How To Deal With Parental Alienation: An Interview With PA Expert Dr. Richard Warshak

Posted by: Matt Allen on Apr 22, 2010 Tagged in: PAS , Parental Alienation Syndrome , Children , alienation

Note: April 25 is the fifth annual Parental Alienation Awareness Day, put together by the Parental Alienation Awareness Organization. To find out how you can help or how to get April 25 recognized in your town, visit the Parental Alienation Awareness Day web site.

Dr. Richard Warshak is the author of Divorce Poison: How to Protect Your Family from Bad-mouthing and Brainwashing, a book that gives parents powerful strategies to preserve and repair loving relationships with their children.

Internationally renowned lecturer and authority on divorce, custody, and the psychology of alienated children, Warshak is a clinical, research, and consulting psychologist and a clinical professor at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center.

He also wrote the chapter on Parental Alienation Syndrome for the Expert Witness Manual, a guide for attorneys and judges dealing with expert testimony.

Read on for the two-part Q&A with Warshak about parental alienation, the signs of it, how to deal with it, and how to restore your relationship with an alienated child.

DadsDivorce.com: For someone who is entering a divorce or in the throes of it and are concerned about parental alienation happening at some point, how can they prevent it or can they prevent it from happening?

Dr. Richard Warshak: There are certainly things you can do to reduce the likelihood of it occurring. Some of it depends on your spouse but one can certainly maintain regular contact with children and keep arranged schedules of contact consistent. It’s also important to not badmouth the other parents and to not give the kids the third degree.

Don’t overreact, don’t allow your contact to be interrupted, and hang in there. If the child expresses distorted views of you, provide the information to help clarify issues when appropriate. You’ll need to exercise great patience if the other parent is alienating.

Some common mistakes parents make is overreacting, trying to talk the children out of their feelings, withdrawing from the child, and accusing the child of merely parodying the other parent’s complaints.

You don’t want to jump to conclusions and conclude that the other parent is always trying to turn the child against you. Innocent situations may turn out to just be innocent situations. Don’t immediately assume alienation is occurring.

However, if you feel the other parent is intentionally alienating, it’s important to discuss your concerns with them if you’re on civil terms. If you aren’t on that level, you need to seek counseling with a third party.

DD: I’ve heard often from parents who don’t even realize they are a victim of parental alienation. Then when you describe what it is, they suddenly go “that’s exactly what is happening to me.” So is there any way of knowing how prevalent this is?

RW: Many of the readers of my “Divorce Poison” book say they haven’t been aware they were hurting children that they weren’t doing it deliberately. It’s helped them appreciate how damaging it is to badmouth a parent.

Once parents read about it, they came to recognize they and their children are victims of it. There’s no way to know for sure due to the variations of research studies in determining the severity of alienating behavior, but it’s believed there are between 20,000-250,000 new child victims each year.

DD: So we talked about the “before,” and attempts to prevent alienation from happening. What about how to act during this stage when parental alienation is occurring? How should you act if you know your ex is alienating you?

RW: If the purposeful alienation extends to denying contact, it’s very important to get legal assistance so you know what your rights are and how orders can be enforced. You cannot allow your contact with the child to be interrupted. Time and space is the beginning to the end of the relationship.

DD: Say one parent has alienated a child. How can the other parent successfully restore that relationship with the child, or how likely is it that the relationship will ever be restored?

RW: It really depends on the circumstances. If you’re still able to gain contact with the child, you may be able to show your children through your behavior that you aren’t this demon being portrayed. Sometimes children are filled with such distortions that you’ll need professional programs to help children live with parents they claim to dislike and reject as a result of alienation.

When it’s more severe, it’s very important to have some legal intervention because the favored parent will say, “There’s nothing I can do. The child just doesn’t want to see you.”

It’s hard to overturn a child’s attitude, so use the court to enforce contact with the child and get them into counseling with you.

Note: Part 2 of this Q&A will be posted Friday.

[ Back ]

Custody and Parental Alienation in Divorce - Immediate Actions to Take and Prevent It

Custody and Parental Alienation in Divorce - Immediate Actions to Take and Prevent It

Custody and Parental Alienation in Divorce - Immediate Actions to Take to Prevent It
By Dianne Ophelia

The most important thing you can do to prevent Parental Alienation in your Divorce or Custody Case is to Act Quickly. Whatever actions you decide to take, don't wait. Every day that passes takes you further and further away from your Children.

