WOMEN were the violent NUT CASES — so go figure.)

    ====

    [as far as abuse dangers:

    IMO: in general, men are physically stronger — but women are generally wackier. Is that Nature’s way of equalizing things?]

  • Julia(member of NANCM)

    I would like to say, first and foremost, I did not watch the special as I knew it would make me angry. The most important people in this whole issue: THE CHILDREN are being ignored.

    When are we all going to act like the grown ups we say we are and look out for their best interest and stop worrying about our own selfish pride. When are people going to pull their heads out of the clouds and truly do WHAT IS BEST FOR THE CHILDREN!!!

    After an ugly battle over the last 2 years, my ex and I have finally pulled our heads out of the clouds and realized that the only best resolution for our children is to co-parent them. Our daughter is special needs; he knows the best place for her is with me because of my educational and professional experiences. He also knows that our son and our daughter are close because all they have been through in the last couple of years, they are their own best support system, and cannot therefore be separated. Rather than thinking of himself, he put his own wants and desires aside and realized the best place for her is with me, which means, the best place for our son is also with me.

    PAS does exist. My own mother used this when I was younger to alienate my brother and I from our father and tried to do it to me and my ex with our own children when the courts placed them with my mother to keep the children out of harms way of mine and my ex’s stupidity. My ex and I now realize that as adults, our needs come last, it is their needs that come first and foremost.

    Parents should be parents, grandparents should be grandparents. CHILDREN should be allowed to be CHILDREN and adults need to act more like adults and set the example for the children. ADULTS NEEDS TO GROW UP, stop playing games like they did in high school. Stop playing the blame game, mind games, manipulation, abuse tactics (physical, mental, emotional, verbal) and do what is best FOR THE CHILDREN.

    If you were abused in any way whether as a child or an adult, seek help for you and your loved ones. If you are to ashamed, then don’t blame society for your failures and expect a hand out. You have to be willing to help your self. To some this post may be harsh, but I went thru being abused by my mother,molested for two years when I was a young teen, raped in my mid 20’s(my daughter was conceived of that rape), abused by my ex as that is all he knew how to treat a woman because he never got counseling for it in his youth. I have gotten counseling, my ex has gotten counseling; we have made amends and reconciled to the fact that we need to do our best to co-parent our children, inspite of our differences. We did not divorce because of the abuse, but actually because we both realized I could get more help for our daugther as a single mom , then we could being married with him in the military. I am grateful that it got me out of the abusive situation, but we were more focused on getting our daughter’s needs taken care of first and foremost.

    When everyone can stop thinking of their wants and desires, and stop feeding into the money hungry court system, put aside their own differences, and think of THE CHILDREN. Stop giving money to a corrupt system. Judges who most often don’t care, just want to make a judgement to where someone isn’t happy, and then they will get tired of the court ruling and come back only to put more money in the pockets of these corrupt judges. If you work together, and keep the court out of parenting your children, stop paying money into the corrupt system and invest it into your best asset: THE CHILDREN!!!

    Think of your childhood. Was it peaceful, if yes. You are fortunate. Did your parents divorce but get along, even “if just for the kids’ sake”. you are fortunate.Were you raised by both parents?….. you are extremely fortunate. Were you abused while one parent turned a blind eye??? Seek help and then be willing to help others.

    Don’t just complain about the system…..be a part of those who want to change it and make it better for all. Stop making it about men vs. women. Men….. women can’t get pregnant without you. Women….you didn’t get pregnant by yourself. If you are both old enough to sleep together, be prepared to raise a child if you both get pregnant(and yes, men get pregnant too; not just the women. Men sleep with women; they should be man enough to take the responsibility of “spreading their seed”, and take on that responsibility as equally as the women do.)
    I pray for each and every person who reads this post that they will hear the truth of the words I write, that they will see that changes need to start within before you can expect anyone or anything in the world around you to change.

  • MOM

    link to article at democratandchronicleDOTcom

    Deadbeat dads

    Entertainers should stop making light of men leaving their kids

    (October 23, 2005) � In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, rapper Kanye West made a lot of headlines by saying that President Bush doesn’t care about black people. His point was that the government ought to have done more to rescue poor people, nearly all of whom were African American, who were left behind in New Orleans.

    So it’s ironic that West’s single “Gold Digger” which is currently No. 1 on the Billboard music charts, takes up the banner for men who are annoyed by having to support their children. That attitude is a major reason many people, like those stranded in New Orleans, end up stuck in a cycle of poverty.

    According to U.S. census information, children in single-parent households are four times as likely to grow up in poverty as those in families where both parents are present. In many poor communities, the number of single mothers, and sometimes fathers, who bear full responsibility for their children is growing.

    Meanwhile millionaire rapper Young Jeezy is being sued by his son’s mother because he has told child support administrators that he owns no property and makes only $35 a day.

    That hasn’t stopped him from appearing on TV draped in diamonds or offering the use of his Atlanta mansion to Katrina evacuees. His son, meanwhile, lives in public housing.

    And these “artists” claim they’re getting a bad rap. Please.

  • MOM

    To Teri In Cali:

    I read your story about “Is He Loser or Is He Dad.” In it you said you divorced three of you children’s dads, they left and were not there for their kids? Given your personal experience with your own children’s fathers, what makes you think all dads want to be involved in their children’s lives? Why did you divorce three of your childrens dads? Were they abusive to you?

    MOM

  • used to be a MOM (member of NANCM)

    Yes everyone, the differences of opinions go on.
    Yup, Used to be a MOM, that’s me. That is it thanks to my former husband who decided that I needed to be punished for leaving an abusive marriage. One more way of being able to control me is through our children. Yup,get her where it will hurt the most. Use those kids to do it and we’ll call it Parental Alienation.
    Whether it be the Mom or Dad who does it, it is 110% wrong. Kids do need 2 parents in their lives regardless of how we feel about our former spouses. Do I like my former husband? No. Would I ever say anything demeaning, demoralizing or hurtful about him in front of our kids? NO.
    But then again, I never got the chance really. In order to avoid child support he repeatedly claimed child abuse to our local child services. They were taken away for 2 weeks with a “no contact” order. They were then released back to me with a “no danger” report.
    Yup, after those 2 weeks when they were released, they were not the same kids…and never have been. We are coming up on the 3 yr mark…and yup, he still has me where it hurts. Yup, sad for me, but sadder for our kids. They have been denied the love of their mom and the rest of my family….but guess what?
    Moms do it also. I have seen it done and it is so wrong….Moms and Dads are both guilty of it and it needs to stop.
    I know some great custodial dads and great custodial moms……can’t we all just do what’s best for our children?

  • PeteKaplan

    Countess,
    I wish you would stop using quotes and claim they’re Fathers’ rights activists, when you don’t even know who you are quoting! How would you like it if someone started using quotes off the internet and saying that they are quoting you?
    And you do the samething with your articles. You use quotes and don’t even say who you’re quoting. How do we know you’re not making these quotes up yourself?
    Please stop protecting these people if they are as bad as you claim.

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    Pete, you know perfectly well that those are quotes by fathers’ rights activists, in their own words. I know exactly who I was quoting. You aren’t allowed to troll my blog anymore, and you’re acting out here. Take it elsewhere, preferably to the fathers’ rights mailing lists where you post most of your drivel.

  • MOM

    If fathers rights activists care so much for children, why would they try and stop a PBS documentary that exposes court corruption that puts children in danger? Fathers rights groups put these children in this position when they demanded an end to the tender years doctrine and equal rights for men to get custody.

  • The Fourteen Percenter

    Tish Wilson wrote, “but most victims of domestic violence are women.”
    here reports that “Women also comprised a larger percentage of all (child abuse) perpetrators than men: 58 percent compared to 42 percent.”
    here reports that “Females were more often (child abuse) perpetrators than males (59.3% females, 40.7% males).”
    I could go on. The question is, who do you want to believe, Tish Wilson or national studies into domestic violence?

  • MOM

    Tish Wilson wrote, “but most victims of domestic violence are women.”
    here reports that “Women also comprised a larger percentage of all (child abuse) perpetrators than men: 58 percent compared to 42 percent.”
    here reports that “Females were more often (child abuse) perpetrators than males (59.3% females, 40.7% males).”

    There is never an excuse for abuse of children but these stats are easily explained as most mothers are the ones caring for their children as most dads think their work is done after a day at the office. Many are single moms whos children’s dads walked out and left them to do it all alone. Extreme stress can make people do strange things. I would like to know more about the dynamics surrounding these statistics. The stats are still pretty high for men considering they don’t usually do most of the day to day hands on parenting.

  • strawberry note

    It is so sad to see 2 women from NANCM, who both were admitted victims of domestic violence, espousing mandatory shared parenting for all other abuse victims (male or female) trying to protect their children. You both should be ashamed of yourselves. Promoting laws like that makes the bar that much higher to hurdle for victims and their children. If you really care about the safety of children, stop affiliating with father’s rights activists, learn something about abuser’s tactics, read a Lundy Bancroft book. Maybe then you can really adequately provide “support” for non-custodial mothers who were victims of abuse. Until then, all you are doing is fueling the FR machine to make more mothers lose their children. But I guess that will keep your support group running, as you’ll then have more and more non-custodial mothers to share in all the grief and pain that you and your children have endured. Get a clue, ladies. Teri Stoddard is not your friend.

  • MOM

    AMEN!

  • http://www.nancm.com NANCM

    More “blanketing”. Gosh, it gets so old so quick.

    If you’ve looked at http://www.nancm.com, the Mission Statement, 3 areas of focus, core beliefs, etc. you will see that NANCM supports shared parenting WHEN (AND ONLY WHEN) BOTH PARENTS ARE FIT AND LOVING.

    Simply because some of the responders on here are from NANCM and they are victims of abuse does not mean that they support an abusive parent getting partial custody. That’s an ABSURD assumption!

    Yes, unfortunately a good portion of NCM’s at NANCM are victims of abuse. But NANCM is in no way a support group for abused women.

    NANCM was created for the emotional support of ANY non custodial parent who is having a hard time adjusting emotionally to their limited or non existent relationship with their children! CAN YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?????????

    Some of you… PEOPLE … just can’t seem to realize how many MILLION shades of gray there are. You want everybody to fit perfectly into your round little peg. Well guess what? Some situations have caused triangular shapes, square shapes, oval shapes, star shapes… and there is not a quick and simple answer that is going to magically fix everybody’s situation.

    Some murderers and rapists use the insanity plea to get away with their crime; knowing full well they aren’t insane. Does that mean that insanity doesn’t exist?? HELL NO!

    Well, the same thing goes for PAS. Are there sick and twisted abusive parents out there (Mothers AND Fathers) who use PAS in reverse to get custody of their kids and continue their abusive ways? YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT!! But that DOES NOT mean that PAS does not exist.

    I am a childhood victim of it myself. I was raised by my Father. My Father did an incredible job as a Father with one exception. He did not foster a healthy relationship with my Mother. He spoke badly of her and encouraged others in the family to do the same. I believed all of this until I got married and had children of my own. When my EX kidnapped our children a year after our divorce and I had my first taste of the family court system, I learned very quickly that the world is not the safe haven for Mothers I once believed it to be. It was a very big turning point in my relationship with my own Mother.

    It’s really so simple people. Anybody who feels the need to focus on gender is only in this for their own personal agenda and not for the CHILDREN.

    Anybody who feels the need to focus on gender and point fingers at the other side is CLEARLY and BLATANTLY part of the problem, not part of the solution.

    Period.

    Beverly Morris
    President & Founder
    NANCM, Inc.
    http://www.nancm.com

  • Julia(member of NANCM)

    strawberry note on October 24, 2005 06:05 PM:
    It is so sad to see 2 women from NANCM, who both were admitted victims of domestic violence, espousing mandatory shared parenting for all other abuse victims (male or female) trying to protect their children. You both should be ashamed of yourselves. Promoting laws like that makes the bar that much higher to hurdle for victims and their children. If you really care about the safety of children, stop affiliating with father’s rights activists, learn something about abuser’s tactics, read a Lundy Bancroft book. Maybe then you can really adequately provide “support” for non-custodial mothers who were victims of abuse. Until then, all you are doing is fueling the FR machine to make more mothers lose their children. But I guess that will keep your support group running, as you’ll then have more and more non-custodial mothers to share in all the grief and pain that you and your children have endured. Get a clue, ladies. Teri Stoddard is not your friend.
    Comment 23 posted by used to be a MOM (member of NANCM) on October 24, 2005 03:22 PM:
    Yes everyone, the differences of opinions go on.
    Yup, Used to be a MOM, that’s me. That is it thanks to my former husband who decided that I needed to be punished for leaving an abusive marriage. One more way of being able to control me is through our children. Yup,get her where it will hurt the most. Use those kids to do it and we’ll call it Parental Alienation.
    Whether it be the Mom or Dad who does it, it is 110% wrong. Kids do need 2 parents in their lives regardless of how we feel about our former spouses. Do I like my former husband? No. Would I ever say anything demeaning, demoralizing or hurtful about him in front of our kids? NO.
    But then again, I never got the chance really. In order to avoid child support he repeatedly claimed child abuse to our local child services. They were taken away for 2 weeks with a “no contact” order. They were then released back to me with a “no danger” report.
    Yup, after those 2 weeks when they were released, they were not the same kids…and never have been. We are coming up on the 3 yr mark…and yup, he still has me where it hurts. Yup, sad for me, but sadder for our kids. They have been denied the love of their mom and the rest of my family….but guess what?
    Moms do it also. I have seen it done and it is so wrong….Moms and Dads are both guilty of it and it needs to stop.
    I know some great custodial dads and great custodial moms……can’t we all just do what’s best for our children?

    JULIA(member of NANCM)LET ME CLARIFY:
    I do not personally recall saying that there should be mandatory shared parenting. Nor do I state that the situation I have with my formerly abusive spouse can work for everyone. Nor did I say was befriending Teri Stoddard. That is an assumption on the part of the poster. I don’t even know who Teri Stoddard is. I was only replying as I felt led to. It is only recently that my ex and I have come to the agreement. My children are not yet with me, and I am still at this point on paper an NCM……. because of the games that were played.

    My ex was only abusive to me………AND I DID STATE……….HE’s GOTTEN COUNSELING…I didn’t think I would need to put………..he is no longer abusive in any way towards me, and has never been abusive towards the children. Some people are mature enough to get past their own hurts and recognize that while I may not like the person my ex is or was during our marriage, does not change the fact that he is still the father of my children. Did he wrong me greatly from one human being to the next? Has he sought forgiveness, yes? Have I been able to put aside my own selfishness? yes!. Do I love my children enough to allow myself to be mature and look out for their own best interest? YES. Sometimes, the abuser is only abusive towards the spouse and not towards the children. That is the situation in my case. Help was sought, we both healed and learned from it. We have overcome our own personal obstacles to do what is best for our children. My post only asked that people stop being selfish and do what is best FOR THE CHILDREN.

  • http://www.nancm.com FrustratedMommy

    It is so sad to see 2 women from NANCM, who both were admitted victims of domestic violence, espousing mandatory shared parenting for all other abuse victims (male or female) trying to protect their children. You both should be ashamed of yourselves. Promoting laws like that makes the bar that much higher to hurdle for victims and their children. If you really care about the safety of children, stop affiliating with father’s rights activists, learn something about abuser’s tactics, read a Lundy Bancroft book. Maybe then you can really adequately provide “support” for non-custodial mothers who were victims of abuse. Until then, all you are doing is fueling the FR machine to make more mothers lose their children. But I guess that will keep your support group running, as you’ll then have more and more non-custodial mothers to share in all the grief and pain that you and your children have endured. Get a clue, ladies. Teri Stoddard is not your friend.

    I am not a writer, I do not claim to be so forgive me if my post just rambles.

    First off, I dont believe that anyone representing NANCM was promoting any laws. Second of all, alot of us see, and deal with PAS on a regular basis.

    Our children ALL of them deserve better. My ex was/is abusive, and a control freak, to me. Never while I was with him, to our daughter. Now I know I am probably going to get flamed here, but should I have shut him out of her life completely?? NO. I would NEVER do what he has done to me. He still has custody. As a stay at home mom through out the marriage I couldnt afford the “fancy attorney” ect. So I lost.

    Face it, as long as the courts feel that someone has to be the “custodial” the one with the more money, power and prestige is going to win in the court. Male or Female.

    Stop the dang gender wars, people are bad no matter the sex, age, creed, ect.
    If we promoted more co-parenting in cases where it COULD happen, I think we would all have happier, more rounded children.

    As a child I was a victim of PAS. My dad tried to insist my mother was the worst person in the world. He had me in such a rage I remember hitting her and calling her a b***h, out of anger.

    Now years later, practically walking in her shoes, I WISH I had the chance to say I am sorry….”I love you mom.” I pray everyday that, God gives her the message.

  • strawberry note

    JULIA(member of NANCM)LET ME CLARIFY:
    “I do not personally recall saying that there should be mandatory shared parenting. Nor do I state that the situation I have with my formerly abusive spouse can work for everyone. Nor did I say was befriending Teri Stoddard.”

    Julia–Here is the article that links NANCM to the father’s rights movement link

    Thank you for the acknowledgement that co-parenting with an abusive former partner is possible for everyone.

  • strawberry note

    Another thought. It feels good to talk here about knowing “good custodial dads” and “good custodial moms” and exploring all the feel good, fuzzy notions of cooperative, 50/50 parenting after divorce. That can happen in rare instances where there was no partner abuse, substance abuse, child abuse/neglect, relatively equal involvement in child rearing during the relationship, where the children can handle and want 50/50 custody. The subject of the film under discussion, however, is not that ideal situation. We are really going off on a tangent. The issue in the documentary is domestic violence, its effects on children and how the courts are failing those children. Let’s keep on focus folks.

  • Anzv

    Ouch! Got quoted! Yup, I was the one who posted that Children’s Crusade bit on soc.men. Too bad you didn’t share any representative quotes from the person I was responding to. I encourage everyone to become familiar with writings by the soc.men poster known as Hyerdahl1, and to evaluate my words against the average level of misandry and bigotry she exhibits.