Actions You can Take Through the Court System:

1. Document everything, absolutely everything. What occurred, what the other parent said, what you said, any statements and behavior of the children, every day.

2. Take your documentation to your attorney and explain to them that you don't want to wait to obtain custody relief from the court. Often attorneys will want you to wait 60 to 90 days or longer, which could then be too late for the children.

3. Ask for very specific Child Custody Court Orders about disparaging the other parent in front of the children; that the other parent shall encourage and see that the children exercise their time with you; and, that therapy commence immediately for the children and the parents to assist everyone in understanding how detrimental parental alienation is to children now and for years to come.

4. Make certain the aforementioned Child Custody Court Orders have "teeth." You want swift and specific remedies if the order is violated, such as a loss of time with the children by the violating parent, change of primary custody and/or mandatory therapy.

5. If the Court has the facilities for a "Case Coordinator" or "Case Management" ask that this is implemented so that you have someone you can directly report to about the activities that are taking place and they can then report directly to the court to obtain immediate remedial orders.

6. Continue to return to custody court with each violation of a court order by the opposing party. You need to establish right from the beginning, that you are not going to sit back and passively allow this type of behavior to continue.

7. Ask for primary custody in each instance, explaining that the more time the children spend with the obsessive parent, the more likely the alienation will worsen to the point that it will be irremediable.

Actions You can Take Personally

1. Keep the children out of the conflict and be certain not to engage in ANY of the behaviors of the other parent;

2. Never blame the children for their behavior. They are innocent victims and don't
understand what is being done to them. This is often difficult when they "act out."

3. Keep communication with the children open at all times. Purchase a cell phone for them to call you whenever they feel like it.

4. Stay interested in the Childrens' lives, their activities, friends, what they are interested in, movies, magazines etc. Let them know you want to be and are part of their life.

5. Send or give the children pictures, small presents or other reminders of you often.

6. Go to as many activities as possible. Even if it is a hostile environment, just show up and stay in the background, so the children can see that you are there, yet stay far away enough so that the children and/or the other parent cannot start a fight or have an emotional outburst.

7. Never play the victim, even though you are being victimized. Stay upbeat with the children and let them know they can feel totally comfortable with you.

8. Make certain the children know that you are not blaming them for their bad behavior, when the behavior is a direct result of the alienation. You don't want the children to avoid being with you because they feel guilty about prior bad behavior. They have to know that they have been and will continue to be forgiven. Be compassionate, but do set firm boundaries.


AND, MOST IMPORTANT, DON'T GIVE UP! Your children will appreciate all of your efforts, if not immediately, than once they mature and look back at the situation.

Your efforts will not go unrewarded; you may just have to be very patient waiting for the reward.

Click Here For More Information about FATHERS WINNING CUSTODY.

Dianne R. Ophelia is a Certified Family Law Specialist and is known as THE 30 YEAR DIVORCE EXPERT. She has been litigating custody and divorce cases for over 30 years, having obtained her Juris Doctorate Degree in 1977. She is considered a leader and innovator in her field.

It is Ms. Ophelia's goal to assist anyone going through the divorce or custody process by empowering them with the knowledge and ability to protect their interests both inside and outside of the Judicial System. Ms. Ophelia's writings, whether in her books, ebooks, articles or blogs, are always comprehensive, informative and easy to understand.

Click Here For Information About The Ebooks Listed Below On DIVORCE AND CUSTODY

Those Books currently available include:


Community Property
Divorce, A Survival Guide, 3rd Edition (For US Residents)
Divorce, a Survival Guide (For California Residents only)
Fathers Winning Custody
Several New Titles will be Released Soon.

Dianne also provides Family Law Divorce and Custody Mediation Services anywhere in the United States and Canada.

Article Source: [http://EzineArticles.com/?Custody-and-Parental-Alienation-in-Divorce---Immediate-Actions-to-Take-to-Prevent-It&id=2270778] Custody and Parental Alienation in Divorce - Immediate Actions to Take to Prevent It

Citizens who support Prop. 8 must defend Constitution because attorney general refuses

Why anyone is surprised about Jerry Brown is a mystery.

An attorney general of a state refusing to defend his own constitution?

Here is a man who refuses to defend a father's or a mother's rights to equal or joint custody of their own children in compliance with the California constitution is playing politics with children's futures. Single-parent homes are the single greatest breeding grounds for crime in every state, so why is this Chief Law Enforcement Officer more concerned about gay-marriage and not heterosexual marriage?

Jerry Brown is pretty gutless,and is pandering for a future run at the governor's office again, or maybe a California Senator's job?

QUEERLY BELOVED

Elected officials bail on U.S. marriage law

Citizens who support Prop. 8 must defend Constitution because attorney general refuses

---

Posted: January 09, 2010
10:15 pm Eastern

By Drew Zahn
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

California Attorney General Jerry Brown

In a case with implications for the entire country, California's Proposition 8 defining marriage as between one man and one woman goes on trial Monday with only private citizens speaking up for the voter-passed constitutional amendment – because state officials have refused to defend it.

Much is riding on the case of Perry vs. Schwarzenegger, for the lawsuit is petitioning a federal court to overturn not just a law, but a constitutional amendment passed by the people and affirmed by the state's Supreme Court. A victory for same-sex marriage advocates in the case could set a precedent for federal courts to overturn every law and amendment in the country currently protecting the traditional definition of marriage.

And yet, though Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and California Attorney General Jerry Brown are named as defendants in the suit, both have refused to act in defense of the amendment, leaving it up to the people of California to take a stand for their constitution on their own.

In June, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California verified Brown's abandonment of the case and therefore permitted quick-acting attorneys from the Alliance Defense Fund on behalf of ProtectMarriage.com, the group that sponsored the amendment campaign, to intervene in the case and take up defense where Brown refused.

At the time, ADF-allied attorney Andrew Pugno stated, "This ruling designating us to defend Proposition 8 reflects the unfortunate fact that, if left up to state officials, the will of the people would not be defended at all."

"This case is as much about whether our government is of, by, and for the people as it is about marriage," ADF Senior Counsel Brian Raum said in a statement released this week. "Just imagine how it would change our democracy if every state constitutional amendment could be eliminated by small groups of wealthy activists. It would no longer be America, but a tyranny of elitists."

ADF points out that the lawsuit, originally brought by two men and two women in same-sex relationships, has been backed by Hollywood-area public relations firm that frequently represents celebrities and their causes.

"In America, we should respect and uphold the right of a free people to make social policy choices through the democratic process," added Raum. "If a handful of activists can void a constitutional amendment adopted by 7 million Californians, we have forfeited the very core of the American democratic system – especially in this case, where the people of California affirmed something that predates America itself."

The case has now reached its trial date and will be heard beginning Monday, Jan. 11, at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco. The trial is reportedly expected to last two to three weeks.

"Monday, the people of California go on trial," Pugno added. "Our legal team is working as hard as possible to win this trial, but we are prepared to fight with every ounce of energy all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary."

YouTube coverage – openness or intimidation?

Complicating the case is a decision by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker approving the trial to be videotaped and broadcast over the Internet on the popular YouTube site.

Though many state courts allow trials to be taped with a judge's consent, the cameras have been historically prohibited during federal trials. But on Dec. 17, the Judicial Council of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals approved the nation's first pilot program for broadcasting nonjury civil trials, paving the way for Walker's decision.

"This certainly is a case that has sparked widespread interest," Walker reasoned. "I think it's worth attempting in a case of this nature and of this public interest."

The judge added, "I've always thought that if the public could see how the judicial process works, they would take a somewhat different view of it."

Defenders of Proposition 8, however, have blasted the decision, concerned that witnesses may be intimidated from honest testimony if they know their faces and words will be distributed widely to the public, where some homosexual activists have already engaged in public harassment, vandalism and even violence toward Proposition 8 proponents.

"The knowledge that you're testifying to untold thousands or millions ... can cause some witnesses to become more timid," said Michael Kirk, attorney for the sponsors of Proposition 8. "The risk is just unacceptable."

The Bay City News Service reports Judge Walker did, however, turn down requests to televise the proceedings live, preferring instead to broadcast over the Internet after a delay, in order for "the process to be completely under the court's control."

Buz Rico, the court's technical advisor, told the San Francisco Chronicle the videotape will be posted on a special YouTube channel set up for the court as soon as possible, which might be later the same day or the next morning.