    I do stand by my claim, which you have correctly distilled from my original wording, that children are routinely manipulated to make false allegations of child abuse. Your figure of only 2-8% of *all* CA allegations being false is of little relevance here. What is relevant is the percentage of CA allegations *in divorce and CC cases* that turn out to be false. If your “numerous researchers” have found *that* to be the case, please name them!

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    Anzv, soc.men posters tend to be obnoxious and nasty, but the men’s/father’s rights posters over there are especially obnoxious.

    Children are not routinely manipulated to make false allegations of child abuse. Everson and Boat found that 17% of the false sexual abuse allegations arose during a custody dispute leading to an age-averaged false allegation rate in custody disputes of 0.8%. Also, An American Bar Association and Association of Family and Conciliation Courts study concluded that of 9,000 custody-visitation disputes, that fewer than 2% involved allegations of sexual abuse. Moreover, they found that allegations arising in post-divorce cases were even more likely to be valid.

    Still more: In its Report of the Presidential Task Force on Violence and the Family, the APA confirms that, “false reporting of Family violence occurs infrequently… reports of child sexual abuse do not increase during divorce and actually occur in only about 2 percent to 3 Percent of the cases… even during custody disputes, fewer than 10 percent of cases involve reports of child sexual abuse (APA Report, 12).

    More: studies examining this comparison do not find significantly higher rates of any abuse allegations raised during divorce or custody proceedings. (Cheri Wood, “The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Dangerous Aura of Reliability”, 27 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 1367-8, n. 7 1994)

    As it turns out, fathers are more likely to make false allegations of abuse than mothers. In the largest study of its kind in Canada, Nicholas Bala and John Schuman, two Queen’s University law professors, looked at 196 custody hearings across the country. The research showed 71% of sexual abuse allegations were brought by mothers, whereas fathers initiated only 17% of the accusations. The rest were the result of concerned grandparents, siblings or partners who, as well as the parents, often sought aid from a child protection agency. Of female-initiated allegations, just 1.3% were deemed intentionally false by civil courts, compared with 21% when the man in the failed relationship brought similar allegations. Fathers’ rights activists assume that only mothers make false allegations of abuse, This study clearly shows that it is mostly fathers who do that.

    All of this is beside the point. I won’t participate anymore in the he said/she said/who is more abusive discussion that is taking place here. I did want to counter your point that children are not routinely manipulated to make false allegations of child abuse, though. It simply is not true.

    What is really important is that when children are being abused that they be believed. Too often, as is the case in the cases covered in “Breaking The Silence: Children’s Stories”, people who are in a position to help these children are allowing their abuse to continue. That has to stop.

  • http://www.nancm.com NANCM

    Posted by Strawberry Rote:

    “If you really care about the safety of children, stop affiliating with father’s rights activists”

    So you’re against working together on this?? You’re denying that there are ANY Mothers who abuse their children?

    Quote:

    “learn something about abuser’s tactics”

    Again, you’re asking us to simply learn about how MEN abuse children? Not women?

    Quote:
    “Read a Lundy Bancroft book. Maybe then you can really adequately provide “support” for non-custodial mothers who were victims of abuse.”

    Yeah, because God knows that Lundy Bancroft (while the books may be very good) is the ONLY person in the world that knows about abuse and how to fix the problem, right? And I’ve said this before… NANCM is NOT a support group for “women who were victims of abuse”!!!! We are a support group for ALL non custodial parents who are having difficulty dealing with a minimized or non existent relationship with their children!

    Yes, it’s called NANCM (The National Association of Non Custodial Moms) because there IS a need for a group that is “primarily” focused for Moms. Only because a VERY high percentage of Non Custodial Parents are Fathers and there are hundreds, if not thousands of websites dedicated to Fathers and custody issues.

    Quote:
    “Until then, all you are doing is fueling the FR machine to make more mothers lose their children.”

    Do you TRULY believe this drivel???? How can you not CLEARLY see that it’s gender biased, narrow minded, CHAUVENISTIC people like yourself that are fueling the CORRUPT COURT SYSTEM machine and making things worse???? And YES, there are males AND females who are equally guilty of this!

    GET IT TOGETHER PEOPLE!! These problems are NOT going to go away and NOTHING is going to get better if you continue to make this a gender war.

    Quote:
    “But I guess that will keep your support group running, as you’ll then have more and more non-custodial mothers to share in all the grief and pain that you and your children have endured.”

    It’s people like YOURSELF that will keep my support group running, because as long as gender biased documentaries and “Mothers Rights” and “Fathers Rights” organizations continue to work against each other instead of WITH each other, the problem is only going to continually get worse.

    Quote:
    “Get a clue, ladies. Teri Stoddard is not your friend.”

    On the contrary, Teri Stoddard has shown in her writings and through our conversations that she is PRO CHILDREN.

    I truly believe that what SO many “Females” can’t get past is that a VERY VERY large percentage of Non Custodial Parents are Fathers. So it’s obvious to RATIONAL and INTELLIGENT people why the majority of people fighting for more custodial rights in today’s world are MEN. Are some of those men gender-biased themselves? YES!

    So someone tell me, how do we round up all the non gender-biased men and women who want SHARED CUSTODY for FIT AND LOVING PARENTS and do something to make a difference and GET IT DONE??

    And then (staying on topic as you requested) how do we get laws in place that protect children from abusive PARENTS.

    Why does there have to be one “side” fighting against abusive Fathers and another “side” fighting against abusive Mothers?? There should be ONE “side”, period.

    The problem lies in the false allegations of abuse, in an attempt to gain custody. One parent trying to make the other parent look bad. The problem also lies in how is abuse proven?

    Why can’t we focus on THOSE problems?

    So many people involved in this are like people on the titanic trying to arrange deck chairs, all the while not seeing that the ship is sinking AND CHILDREN ARE DIEING!!

    Open your eyes. Deal with some issues that can make a DIFFERENCE.

    THAT, my friend, is about as focused as you can get.

    Beverly Morris
    President & Founder
    NANCM, Inc.
    http://www.nancm.com

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    Trish: “I did want to counter your point that children are not routinely manipulated to make false allegations of child abuse, though. It simply is not true.”

    Mistype! It is true that children are NOT routinely manipulated to make false allegations of child abuse. Bona fide false allegations of abuse are rare.

  • Julia(member of NANCM)

    BEV: AMEN. AS usual, you are straight to the point and right on target.

  • http://www.nancm.com NANCM

    Glad you caught that mistype. I was about to ask you about it. :)

  • strawberry note

    Bev–
    While you are certainly loud in your arguments by using lots of caps and exclamation points, you aren’t making any real points. You are also very mistaken. I think you will be hard pressed to find much about “mother’s rights” groups, because there aren’t any. Most people who are working on the issue of truly protecting children from harmful custodial arrangements are interested in the rights of the children to stability, safety, health and mental well-being. It is only father’s rights groups and those women duped into helping them with shared parenting groups that spout off about parent’s rights, constititional rights to parenting, etc. Chidren are not CD collections to be divided down the middle.

  • http://www.nancm.com NANCM

    Strawberry Note,

    So you’re telling me that as a fit and loving Mother who divorces a fit and loving Father, that if the custody decision came down to the Father having full custody (because it happens a lot in today’s world) that you would simply walk away and be happy with that decision.

    You would not fight for your right to have a relationship with your child? You would not, as the woman who gave birth to the children, feel you have a right to half of the time with them?

    CD Collection???? You can’t compare children to inanimate objects. (Wow, it was hard not to use an exclamation point there!!!) But the fact remains that if a man and a woman have children together then the child is half their Mother and half their Father. What, you want to try to change science now to say one of the parents isn’t TRULY a biological parent??

    Get real.

    And if I haven’t made any “real points” to you yet, it’s proof that you my friend are the one who is “duped”.

    As I explained before, it’s women such as yourself who just don’t get that there is a REASON there aren’t many “Mothers Rights” groups. It’s because in most cases women get custody, and in most cases Fathers are shut out of their children’s lives by a controlling and manipulative custodial Mother.

    NANCM happens to be the very small minority of Mothers who this has happened to and we can see clearer than ANYBODY the wrongs that are being done to Fathers all over the world.

    I challenge you to walk one day in my shoes; reading e-mails from Mothers who have been alienated from their children. I challenge you to walk one day in my shoes, wondering what my kids had for breakfast, did they finish their homework, did they catch the schoolbus on time, what are they going to eat for lunch, what did they wear to school, what new friends will they make today, will they get home safely?

    Did they even think about me today??

    Just one day in my shoes. And let’s see if it makes you use a capital letter or two, or an explamation point or two… when you get involved in a conversation with people who don’t have a CLUE what they are talking about.

  • Fourteen Percenter

    “Breaking the Silence: Children’s Stories” presents a view of child abuse that is the opposite of the truth.

    In “Breaking the Silence,” men are portrayed as monsters and child abusers. Yet most studies that I’ve read indicates mothers are the perpetrators of child abuse in more than 60 percent of the cases.

    Natural birth-fathers are protectors of their children – contrary to the message in “Breaking the Silence.” Yet men are often hindered in protecting their children because the media like to portray them as evil – and they are pushed away from the families they love.

    “Breaking the Silence” will contribute towards the problem of violence toward children, of fatherlessness, of judicial abuse; not the solution.

    Please take a minute to read the poem below. “Monster Mommies,” by Kristiana Colegrove, addresses the tragedy of the true perpetrators of child abuse.

    Perhaps the producer’s next film can address a real problem and offer real solutions.
    **************************
    Monster Mommies
    The last thing these children
    saw
    before they were
    killed
    was the first face
    they saw
    when they were
    born.
    It’s a treason on life.
    It’s omission of the agreement
    sworn in for creation.
    When the baby breathes first breath
    you are obligated
    to be the soft
    be the welcome
    be the guide
    into this journey, this world.
    The Universe granted
    precious gifts.
    Children.
    Our society is shocked into
    watching
    shocked into acceptance.
    Court TV
    produces and profits.
    Can’t believe the Monster Mommies
    get to live.
    Benefits, cable, 3 meals a day.
    The blood from their babies
    is not dry.
    To claim their God “demanded” it.
    That they were “depressed”
    to get off
    to get life.
    SERIOUSLY WRONG.
    How the tears keep coming
    long wails of grief.
    Wishing to wrap those kids in safety
    so they’d never
    know such fear
    such horror.
    To see our boys
    play in the sunshine
    and feel the force of joy.
    It is incomprehensible
    how distorted that could be.
    To turn playtime into homicide.
    How many more Monster Mommies are there?
    I want to crush
    drown
    suffocate
    and starve
    all the Monster Mommies.
    Search them out while
    tucking into beds
    closing closets
    kissing goodnight
    hiding behind Band-Aids.
    Search them out
    so they will all be gone.

    (KRISTIANA COLEGROVE)

  • strawberry note

    Bev, I have walked in your shoes. I never willingly let a violent man have 50/50 custody as you did, blinding myself with fanciful ideas of cooperative co-parenting. You were set up. Set up in fact by the work of the very FR groups and policies you align yourselves with. Don’t you know that FRs advise the men to go for 50/50 as a stepping stone for full custody? You are now shut out of your children’s life? Well, guess what. That is also part and parcel of what abusive fathers do–isolate, manipulate, refuse visitation/telephone contact. Yes, I think about you and all the moms out there that never should have lost their primary caretaking role in the first place. And if you would educate yourself on family law policies, you might just learn you are now helping make more non-custodial mothers. Your support service is wonderful and very much needed, but your politics are devastating to the very population you seek to serve–and their kids.

  • http://www.nancm.com NANCM

    MY EX HUSBAND NEVER ABUSED OUR CHILDREN!!! Please stop accusing him of such. My EX is a wonderful Father and loves our children very much.

    Was he a good husband? NO! Was he verbally and emotionally abusive toward me? YES! But he never physcially abused me OR my children! God forbid my kids find this blog and read your ignorant (as in uninformed) post saying their Father is an abusive man.

    GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT BEFORE YOU SPEAK.

    Does this help clear up why I am in favor of 50/50 shared custody FOR FIT AND LOVING PARENTS?? Why can’t you seem to absorb that when I’ve said it over and over and over and over again.

    I DO NOT SUPPORT SHARED PARENTING IF THERE IS ABUSE INVOLVED.

    I mean, Holy Shit. It’s no wonder I have to spell with capital letters and exclamation points. You can’t get very simple concepts into your thick skull.

    I am not “aligned” with Fathers Rights groups. Nor am I aligned with Mothers rights Groups. I have my opinions, based on my own personal circumstances; which happen to be that a Father was able to move children 1,200 miles away from a fit and loving Mother based solely on the fact that he felt he could do an okay job on his own – with no regard to how it would hurt me and the children emotionally.

    If you listen to nothing else, please believe me when I say that if you don’t stop covering everyone with the same blanket and stereotyping genders, you are doing 100 times more harm than good.

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    NANCM: “CD Collection???? You can’t compare children to inanimate objects. (Wow, it was hard not to use an exclamation point there!!!)”

    She was likely referring to Lord Falconer’s statement about his opposition to 50/50 joint custody. Falconer is the UK constitutional affairs secretary. Fathers’ rights activists in the UK have been lobbying heavily for presumptive 50/50 joint custody for many years, and the UK has already rejected it twice. Falconer said: “There cannot and will not be an automatic presumption of 50-50 contact. Children cannot be divided like the furniture or the CD collection.”

  • http://www.copss.org Cal Law

    you’ve got to be kidding!

    I saw the PBS show last night. Outright propaganda. No balance, no counter-views, pure agenda. Afterward, I remembered watching PBS as a kid. I remembered watching shows on the great Alaskan wilderness, and wondering why a big corporation like Exxon was sponsoring the show. So now when I see a show like “Breaking the silence”, I think, this is just the same old story: an entity with an agenda and money purchasing PBS time.

    The show was particularly painful when they talked about the girl getting put to bed. I tuck in my daughter, but when I do it, I make sure the sheet wraps under her feet, that she has extra blankets if it is going to be a cold night, and that the blankets are square on her and not pushed to one side. Then I give her a kiss good night on the forehead, she gives me a kiss on the cheek, and I remind her to go right to sleep so that she is not tired in the morning. It’s terrible to think that I might be associated with the monster portrayed on the PBS show, just because I am an active father in my daughter’s life. I would expect people to complain that she is too assertive or tomboyish from being around her dad too much, but not this garbage.

    I was at a local chapter COPS meeting several days ago. COPS is a statewide shared parenting organization in California, which is often categorized as one of those fathers groups. The topic of discussion was the involvement of women in the organization. Several members insisted on clarifying that the organization is for parents not just fathers. In fact, there was one father there who had sole custody of his daughter who made it clear that he only had sole custody because the mom was a drug addict and had threatened to kill him. The point I’m making is that, from what I’ve seen, “father’s groups” generally have the perspective that a child should have access to both parents (with the obvious exception of the few extreme cases), and would welcome non-custodial mother’s who just want to share in raising their children, and would reject custodial fathers who use custody to alienate the child’s mother.

  • fathers4justicepa

    Trish…
    [edited]
    It’s about the children [edited]. Current family laws allow for decisions based upon accusations and not facts. Children should have equal rights to both parents, unless a parent is PROVEN unfit.
    Most male abusers of childrenare significant others “NOT” the biological fathers. IE boyfriends and second husbands.
    Not so of the female counterpart..

    PAS is a reality that many of us can attest to.
    That woman in NY and her girls for the TV camera’s was a perfect example. Those poor girls didn’t know what was wrong. Women like that should be taught that their actions hurt their children.

    Everyday I hear of mothers bashing their children’s heads in with rocks,
    Drowning them in the bathtub,
    or throwing them into SF bay. Rolling them into a lake ect ect ect. Yet I don’t see ANYTHING in the news or programs about what is wrong with mothers……
    It’s women having sex with 12-14 yr old boys AND THEY ARE TEACHERS!
    Oprah and other femanazis
    make it sound like it’s not sexual abuse it was LOVE…

    If it were a man having sex with girls he would be drawn and quartered by other men… yet women say nothing!

    Recent laws dictate that a person who kills a pregnant mother can be charged with both murders….
    What about Mother’s who abort their children? Is that not murder?
    You can’t have it both ways….
    Women have complete and total control of their own reproductive systems and the choices whether or not to have children. Men on the other hand have no choices. If a man has sex and the woman gets pregnant, its her choice whether or not to bring the child into the world… the man has NO say… but he will Pay…
    Don’t worry though things will change that is guarenteed. However you stand
    on the subject Gay marriage will change the family court system, when it passes, and it eventually will,from that day forward courts will need to be gender neutral.

  • strawberry note

    Bev writes: “Was he verbally and emotionally abusive toward me? YES”

    Domestic violence is not just physical abuse. The children were witnesses of what you describe above either directly or indirectly. Abusing the mother of one’s children is not good fathering. In many states it falls under the child protection statutes of mental and emotional cruelty to children. I am sorry you are defensive, but that defensiveness comes from the discomfort of hearing the truth. And, if you look at the link I sent to Julie of your group, you will see that whether you want to be or not, you are identified as part of the father’s rights movement. Time to examine some of your positions.

  • http://www.FIRMncp.com Eric from FIRM

    Give me a break, trishy pooh…

    I have read your site and your “supposed” quotes from studies. I researched them. You blatantly lie and twist things to smithereens. You only quote what you want told and leave out the truth just like the PBS show will do as evidenced by those that have seen the screening.

    You should be ashamed. Your misandry is showing…

    Eric
    Fathers’ Integrity & Rights Movement (FIRM)

    misandry (mis’-an’-dre’) n. hatred of men. (1) the attribution of negative qualities to the entire male gender. (2) the claim that masculinity is the source of human vices such as domination, violence, oppression, and racism. (3) a sexist assumption that (a) male genes, hormones and physiology, or (b) male cultural nurturing produce war, rape, and physical abuse. (4) the assignment of blame solely to men for humanity’s historic evils without including women’s responsibility or giving men credit for civilization’s achievements. (5) the assumption that any male person is probably domineering, oppressive, violent, sexually abusive, and spiritually immature.