---

Related offers:

"The Marketing of Evil: How Radicals, Elitists, and Pseudo-Experts Sell Us Corruption Disguised as Freedom"

"The Gay Agenda: It's Dividing the Family, the Church, and a Nation"

"See how Americans and their Constitution have been betrayed by judge-made law"

---

Previous stories:

Federal judge tosses lawsuit against Prop 8

Private lawyers to defend California Constitution

Battle over 'gay' weddings far from over

Iowa, Vermont 'marriage' decisions 'aberrations'

Traditional-marriage supporters buoyed by arguments

Lawmakers: Court should reject voters' decision

Allies rally behind Prop 8 in judicial battle

California AG attacks own constitution

Supremes to review 'gay' lawsuits against Prop. 8

Watch sparks fly as 'gay' activist mob swarms Christians

'Gays' demand endorsement of lifestyle

School holds surprise 'Gay' Day for kindergartners

School takes 1st-graders to see lesbian teacher wed

'Gay' marriage battle goes to kindergarten

'Bride,' 'groom' can't marry in California

County surrenders in same-sex marriage war

Counties to Supreme Court on 'gay' marriage: Drop dead

'Gay' rights group to Supremes: Don't let people vote

It's voters vs. black robes in November

County clerks urged to ignore same-sex marriage ruling

'Gay' marriage ruling to spark lawsuits nationwide

Whoa! Marriage laws aren't changed – yet

Supremes asked to give voters a chance

City clerk suing not to wed 'gays'

California battle over same-sex marriage not over

Black robes trash traditional marriage

California's 'judicial fiat' condemned – by judge

Plan pushes for last step in eliminating marriage

Court asked to protect 1-man, 1-woman marriage

Pro-marriage groups: 'Don't trust courts!'

Gov. Arnold 'terminates' man-and-woman marriage plan

Gov. Arnold says 'marriage' can be terminated

California handing out marriage privileges

'Marriage' to become museum piece

Homosexual marriage minces west to California

Court will decide if California voters were right

Vote or pay us damages, group tells lawmakers

7 more states say no to 'gay marriage'

Same-sex rulings will 'echo' across U.S.

Senate rejects 'gay marriage' ban

California Senate OKs 'gay' marriage

Mayor faces trial for same-sex marriages

60% of polled Americans: No homosexual marriage

It's 'gay' marriage in Massachusetts

Poll: Massachusetts opposes 'gay' marriage

'Gay' marriage ruling's consequences 'dire'

'Gay' marriage ban struck down in Massachusetts

Bush to block 'gay' marriage

Poll suggests backlash on 'gay' issues

Court strikes down Texas sodomy law

Supreme Court hears 'right to sodomy' case

High court to give 'gays' their own 'Roe'?

---

Drew Zahn is a news editor for WorldNetDaily.

---

Parental Alienation Syndrome

What is Parental Alienation Syndrome?

By Cathy Meyer, About.com

See More About:

• children and divorce
• cooperative parenting

Question: What is Parental Alienation Syndrome?

Answer:

Parental Alienation Syndrome is the deliberate attempt by one parent to distance his/her children from the other parent. The motivation is to destroy the parental bond between his/her children with the other parent. The alienation process develops over time and some of the symptoms of the syndrome include some or all of the following:

A parent will speak badly of or criticize the other parent directly to the child or children. Negative statements about the other parent may be direct or indirect.