    Patrick M. Arnold, Society of Jesuits

    from link

    [Editor’s note: Please don’t paste large excerpts from other sources in the comments. Thank you.]

  • Julia(member of NANCM)

    Strawberry Rote:
    as you asked us to do: STAY ON FOCUS. IT IS NOT ABOUT MEN, IT IS NOT ABOUT WOMEN!!! THIS IS ABOUT CHILDREN!!!!!!!!!!!!

    IT SHOULD ALWAYS BE ABOUT CHILDREN!!! Or do you wish to start separating them into boys and girls; “oh, we,should only focus on protecting girls because they are more or less going to be abused when they get older by men because boys grow up to be abusive men when they are abused as children”. NOT ALL ABUSED CHILDREN END UP AS ABUSERS. SOME TAKE WHAT THEY WENT THRU TO BETTER THEMSELVES AND TO HELP OTHERS. LET’s ALL GET REAL PEOPLE.

    GROW UP!!!, STOP PLAYING WORD GAMES AND COME TOGETHER TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT: THE CHILDREN.

  • http://feminist4fathers.blogspot.com/ Teri

    MOM said

    “To Teri In Cali:

    I read your story about “Is He Loser or Is He Dad.” In it you said you divorced three of you children’s dads, they left and were not there for their kids? Given your personal experience with your own children’s fathers, what makes you think all dads want to be involved in their children’s lives? Why did you divorce three of your childrens dads? Were they abusive to you?

    MOM”

    MY reply:

    Yes, I’ve been divorced 3 times. I wish I had been wise enough to realize I wasn’t mature enough to marry. I had low self-esteem. No, none of them ever abused me or our children. The MAJORITY of divorces do NOT involve abuse of any form.

    Two of the men were around for awhile, one not at all. I can look back and see things I did that made the situation worse. I’m not taking full responsibility, no way, but I see how things could have been so much better for the children if we had worked together, and we could have. MOST people can put the kids’ needs first.

    I never said all men want to be great dads. I would never say that, just like I would never say that all women want to be great moms. I know too many custodial mothers whose kids never hear from their fathers and too many custodial fathers whose kids never hear from their mothers.

    This WAR we fight is for GOOD parents. I understand that many of you are victims of abuse. I get it. I affects your perception. Let me assure you, MOST people don’t abuse. MOST parents are GREAT parents. This fight is for them.

    You only represent 5-10% of divorcing women, yet you want to control what happens to 100% of couples in family court. I just can’t accept that.

    Please read this article too:
    link

    Teri
    http://feminist4fathers.blogspot.com/

  • strawberry note

    Teri says” “You only represent 5-10% of divorcing women, yet you want to control what happens to 100% of couples in family court. I just can’t accept that.”

    There is nothing to prevent divorcing couples in which there was no marital history of domestic violence or child abuse from agreeing to 50/50 shared physical custody. Surely you know that. You, Teri are trying to force this policy on those that are least able to protect themselves and their children. This is not about good fathers (and mothers) sitting down for tea and crumpets, holding hands and singing Kumbayah together. This is about parents who can not co-parent for safety or conflict reasons. Conflict of any kind is the number 1 reason children do not heal from divorce. Not every child can handle shuttling back and forth from home to home like a ping-pong ball. Have you ever talked to a teacher about how these kids fare? I for one have watched a little kindergartner sitting on a suitcase at the end of the day, crying because he had no idea where he was supposed to go at the end of the school day and who was to pick him up. Some kids can handle it, some can’t. Some parent’s can handle it, most can’t. Custody decisions are supposed to be about what is best for the children–taking each case and child individually–not about the parent’s rights or wants.

  • MOM

    This WAR we fight is for GOOD parents.

    How do you know which parents are good and which are bad? You want equality to be the presumption to begin with. That will include good and bad parents? How can you tell which is which? How many parents/fathers in this movement do you actually know personally? Have you ever spoken to any of their ex spouses? How do you know the parents you are defending are “good parents” you made bad choices in the past because as you say you have low self esteem? Maybe by supporting these fathers you are again making bad choices? Work on your self esteem!

    I understand that many of you are victims of abuse. I get it. I affects your perception.

    It doesn’t affect my perception. I am not a victim of abuse I am a survivor of abuse. BIG difference! I can now smell an abuser at 20 paces!

    Let me assure you, MOST people don’t abuse.

    No just about every woman I know has been in a abusive marriage/relationship. LOL maybe their perception is off? Maybe they just imagined it all?

    MOST parents are GREAT parents.

    Are they? Do you know most parents on the planet? You make very broad statements.

    This fight is for them.

    If they are great parents they are probably parenting and not wasting time in courts and on yahoo websites.

    You only represent 5-10% of divorcing women, yet you want to control what happens to 100% of couples in family court.

    We want to protect our children from abuse!

    I just can’t accept that.

    No one is asking you to accept anything. You know nothing about abuse because as you said you were never abused nor were your children. How dare you come here and lecture women about how wonderful dads are? The dads of our children weren’t wonderful. Thats what we are talking about! Our children’s fathers abused the mother and the children! Can’t you accept that? Seems you can but you are not going to shove it down our throats. If you had any education about abuse you would never be here making such insensitive comments. Our issue and yours is not the same so go seek recruits elsewhere!

  • MOM

    Teri go rent the shining or the burning bed. In those movies you will see a pretty accurate picture (or was it just my skewed perception) of what my ex husband was like. Maybe my perception is a bit off because of the number of times I was beat around the head. Maybe some of my brains were pulled out along with my hair? [edited]

  • http://www.nancm.com NANCM

    Strawberry Note said:

    “There is nothing to prevent divorcing couples in which there was no marital history of domestic violence or child abuse from agreeing to 50/50 shared physical custody.”

    Are you kidding me??? You’re really THAT ignorant about what’s going on in the family court system today? There are corrupt judges, lawyers, mediators, evaluators and hundreds of others that are keeping EXACTLY that from happening.

    You can tell yourself you know about my situation all you want. But I’ll say it again; there was NO abuse in my relationship beyond my EX having an affair, talking down to me and treating me like his “property” (we’d been together since I was 15). It was NOTHING that I would categorize as abuse. It was typical BAD human behavior. Period.

    Yet that didn’t keep the courts from allowing a “loophole” to be open for him (a Notary’s Jurat that was not signed properly) which gave him the opportunity to “legally” kidnap our children over state lines. My EX knew and his attorney knew that the techinicality was there and they used it as leverage when the Judge ruled in my favor.

    HAD THERE BEEN A LAW IN PLACE STATING THAT CHILDREN ARE TO HAVE ACCESS TO BOTH FIT AND LOVING PARENTS MY EX WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO TAKE MY CHILDREN OVER STATE LINES.

    Instead of helping me to get my babies back and continue a 50/50 arrangement, the courts – YES, THE COURTS – told me that I would have to prove him as an abuser – as an unfit Father – to get my children back.

    It’s no wonder so many men and women lie about their EX spouses. It’s what the lawyers and the court itself TELLS us to do!!

    Excuse me while I go vomit now.

  • http://www.nancm.com NANCM

    Mom,
    Your comments take me back to my statement that we need to pull together and focus on the REAL problems, instead of constant gender bashing and making it a war of male against female.
    No matter who is doing the abusing, the Mother OR the Father, the children need protected!!

    1. Abused children need protecting

    2. Fit and Loving Parents need protected from having their children taken away from them.

    3. There are good Mothers and bad Mothers.

    4. There are good Fathers and Bad Fathers.

    How do we constructively put all of those statements together and subsequently work together to get some real issues SOLVED!?!?

  • MOM

    NANCM sounds like you are in what we call denial.

    Your ex verbally and psycologically abused you and if he did it to you I am sure he does it to the children too! When he cheated on you he cheated on his children too! Why didn’t you and your ex have 50/50? HMMMMMM? Maybe because he wouldn’t agree to it? He had his attorney put that loophole there to deceive you darling. Your ex abused you and he abuses his new wife and he abuses his kids! Once an abuser always an abuser! Stop defending him. Get some backbone woman! Wake up!

  • MOM

    I am NOT going to pull together to give presumptive 50/50 shared parenting to men and women across the board. NO WAY JOSE! Everyone has a right to be heard. We all have a right to protect our children. NANCM, if your ex was soooo great a dad as you say why did he take them away from their mother? BASTARD! 50/50 parenting won’t do anything to protect the childrten from a parent like that! They want to be vindictive they will still be vindictive. The only way to protect the children is to get such parents out of their lives altogether!

  • http://www.laryholland.org Lary Holland

    To Diana Hartman, she states:
    those who assert that mothers are the majority child abusers define domestic violence without the inclusion of child sex abuse…

    My above post actually includes both sides of the equation, and further Teri in Cali posts the majority sexual abusers is indeed “mommy’s new boyfriend.” The post I included earlier lists the link to the entire study that supports Teri’s stance and my stance and debunks Diana Hartman’s stance.

    She refers to “twisting of facts” when the numbers are broken down merely because they do not support her stance.

  • DAD

    I am a father who gets to see his children solely because the state in which I reside passed a legislative presumption toward shared parenting.

    My ex-wife tried EVERYTHING in the book to deny me visitation. She accused me of molestation. This accusation was deemed by the Court to have been of high likelihood having been made with false or malicious intent. After the CPS records were turned over to us by a judge’s order, we discovered that the ex had also accused me of being the DC Sniper. The State’s Attorney actually laughed about this. What consequences befell the ex for this? None.

    There is no depth of absurdity to which women are discouraged to sink in their path of vindictiveness. Women are not sugar and spice and everything nice. They use the family court system to exert their own form of aggression. They look at their children as their property, an entitlement like all the rest. Women virtually monopolize victimhood. The divorce is usually about THEIR attempts to maximize financial gain and exact retribution for whatever wrongs are supposed.

    Certainly, men engage in this type of detrimental behavior as well. But, you CANNOT have it both ways. Are WOMEN the victims in divorce? Or do they TYPICALLY stand to have the most to gain by using the children as weapons to exact a more favorable financial settlement? We hear talk ad infinitum about work inequity, marriage financial inequity, about how moms enjoy a lower standard of living post-divorce due to these things. So, why does it stand to reason that men are the ones initiating a course of action most likely to be to their marked detriment? Women, according to the dogma propagated on sites such as this, are the ones in the weaker position. They have the most to win by using the Courts. Simple deductive analysis should make it obvious to anyone who is most likely to pursue this course of action.

    If our focus is the “children,” then we should be trying to strengthen families instead of developing marriage “law” which solely defines its own dissolution. There is no fault anymore in divorce, no penalties for misbehavior. What price did my wife pay for telling the ATF and FBI that I was the DC Sniper? NONE. Nothing. Zero. The system and lack of consequences encourage this type of behavior, of her disappearing with the children. Her own attorney chided her in open court about this. But, there were never any consequences. And, who suffered? Did I? No. Did she? Certainly not, despite being the instigator of everything. The kids DID. And, that damage cannot be repaired.

    It is WHOLLY unrealistic to expect women who have grown up in a consequenceless society, where they can hit men and have it laughed off, where they can lie, steal, and cheat and have it be excused, to exercise restraint in a divorce proceeding where there are even FEWER consequences. Why should they exercise restraint? There is no benefit to it to themselves. This society is “me first” and everyone else second. Without real TEETH in a marriage, without FAULT in divorce, without CONSEQUENCES to actions, how can we expect people to do right by precious little humans who are viewed as no more than CHATTEL by their parents and courts alike?

    If we want to solve this, we have to encourage people to stop fighting over things. Give them no arena, no reason, nothing to fight ABOUT, and they will stop fighting. If women know that there is no POINT to making baseless accusations, they will stop making them. If they know there are consequences to malice, they will stop. REAL penalties on PARENTS stop this nonsense. Equitable divisions of property, blackletter law, presumptive child support formulas, and sane assumptions about coparenting mitigate disputes.

    I empathize with those who desire to move across country to have a better career or higher average surface temperature. But, sh!t, who is this about, YOU? When you have children with somebody, you GIVE UP YOUR RIGHT to do things for yourself and only yourself, just like that MAN, who pays support in the VAST majority of cases, gives up his right to a certain slice of his check when he fathers children. Encumbrances are a two-way street and children are not an entitlement nor property.

  • Loving Grandmother

    To MOM,

    “Your ex verbally and psycologically abused you and if he did it to you I am sure he does it to the children too! When he cheated on you he cheated on his children too!”

    What about the Mother doing the cheating? Statistics show women cheat on men just as often, thereby, destroying the family.

    From what I read in Nancy’s posts, she puts the children first. Bravo!

  • MOM

    Dad I hope your ex never endangers your child and you cannot protect them because everyone will think you are reporting false abuse. Worse yet maybe one day your child will be abused but not believed because we all know children just make these things up don’t they? Its a two edged sword but I would always rather err on the side of the child to ensure that they are protected from an abuser! Maybe as an adult that means I have to suffer but better me than ever a child!

  • zingzing

    just because some men beat there kids doesn’t mean men shouldn’t have the same rights as women in court. if a man is beating his kid, then he shouldn’t have custody of that kid. duh. but the post seems to advocate that the law view all men as suspect. which is totally wrong. obviously.
    the original post is a sickening example of blatant sexism. it’s really disgusting and stupid. it’s like saying that if a man and a woman got into a car accident, it’s automatically the woman’s fault. go away.

  • http://feminist4fathers.blogspot.com/ Teri

    MOM,
    Thank you for proving that bitter women can be just as offensive on the internet as angry dads.

    I’m sorry all of your friends are abuse victims. I’ve read that people who are victims tend to attract perpetrators. I guess you could attract other victims too.

    None of my close friends have ever been abused. I’m not prejudiced, towards either gender. I’d say between you and I, I have a little clearer perspective on child custody, wouldn’t you?

    If you would stop being afraid long enough to listen you would learn that all of the shared parenting bills include protection for children from abusers, of BOTH genders.

    I know fathers whose children are being abused or neglected by the mothers, yet the men have not been able to get shared or sole custody. Why? Because people like you keep telling everyone that only men abuse. I know men who have been battered by their ex-wives, yet were not able to get any help. Why? Guess.

    Teri
    Feminist4Fathers (and mothers)
    http://feminist4fathers.blogspot.com/

  • http://feminist4fathers.blogspot.com/ Teri

    MOM said: “Dad I hope your ex never endangers your child and you cannot protect them because everyone will think you are reporting false abuse.”

    That’s right. They usually DON’T believe fathers. They usually DO believe mothers. Look at the statistics.

    I’m sorry in your case they didn’t listen. Now you know why the dads are fighting so hard. That is exactly what happened to some of them.

    Our fight is for the CHILDREN.

    Teri
    F4F

  • Julia(member of NANCM)

    One thing I wonder is that while everyone continues to point fingers at everyone else,do they realize that they have three pointing back at them? When did this become about which gender is worse about abuse?

    I thought this was about the CHILDREN!!!! Let’s get our focus back to the CHILDREN!!!! Not every abusive situation stays the same; some abusers do get help; victims get help to overcome and are no longer in a place of being “the victim” and some abusers/victims are able to overcome those obstacles to put the needs of THE CHILDREN first. Some people abuse simply because their relationship was not making them happy and they took out their frustrations in a very unhealthy manner.

    Not all situations are exactly alike. Instead of trying to put everyone into a square peg or round peg, how about we realize we are all human beings with our own flaws and fallacies, and just accept that fact. How about we simply stop stereo typing everyone. The gender war does not help BOY CHILDREN or GIRL CHILDREN(REGARDLESS OF GENDER……THEY ARE ALL STILL CHILDREN)

    Every situation is different.Not all cases is it in the CHILD’s best interest to have access to both parents. In some cases, it is essential for the CHILDREN to have access to develop/maintain relationships with both parents, grandparents, aunts,uncles, and sometimes even new sibling relationships out of subsequent marriages for the parents. Do what is BEST FOR THE CHILDREN. So let’s stop pointing fingers, put our heads together, and pull resources together to allow CHILDREN the best of what they deserve.

  • http://feminist4fathers.blogspot.com/ Teri In Cali

    You’re right Julia. Please don’t think I only support fathers. I just get defensive on their behalf. I support ncp moms too!

    Teri
    F4F

  • strawberry note

    Julia writes: “Not every abusive situation stays the same; some abusers do get help; victims get help to overcome and are no longer in a place of being “the victim” and some abusers/victims are able to overcome those obstacles to put the needs of THE CHILDREN first. Some people abuse simply because their relationship was not making them happy and they took out their frustrations in a very unhealthy manner.”

    Agreed in part. Yes, some batterers get help. “…according to countless battered women whose partners have participated in batterer programs, many batterers who are attending or have attended a batterer intervention program continue to be violent and/or controlling.”(Source: NY State Office for the Prevention of Domestic Violence).

    Yes, victims (adult & child) heal when they are removed from their abuser.

    Victims who ask for protections for themselves & the children through the court ARE putting the children’s needs first. Again, presumptions for shared parenting aren’t necessary for parents who agree, and are a harmful to children in DV cases, and questionable in others absent abuse.
    Continuing to push for those presumptions is short-sighted, shows a distinct lack of knowledge about family law, and would not likely have helped your individual cases.

    People do not perpetrate domestic violence because they are unhappy in the relationship or because they are “frustrated”. We all have had experiences of being unhappy and frustrated. That is not a license or excuse to harm another person.

  • http://www.A4F.com/ Mona Lena

    > MONEY <

    LONG,Long time ago [edited]

    Mona Lena ( smiling )

  • http://www.copss.org Cal Law

    you’ve got to be kidding!

    this blog is WAY too long? If anybody actually gets to the end (or at least this far), I’d like to add a few tidbits of information.

    It seems that anecdotal stories carry more weight, and maybe rightly so, with this group than statistics based on empirical studies. Therefore, I submit, that if moms are, by nature, the nurturers that we all wish each one was, then dads are likewise, by nature, the protectors and providers that we all wish each one was.

    I still haven’t read any consensus as to what the definition of DV actually is and if the definition, whatever it may be, should be applied to men and women equally. For example, it my case, I technically qualify as a DV victim, which I suppose makes my ex both a perpetrator of domestic violence and a threat to our daughter. Unfortunately, I just don’t see it that way. In both instances of my ex’s DV, I was acting stupid and, to a degree had something coming. I learned what ticks her off and I made sure not to do it anymore. End of story. I’m sure if I continued, she would continue responding in a similar fashion. Notwithstanding, my ex has never struck our daughter, and despite any personal feelings I might have toward her, I still think she a pretty great mom, and an asset to our daughter. So what’s the deal with the definitions? Who gets to decide what the definitions are? And what if someone disagrees with those definitions?

    Several posts talk about what’s best for kids, how we need to do it for the children. The main reason I am writing is that I was one of those kids. And yes, Parental Alienation is very real. In my opinion it is one of the worst things a parent could do to a kid. Again, definitions play an important role here as well. Do you know the difference between PAS and PA? The psychological community has not yet adopted PAS (parental alienation syndrome) as an official disorder, however, it (and the courts) widely accept Parental Alienation and a very real act.

    That’s what the whole PBS show was about. Apparently, the courts and psychologists have accepted PA (not PAS, yet) so widely, that someone with money to burn put together a showcase of several exceptional cases where there was an awful man who hurt both his ex and his kid. Once they got the viewer’s heart and attention (including mine), they used it to push an agenda that the court’s growing recognition of parental alienation (not necessarily PAS as the PBS show suggests) is the cause of abuse to children. Again, it helps to be talking about the same definition. Is it Parental Alienation or Parental Alienation Syndrome? Is there a difference?

    Getting back to the kids. I’d like to recommend an excellent read if one were really interested in the kids view. See link . Dr. Ahrons’ book ‘We’re Still Family: What Grown Children Have to Say About Their Parents’ Divorce’ is very accurate, in my opinion. It provides a balanced report, and comprehends that this is not a simple issue (i.e., ‘all dad’s are batterers’ or ‘every case should be 50/50 always’). I do not agree with many of the author’s conclusions on the institution of marriage. She seems to imply that marriage is not that important. I, believe it or not, still think that marriage is very important. Aside from Dr. Ahrons’ conclusions, her research is very valuable to any single-parent or other concerned person who sincerely wants to know what going on with the kids, especially if one wants to get a heads-up on the long-term effects of today’s actions. That’s my plug for Dr. Ahrons.

    Finally, this may be of interest. In working with parents in the family court, I’ve a few non-scientific observations. White American men tended to believe that, by law, they were not equally entitled to custody of their children, as a result though it a waste of time to ask. White American women tended to consider attaining sole or primary custody as paramount to their womanhood. Foreign women were very different in this respect, and were far more likely to start out asking for 50/50 custody. They tended to believe that kids needed both parents and that 50/50 seemed to be inherently fair. Hispanic men were far more likely to ask for sole custody of the children at the outset, and had no shyness about it. Let’s see, oh yes, and finally (and this was very difficult for me), in talking to parents on a one-to-one basis it seemed that VERY OFTEN what one really wanted was not that far from what the other wanted. However, out of fear of what the other might do, each would fight to get the most custody, thus feeding the fears of the other. So often I thought that if each parent was somehow guaranteed that their relationship with their child would not be put in jeopardy, they would have a better outcome. And I’m not kidding!

    later alligator

  • http://www.templestark.com Temple Stark

    Can we take the bitchfest* back to where it came from and remove it from this site.

    *bitch, as in interminable whine.

  • RogerMDillion

    If it takes that much to say so little, no wonder you people don’t listen to each other.

  • Arizonadad

    I believe I have found the chinc in the family courts armor. I am starting an open discussion on this subject, in my personal live real time chat room. stating at 6pm 10/27/2005. Anyone interested in joining this discusion may join in at

    NCPParentTalkandLegalReformatgroups.msn.com

    I suggest you get in on the ground floor and be there tomorrow night on time, sign in early so you can keep up with the progress of the discussion. This is the only invitation you will get. We will start moving forward tomorrow night after 6pm PST.

  • Julia(member of NANCM)

    Arizona dad,
    I tried to go to your group but kept receiving a DNS error; please email me the link from your group; i would be interested in participating in this chat.

  • Adryenn Ashley

    Larry said:
    “There should be a study of how many daughters grew up without fathers around so they don’t know how to engage in a healthy relationship (bonding to any man that pays them attention)…”

    I did that study as my thesis in college. I surveyed only daughters of single mothers and found that there was a significant reduction in: self esteem, ability to maintain relationships with men, and understanding and acquisition of the skills needed for long term relationships. The women surveyed were all raised by single mothers without any involvement with their fathers, nor were their mothers remarried. What I heard over and over was that they longed for a husband, but upon interviewing them after the survey, found that they had unrealistic expectations of the men they wanted.

    The interesting aspect of this is that single daughters of single fathers had significant difficulty establishing relationships with women, and had trust issues.

    Basically I think the outcome is that without unrestricted unfettered access to both FIT parents, children will have less positive outcomes. It doesn’t matter if its fatherlessness or motherlessness. The fact is that women have the majority of sole custody, so it is easier to study the outcomes for fatherlessness. If the gender bias was reversed, we’d see similar outcomes. What kids NEED is to know that THEY can see who they need when they need and not be given a hard time about it. Those children have similar (nearly identical) outcomes as children from in tact families.

    So, I think the key is to accurately define abuse in terms of the kind that can affect children and vigorously protect them from that. But as a woman, I do not have the constitutional right to not be insulted. If I don’t get along with my husband that’s not ALL his fault. If he’s a jackass, and I married him, and I had kids with him, that’s not ALL his fault.

    But if one parent has a temper, that parent should get help, regardless if its the mom or dad. If BOTH parents are required to go to counseling for communication to reduce the occurance of conflict, that would reduce the incidence of violence. Why are we willing to let things go til the last minute? Why are we not out there recruiting women who are unhappy in their marriages and teach them the skills they need to be happy in the marriage they have?

    We have to get over this win at all costs way of divorcing. This means men AND women. I know plenty of women who got royally screwed, and I mean are in desperate need now, who used to be millionaires. Their husbands scammed the court. The court either went along or looked the other way or was negligent. Or the attorney violated their oath and should be disbarred. None of that is happening. Why are those women still in poverty? Greed.

    It goes both ways. As long as we allow women to exploit the system for financial gain, women are going to be hurt when the men figure out the rules of the winning strategy and turn the tables. Lets change the rules and not allow ANYONE to exploit our children.

  • MOM

    here

    Volunteers Combine Efforts to Raise Attorneys Fees for Appeal for 9-year-old Girl
    A group of volunteers focused on child advocacy is actively recruiting members nationally to help raise money for attorneys fees in an unusual way — by selling candy bars.

    (PRWEB) October 27, 2005 — Kandy 4 Keyarah is a nationally growing grassroots group of volunteers who are organizing to raise attorneys fees for Keyarah’s appeal through selling candy bars and hosting benefits events. With volunteer representatives in Illinois, Ohio, Kentucky, Georgia, Florida, Washington and Colorado, they are actively seeking volunteers to lead the growing effort in other states as well. ?We will not stop until we see justice served,? said Ava Ivy, Illinois Volunteer Leader, ?and this child returned to her home. We will reach our goal, if we have to, one candy bar at a time.?

    One such benefit event is a Koncert 4 Keyarah! Benefit Concert scheduled for November 19, 2005, at 1 p.m., at the Westin O’Hare Hotel, 6100 North River Road, Rosemont, Illinois, which will hopefully raise money for Keyarah’s appeal fund as well as raise awareness of this growing problem within the nation’s family courts system. This kick off activity in the Chicagoland area will spotlight Keyarah, a 9-year old girl, an unfortunate victim caught up in court actions within the family courts system between Washington and Kentucky states. Keyarah?s biological father was granted sole custody. According to Keyarah?s mother, Darla LeNoir, a disabled army veteran diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 1997, she just wants justice served and family law adhered to. ?I haven?t been able to speak to my daughter via telephone since January of this year, and I?ve only been allowed to see her twice with a supervisor present ? and that was in July,? she said. ?I just want to make sure my child is safe and happy.?

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    Adrynne, that sounds like an interesting study. Did you account for the types of fathers who were no longer present in these children’s lives? Why where they no longer there? What was the quality of the relationship the father had with the mother while they were still together, and why was he no longer in the picture?

    Could their reasons for abandoning their children have influenced their children’s views? It’s highly unlikely that forcing a father who wishes to abandon his daughters would change their point of view towards men and relationships if he were forced to maintain a relationship with them. If a man who does not want any involvement with his children is forced for one reason or another to remain in contact with them, wouldn’t it stand to reason that these men would not be happy about the arrangement? And that dissatisfaction would influence their daughter’s views?

    How old were the women? Were they college-aged, like you? Did you take into consideration the life changes they were going through as they entered college (if they were in college), as in growing into young women, moving out of the house for the first time, going to college and the stress that accompanied it? If they were not in college, did you take into account the period of life they were living in? The stress of a new job, living on their own as young adults, trying to obtain credit in their name for the first time, serious relationships for the first time in their late teens and twenties, possibilities for the first time of actually becoming engaged and getting married, and the stress that goes along with those life changes, etc.?

    How long of a period of time did you study these young women? Did you account for economics (poverty, class, race, etc.)? Did you account for the education levels of the mothers? Did you account for the education levels of the daughters?

    I think your study likely shown a case of correlation does not equal causation. There are many reasons why young women may not have the kinds of views of men and relationships that you described in a single parent setting, but study after study has shown that the most important factors regarding child and young adult well-being are the economics, the mother’s education level, and the life satisfaction of the mother. Isaacs, Montalvo, and Abelson found that “the cumulative body of social science research does not support the presumption that frequent and continuing access by both parents lies at the core of the child’s best interest. What counts is not the quantity of time, but the extent to which the access parent and child have a relationship in which the child feels valued. The regularity and predictability of visits is more important than frequency of visits.”
    ,

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    Adrynne, I just realized that I came across a bit too dry in my comment to you. I’m really interested in your study. I’d like to hear more about it. I tend to ask a lot of hard questions when it comes to any study, no matter who does it. I still think it might be a case of correlation vs. causation, but I’d like to hear more from you.

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    Mom, do you have any other information about that case other than the press release? I get press releases from moms all the time, and they usually don’t give enough information. I need more information about that case if I’m going to determine if it’s worth looking into further, and then forwarding it on to my colleagues. It’s easiest to just e-mail me the info. You can find my e-mail address on my blog. My blog is linked at my name at the top of this post.

  • Arizonadad

    To Julia:

    All I can tell you is I dont know what a dns error is, Just keep trying.

    The first meeting turned out just as I expected, not a single damned one of the more than 50 people I personally invited showed up, This makes it very clear why their marriages broke up, they can not commit to marriage why expect them to comit to doing something that could help all of our children! What a waste all of these loud mouth do nothings are.

  • Arizonadad

    The DNS error may be that for some reason it may need to be typed in differently Try link

  • MOM

    Isn’t it ironic that fathers praise judges for finding mothers such as Brigette Marks guilty of PAS yet they do not want to commend judges for finding fathers guilty of abuse. The Marks case is a textbook example of how fathers use these claims of PAS to take children away from moms who are only seeking to protect the children. Also the fathers praise the custody evaluators for accusing the mothers of PAS, then turn around and accuse these same judges and evaluators of being biased if they go against fathers and want them kicked off the bench or jailed. If these experts are so wise and wonderful where is the praise when they go against dads?

  • Robert Brown

    I believe that how men and women treat each other will be reflected in their treatment of their children. Most unbiased studies show men and women batter each other at about an equal rate. Gender-feminists have been quite successful at having the facts hidden. The following scholarly study is one example.

    REFERENCES EXAMINING ASSAULTS BY WOMEN ON THEIR SPOUSES OR MALE PARTNERS: AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

    Martin S. Fiebert
    Department of Psychology
    California State University, Long Beach

    SUMMARY: This bibliography examines 174 scholarly investigations: 138 empirical studies and 36 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 163,800.

  • Robert Brown

    Dr. Fiebert’s complete study may be found at: link

  • http://mensissuesrobertcedric.blogspot.com/ Robert Brown

    WOMEN ARE MAJORITY OF PERPETRATORS OF CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT

    �Child Maltreatment 2003� is available on the Children�s Bureau website: link

    Who are the perpetrators of child abuse and neglect? Who typically abuses and neglects children?

    Answer

    Most States define perpetrators of child abuse and neglect as parents and other caretakers� (such as relatives, babysitters, and foster parents) who have harmed a child in their care. It is important to note that States define the term �caretaker� differently. Harm caused to a child by others (such as acquaintances or strangers) may not be considered �child abuse� but rather may be considered a criminal matter.

    According to the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System�s most current report, �Child Maltreatment 2003,� of the approximately 906,000 child abuse and neglect victims in 2003, the largest percentage of perpetrators (79.7 percent) were parents, including birth parents, adoptive parents, and stepparents. Other relatives accounted for an additional 6.4 percent, residential staff for .2 percent, and day care providers for .8 percent. Unmarried partners of parents accounted for 4 percent of perpetrators while foster parent accounted for .5 percent of perpetrators.

    In 2003, 58.2 percent of child abuse and neglect perpetrators were females and 41.8 percent were males. For the most part, female perpetrators were younger than male perpetrators; of the women who were perpetrators, 43.8 percent of females were younger than 30 years of age as compared to 33.1 percent of males.

    Approximately 83.9 percent of victims were abused by at least one parent. An estimated 40.8 percent of child victims were maltreated by their mothers acting alone; another 18.8 percent were maltreated by their fathers acting alone; 16.9 percent were abused by both parents. Victims abused by nonparental perpetrators accounted for 13.4 percent of the total.

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    It doesn’t surprise me that fathers’ rights activists feel very threatened by this documentary. It will go a long way to show how Parental Alienation Syndrome is junk science being used as a weapon by abusive and angry and controlling men against their ex-partners. The American Psychological Association has come out against alienation. Bold emphasis is mine. This is from the APA’s website:

    Family courts frequently minimize the harmful impact of children’s witnessing violence between their parents and sometimes are reluctant to believe mothers. If the court ignores the history of violence as the context for the mother’s behavior in a custody evaluation, she may appear hostile, uncooperative, or mentally unstable. For example, she may refuse to disclose her address, or may resist unsupervised visitation, especially if she thinks her child is in danger. Psychological evaluators who minimize the importance of violence against the mother, or pathologize her responses to it, may accuse her of alienating the children from the father and may recommend giving the father custody in spite of his history of violence.

    Some professionals assume that accusations of physical or sexual abuse of children that arise during divorce or custody disputes are likely to be false, but the empirical research to date shows no such increase in false reporting at that time. In many instances, children are frightened about being alone with a father they have seen use violence towards their mother or a father who has abused them. Sometimes children make it clear to the court that they wish to remain with the mother because they are afraid of the father, but their wishes are ignored.

    It is also not true that women and men are equally abusive. Fiebert’s list, which was just copy/pasted here, has been circulating on men’s and fathers’ rights web sites and mailing lists for years to insinuate that women are just as abusive as men. It simply is not true. Those studies overwhelmingly use the problematic Conflict Tactic Scales (CTS) to come to their conclusions. Measuring the Extent of Woman Abuse in Intimate Heterosexual Relationships: A Critique of the Conflict Tactics Scales, by Walter Dekeseredy, describes numerous problems with the methodology of the CTS. There is also “The Problem With Proxy Measures: The Inaccuracy of the Conflict Tactic Scales and Other Crime Surveys in Measuring Intimate Partner Violence by Joan Zorza, Esq.”, which was published in Domestic Violence Report in 2001. It’s not available online. It reiterates many of the same concerns as the DeKeseredy article. Domestic Violence Report is very well respected in the legal community. It has a wide circulation, and it’s articles have great impact on how the courts operate.

    While it has its uses, the CTS should not be misused to “prove” that women and men are equally abusive. No one in the medical establishment with any credibility, nor anyone in the domestic violence community, buys the men’s/fathers’ rights line that women and men are equally abusive.

    Regarding child abuse, what should be looked at is the amount of time mothers vs. fathers spend with children. Despite spending considerably less time with children than do mothers, fathers do a substantial amount of child abuse. Also, mother are most often cited for neglect. Fathers are most often cited for abuse. Child abuse should not be condoned no matter who does it. This documentary takes a good, hard look at one population that does it – abusive fathers. Abused children and the mothers who are trying to protect them finally have found a voice with this documentary. All the child abuse statistics related to mothers won’t change or negate that.

    Spamming and trolling comments here with cut/pastes of documents found on men’s/fathers’ rights web sites about child abuse by women and propaganda about women being as abusive as men does not negate from “Breaking The Silence: Children’s Stories”. Finally, word is getting out to the public, to legislators, and to court personnel about the serious problem of abused children being awarded to the custody of their abusive fathers. Fathers’ rights activists don’t like that, and they have been attacking this documentary before it even aired.

  • silverside

    Re: Stats on child abuse. Trish is correct, that women make up a disproportionately high number of primary caregivers, and most of them are that way, not due to any custody challenge, but just because the father is absent or does not care to be the caregiver. This is especially true of single, low-income teen moms. Given that the stats on single parenthood are heavily weighed toward this demographic group, it is no surprise that they make up a disproportionate percentage of abusers. But guess what? When kids are in SINGLE-FATHER HOUSEHOLDS, they are EVEN MORE LIKELY TO BE ABUSED.