• For instance, the parent may say, “We can’t afford a new dress for the school dance because your father/mother decided to spend the money on vacation with their new friend.” A more direct comment would be, “your father/mother left because he/she didn’t care enough about you to try and make the marriage work.” Either statement is meant to cause the child to feel anger toward the other parent. It is an attempt to use the child to get back at the other parent for causing emotional pain.
• A parent will speak badly of the other parent within the hearing range of the child or children. There are parents who say they would never say anything negative to their child or children about the other parent. They don’t seem to have any problem saying negative things to other people though and if their child or children happen to be within hearing distance the better. These people hold themselves up as a “good person.” They want to instill anger in their children toward the other parent without looking bad. It’s easy to say they had no idea the child was listening so they don’t have to take responsibility for their actions. I like to say they are being very aggressive in a passive way.
• A parent will make the child privy to the details of the divorce and the ongoing conflict between the parents. They discuss financial problems brought on by the divorce. Make the child aware of legal issues that are ongoing and make it appear that if it weren’t for dad or mom their life would be easier.Not only can this cause the child to feel anger toward the other parent it can also cause the child to feel responsible for your situation and want to take on responsibilities that are not theirs.
• A parent will use body language to communicate their dislike of the other parent. The child may witness dad/mom roll their eyes or shake their head at something the other parent did or said. Such body language sends a negative message without a word being spoken. Children are smart and know that a roll of the eyes is a dismissive gesture. One clearly meant to send the message that the other parent is stupid or wrong in some way.
• Refusing to be around the other parent or to co – parent with them sends the child a negative message also. Children may be told that their dad/mom is always angry and the other parent doesn’t want to be around the anger. The other parent might not be angry at all but, such accusations can cause a child to have unfounded hard feelings toward the other parent.
• A parent may go as far as accusing the other parent of sexual, physical or emotional abuse. If you have, small children who are not yet able to communicate exactly what has happened such accusations can be very dangerous to the child/parent relationship. They may also have severe legal consequences. If a child is too small to talk and communicate what happened you should insist on a medical examination and an evaluation by a psychiatrist is you suspect abuse. If the child is old enough to speak for themselves and communicates to you that they have been abused then it is your responsibility to help them hold the other parent responsible.

Children who have to live with the unresovled conflict and anger of their parents suffer tremendously. Add to the normal stress of separation and divorce the feeling that the child should choose between the parents and you can cause damage that lasts a lifetime. A child is powerless when it comes to ending the conflict he/she is witnessing. They may feel that if they make a choice it will lessen the conflict they have to live with. One parent can cost their child the other parent and their only motivation is revenge, fear, anger or jealousy. It’s a terrible price for children to have to pay in an attempt to assuage a parent’s feelings.

It is imperative that parents be willing to parent cooperatively, that they put their child’s needs first and that their only concern is their child’s sense of security.

Child Custody: Does A Mother Make A Better Parent?

Child Custody: Does A Mother Make A Better Parent?



It's time that family court judges and child welfare social workers realized that for the best interest of a child, that all children need both parents to develop in a healthy and stable manner.

Anti-Parental Rights Bill on Texas Governor's Desk - We Need Your Help to Veto It !!

by Erin Casssity

Call Gov. Rick Perry to VETO SB 1440 - it is an Attack on your Parental Rights!
Your phone calls and emails are working. Keep calling until he vetoes it!

Call Gov. Perry at 512-463-2000 and voice your opposition to SB 1440.

You can also call the Texas Citizen's Opinion Line at 800-252-9600.

You can email your views at morgan.johnson@governor.state.tx.us .

Another effective thing to do is to call your state rep or state senator and ask them to call upon Gov. Perry to VETO SB 1440.

Texas state reps: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Members/Members.aspx?Chamber=H .

Texas state senators: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/Members/Members.aspx?Chamber=S

from Robert Morrow 512-306-1510 grassroots political activist

A wide variety of groups oppose SB 1440. These groups include conservative, libertarian and yes, even some liberal child advocacy groups such as the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, NCCPR: http://nccpr.blogspot.com/2009/06/texas-tries-to-legalize-flds-type-raids.html

In addition to the NCCPR, other activist groups who OPPOSE SB 1440 and are asking Gov. Perry to VETO this attack on parental rights and threat to the well being of children are listed below. The critical problem with SB 1440 is that it would do away with a COURT HEARING for parents and their lawyers before CPS runs roughshod through your life. Many CPS complaints are false, bogus, exaggerated, and sometimes even malicious complaints by neighbors. Oftentimes, these are anonymous complaints as well.

A CPS investigation can be extremely traumatic not just parents but CHILDREN as well. It is critical that parents and/or their lawyers have the chance to appear before a judge to tell their side of the story BEFORE CPS has access to your child, removes your child for an interview, does naked strip searches of your child, snoops around your home or seizes your child's medical and school records.

SB 1440 would do away with the parents' side being heard before a judge; instead it would institutionalize EX PARTE hearings with only CPS present before a judge, in essence turning these hearings into rubber stamping affairs for CPS. THIS THREATENS PARENTS, CHILDREN AND FAMILIES. UNNECESSARY CPS INVESTIGATIONS ARE OFTEN EXTREMELY TRAUMATIC FOR FAMILIES!

Groups that OPPOSE SB 1440 and who are asking Gov. Rick Perry to VETO SB 1440:

TEXAS HOME SCHOOL COALITION -- TIM LAMBERT
EAGLE FORUM - CATHIE ADAMS, BRIAN RUSSELL
FREE MARKET FOUNDATION - KELLY SHACKLEFORD, JONATHON SAENZ
PARENT GUIDANCE CENTER - JOHANNA SCOT
TEXANS FOR ACCOUNTABLE GOVERNMENT - CHUCK YOUNG, KATIE BREWER
TEXAS CAMPAIGN FOR LIBERTY - DEBRA MEDINA
NATIONAL COALITION FOR CHILD PROTECTION REFORM
LIBERTARIAN PARTY - ROBERT BUTLER
CONSTITUTION PARTY
REPUBLICAN LIBERTY CAUCUS - PIERRE DEROCHEMONT, DON ZIMMERMAN
TRAVIS COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTY CHAIR - ROSEMARY EDWARDS
CITIZENS COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
PAUL D. PERRY - BUSINESSMAN AND MEDIATOR
ROBERT MORROW - GRASSROOTS ACTIVIST

(The above list is not all inclusive)

Links to learn more:

1) Tim Lambert's blog gives a super explanation: http://www.rightintexas.com/

2) Parent Guidance Center: http://www.parentguidancecenter.org/web/ (excellent web page)

3) NCCPR Child Welfare Blog: http://nccpr.blogspot.com/2009/06/texas-tries-to-legalize-flds-type-raids.html

SB 1064 by Senator Kirk Watson was filed early in the session, and it sought to allow CPS, in the course of an investigation of abuse or neglect, to get the medical or mental health records of children who are the focus of an investigation. In order for CPS to accomplish this, the person refusing to give the records and parents must be given notice and a court hearing and CPS must show "good cause" for the action before the court would order the release of said records to CPS.

However, the bill was substituted in committee for a very different SB 1064, which was passed out of the Senate and sent to the House. The new SB 1064 gave the court authority to force parents to give CPS access to the child and/or transport the child for "interview, examination and investigation," without a court hearing or notice to the parent. Worst of all, the language in the current statute that requires CPS to prove "good cause shown" was stricken. Thus this bill would allow CPS, during an investigation in which the parents would not waive their 4th amendment rights, entrance into their home, access to medical or mental health records of their children or transportation of the child, on the simple filing of an affidavit by a CPS worker with no hearing or opportunity for the parents or their legal counsel to present their case.

The reason that the committee substitute was not filed as the original bill is clear. It would have caused a firestorm of opposition for the wholesale destruction of parental rights in the course of an investigation of child abuse by CPS. When the bill was scheduled for a hearing in the House Human Services Committee, officials of the Parent Guidance Center - a pro-parent group that helps families who are under investigation by CPS - presented written testimony and signed witness cards in opposition to the bill. Strangely, that testimony and those witness cards were not entered into the record of the hearing on the bill.

On the last day of the session, Representative Patrick Rose, chairman of the House Human Services Committee, offered a floor amendment to SB 1440 (another bill by Watson), which was on the Local and Consent Calendar. The amendment offered by Rose was the language of committee substitute SB 1064, and since SB 1440 was considered non-controversial and the sponsor of the bill (Rose) agreed to the amendment, it was adopted on a voice vote, and the final language of SB 1440 includes the committee substitute language of SB 1064.

This whole sordid story is an example of how legislation that could never pass a public debate and vote in the Texas legislature can become law. I'm sure the intent of those seeking these changes is to protect children from abuse, but to allow this simply because it makes the process go faster is a gross abuse of parents' rights to protect their children. We hear stories on a regular basis of out of control CPS officials who regularly seek court orders without notice to parents who refuse to open their door and give CPS full access to their children. In fact, a story this week in Corpus Christi explains how a CPS worker made a false allegation of abuse for vindictive reasons. This bill, if it becomes law, will lead to abuse of innocent parents who are dealing with false accusations and simply seeking to protect their children.

SB 1064 - http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/billtext/html/SB01064I.htm

Austin American Statesman blog:

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/2009/06/11/0611cps.html

Child Custody Case to study Constitutional Protections

Fathers frequently left without significant contact
Posted: May 12, 2009
10:58 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A court hearing is scheduled tomorrow on arguments that allege the basic child custody procedures used by judges in Bradley County, Tenn., are unconstitutionally biased in favor of one parent.