    From NIS 3rd National Incidence Study:

    Family Structure. Children of single parents were at higher risk of physical abuse and of all types of neglect and were overrepresented among seriously injured, moderately injured, and endangered children. Compared with their counterparts living with both parents, children in singleparent families had:

    a 77% greater risk of being harmed by physical abuse (using the stringent Harm Standard) and a 63% greater risk of experiencing any countable physical abuse (using the Endangerment Standard);

    an 87% greater risk of being harmed by physical neglect and a 165% greater risk of experiencing any countable physical neglect;

    a 74% greater risk of being harmed by emotional neglect and a 64% greater risk of experiencing any countable emotional neglect;

    a 220% (or more than three times) greater risk of being educationally neglected;

    an approximately 80% greater risk of suffering serious injury or harm from abuse or neglect;

    an approximately 90% greater risk of receiving moderate injury or harm as a result of child maltreatment; and

    a 120% (or more than two times) greater risk of being endangered by some type of child abuse or neglect.
    Among children in single-parent households, those living with only their fathers were approximately one and two-thirds times more likely to be physically abused than those living with only their mothers.

    In addition, because women make up the vast majority of caretakers, they tend to be held responsible for neglect, which is defined as a form of abuse by HHS, even if the father resides in the home. Note that HHS defines neglect loosely; it can mean failing to get the kids to the doctor “on time”–and that in a country without health insurance. Not to excuse neglect, but very often, it’s another name for being poor. When actualy physical abuse is separated out, MEN ABUSE MORE THAN WOMEN. Same study as above:

    Abused children presented a different pattern in connection with the sex of their perpetrators than did the neglected children. Children were more often neglected by female perpetrators (87% by females versus 43% by males). This finding is congruent with the fact that mothers and mothersubstitutes tend to be the primary caretakers and are the primary persons held accountable for any omissions and/or failings in caretaking. In contrast, children were more often abused by males (67% were abused by males versus 40% by females). The prevalence of male perpetrators was strongest in the category of sexual abuse, where 89% of the children were abused by a male compared to only 12% by a female.

    Also note that multiple studies have shown (cites available upon request) that men, MOSTLY FATHERS, are responsible for 70-90% of the cases of shaken baby syndrome, one of the leading causes of infant mortality. These are mostly teen dads, or dads in their twenties. Often low-income. So these guys are even worse than their girlfriends of the same demographic group when it comes to taking care of kids. Maybe she was “guilty” of not having enough food in the home or not having the house clean enough. But at least she didn’t shake the kid till he was brain-damaged or dead. In fact, mothers were the LEAST LIKELY perpetrators of shaken baby syndrome.

  • Robert Brown

    RE: The Countess
    Dr. Fiebert’s work was not copied and pasted. The comments section on this blog did not hold the complete document. I posted the link to his work.

    Dr. Fiebert’s work is not the only one that shows a high incidence of abusive women.

    No one is denying that men are abusive. Those who are truly interested in domestic violence only desire to show the true scope of this problem.

    Of course gender-feminists only want to see one side of the issue, but slowly the truth is being brought to life.

    But of course Dr. Fiebert has an agenda but gender-feminists do not.

    Countess, just because you don’t personally know of any men or boys abused by their wives/mothers does not mean it does not exist. Men/boys rarely report the abuse they receive by women/mothers.

    Countess, could you give me a rough estimate of how many men/boys have been abused by women? What sort ofbatterers programs are available for women who abuse their spouses/children? Are these programs helping abusive women deal with their anger/abusive behaviour? What sort of shelters are available to men/boys abused by women/mothers?

  • Robert Brown

    Countess, do you call everyone who disagrees with you a troll and a spammer? At least you acknowledge the fact that women are responsible for some domestic violence and abuse of children. Most gender-feminists refuse to acknowledge women’s violence.

  • Robert Brown

    LESBIAN BATTERING
    The patriarchy can not be blamed

    SAME-SEX BATTERING

    Domestic violence occurs within same-sex relationships with the same statistical frequency as in heterosexual relationships.

    [Editor’s note: Just provide an excerpt and a link to the source, please.]

  • silverside

    What sort of shelters are available for men abused by women?

    Shelters are used to house persons made homeless by domestic violence. Virtually every study on the causes of homelessness ranks dv as a major cause of homelessness for women. For men, it has NEVER ONCE even registered on the radar. Not one study. Men are typically homeless for causes related to mental illness, often coupled with alcohol and/or drug abuse.

    In fact, looking at homelessness overall, men make up a significant number of homeless persons, especially the CHRONIC homelessness–persons with more than a year of homelessness or multiple episodes.

    If you have a concern about homeless men, then address the needs of these guys, although admittedly, they are a difficult population to work with. But why work with a difficult population, when you can fuss about a made-up, so minimal they they don’t even register in the statistics population? Men are not homeless because their wives beat them, though sometimes they have a history of abuse towards others, which is why no friends or family will take them in.

  • Robert Brown

    MALE VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

    The vast majority of recorded incidents of domestic violence are of men on women. Society, although aware of the male victim, treats him as a joke. In realty he is a man in fear, a man in isolation, a man stigmatized as weak. Why? Because he does not conform to the stereotypical male image.

    In law, a male victim faces two obstacles; firstly to prove he is a victim, and secondly, to ensure that his children are protected and do not become the new victims. Men very often remain in an abusive relationship for the sake and protection of their children.

    Most men react by staying silent. Often this silence is encouraged by factors such as fear of ridicule and the realization that it is unlikely his partner will be evicted. Even when a man has proved he is the victim it seems his only course of action is to leave the home. He is then separated from his children and often experiences difficulty in obtaining realistic and regular contact with them. He is in fact treated as the perpetrator rather than the victim.

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    Robert, you spammed the same men’s/fathers’ rights nonsense on my blog as you have here. I banned you and removed some of your spam from my comments. I won’t allow my blog to be used for anyone’s personal soapbox. If you want to post endless documents you find on men’s and fathers’ rights web sites, start your own blog.

    Spamming like that is akin to shouting. You can’t drown out the fact that this documentary is airing and is getting the attention of legislators and courts. “Breaking The Silence: Children’s Stories” finally gives abused mothers and abused children a voice – one that has for far too long been drowned out by fathers rights activists who have more time and more resources on their hands than they do.

    I have already more than sufficiently shown your copy/pastes for the misrepresentations that they are, as has Silverside. I don’t feel a need to continue. Nothing you have copy/pasted here negates from the documentary or its main points. It’s clear that men’s and fathers’ rights activists feel threatened by that documentary. Otherwise, they wouldn’t attack it and spam unrelated nonsense the way you have.

  • Robert Brown

    So Silverside, there are zero male victims of domestic violence. Tell that to those vicitimized by women.
    Don’t be so sure that male victims don’t register. Of course they don’t register on official gender-feminist lists. That might entail facing the fact that both men and women are victims.
    Nice that you are concerned about homeless men though.

  • Robert Brown

    Of course Countess, you call the facts ‘nonsense’.

    I did not comment one way or the other on the PBS show. But we are all well aware that there is/can be media bias. I do not feel threatened by one television show.

    I could show you many, many studies that counter the gender-feminists inspired stats. They are out there for anyone who truly wants the facts on domestic violence. Besides, numbers are not important, people are, male and female.

    Really, men/fathers have more money and resources than mothers/women. Don’t you have NOW? What government funded agencies exist for men and boys?

    I didn’t realize I was banned (lol) from your blog. I noticed you removed articles that you didn’t like, which is your right but I stand by what was written, ie. the stats on lesbian violence.

    I do have my own blog. Perhaps you will take a minute and have a look at it. You might even learn something new.

  • Robert Brown

    DOMESTIC VIOLENCE MYTHS ARE VIOLENT

    The gap between public perception about domestic violence (DV) and its reality is astonishing. DV was recruited as a weapon in gender wars, but those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

    In 1984, Diana Russell claimed that 54% of women were the victims of sexual abuse. In 2000, an advocacy group claimed that one in three women around the world have been physically assaulted by their partner. The horrifying statistics keep coming, and varying, but all insist that men are an inherently serious problem.

    We rarely hear of the hundreds of serious, academic studies on intimate violence that have been done over the last 35 years. They do not serve those using violence for their own abuse of others. The most authoritative studies are the three Nation Incidence Surveys commissioned by the Department of Heath. While the rate of mild violence, such as slapping or throwing a magazine, are about the same per year for each gender (around 20%), women commit over twice the severe partner assaults as men: punching, kicking, and threat or use of a weapon: 4.6% of women and 1.9% of men.

    [Statistics are cited from the DHHS National Incidence Report on Child Maltreatment, and DOJ 1994 report, �Murder in the Family�]

  • Robert Brown

    Countess wrote: Otherwise, they wouldn’t attack it and spam unrelated nonsense the way you have.

    Isn’t there a saying that goes something like the ‘kettle calling the pot black?

    Unrelated nonsense? LOL

  • Robert Brown

    This excellent article is in pdf form. See link below.

    DISABUSING THE DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC ABUSE: HOW WOMEN BATTER MEN AND THE ROLE OF THE FEMINIST STATE

    Over the last twenty-five years, leading sociologists have repeatedly found that men and women commit violence at similar rates. The assertion that “the phenomenon of husband battering” is as prevalent as wife abuse is confirmed by nationally representative studies, such as the Family Violence Surveys, as well as by numerous other sources. However, despite the wealth and diversity of the sociological research and the consistency of the findings, female violence is not recognized within the extensive legal literature on domestic violence. Instead, the literature consistently suggests that only men commit domestic violence. Either explicitly, or more often implicitly, through the failure to address the subject in any objective manner, female violence is denied , defended and minimized.

    Written by Linda Kelly, Professor of Law, Indiana University of Law
    (Florida State University Law Review, Volume 30)

    Complete report found at: link

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    Robert certainly feels threatened by anyone that points out the truth that the vast majority of domestic violence is committed by men against women. I have never said that men aren’t abused. They are, but their abuse is not as common as male violence against women. That’s not bad or good. It doesn’t negate from men who are abused. That’s just a fact.

    Still, men’s rights advocates don’t like it. That’s why he’s posting stuff he has found on men’s and father’s rights mailing lists, the sole purpose of which is to undermine violence against women. I recognize one copy/paste from MenWeb. Another one is from was originally from Menstuff.

    By the way, Robert, those stats aren’t cited directly from the report “Murder In The Family”. They have been taken out of context by the men’s rights regurg you have copy/pasted here. You’re wasting your time spamming this crap all over this blog post. Find another hobby.

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    Robert, the Kelly study (which was published in a law review and not a medical journal) relies on research that used the Conflict Tactic Scales, which I have already pointed out have been cited for having serious methodological problems. The CTS tabulates individual physical “hits” without taking them in the context of the abusive incident or the abusive relationship. Domestic violence is about much more than physical violence. It includes emotional, legal, mental, economic, and verbal abuse. It is a cycle of abuse that cannot be reduced to isolated “hits”. Dekeseredy has already discussed all of this in the article I had linked to.

    Here’s more:

    Many social scientists consider CTS data “probably the best available when it comes to estimating the incidence and prevalence of woman abuse in the population at large” (Smith, 1987, p. 177). Yet, quite a large number of researchers have criticized the CTS for the following reasons:

    * The CTS rank orders behaviors in a linear fashion, from least serious to most serious. In doing so, it incorrectly assumes that psychological abuse and the first three violence items (e.g., slaps) are automatically less injurious than the items in the severe violence index. Many strongly object to creating what Liz Kelly (1987) calls a “hierarchy of abuse based on seriousness” because emotional abuse is often experienced as more harmful than physical violence (Chang, 1996; Kirkwood, 1993), and a slap can often draw blood or break teeth.

    * The CTS works from an ideological base that presumes that violence is family-based, rather seeing the issue as one of male violence directed toward women.

    * The CTS only asks about several specific types of abuse, but does not ask about many others. Many researchers fear that respondents will not report abuse that is not asked about, such as scratches, burns, and sexual assault.

    * The methodology of the CTS is simply to count the raw number of violent acts committed. What it cannot tell us is why people use violence. Thus, CTS data almost always report men and women as equally violent, and thereby miss the fact they use violence for different reasons. Women use violence for a variety of reasons, but a common one is to defend themselves. Men typically use violence to control their female partners (DeKeseredy, Saunders, Schwartz, & Alvi, 1997; Ellis & Stuckless, 1996).

    * The CTS only situates violence and verbal aggression/psychological abuse in the context of settling conflicts or disputes (note again the preamble above). In doing this, it ignores a large number of control-instigated assaults that do not have their root in conflicts or disputes. Even worse, it may miss attacks that “come out of the blue” with no external reason or dispute to mediate. These attacks, whether physical or verbal violence, may be as or more highly injurious as those that stem from conflicts or disputes. The CTS, although it may accurately count numbers of blows struck, overlooks the broader social psychological and social forces (e.g., patriarchy) that motivate men to abuse their female partners.

    —–

    As suggested above, the CTS does not provide adequate answers to this question. Much worse is that many people think that the answers the CTS provides do in fact deal with this question. The data that arise from the use of the CTS are commonly, and problematically, used to show that violence in relationships is “sexually symmetrical” (Dobash, Dobash, Wilson, & Daly, 1992). In other words, by simply counting the number of blows struck, the data appear to show that women are just as, if not more, violent than men. Unfortunately, this crude methodology can hide as much or more than it can illuminate (Schwartz & DeKeseredy, 1993).

    These problems can be avoided by including questions about motives, meanings, and contexts in different sections of the CTS or CTS2. For example, DeKeseredy and Kelly (1993) placed the following three questions after both the first three and the last six violence items in the CTS, as part of a national study to measure the prevalence of violence in Canadian university and college dating:

    On (the following) items, what percentage of these times overall do you estimate that in doing these actions you were primarily motivated by acting in self-defense, that is protecting yourself from immediate physical harm?

    On (the following) items, what percentage of these times overall do you estimate that in doing these actions you were trying to fight back in a situation where you were not the first to use these or similar tactics?

    On (the following) items, what percentage of these times overall do you estimate that you used these actions on your dating partners before they actually attacked you or threatened to attack you?

    In analyzing the data generated by these questions, DeKeseredy et al. (1997) did not find support for the sexual symmetry thesis. Rather, a substantial number of women reported that their violence was in self-defense or “fighting back.” These findings are consistent with Saunders’ (1986) study of battered women. Thus far, the sexual symmetry thesis has only been supported by those using crude measures, such as the CTS with no further questioning.

    The most important point of this paper is that the bulk of the research in this field has simply counted blows (who hit whom, and how often). The CTS2 speaks to one context issue (but only one) by asking about injury. A light slap may be different than one that jars loose several teeth. A push out of the way is different than a push down a flight of stairs. However, the survey still does not easily differentiate between a victim fighting back for her life, a survivor retaliating, and an instigator of violence without cause. All are considered violent. Even the more recent strategy of asking who struck the first blow (purportedly to tell who is the aggressor and who is fighting in self-defense) can be hard to place in context. When a woman has been beaten 30 times in the past and knows from her husband’s behavior that a beating is coming within minutes, and further knows that if she strikes first she will end up being hurt less, does that mean that the violence is the woman’s fault?

    Men and women are not equally abusive Robert, and your repeated postings of stuff you find on men’s and fathers’ rights web sites won’t change that. I suggest you stop now and watch a nice, pleasant movie.

  • Robert Brown

    No Countess, I do not feel threatened, the truth is on my side. I have never undermined violence against women. I know it is a serious situation but your ideology prohibits you from understanding the other side of the issue so you accuse me of cutting and pasting and taking things out of context. That is totally untrue. I don’t know where you have come up with this cutting and pasting. These are legitimate articles albeit ones that you don’t like. I have been around gender-feminists long enough to know that anything they dislike they ridicule or dismiss as just not possibly true.

    Why can’t you at least be rational and admit that professionals other than gender-feminists produce statistics. Your desire to vilify men is transparent. Are you saying that Dr. Linda Kelly’s research is invalid?

    I don’t think I am wasting my time. It obviously hit a nerve with you. Sometimes, Countess, the truth hurts.

    I have many hobbies, I don’t need you to tell me to find another one. I will not tell you to find another hobby. Keep writing. I know I will

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    Robert, studies that find parity between men and women regarding domestic violence rely exclusively on the Conflict Tactic Scales. I have already demonstrated how problematic the CTS is. The majority of of domestic violence is committed by men against women. Nothing you post here is going to change that.

    You really need to calm down. Try listening to some Enya, or something.

  • Robert Brown

    I know, Countess, you aren’t gonna like these stats either

    HUSBANDS AND WIVES ASSAULTING EACH OTHER AT NEARLY SAME RATE

    What domestic violence presenters don’t tell you

    How many know that the same research which is used to say that a woman is severely assaulted by her husband/boyfriend every 15 second in this country, also indicated that a man is severely assaulted by his wife/girlfriend every 14.6 seconds.
    (Straus, M. A., 1977)

    How many know that although most Archival research (data which comes from police arrest reports, hospital records, judicial reports, and domestic violence shelters usually set up to help female victims) indicates only a small percentage of male victims of domestic violence, that the vast majority of scientific Survey research continues to indicate that husbands and wives are assaulting each other at nearly the same rate, a range from 35 to 50 percent male victims.
    (Straus, M. A., 1977; Steinmetz, 1978; Brutz & Ingoldby 1981; Makepeace 1981; Makepeace 1983; Elliot, D. S. et al., 1985; Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R., 1986; Meredith et al. 1986; Szinovacz, 1987; Barling et al., 1987; Mason & Blankenship, 1987; O’Leary & Arias, 1988; Malcolm, G., 1994; Dunn, K., 1994; Coochey, J., 1995; Carrado et al., 1996)

    How many know that when Feminist groups and domestic violence workers are exposed to these facts they will immediately minimize the importance of these studies by raising the argument that even if women do assault their partner it is usually for reason of self-defense, yet they produce no scientific research to support this claim other than some case studies or anecdotal information. Although limited, scientific research data suggests that only 10-20% of women assault their male partners for reasons of self-defense. Domestic violence shelters are likely to see these women and are less likely to see the 80-90% of women who assault their husbands/boyfriends for reasons other than self-defense. Interestingly, about 30% of the men said they assaulted their partner in self-defense.
    (Carrado, et al., 1996; Sommer, 1992)

    How many know that survey research suggest that women who are assaulted are 9 times more likely to report to police and 5 times more likely to tell a friend/relative than men who are assaulted by their wives. (Stets, J. & Straus, M. A., 1990) In general only about 8-10% of women who are assaulted and 1-2% of men who are assaulted report the assault to an agency/authority. (Fontes, 1998) This is likely why archival data indicates more female victims.
    How many know that most assaults between partners are mutual 48.6%, men only 25.5%, and women only 25.9%. Or that women are more likely to stick the first blow against their intimate partner, as reported by women themselves. (Straus, 1997) One study showed that 83% of the couples studies engaged in “bi-directional or mutual physical aggression.”
    (Jennifer Langhinrich-Rohling et al., 1996).

    How many know that 60% of women who are arrested for domestic violence against their husbands have previous criminal records.
    (Jurik, N. C., 1989; Jurik, N. C., & Gregware, P., 1989)

    How many know that although women are seven times more likely to report they needed to see a doctor as a result of being assaulted by their husband (Gelles, 1996), one does not know if they are seven times more likely to actually be injured by their husbands than husbands are by their wives. Only 3% of the women reported they needed to see a doctor and only 0.4% of the men reported they need to see a doctor as a result of being assaulted. (Straus, M. A., 1997) Women are nearly twice as like to use an object when she assaults a male partner which can equalize the level of injury he receives.
    (Straus & Gelles, 1986)

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    Waste your evening copy/pasting men’s and fathers’ rights regurg to your heart’s content, Robert. You obviously feel so threatened by a feminist who posts the truth about those issues that you feel it necessary to drown out any valid information on those subjects with men’s rights nonsense. Nothing you’ve posted is anything I have not seen before. You are like most men’s/fathers’ rights activists in the kind of behavior you engage in. I have better things to do than to keep responding to you. I’ve sufficiently gutted what you’ve posted so far. I’m going to enjoy “CSI” and “Without A Trace” that I taped last night, and it’s dinner time.

  • Robert Brown

    Thanks for the music suggestion, actually I prefer Clannad over Enya, although I think the lead singer of Clannad is Enya’s sister. To each his/her own, I guess. Any movie suggestions for this evening?

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    Ohhh, Robert, Clannad. I like that group. I have one of Maire Brennan’s solo CDs. My husband prefers Enya, but we listen to both.

    A good, under-rated movie that’s perfect for Halloween is “The Devil’s Backbone”. It’s about children living in an orphanage during the Spanish civil war. There is a ghost in the orphanage. My description doesn’t do the movie justice. This movie deserves more attention than it gets. You can find it at Blockbuster, in the foreign film section. It’s in Spanish with English subtitles.

    Now, onto “CSI” and “Without A Trace” and dinner. Enjoy your movie, if you watch it.

  • Robert Brown

    Countess, thanks for the movie suggestion, sounds like a good one.

    I don’t think you have gutted anything. The posts are not meant for you. Don’t waste your time responding to them.

    My only hope is that maybe one person that reads this will do their own investigation and come to their own conclusions after reading both sides of the issue. There are two sides to this issue.

    I would, though, like to know what your idea of cutting and pasting is. I always thought that it entailed taking paragraphs from different articles and putting them together. I have not done that. For anyone interested, I will gladly send the URL.

    Since you do admit that men and boys are victims of domestic violence do you support shelters for these men and boys being made available? Do you agree that these violent women should, like their male counterparts, be made to seek treatment? Should these violent women loose custody of their children if they are the sole abusers? Presently, the system denies that women are abusers and therefore are not obligated to receive treatment for the violence they inflict. How can the problem of family violence ever be solved if women are not accountable for their criminal behaviour? I will not even touch the rash of women teachers who have recently been sexually assaulting young boys.

    Again, thanks for the movie suggestion!

  • Arizonadad

    In my case I was not permitted an evidenturary hearing or permitted to prove anything. My ex wife is trained in the deadly martial art form of tae kwon do and is ex military. I am a viet nam vet. she admitted under oath that during our 9.5 year marriage I never laid a hand or her or the children. she had threatened to kill me during one of her psychotic episodes.

  • Eric Olsen

    Robert, please stop copying and pasting whole news stories from other sources – thanks

  • http://www.bhwblog.com bhw

    I would, though, like to know what your idea of cutting and pasting is. I always thought that it entailed taking paragraphs from different articles and putting them together. I have not done that. For anyone interested, I will gladly send the URL.

    Robert, I’m an editor here at Blogcritics. What you’re doing IS copying/pasting because you’re … um, copying, verbatim, content from another source and pasting in as a stand-alone comment here at Blogcritics.

    Please make your own point, and feel free to back it up with other sources if you’d like. But please do stop dumping large volumes of content from other sources without making any commentary of your own.

    Oh, and each time you do quote a from another source, make it a short exceprt and include the URL. Do this every time. Nobody should have to ask for a link.

  • SaraJaneSteel

    I think using these gender-based statistics is really besides the point. It’s no earth-shaking revelation that a child can be abused by the father AND/OR the mother. These stats of “the likelihood of child abuse is more prevalent when the child is left with the father” or vice versa reduces this to a petty battle of the sexes. There’s seems to be such a blame-fest going on no one appears to be paying attention to the very reason this topic is up: the CHILDREN.

    IMHO: in this case (child abuse), I believe that either parent (in some cases, BOTH parents) are ill-prepared, under-educated, under-funded and in all other ways UNFIT to even BEAR children, to say nothing of RAISING them. I see what’s going on in front of me, and it gets worse with each generation: For the most part, parents don’t know WHHHAAT THE FFFFUCKKK they’re doing!!!!

    Oh, but the parents raise up in defense “I know what’s best for my child”….”I WANT the best for my child”…But how do they REALLY know what’s best?? Where did they get thier qualifications? People seem to take for granted the (erroneous) belief that having a functional pair of reproductive organs equates parental qualification. That, in that instant they magically become aware of what to do, what to provide to give the best possible upbringing for thier child…..But history has shown this is simply not true. The innate sense animals have when they bear young is something that is not fit for comparison…And WANTING the best for your child is not only not enough, it just may be something that is too tough to actually deliver (or even figure out) and the “parents” just can’t cut it…(and I can’t help but be reminded of the old saying, the road to hell is paved with good intentions).

    I see it as so tragic that these parents’ skill, mettle and sense of responsibility (or lack thereof) is only questioned AFTER the child is born and not before…but by then it’s far too late. And the only planning these types of parents make is stocking up on diapers and milk formula, the preparation, setting aside room for a crib…..IF THAT!! The rest is seemed to be made up as they go along. Can you see what’s sorely lacking? The way I see it, a parent isn’t really raising a child, he/she is raising AN ADULT…And if this endeavor isn’t treated as such, there will be repercussions that will more than likely carry on when YOUR child becomes a parent. Your deficiences will become THIERS. I have a hunch that if these parents would look in through the right end of this scope….there would be a shift in thier consciousness (however small) and this negative spiral would begin to slow…if only a little bit.

    This problem has progressed so far for so long, I can’t think of any solution that wouldn’t be considered austere.

    Two words: parenting license.
    You require a license for driving a car, operating a gun, etc…yet you have 1,000,000,000x more potential in creating scarring, life-altering damage when you have an impressionable mind of a young child in your very hands and you just happen to have NO IDEA what the f you’re doing. That PBS documentary illustrates this very point quite well. If after the series of screenings, interviews and examinations for the parenting license you do not pass, your right to reproduce would be revoked.

    *sigh* I know, I know… “*gasp* How dare you! That’s the kind of thinking that’s fit for the Chinese government!! How very un-American of you to even suggest such a thing!!”

    But I can’t help but see how much…not only pain, anguish and trauma this would spare, but the kind of pain, anguish and trauma that perpetuates itself like a cycle from one generation to the next as it often does with child abuse and childraising by unfit parents.

    America is supposed to be ‘the land of freedoms’ but that definition shouldn’t include ‘freedom to abuse your rights’, particularly one’s reproductive rights. But idea of American freedom by it’s very foundation was built upon “good intentions” and look at things now.The things our forefathers wished for us to revel in and pass on has slowly degraded over the years…American law is so ridden in loopholes. Our rights compromised, twisted and contorted to the will of whichever politician is in power solely to further thier agenda. America has become a perverted shadow of it’s former self. Our forefathers didn’t seem to anticipate the greedy and malignant side of human nature…Oops, that sounds like another topic for another time…..

  • http://Whateveryoneneedstorealize Arizonadad

    Is that it is the corrupt incompetent courts that are fueling the fires of abuse. the corruption is so frustraghting is truely drive some over the edge. Sciety itself is creating so much presure on the family unit that no one 40 years ago had to deal with. If you ask people to get back to basics, some have no understanding of what that is. How much less expensive is it for a family to own one car, how much less expensice is it for the entore family to set down at the dinner table together. the list can go on and on it boils down to a true basic family system with relatives close by and a one income family not trying to keep up with the joneses Kids being spoiled with every electronic toy on the market. spending quality family time together. Instead we see the malls full of unsupervized teens or out way after dark very little time where the family really interrelates with each other. something has to change and i believe that is the fact that divorce is so easy to get.

    Our correctional facilities work so well that instead of closing them down they are continualy building more. Our courts are so corrupt no one can expect justice if they can not afford to make some attorney rich. I think I speak for many people when I say it is time to take our country back from the power brokers, the major corporations and the out of control government. what happened to all of the good paying middle class jobs. The primary best paying job right now is the divorce mother working full time to support herself and three kids on child support and working so many hours she can not take the time to supervise her own children. Either we start controling divorce or it will continue to spiral to destruction. Our society will not tollerate much more.

  • Robert Brown

    I apoligize for the cutting and pasting. I am relatively new to blogging and am just learning the etiquette. Thanks for taking the time to explain.

  • Silenced mother

    “Breaking the Silence: Children’s Stories” uncovered the tip of an iceberg that has been hidden from the public’s view for the last 20 years. I write this letter because I’m concerned that a few critics of the documentary are purposely or inadvertently shifting attention away from the rest of the iceberg.

    One critic of the documentary, who started a group called “Fathers and Families”, recently organized a letter writing campaign to persuade others to write letters to criticize PBS for airing the documentary.

    I appreciate the documentary and I think the issues it covered were clearly defined. Family courts are the only forums available for handling custody and visitation cases. Many family courts are not able to appropriately handle custody and visitation cases involving abuse because:

    – There is a lack of adequate training and a lack of minimal standards for those responsible for handling domestic violence and sexual abuse cases in family courts and related offices;
    – Overwork, a lack of attention to details and no oversight in abuse cases contribute to uncorrected errors that eventually skew histories of abuse cases;
    – There are a lack of clearly defined effective roles for children’s attorneys in abuse cases; and,
    – The “parental alienation” scam that’s frequently used as “a legal tactic” for abusers takes full advantage of the environment created by the factors mentioned above.

    The individual organizing the letter writing campaign to criticize PBS wants others to share his opinion that the documentary is against fathers in general. He attempts to gather support for his cause by appealing to the “us against them” mentality and replaces the most important question of: “How we can better protect abused children in family courts?” with his own question of: “Who is more abusive?”.

    He states that “statistics show” that mothers are more abusive than fathers. Unfortunately, he distracts attention away from the main message of the documentary by using child abuse statistics out of context. While “neglect” cases comprise most of the reported child abuse cases and mothers are held responsible in most “neglect” cases, he has conveniently ignored the explanations and definitions provided with those statistics that give meaning to the numbers. For example, according to information provided with the statistics from the Department of Health and Human Services, mothers are held responsible for most “neglect” cases – which include accidental injuries and “failure to protect” cases – because mothers are typically the primary caregivers of their children.

    Perhaps the most important statistic the critic of the documentary ignores is from Childhelp USA. That is: “The actual incidence of abuse and neglect is estimated to be three times greater than the number reported to authorities.” Based on what we know about domestic violence, childhood sexual abuse and the way our family courts handle abuse cases, one could conclude that many – or most – unreported abuse cases involve battered mothers and abused children who are afraid to report abuse.

    To help us to better understand the statistics about child abuse in relation to the national scandal addressed in the documentary, the following questions about the statistics should be considered:

    Why aren’t the majority of child abuse cases reported? Who are the abusers and who are the victims in the unreported cases? The documentary shows a small representation of thousands of mothers who, trying to protect their children from abuse, are said to have variations of “PAS” and are accused of “neglect” and “emotional abuse” for trying to protect their children from further abuse. How many reported “neglect” cases are actually cases involving protective mothers? How many mothers are charged with “neglect” for being unable to protect their children from abuse?

    Thanks to the airing of the documentary and the dialogue that will follow, the public will not continue to be swayed by the smoke and mirrors thrown up by those who use statistics out of context or by those who use the “PAS” scam in their own cases or by those who use the “PAS” scam as a cottage industry to make a living in the family court system. The airing of the documentary has empowered many victims of the “PAS” scandal with the hope that congressional investigations and family court reforms will take place as a result of the airing of the documentary.

    I cannot sign my name at the end of this letter. Like the mothers in the documentary, I am a protective mother who has been effectively silenced. After five years living this nightmare, I still cannot believe this is happening in this country in this day and age. I feel like I am living in a holocaust. Please investigate this national crisis and do everything you can to help. Please encourage others to do so as well.

    Thank you for reading this letter.

  • Arizonadad

    So you belong to which female groups that are making every effort to stop the progress mens groups are trying to make. there are men in the very same place you are with their history of the silver bullet technique being used to destory their relationship with their children and ruining their careers and destroying their lives for nothing more that being divorced from the extremely vendictive women they were married to. do not cry on my shoulder, I have had three children abducted by their mothers and everytime have proven they lied, I actually got custody changed twice for good cause and still never got my children back. the issue is not gender it is the corrupt courts. I agree with you the statistics they used were misrepresented, to the detriment of the mens favor. My most recent ex had to be sued by her own parents to recover child support arrears for the two children she gave away. I totally supported all of her children for nearly 10 years, she kept the one she could force me to continue to support and gave the other two away. She uses my child support to pay what she owes for her child support. My child does without.

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    Thanks for sharing your story, Silenced Mom. That was a very brave thing to do, considering some of the kinds of comments that have been posted here by fathers’ rights activists. I hope that the documentary will educate legislators and legal personnel regarding cases such as your own. Sadly, there aren’t any women’s groups that focus on helping protective moms and other moms caught up in ugly custody battles. There are individuals helping out, but there aren’t nearly enough of them. Once again, than you for commenting here.

  • Loving Grandmother

    Silenced Mother,

    I would have to disagree with you in regard to Parent Alienation Syndrome. IT IS NOT A SCAM. I have contact with many fathers, all of whom are victims of PAS, along with their children. The sad part is, they ALL have the same manipulation, only at varying degrees, being played on them.

    I have been to several single Mothers websites and I can tell you, after 3 years into this, they share their next plan of attack AGAISNT THE FATHERS, with other mothers. And then they share the laughs.

    There are many, many forms of PAS. THE CHILDREN SUFFER, THEY ARE THE VICTIMS.

    I do agree, there is an iceberg, but your in the wrong ocean. Stepmoms, sisters, aunts and grandmothers are speaking up for the fathers and what is going on. They see first hand the devastation and distruction of children.
    The truth will be revealed.

    NO one on this earth can tell me, the sick, twisted crap my grandchild is fed, IS NOT PAS.

    I could also share with you court transcripts of PAS being proven in courts. It would take paint off the wall of what some people won’t do.

  • Arizonadad

    Was it the Galuzo v Galuzo case the US Supreme court ruled on that ruled PAS is a reason to consider a change of custody, because 22 states have already recognized it as a valid complaint and because it passed the FREY test? And isn’t it a fact that the american soiciety of psychology will not be able to add it to their list until 2010 because that is when their next changes to the list are to take place? And if the US Supreme court ruled it is a valid complaint does that make it case law for all states?

  • Arizonadad

    Well she did it again and may get away with it again. I just found out friday that my child was being relocated to georgia from new mexico. No notice of entent to relocate has been filed. My ex wife has not made any contact with me for several months. she uses our child to transmit any information to me putting our child in the middle. Her past practice has been to move just before filing for divorce, so I am assuming that husband number five will be history very soon.

    So far I have contacted my local sheriff for assistance and he refused to take a report. I have contacted my state attorney General, the Sheriff in the last location, the local FBI office, my district state senator, My US senator and a local TV station. So far nobody seems the least bit interested in persuing a charge of parental interference or child abduction. One of the many reasons the custody was reversed in the first place was the number of moves in such a short period of time. My ex wife assured the new mexico judge that she had purchaseda new home and was going to continue to live in that state perminently. The judge is requored by every law on the books to enforce my change of custody order and violated some 18 state and federal laws when she refused to enforce that order. Now my ex wife is on the run again. she has terminiated all telephone contact that was ordered by the court and computer contact as well. changed our childs school in the middle of a semester. I’m sure she had to get rid of all of my childs pets, again. My daughter was on the honor roll last year, this year she seems disinterested. Her mother has destroyed the college account I set up for her. she says its ok because she is not smart enough to go to college anyway. I hope some one helps soon, one of the responsible law enforcement agencies because my ex wife is destroying our daughter. And until someone else does something I am powerless to stop her. Three states, four courts and seven judges have criminally interfered with my legal access and rights to my child. when is this going to stop?

  • Loving Grandmother

    Arizonadad,

    And PBS said PAS is a legal tactic. Ya, right. This is PAS.

    I would take your story to the media or find some good fathers activitists groups.

    So much for your rights.

  • MOM

    I do not believe in PAS. I don’t think there is a systematic effort by custodial parents to alienate their children from the other parent. I think its just parents that haven’t got their issues with each other under control and are using their children to vent their frustrations. The children easily pick up on this and as they are usually living with the one parent most of the time they don’t want to do anything to trigger or upset the parent they are living with most of the time so they try not to show that they care for the other parent when deep inside I believe they really do.