WND previously reported on the case stemming from a divorce dispute that attorney Stanley Charles Thorne believes could impact custody decisions nationwide, because it calls down the authority of the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause to help fathers who are good parents.

According to Thorne, the case before Circuit Judge J. Michael Sharp is testing the court procedures used in the child custody case of 3-year-old Kate Hopkins, which began in 2007.

After more than two years in court and five different judges, the case is set for trial beginning May 27 in Sharp's courtroom. But Sharp is hearing the constitutional issues before the rest of the case is heard.

Attorney Jeffrey Miller will argue on behalf of fit Tennessee parents and their children, and an attorney from the Tennessee attorney general's office, Warren Jasper, is expected to argue on behalf of the standard procedures.

According to a statement from Thorne, one of the procedures that will be challenged is the "80-day rule" created by local judges. It automatically takes effect as soon as a child custody case is filed, allowing one parent only 80 days a year with the child while the other parent is allowed 285 days – regardless of circumstances.

The rule, Miller argues, discriminates against one parent, violating the principle of equal protection as well as due process, since it is imposed without a hearing.

Such procedures would be banned if Sharp rules the practices are unconstitutional, Thorne's statement said.

Hundreds of divorce cases are filed daily across the U.S., and according to the Children'sJustice.org website, custody dispute cases leave nearly 38 percent of the fathers with no access or visitation rights to their children. In addition, four in 10 mothers report they interfered with the father's visitation to punish him at least once, half the mothers see "no value" in the father's continued contact with his children and 70 percent of the fathers wanted more time with their kids.

Thorne is serving as a consultant in the case of Jeremy Hopkins, a successful lawyer, in his attempts to be treated the same as his daughter's mother, Elisabeth, also a successful lawyer, in their custody of Kate.

Since the mother left the family in Tennessee and took Kate to Pennsylvania about two years ago, Jeremy Hopkins has been allowed only sporadic days with his daughter.

"All I want for my daughter is for her to have mom and a dad," Jeremy Hopkins told WDEF-TV in Chattanooga.

Michael McCormick of the Institute for American Families said the system is set up to pit a mother against a father in a marital dispute, when it should be working to accommodate the needs of a child for both a mother and father.

"The courts are going to pick a winner and a loser and when they do that, the child ultimately loses," he told the station at a recent rally regarding the case.

"If we look at what's happening to our society we can trace the social pathologies just as increased rates of incarceration, early sexual activity for girls, truancy issues related to the family breaking down and the social fabric of our society is breaking down in terms of the family breaking down, we are being weaken as a nation and we need to change that," McCormick added.

He estimates 17 million fathers nationwide do not have fair access to their children, and about 3 million mothers have the same problem.

Thorne, who has 25 years experience as a lawyer, most recently has specialized in constitutional issues in family courts, representing parents and children on various issues.

The family's life was disrupted by the mother's decision to leave, Thorne said, but the relationship of the father and daughter was aggravated by a "family court system that cares for neither of them while it keeps them mired in a swamp of never-ending legal hassles just to be together."

"Many constitutional issues will be decided by Kate Hopkins' case," he continued. "Perhaps the most important is where the Constitution draws the line to protect the relationship between an innocent child and an innocent parent from government interference."

he dispute came to a head just before last Christmas, following the expiration of the most recent visitation order. Jeremy Hopkins, on a scheduled visit with his daughter, decided to have her stay in Tennessee until a court hearing on the required court-ordered visitation plan.

Instead, he was arrested for interfering with a custodial plan, "even though there was no court order in force," and his daughter was returned to Pennsylvania. The warrant later was quashed by a judge, who essentially determined it never should have been issued.

Thorne questioned the legal system ordering a child taken from one parent "when the child is in no danger … and the child has never been abused, neglected, or harmed" and given to another parent absent a court order.

The 14th Amendment states: "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

"This case affects not just the people of Tennessee," Thorne said. "This is huge."

Numerous organizations are working for the rights of fathers in disputes like the Tennessee case, including FathersCustody.org, LongDistanceParenting.org, Fathers False Charges Helpline, Fathers National Lawyers Referral, WinningCustody.com and FathersRights.org.

The original article can be found here:
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=97943