  • kevin smith

    Well I know PAS exists personally and as far as I know there is no debate as to wether it exists or not, just whether it should be classified as a disease or mental illness.

    If 5-10% of cases involve custody disputes why cant we just do more thorough investigation,short term and long term???I would think either a TRULY abusive person,or a person exhibiting PAS,would be easily discovered by a trained expert.Especially in cases where the parties dont have the money for psychologists and experts etc.
    A neutral party who is TRAINED in psychology and not a party to either side.

    just my opinion

    kevin

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    Kevin Smith: “Well I know PAS exists personally and as far as I know there is no debate as to wether [sic] it exists or not, just whether it should be classified as a disease or mental illness.”

    True. There is no debate as to whether it exists or not. It doesn’t exist. It is not included in the DSM-IV. The American Psychological Association has already written a statement that shows it does not support “alienation”.

    APA Presidential Task Force On Violence And The Family

    [excerpt – bold my emphasis]

    Family courts frequently minimize the harmful impact of children’s witnessing violence between their parents and sometimes are reluctant to believe mothers. If the court ignores the history of violence as the context for the mother’s behavior in a custody evaluation, she may appear hostile, uncooperative, or mentally unstable. For example, she may refuse to disclose her address, or may resist unsupervised visitation, especially if she thinks her child is in danger. Psychological evaluators who minimize the importance of violence against the mother, or pathologize her responses to it, may accuse her of alienating the children from the father and may recommend giving the father custody in spite of his history of violence.

    Some professionals assume that accusations of physical or sexual abuse of children that arise during divorce or custody disputes are likely to be false, but the empirical research to date shows no such increase in false reporting at that time. In many instances, children are frightened about being alone with a father they have seen use violence towards their mother or a father who has abused them. Sometimes children make it clear to the court that they wish to remain with the mother because they are afraid of the father, but their wishes are ignored.

  • Kelly Baker

    There sure are a lot of misogynist comments on here from a bunch of people claiming to respect and treat women well. Why are these men so opposed to keeping sexually abused children away from their abusers?
    Why are they so angry that children are telling their side?
    Why do they conflate children being heard when they report abuse with attacking all men?

    Do they believe all other men are also beating their wives and raping their children? So if one gets held accountable the cat is out of the bag and they all have to stop? Wrong guys, most men do not hate women or abuse children.

  • John Jameson

    what “rights” are all of these angry “dads” asking for exactly? The right to have a child’s report of sexual abuse by their father ignored? The right to punish a woman who divorces you by taking the kids away from her? The right to make sure women who report domestic violence are ignored or better yet punished by the courts for telling on them?
    What RIGHTS are we talking about?

  • Pat Parker

    I don’t see why these angry men are so insistently changing the subject.
    The kids in that video told the camera that they didnot want to be with their abuser. They said that they were afraid to be with himbecause more abuse would happen. What is so threatening about abused children telling the world about how they feel and how they want to be protected from abuse? Who could possibly feel angry about these kids speaking up besides an abuser?

  • hmmm…

    can one of you boys show me ONE place where even ONE feminist claims that women are never abusive or men are never victims?

    THANKS

  • reality

    Well, if all of you had kept up with things in the media, you know what……find it yourselves.

    Breaking the Silence has a few secrets.

  • Rick

    This IS a very scary group. They attack every man, every father and every parent who simply wants to be a part of his kids lives.This lady Heller something, flatly refuses to acknowledge the fact, that there are some great, caring, loving an outstanding fathers, whom have been falsely accused of henious crimes by the mother and her unscrupulous attorneys just to get the upperhand in a custody case.Lies, innuendoes and false allegations, are a part of their tools and weapons they frequently use to deny an innocent child his/her right to have a healthy and loving relationship with her/his father. The feminist movement and it’s puppets, are successfully implementing their goal of eliminating men from the equation,and as a result, our children will suffer at the hands of their mothers, the real abusers.

  • Angella

    Honestly men DO have rights and I hardly think that should be a question. I have seen this happen, where children were given to unfit- abusive fathers more often then I have seen it go the other way. I think that if YOUR NOT ABUSIVE YOU HAVE NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT HERE. I have read this book and I think its great, it doesn’t say all men are bad at all. However, I just read through some of these comments and saying things like the author should be shot etc … does not prove you are not violent in the least. Saying “Abusive fathers are far more likely than nonabusive parents to fight for child custody, not pay child support, and kidnap children” is a fact. That doesn’t mean its anti-men- this book is anti-abusive men and Everyone should be against abusive men- esp. non-abusive men. They are the ones giving you a bad name, not the women who stand up for each other and children.

  • Rick

    In a Domestic dispute, all a woman has to do is call 911, say she was physically, verbally or emotionally abused and the man is immediately arrested. Without ANY prove, he can be incarcerated for weeks. In the meantime, the Social Worker assigned to the case, is telling this woman, that in order to protect herself and her children from this “Monster” and sociopath, there are many ways to completely eliminate him from her life. Then, in conjunction with her attorney, the GAL assigned to the case, the court psychologist and the therapist,they begin to build a case all based on “false allegations”.From then on, it is the responsibility and duty of the father to prove himself innocent of all those evil and wicked lies.These tactics ladies and gentlemen, are widely and very often use by the legal and mental health communities to get the upperhand in custody cases and in the process, ruin the man’s life. Unfortunately and for obvious reasons, NOBODY keeps any statistics on this HUGE problem and the people involved, knowing that what they do is deeply wrong, illegal and unethical, usually look the other way. I challenge anybody here on these boards to openly, honestly and , with the facts, address this travesty of the law.

  • Darla LeNoir

    Whoever Mom, is thank you for posting the site about my daughter Keyarah on Oct 27! My sister told me just today.

    I was accused of PAS, unfortunately it wasn’t true, however, that didn’t stop the courts from actually taken my daughter from the lifestyle she was accustomed to and placing her in squalor.

    Now my ex-husband gets to warp her mind and make her believe she can only be on welfare because he’s to lazy to get off of his butt and get a job.

    Yes, I’ve seen woman use their children to get back at their ex, however, these same women are the ones raising and supporting these children, the “fathers” are claiming to love. I’m not saying all me are dogs, just the majority, which is mostly all of them.

    Their are very “few men” who actually want their children, the others, like my ex, just wants the support and guess what I don’t mind paying it, my daughter is worth every, every penny of it! Do I care that it doesn’t go for her? No, I still send her clothes, shoes, and whatever else she needs, it’s not about my ex, it’s about my daughter and yes he is a “a**hole” and he knows it.

    I myself take joy in knowing “Every DOG does have it’s day!” Hopefully I’m around to see it!

  • Rick

    Mrs. LeNoir: Forgive me for asking but how in the world did you EVER have a child with such a low-life loser? Most women who are ALWAYS complaining about how awful and terrible their exx are, ALL dogs, seem to lack a sense of being keenly selective and not jumping in bed with the first idiot that offers them the moon. As a man, I am aware of the fact that there are thousands of men…? who do not deserve to be call fathers and in fact, should be locked up for their irresponsible behavior. On the other hand, there are millions of us who happen to be outstanding dads, caring, loving and excellent providers. You want to save yourself any future headches? Be careful who you have kids with.Don’t blame us all for YOUR mistakes.

  • reality

    Mrs. LeNoir,

    then why do they call it the Malicious Mother Syndrome? Funny how when mommy does the PAS to the child, no one holds a benefit for the Father.

    I have access to many cases regarding PAS, the court trnascripts and so on. After reading thru many of them, the right decision was made, custody to the father.

  • Angella

    Rick-
    You said “In a Domestic dispute, all a woman has to do is call 911, say she was physically, verbally or emotionally abused and the man is immediately arrested. Without ANY prove, he can be incarcerated for weeks. In the meantime, the Social Worker assigned to the case, is telling this woman, that in order to protect herself and her children from this “Monster” and sociopath, there are many ways to completely eliminate him from her life.”
    I am not trying to attack you, but that is not really true.
    I have been thrown in jail because my ex-fiancé attacked me and the neighbor called the cops because we were fighting. We BOTH went to jail and I didn’t do anything wrong, believe it or not.
    Also- emotional and verbal abuse is really hard to prove and to get someone arrested for- Even when someone is obviously physically abused the abuser may only be held for one night and sometimes he isn’t even held that long. I wish it was that easy, maybe less people would suffer honestly since they could get proper help. I know all of this from experience so at least for me this is all the truth.
    Lastly- getting rid of an abuser is not easy, in fact, the risk of dying from DV increases when you try to leave and even after you “rid your self of them.” Abusers don’t really like when you decide how to live your own life, they don’t take you leaving lightly and like 75% of DV deaths happen while trying to leave- or after you get away.

  • Rick

    Dear Angela: That was a very nice and respectful response. You do deserve a lot better. As was a victim of DV myself. It(DV) was just the beginning of ten long years of pure hell.The legal system is way over-rated. It NEVER works to solve your problems. On the contrary, it creates chaos and mayhem in your life and the lives of your love ones.After I spent my life-savings and almost lost my sanity and realized that it had ALL been my fault. I married the wrong person. PERIOD.It’s been ten years since and now I am veeeeery selective as to whom I go out with.I still have not found the right person to spend quality time with but I am at peace, and a firm commitment of never, as a result of my mistakes, to get involved with the unscrupulous, inept and incompetent system. Thank God, I survived the legal and mental health communities. Many others didn’t.My advise to you is,be very, very, very selective when picking the man of your dreams.Avoid the system at all costs. It’s only a very expensive, painful and life-changing experience. Again, you sound like a wonderful woman and the right man would be thrill and blessed to have you as his soul mate.
    Wish you the very best.

  • http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog The Countess (Trish Wilson)

    For the record, Malicious Mother Syndrome was made-up junk science that is not recognized as valid by the American Medical Association. It has no validity in medical or legal circles. It’s just a rehash of the equally invalid Parental Alienation Syndrome.

    Women don’t routinely make up allegations of abuse and their partners are immediately arrested and thrown in jail. Women certainly can’t get restraining orders by merely claiming abuse. A 1999 Women’s Bar Association Law Journal article about domestic violence and restraining orders by Pauline Quirion, Esq., stated that “[t]he high frequency with which RO’s [sic] are issued might lead some skeptics to assume that these orders are granted too easily for minor offenses and almost any man is at risk of being a defendant. The data from the new RO database in Massachusetts reflect otherwise. Men against whom RO’s have been used are clearly not a random draw from the population. They are likely to have a criminal history, often reflective of violent behavior toward others. Research suggests that false reports of family violence occur infrequently. Although many believe that women especially will lodge false charges of child abuse or battering against their spouses in an effort to manipulate or retaliate, the rate of false reports in these circumstances is no greater than for other crimes.”

  • Rick

    The idea of getting statistics from these so called experts, is hogwash. The majority of those institutions i.e. Bar Association, American Medical Association and the rest, are part of the “boys-club” mentality.They all work together for their OWN mutual interest and financial benefits.It has nothing to do with the real world nor justice. You truly want to know what is going on? Spend a few days hanging around Family Courts, DV section. Learn how they give out Restraining Orders with no evidence of wrong doing whatsoever. Learn how attorneys manipulate the law to their own advantage and their clients’.They have lunch and a few drinks with the oppositon(your attorney) and work out ways to do you in. Their “secret” meetings behind close doors in the Judge’s Chambers. How they come to a “deal” without your consent.How men who are proven, through DNA, NOT to be the kid’s biological father, is forced to keep making Child support payments, or others who ARE the biological parents, making their payments on time and NEVER allowed to see their children. These inaccurate statistics and their sources, is just a way to justify their one sided, biased, and anti- men mentality in our society, PERIOD. I hope you guys and gals out there do not buy into it.

  • reality

    Rick,

    I don’t buy into it for one minute. Know it for what it is. Government reports also indicate where the true statistics lay.

    I am a woman, know their games too well. I have an RO for taking the child to a doctor because the mother neglects medical treatment. How life threatening is that?

    And don’t for one minute think that PAS does not exist. IT DOES and is used continiously toward this propaganda agaisnt men.

    There are many very good Fathers who should be raising their children. Fathers who would be the better parent and not play these games. Do what is best for the child.

    What my hope is, that someday, parents realize the damage they do, work on a parenting plan, which involves both parents and these games stop being played. True shared parenting would alleviate so much of the conflict. Maybe then, we will see an end to PAS.

  • Rick

    Reality: “True shared parenting” is a very noble idea. Unfortunately, in most divorces, there is so much friction and hatred, it is impossible to have a friendly and civilized divorce.Moreover, the legal and mental communities, will never allowed it to happen.Contested and nasty divorces, is their bread and butter.Imagine for a minute an amicable divorce system, where with these characters go? What would they do to survive? Another factor is that, as long as we have groups such as this site, G.A.L. programs who are desperate to take kids away from caring parents, as long as we have attorneys and psychologists, who make their money at the expense of the misery inflicted on others, the status quo, will remain. Foster Care is another institution, that has become a 12 Billion dollars per year industry and who do you think benefits from it? You are right. Those individuals above. The whole thing is a business, a very lucrative business at the expense of our precious children. Best thing to do? Stay single.
    Wish you well.

  • jot

    - – – “Breaking the Silence: Children’s Stories” presents a view of child abuse that is the opposite of the truth.

    If the stories told in the documentary were true then no, they are not the opposite of truth. It is that simple. Did the documentary claim that mothers are not abusive? Did the documentary claim to be about parental abuse by both mother and father, because if it had then yes, it could be considered biased. That however is not the case. It really is okay to zero in on one area of a matter.

    – – – In “Breaking the Silence,” men are portrayed as monsters and child abusers.

    If a person committs criminal acts, should they be portrayed as an exemplary and honorable person? Whats wrong with truth?

    – – Natural birth-fathers are protectors of their children – contrary to the message in “Breaking the Silence.”

    Not all fathers (or mothers) protect their children. A father who abuses his children could hardly be viewed as a protector nor should he be portrayed as one. Protecting someone does not mean protecting a right to beat the crap out of them.

    – – – men are often hindered in protecting their children because the media like to portray them as evil – – –

    The media has come to be what is apparently the most powerful entity in our world today. I expect it will not be much longer now before blaming “the media” becomes a defense in criminal trials. Your honor, the media made me do it. If the media was really that powerful I think a whole lot of women would walk around swilling alcohol and taking anti-depressants all day because “the media” (and everything else) has made us look like turds on a stick for a long time.

    I have a better idea – why don’t people take responsibility for their own actions instead of trying to find someone or something else to blame their unacceptable behaviors on.

  • Chris

    After reading all the comments, I hate to say I agree with some more than others. I am recently seperated from my high school sweet heart. We have been together for nine years and married for five. Through out the relationship, there was never any “fights” physical or mental. We had three beautiful children together, ages 5, 3, and 1. I am a successful business man and she is a homemaker. One weekend she looked up at me and said “we are ending”. I just laughed it off. I Didn’t take her seriously, although now I do. I know what she meant. On weekends we would go do our seperate things. Weeknights would consist of laying together watching tv while rubbing her feet. But it was different. She was wore out from the day to day duldrums of child care. She says” I wish I could talk to someone other than my kids” I would say “but your kids love hearing you talk. After three months of seperation, I understand where she is coming from. I used to be able to tuck my kids in at night and rub their little backs until they fell asleep. Now that is something that I get to do only half the time. She says she misses getting the kids ready for the day when it is my days. It is just something that takes adjusting to. When you say you have to think of the children first, just don’t say it, DO IT. I have joint custody of the kids. One week I get them for three nights a week, and the next four. Because she took care of the kids while married, I chose to work out an agreeable sum of money for child support, pay for her car and insurance, and any medical bills that may arise. Do I have to? Not in Oregon, but I choose to because I don’t want the quality of life for my kids to decline, or resent either one of us in the future. When it is my nights to have them, I tell them it is o.k. to cry, to miss mommy. I miss stuff about her to. Sometimes it is more destructive on the kids than not to stay together for them. Now my kids look forward to coming home to me as well as their mother. We both have special things we do with them. When there is divorce, which will be coming, we have already decided that we don’t need lawyers. At first, she tried to use the kids against me, fearing that i would retaliate and get a lawyer and steal them from her.Now she nows I just want equal time with my kids

  • Essie

    I just wish the courts would look at both sides fairly. A friend of mine is going through hell with his ex wife. She lied time and time again to paint him as physically abusive (she claimed he tried to run her over at a daycare pickup she wasn’t even supposed to be at-in front of ten people! None of which wanted to get involved. Shame on them). So of course he has no legal rights to his kids, sees them for a few days every two weeks, and pays so much child support and daycare support (for daycare he can’t use if needed) that she gets more than half of his paycheck.
    In addition, she berates him in front of the children and brings the kids into their conversations regarding the divorce, i.e: the house, stupid possessions they’re still exchanging….Why did they need to be involved in that? It’s not their fault. She continuously tries to put them against their dad and in the end they’re left crying and upset.
    I agree that the gender war has got to stop. Be adults, be PARENTS, and think about the best situation for the kids.

  • http://groups.myspace.com/fathershaverights2 kenn stanley

    I am upset that Fathers are continuosly attacked by the media. fathers are more often than not loving, caring parents.

  • http://xenosapienprl.blogspot.com/ Pat

    I would like to offer my blogsite free for men that wish to be fathers; perhaps my struggle can act as encouragement.

    Thanks,

    Pat

  • http://www.glennsacks.com/pbs/loeliger.php a good father

    PBS’s Breaking the Silence: The film was a public relations debacle for PBS, particularly after it was revealed that one of the mothers portrayed as a heroic victim in the film had been found culpable of multiple acts of child abuse by a California Juvenile Court.

    PBS Portrays Known Child Abuser as Hero

    Juvenile Court Found Mother Culpable of Multiple Acts of Child Abuse.
    Fatherhood advocates have publicly revealed extensive court findings, records and testimony that indicate that Sadia Loeliger–portrayed as a heroic mom in a recent, nationally-broadcast PBS documentary–abused children under her care. A Tulare County Juvenile Court concluded in August of 1998 that Sadia Loeliger had committed multiple acts of abuse, and adjudged both her daughters as dependents of the Juvenile Court.

    Sadia Loeliger and her 16 year-old daughter Fatima were key figures in PBS’s Breaking the Silence: Children’s Stories. The film purports to detail an alleged crisis of fit mothers losing custody of their children to violent husbands in divorce. In the film, Sadia is portrayed as the victim of anti-mother bias in family courts.
    Doris Nava Arellano, Sadia’s babysitter for 18 months, testified that “every child in the house is afraid” of Sadia and that “Sara actually has scars on the back of her legs and on the left side of her head from Ms. Ali-Loeliger’s attacks on her.” for the full story

  • http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/Communications_Office/oral_arguments/06/1213/1213.asp#060896 jackie

    Interesting to see the diverse comments on Father’s rights and alientation abuse by mothers. I was doing research for a client and came across this interesting case (Barth v. Barth, in Ohio). Ohio Supreme Court link:

    Interestingly enough, as I reviewed the documents it became clear to me that effectively the mother won custody by taking the children away from the father. She ends up with sole custody and the case is in court for 2 or 3 years while they decide whether the case should be heard in Ohio or California. Meanwhile the kids suffer because the parties clearly can’t come to a simple agreement on custody and visitation.

    Not sure what you think – but I know having been through a divorce that the parents should never place unnecessary geographical boundaries between either parent and the children. Doing so hurts the children. The innocent victim in the marriage.

    Call it Parental Alienation if you want. I’ll simply call it bad parenting. If you want to move away from your husband – move. But don’t take the kids and then deny him visitation. Don’t hide behind the court for 2-3 years while you tell the kids that the father is a liar, cheater, or whatever. No matter what you feel, he’s their father. Respect that.

    Same goes for you dad. Be there for the kids. Visit as often as you can. One day the children may just decide to live with you.

    And as for the lawyers in the case? Your sick. You are just feeding on the anomosity and hate between the parties to take your rich fees. If these parties were on welfare this case would never see the light of day in the court system.

    Oral arguments are Wednesday at the Supreme Court of Ohio will be interesting to see how they decide this case.

  • MotherTeresa

    Sadia Loeliger was never proven to be a child abuser based on evidence. It was all false allegations trumped up by the father who used an illegal immigrant’s testimony. The woman never showed up in court. Ohters supported dad’s false claims. It is interesting to note that when such claims are made against a father by a mother, of coarse the father’s rights groups claim they are false but jump all over it when its a claim against a mother but just as false claims against a dad can be believed by judges, child protective angencys, custody evaluators etc so too were these claims against Sadia Loeliger. Her daughter has chosen to be with her mother now. Thats proof the father tried set mom up.

  • MotherTeresa

    The only thing that will help children of divorce is for their parents to work together and treat each other with dignity and respect. Only then can true shared parenting work. Any parent that can’t put their issues with the other parent aside and work together in the best interest of their child is not a fit parent because fit parents cooperate.

  • Bob Pierce

    I believe in fathers rights and I believe in mothers rights. In simpler english, I believe in parents rights. I believe abuse happens on both sides of the family. My disgust comes from automatic awarding custody to the mothers simply because they are the mothers. I get disgusted when I turn on the news and the only ones that is spoke about is “Deadbeat Dads”. Why not report on Deadbeat parents? Who would want to fund that story? Children growing up without their fathers is a staggering major reason for the failing of many areas in our country. Remember when parents stayed together because they loved each other and dated for awhile (not 3 months) planned their future and generally knew each other well enough that divorce wasn’t the norm but neither was hopping in bed with the first guy or girl you knew after puberity. Men stand up and be a man. Make other men accountable for the life. Woman be the ladies of the family. Don’t say what isn’t true. Things get to tough (they do sometimes with our childish ways) go to mom’s house not to the shelter. Parents-be friends, be lovers and most of all be parents. We are alive on this earth long enough to keep making the same mistakes over and over again. Young People-do it right before your married and you won’t have to worry about what happens when you divorce.

  • http://www.daddyblogger.com Angela Pedersen, R.N.

    It is a child’s right to have EQUAL time with BOTH fit parents!

    Domestic Violence: Men and Women are victims!

    Also, states and family court systems profit from the creation of a non-custodial parent (usually the father)through Title IV-D federal incentives. The states and court systems must stop “pimping” our children for the sake of profit.

  • kb

    My ex-wife is a convicted batterer, yet she has residential custody of my daughter. The ex consistently denies parenting time to me by whisking my daughter off when I am supposed to pick my daughter up. The ex has filled my daughters head with lies about me and my family, which has been witnessed by myself, my family and neighbors, if it’s not PAS I don’t know what to call it. I’m tired of being portrayed as a monster.

  • http://www.mediaradar.org Andrew_S

    There is a great and varying disparity in truth reading when gender politics is thrown into the mix, just like any cooked books. They can be interpreted in many ways and the politics here is simply motivated by money and employment for it’s own sake. My understanding is beyond the simplicity of political ‘he said she said’, proxies for social engineering and trying to understand the product. The legal system is and has been the hidden third party in US social politics. Since they have inserted themselves by fiat into the business of people husbandry. Females are predictable, and never were intergenerational thinkers, I think a poster quoted ‘the me first’ mentality, and just as men are predictable in their behaviour, and I find no equality in todays statute laws that are so far removed from the constitution or intent, it is no longer a laughing matter.
    And herein so it would appear by the postings of the socially dysfunctional females who will not even consider espousing any form of legal equality. The laws are draconian if not downright sexist, supported by the very system that pretends through this very elastic doctrine of ‘the best interest of children’. In simple terms I have not heard anyone state this clearly. The law by sheer stats alone and it’s product outcome, makes it quite clear that women are to be forever bound to children, and men shall be bound in servitude to that purpose. Now if family courts do not openly practise this then I need to have a retrial or a rectal lobotomy. I believe the legal system is socially autistic and certainly not independant of the state/federal social actuaries. I also believe women of the future have pimped themselves and children to a worse form of patriarchy yet to unfold, and we shall all pay, males for their basic and predictable chivalry and conditioning, and women for their betrayal of what is and always has been a tenuous relationship. The pointy finger game is only good for politicians. OUR children, all of them will pay the highest price any society has yet paid for the inequities of their parents and their choices. Why is it that dysfunctional harridans the likes of trish wilson who project personal glass house relativity as being a social norm, even to the cost of others. Statistically based on the DOJ figures 23,000 males annually in the US not only suffer abject trauma at the hands of this current gynocatric based cleptocracy, but they take their own lives, and this does not include children, mothers nor many others whose lives are mere fodder that ensures a system is well fed. The carnage is intergenerational and often not immediate, this has a disconnected purpose and beyongd the socially autistic. The simple destruction of the private class of individual, in the name only of social feminism. Guess what it is still ultimately a male dominated doctrine, but a gynotopia the likes of which I gringe at and the most ardent healthy communist types would be absolutely proud of. After all I am sure in the future you will be told if and when to have a child and with whom, for the benefit and by state mandate. You don’t get a choice.
    The mantra from many a eugenisist was ‘It is important to remove from the minds of men, their sense of family, religiosity and independence’, it was never said of women, has anyone ever read ‘body parts’. What is to come has to be worse. You go Trish, is this you trying to get a new mercedes or a jaguar – Of course females never lie, about anything.

  • http://www.fatherssupportingfathers.org NANCY LANKFORD

    I AM GOING TO KEEP THIS SHORT AND SIMPLE!
    CHILDREN ARE BORN TO A FATHER AND MOTHER WHO BOTH NEED TO PROTECT THEM. ANYONE THAT GETS IN THAT WAY OF THE PARENTS SHOULD BE ASHAMED BE IT MAY THE FAMILY COURTS OR YOUR OPINIONS.
    THE CHILD IS AN EXTENSION OF BOTH PARENTS NO MATTER KEEPING ONE AWAY.
    GIVE YOUR CHILD UNCONDITIONAL LOVE BY LOVING THEM AND THEIR OTHER PARENT THE SAME WAY.
    BE CAREFULL OF WHO YOU CHOOSE TO MARRY AND DO NOT BRING CHILDREN INTO MISERABLE RELATIONSHIPS ~
    AFTER ALL ITS BOTH OF YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT THE CHILD. PBS HAS LOST MY SUPPORT OF OVER 27 YEARS FROM THEIR DECISIONS……
    WITH US BEING A MAJOR LEADER IN PROTECTING CHILDRENS RIGHTS THEY WILL FEEL THE IMPACT UNTILL THEY CHANGE THEIR VIEWS.
    SINCERELY,
    NANCY SUMMERS LANKFORD
    AUTHOR, DIRECTOR OF PROJECT PREVENT, SUPERVISOR OF INVESTIGATAIONS FOR FATHERS SUPPORTING FATHERS, CHILD ADVOCATE, TEACHER AND MOST OF ALL A MOTHER OF 8 CHILDREN AND GRANDMOTHER OF 4 GRANDCHILDREN…

  • JMO

    I am currently being attacked. My wife petitioned the court for a Domestic Violence Protection order. My rights are in jeopordy. She has hit me on many occassions. I finally started to yell at her verbally when she attacked me. I couldn’t take it anymore and I moved out. I knew I couldn’t take the children on my own. Now, I have filed for a divorce two years after moving out. My wife is outraged, since she was getting ready to move out of state with the children. Her attorney advised her to petition for the Protection order. I have fought back verbally and if that is abuse, then so be it. But I definatley do not deserve to be taken to court with no police record and no proof of abuse. She is lying to everyone and she even has a friend who is collaborating for her in court. Luckily, I have friends and family who will do it honestly and saw many instances of her abuse. I do not deserve to have my children, my gun rights and my property taken away from me. Also, my livelyhood is in jeopordy due to my licensing. I can’t believe that anyone would think this is OK. It has to stop…!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • mike shea

    Voices in this country are no longer really heard due to such rampid acts of domestic issues conceerning seperating parents and children. the entire system has become just another capiatlist ploy to gain profit instead of going to the root of the problem.
    The american family has changed my friends. There is no more beaver, cleaver to hide behind. Marriage, divorce, seperation, its all just a matter of time before the machine breaks down and the vultures get to feed. If you want a real resolution to this, remember the trail of scorn left behind in what we do now. Our children won’t be children forever and practices and social acceptances taught by us now will surely be followed later by the same delicate little people we set out to protect.
    There is no right and wrong here. Its all wrong in reality. Reap what you soe; as is was, we as adults are always sowing, deep, relentless trends of corruption directly to our children. If you don’t think for a second that it will affect on our future then we are so blind and self-absorbed.
    If you truely want to become something more, reach into those young lives and show them that there is love, a bond that never fades. Grow with them for they are the future. Minipulate them into becomming even something beyond what you are now. Show them your time because once you have them, your time is no longer yours to keep anyway. This was at one time the real root of what breeds a creative and strong family and nation.
    Where the hell is our morals anyway? If you are not willing to die for your child, give up your time, teach them all the good things, make them aware of the bad, Why have them. You learn to be a parent by watching your own. Its all we have to go on really. If there has been a broken link in the chain then fix the damm thing so others going up it won’t ever let it be broken again.
    I grew up broken and fragile-a-chain. I put the link back so my future spawn will not have to endure it as i once have. Give those young lives a clear path and this cycle of immune and reckless defiance of the truth will be gone.

  • FRANK SOLCHAGA

    HI TO ALL–FORGIVE THE UPPER CASE AS I AM GOING BLIND. THE FOLLOWING ARE FACTS AND U MAY INTERPIT ANY WAY U CHOOSE BUT THEY SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. MN BUREAUE OF CRIMINAL APPREHENTION STATS. 1. THE MOST HAIOUSE CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN AND MEN ARE DONE BY WOMEN 65%. 2. D O J DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE STATS-FOR THE LAST 4 DECADES WOMEN HAVE OUT PACED MEN IN CRIME BY 400%. 3. WOMEN WHO HAVE APPLIED FOR WELFARE HAVE DECLARED THEMSELVES AS UNFIT MOTHERS BECAUSE THEY CAN NOT PROVIDE THE 5 BASICE NEEDS OF THE CHILD/REN-FOOD,SHELTER,CLOTHING,SCHOOLING AND MEDICLE?. 4. MN STILWATER PRISON 87% OF MALE INMATES WERE RAISED BY A SINGLE MOTHER DIVORCED/PATERNITY?. 5. 75% OF JUVENILES MN THAT ARE INCARCERATED WERE RAISED BY A SINGLE DIVORCED/PATERNITY MOTHER?. 6. DOJ STATS ACROSS THE NATION 8NDER THE NEW LAW THAT WOMEN CAN BRING AND DROP OFF A CHILD/REN AND NOT GET PROSACUTED 1,000,000 IN THE LAST DECADE. I SUPPOSE WE CAN SAY THAT ALL THESE ENTITIES ARE RUN BY MALE CHAUVINIST PIGS. HUMMMMM I PUT TOGETHER A STUDY THAT TOOK ME 5 YEARS ON BATTERED WOMEN AS I BELIEVED LIKE ALL OTHERS WOMEN WERE GETTING BATTERED-( HEATED ARGUMENTS AT THE BAR ) MY STUDY CONCLUDED FROM ALL THE MAJOR UNIVERSITYS THAT FROM A LOW OF 35% TO A HIGH OF 85% WOMEN ARE BATTERERS JUST LIKE MEN. HUMMM THE FOCUS IS LOST IT IS NOT MAN OR WOMEN IT IS THE CHILD/REN. IT IS A BILLION DOLLER INDUSTRY FOR ATTYS JUDGES AN SOCIAL SERVICES. BY THE WAY 65% IS SUBSIDIZED BY YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY MONEYS TO ALL COUNTYS. THE AVERAGE DIVORCE ACROSS THE NATION COST $35,000 THAT IS A CHILD/REN COLLIEGE EDUCATION. CHILD/REN ARE TREATED AS CHATTEL PROPERTY. IT TAKES 2 PARENTS AND A COMMUNITY TO RAISE A CHILD/REN. IF THEY CAN NOT–THROW THERE @$$ IN JAIL. THANKS FOR LISTENING

  • gepetto

    as a father i’ve faced so many hurdles, outright ridicule and discrimination in the courts. the system seems to make it so disgustingly complicated to do the best thing for a child, even when the dad is clearly the best choice. i recall my first court hearing in torrance court, where a clerk (erica) asked me “why are you doing this?” (refering to why i initiated the custody hearing). after i told her, i later found out that she divulged a lot of the information, and even advised the respondent based on what i’d said. i was devastated as this clearly gave her an advantage. this was the first in a series of events. i’ve learned so far that if your intentions are clearly positive and from your heart- things will get better, but you have to hang in there and be smart. good luck

  • Moses

    When are we men and women going to wake up and realise that there are people (evil people) who do not like us (men or women) and who do not like happy families or happy children. These (evil) people are playing us (men and women) one against the other for their own evil purpose. These same evil people do this over and over and over again. For example we now know there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq but for almost 10 years those phantom non existent weapons have driven the “war on terror” that is playing muslims against christians. It is these same evil people that are playing men against women. These people don’t care about me and they don’t care about you – wake up and smell the coffee…

  • Cindy

    Moses,

    I think you meant to post in a different thread.

  • sparky

    I’m left wondering why women continue to have children with men. The prevailing legal and social presumption seems to be that we’re all abusers. Men couldn’t possibly want custody for any reason other than to harm their mother or save a buck. There’s no biological reason anymore, just ask Nadia Sulaiman, there is not a shortage of sperm available. Come on ladies, go straight to the source and cut out the middleman.

  • Kara in Arizona

    As I saw my father Break my mom’s jaw when I was five years old, my granpa came to get my mom he stood on the Lawn with a gun to get her out of the house.However my brother and I were left in the home with my Dad.
    All you people who have these opionions but never lived throught the experiance of being left with an Abusive father need to Shut up. my Mom went back to him because it was the only Way to Be with Her Kids.

    I am so sick of hearing people who have no idea what goes on in abusive families talk as if they Know about it. PAS is crap it’s a way for controlling and Abusive men to Contuine to Hurt and Punish his ex-wife. i have seen my mom almost killed by my Dad many times to believe the ideas being pushed by the Mens movement.

    Controlling a woman’s access to her children is a anorther form of Control Men attempt to use to have power over women.

  • JB

    MEN HAVE RIGHTS TO SEE THERE CHILDREN REGARDLESS , FUCK THE LAWYERS WHO FEED OFF THIS AND JUST THINK OF THE $$$$ .

    WE WILL FIGHT TILL WE DIE FOR OUR CHILDREN .

  • Dawn Remington

    I agree that children need to be protected and the system is a miserable failure at protecting them. I believe men are perpetrators of abuse far more often than women. What needs to happen is someone needs to develop a way to find out the truth of the abuse from the children and not subject them to abuse from anyone.

  • iknowstuff

    the facts are that: even the guy who coined the term “parental alienation” a term guys use for “she’s making stuff up” later retracted his own term, admitting he made a big mistake.and people still use it.abusive guys fight for their kids because they have them already trained for their abuse. i don’t know why mothers protecting their kids even show up in court because the law for every state is that even if the court grants anything to an abuser, a mother does not have to comply if it’s not in the best interest of the child. and survivors of abuse don’t make things up. the law states that abusers don’t have rights, so don’t give up, moms! you do what you have to do so your kids have a future. you can get a confidential adress, your kids can become emancipated at 14 so they cannot be legally forced to be in horrible situations, the law is on your side. get restraining orders,renew them,but dont expect these guys to actually be arrested for violating them.jails are overcrowded so u have to be your own law enforcement.dont get caught off guard

  • Teri Fonseca

    There can be problems with both genders when it comes to divorce and custody. It would be essential for children’s growth and Developement that each case be evaluated in reality. The truth can lead to healing. The distortions that are brought into family court and litigated are ridiculous.
    Court appointed officials should be ther to protect children, with as much education they have it shouldn’t be difficult to see an abuser. Get a clue , protect children, rather then increasing the amount in your bank account.